Author
|
Topic: How do you define the Theory of Evolution?
|
CRR
Member (Idle past 2264 days) Posts: 579 From: Australia Joined: 10-19-2016
|
|
Message 53 of 93 (813471)
06-27-2017 9:44 PM
|
Reply to: Message 51 by Pressie 06-27-2017 8:10 AM
|
|
Re: Jerry Coyne's Definition
And ignore Kerkut's working definitions? Why?
Which do you think is better?
This message is a reply to: | | Message 51 by Pressie, posted 06-27-2017 8:10 AM | | Pressie has replied |
|
CRR
Member (Idle past 2264 days) Posts: 579 From: Australia Joined: 10-19-2016
|
|
Message 54 of 93 (813472)
06-27-2017 9:46 PM
|
Reply to: Message 52 by Taq 06-27-2017 11:12 AM
|
|
Re: Jerry Coyne's Definition
There isn't a single sentence in existence that covers all of evolution.
How much space do you need? Two paragraphs? Three? Take as much as you think is necessary.
This message is a reply to: | | Message 52 by Taq, posted 06-27-2017 11:12 AM | | Taq has replied |
Replies to this message: | | Message 58 by Taq, posted 06-28-2017 10:47 AM | | CRR has not replied |
|
CRR
Member (Idle past 2264 days) Posts: 579 From: Australia Joined: 10-19-2016
|
|
Message 66 of 93 (813604)
06-29-2017 7:54 AM
|
|
|
Jerry Coyne's Definition
Why Evolution is True Jerry Coyne Chapter 1 - What is Evolution? p3
quote: In essence, the modern theory of evolution is easy to grasp. It can be summarized in a single (albeit slightly long) sentence: Life on Earth evolved gradually beginning with one primitive speciesperhaps a selfreplicating moleculethat lived more than 3.5 billion years ago; it then branched out over time, throwing off many new and diverse species; and the mechanism for most (but not all) of evolutionary change is natural selection.
Looks like a definition to me. I have read the whole book; and I have read several other books by noted evolutionists.
Replies to this message: | | Message 67 by PaulK, posted 06-29-2017 7:59 AM | | CRR has replied | | Message 70 by RAZD, posted 06-29-2017 8:26 AM | | CRR has not replied | | Message 72 by Taq, posted 06-29-2017 11:23 AM | | CRR has not replied |
|
CRR
Member (Idle past 2264 days) Posts: 579 From: Australia Joined: 10-19-2016
|
|
Message 68 of 93 (813606)
06-29-2017 8:15 AM
|
Reply to: Message 67 by PaulK 06-29-2017 7:59 AM
|
|
Re: Jerry Coyne's non-Definition
So he wrote a whole book about why evolution is true and never defined the theory of evolution? You're clutching at straws.
This message is a reply to: | | Message 67 by PaulK, posted 06-29-2017 7:59 AM | | PaulK has replied |
Replies to this message: | | Message 69 by PaulK, posted 06-29-2017 8:24 AM | | CRR has not replied | | Message 71 by Taq, posted 06-29-2017 11:21 AM | | CRR has not replied |
|
CRR
Member (Idle past 2264 days) Posts: 579 From: Australia Joined: 10-19-2016
|
|
Message 74 of 93 (813710)
06-30-2017 3:57 AM
|
|
|
Your Definitions
OK so you don't like my definitions, what's your's?
Replies to this message: | | Message 75 by RAZD, posted 06-30-2017 7:06 AM | | CRR has not replied | | Message 77 by dwise1, posted 06-30-2017 1:25 PM | | CRR has replied |
|
CRR
Member (Idle past 2264 days) Posts: 579 From: Australia Joined: 10-19-2016
|
|
Message 85 of 93 (813917)
07-02-2017 8:26 AM
|
Reply to: Message 77 by dwise1 06-30-2017 1:25 PM
|
|
Re: Your Definitions
I guess you, like many others, missed the sarcasm in that comment.
This message is a reply to: | | Message 77 by dwise1, posted 06-30-2017 1:25 PM | | dwise1 has not replied |
|
CRR
Member (Idle past 2264 days) Posts: 579 From: Australia Joined: 10-19-2016
|
|
Message 86 of 93 (814074)
07-04-2017 6:17 AM
|
Reply to: Message 62 by dwise1 06-28-2017 2:54 PM
|
|
Re: Jerry Coyne's Definition
We need to know the context of that quote to be able to understand what he's really saying.
Which is why I told you where I got it from.
Coyne turns out to be a outspoken critic of creationists... Yep, that's why I used his definition, because he is hostile to Creationism. Personally I think Coyne gives a pretty good definition of the theory of evolution here, although I prefer Kerkut's definition for the General Theory of Evolution because it is more succinct.
This message is a reply to: | | Message 62 by dwise1, posted 06-28-2017 2:54 PM | | dwise1 has not replied |
|
CRR
Member (Idle past 2264 days) Posts: 579 From: Australia Joined: 10-19-2016
|
|
Message 87 of 93 (814075)
07-04-2017 6:22 AM
|
Reply to: Message 83 by caffeine 07-01-2017 5:07 PM
|
|
Re: Evolutionary Lineages rather than species?
caffeine writes: The article you cite is on the right track, in my opinion. The boundaries between two species are no more meaningful than those between genera and families - they're wholly arbitrary and far too much ink and thought is wasted on them. I think arguing that creationists are wrong because speciation has occurred is a mistake. Speciation has no clear, objective definition. I agree.
This message is a reply to: | | Message 83 by caffeine, posted 07-01-2017 5:07 PM | | caffeine has not replied |
Replies to this message: | | Message 88 by Pressie, posted 07-04-2017 8:48 AM | | CRR has not replied | | Message 89 by RAZD, posted 07-04-2017 1:58 PM | | CRR has replied |
|
CRR
Member (Idle past 2264 days) Posts: 579 From: Australia Joined: 10-19-2016
(1)
|
|
|
|
|
Message 90 of 93 (814136)
07-04-2017 10:04 PM
|
Reply to: Message 89 by RAZD 07-04-2017 1:58 PM
|
|
Re: Evolutionary Lineages rather than species?
How does this affect my definition in Message 3 of the Theory of Evolution?
I think I have said before that you gave quite a good definition.
This message is a reply to: | | Message 89 by RAZD, posted 07-04-2017 1:58 PM | | RAZD has seen this message but not replied |
|
CRR
Member (Idle past 2264 days) Posts: 579 From: Australia Joined: 10-19-2016
|
|
Message 91 of 93 (814432)
07-09-2017 7:32 PM
|
|
|
Agree to not agree?
So are we all agreed that we can't agree on a single definition for the Theory of Evolution?
Replies to this message: | | Message 92 by Tangle, posted 07-10-2017 4:12 AM | | CRR has not replied | | Message 93 by ringo, posted 07-10-2017 12:49 PM | | CRR has not replied |
|