Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   "Best" evidence for evolution.
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 376 of 830 (870401)
01-18-2020 6:24 PM
Reply to: Message 375 by caffeine
01-18-2020 1:24 PM


Re: Ordinary selection of built in variation is not species to species evolution
I said I think chimps are less similar to humans than goats are to horses so there's my disagreement. I also have to note that the picture you posted of the foot doesn't show what I was referring to about the big differences in the flesh of chimp versus human. But this is going nowhere.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 375 by caffeine, posted 01-18-2020 1:24 PM caffeine has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 380 by caffeine, posted 01-19-2020 6:30 AM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 377 of 830 (870408)
01-19-2020 2:11 AM
Reply to: Message 373 by RAZD
01-18-2020 10:58 AM


Re: Homo habilis feet
Each stage is "A bit smaller a bit tighter" than the previous stage. That's what intermediate means.
And this takes me back to my original point which is that this sort of change is impossible by trial and error of random mutations, let alone their having to be coordinated with similar staged changes all over the body. What you are calling intermediates in the sense of their having supposedly evolved to that position, are really just built-in genetic variations of the creature, whether ape or human being.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 373 by RAZD, posted 01-18-2020 10:58 AM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 378 by dwise1, posted 01-19-2020 2:52 AM Faith has replied
 Message 382 by RAZD, posted 01-19-2020 9:39 AM Faith has not replied

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5930
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.8


Message 378 of 830 (870409)
01-19-2020 2:52 AM
Reply to: Message 377 by Faith
01-19-2020 2:11 AM


Re: Homo habilis feet
And this takes me back to my original point which is that this sort of change is impossible by trial and error of random mutations, ...
Why is why we keep telling you that that is not what we are talking about. Rather, we are talking about how it would have evolved! Instead, you keep prattling on about your nonsensical "trial and error" that you continually refuse to describe and which has nothing to do with evolution and definitely not with how life even works.
Learn something instead of pontificating about things that you know nothing about! And refuse to learn anything about while falsely claiming to know more than a great many who have taken the time to study and to learn the subject.
Ambassador Londo Mollari could just as well have had you in mind: "Ah! Arrogance and shtupidity all in the same package. How efficient of you."
Edited by dwise1, : added "and definitely not with how life even works"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 377 by Faith, posted 01-19-2020 2:11 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 379 by Faith, posted 01-19-2020 2:54 AM dwise1 has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 379 of 830 (870410)
01-19-2020 2:54 AM
Reply to: Message 378 by dwise1
01-19-2020 2:52 AM


Re: Homo habilis feet
I'm sorry, but trial and error of mutatiobns is obviouslyu the only possible way evolution could ever occur and it's impossible and that's the end of that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 378 by dwise1, posted 01-19-2020 2:52 AM dwise1 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 381 by jar, posted 01-19-2020 7:56 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 383 by JonF, posted 01-19-2020 9:50 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 385 by dwise1, posted 01-19-2020 4:59 PM Faith has replied

  
caffeine
Member (Idle past 1024 days)
Posts: 1800
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008


(1)
Message 380 of 830 (870411)
01-19-2020 6:30 AM
Reply to: Message 376 by Faith
01-18-2020 6:24 PM


Re: Ordinary selection of built in variation is not species to species evolution
I also have to note that the picture you posted of the foot doesn't show what I was referring to about the big differences in the flesh of chimp versus human.
Possibly because differences that are not explicable in terms of anatomy, nor visible in pictures, don't actually exist. They're just something invented in a desperate attempt to maintain an special creation for humans.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 376 by Faith, posted 01-18-2020 6:24 PM Faith has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 393 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 381 of 830 (870412)
01-19-2020 7:56 AM
Reply to: Message 379 by Faith
01-19-2020 2:54 AM


Re: Homo habilis feet
Faith writes:
I'm sorry, but trial and error of mutatiobns is obviouslyu the only possible way evolution could ever occur and it's impossible and that's the end of that.
You keep saying stuff like that but never provide any evidence or even reasoning of why it should be correct.
Time for you to actually defend your assertion.

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill StudiosMy Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 379 by Faith, posted 01-19-2020 2:54 AM Faith has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 384 by dwise1, posted 01-19-2020 3:30 PM jar has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 382 of 830 (870413)
01-19-2020 9:39 AM
Reply to: Message 377 by Faith
01-19-2020 2:11 AM


human evolution, step by step
And this takes me back to my original point which is that this sort of change is impossible by trial and error of random mutations, ...
Except, as you have been told so many times, it's not just mutation but selection. Evolution is a two-step feedback response system that is repeated in each generation:
Like walking on first one foot and then the next. The "trial" is surviving to breed and pass on the mutation/s to the next generation, where it all starts over.
... let alone their having to be coordinated with similar staged changes all over the body. ...
There are no "similar staged changes all over the body" that need to occur. Each mutation stands or dies on its own by surviving to breed and pass on the mutation/s to the next generation, where it all starts over.
You can have hands evolving separately from feet, leg bone lengths evolving separately from arm lengths and body size. The only criteria is that the individual survives and breeds to pass on the changes to the next generation.
In fact evidence shows this to be the case, with some traits occurring at different times than other traits. Such as bipedal gait before hand and foot shape before skull size increase.
... What you are calling intermediates in the sense of their having supposedly evolved to that position ...
Are fossils that show mutations from a parent population that are passed on to offspring that undergo further mutation and selection. It's a continuous process.
... are really just built-in genetic variations of the creature, whether ape or human being.
And yet we can show many intermediates evolving between ape and human being ... doesn't that mean that human beings are part of the "built-in genetic variations of the" ape genome ... if your view is correct? It isn't, but for the sake of this argument we can assume it is: if we can show the same kind of "built in genetic variations" see in dogs -- slight changes in size, slight changes in shape, changes caused by interruption of development (HOX gene) say in dog skulls (ie - bull dog vs collie), etc -- then doesn't that mean we have "built in genetic variations" going from ape to human?
Compare a human child with a chimp child and they are more similar than some dog breeds. The major differences notable in the heads of adults occur through development after birth.
But evolution has an advantage over your concept: it can add genetic variation with random mutations, while your concept is stuck with an (albeit totally unknown, because you can't elaborate why) limited number of "built in" variations (how many? where are they built in? where are they hiding?).
Evolution is only limited by survival and breeding.
That is why evolution will always be a better explanation than your concept.
Enjoy
Edited by RAZD, : .
Edited by RAZD, : ..
Edited by RAZD, : ...

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmericanZenDeist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 377 by Faith, posted 01-19-2020 2:11 AM Faith has not replied

  
JonF
Member (Idle past 167 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 383 of 830 (870415)
01-19-2020 9:50 AM
Reply to: Message 379 by Faith
01-19-2020 2:54 AM


Re: Homo habilis feet
Selection.
But you have to hold on to your ignorance.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 379 by Faith, posted 01-19-2020 2:54 AM Faith has not replied

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5930
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.8


Message 384 of 830 (870436)
01-19-2020 3:30 PM
Reply to: Message 381 by jar
01-19-2020 7:56 AM


Re: Homo habilis feet
Time for [Faith] to actually defend [her] assertion.
First she needs to explain just what she's talking about. Which she refuses to do despite repeated requests/demands.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 381 by jar, posted 01-19-2020 7:56 AM jar has not replied

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5930
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.8


Message 385 of 830 (870441)
01-19-2020 4:59 PM
Reply to: Message 379 by Faith
01-19-2020 2:54 AM


Re: Homo habilis feet
I'm sorry, but trial and error of mutatiobns is obviouslyu the only possible way evolution could ever occur and it's impossible and that's the end of that.
Except for the inconvenient truth that that is completely wrong!
If you just keep repeating the same groundless false assertion over and over again, then we cannot get anywhere. And you steadfastly refuse to describe or explain or discuss it which only generates unnecessary confusion and acrimony.
Though I wouldn't be surprised to learn that that is exactly your purpose, which would be to create a ludicrous strawman that you refuse to describe or explain just so you can throw your hands up and shout "Impossible!". The confusion and acrimony that that generates is a side-effect which you welcome. Typical creationist dishonesty!
Evolution works because of how life itself works. More specifically, evolution is the collective result of populations of individuals doing what living individuals do (ie, mature, survive in their environment, reproduce, etc). Every description of how evolution would work must be according to how life works. By all appearances, whatever your idea of "evolution" must be has nothing to do with how life works, which is the problem.
Here in yellow is what I see you as describing your "model" -- if you disagree with this list, then please submit (finally!) your description:

  1. All changes are because of mutations. (Wrong! Changes are the result of selection acting upon genetic variability. While genetic variability is increased over generations by mutations, it is also increased by other mechanisms such as chromosomal cross-over.)
  2. All changes are enormous, effectively single steps to the final result. (Wrong! While single large changes are possible, the vast majority of changes are small and cumulative.)
  3. All changes are to happen within a single or a few generations -- again a single step. (Wrong! It takes many generations for these small changes to accumulate.)
  4. All related changes must occur at the same time or at least within a generation or two. (Wrong! Different traits change at different times and at different rates, as is demonstrated repeatedly in the fossil record.)
  5. Your idea of selection is trial and error in which one single massive attempt is made to arrive at the final result. When that one single massive attempt fails (as it almost inevitably must), then you go back to scratch and make another single massive attempt which similarly fails, etc ad infinitum. (Absolutely wrong and completely contrary to how life even works! Where to even begin?
    1. Trial and error normally entails making a single complete attempt with a binary outcome: total success or total failure.
      There is normally no allowance made for partial success nor any method for keeping track of partial successes or factoring them into the next attempt.
    2. Upon failure, you start all over from scratch. By what mechanism does that happen here? "Scratch" was the parent generation, which in many species (in the real meaning, not yours) would be gone once their offspring failed. With no "scratch" starting point to go back to, however could you possibly go back and start all over from scratch? Life simply does not work like that!
      Obviously, given the way that life does work, each generation (AKA "attempt") results in a changed genome. It is that changed genome which forms the starting point of the next attempt (ie, the next generation of offspring), which in turn creates further change in the genome and hence yet another new starting point for the next attempt after that. And so on.
      Of course, that gets us back to cumulative selection which a) is far more descriptive of how life works than your single-step selection does and b) you vehemently deny even exists. Yet, compared to your "trial and error" "model", it is the only solution that actually works.
    3. Who's making each attempt? A single individual in the population? All individuals in the population? The population as a whole effectively acting as an individual? The answer to this question will have profound effects on the probability model for your "model".
    4. Trial and error is a learning method by which an intelligent agent makes a series of attempts and learns from each failure what does not work, which can help to suggest what to try in the next attempt. Obviously, there is no intelligent agent in your "model" nor can there be any learning. Therefore, instead of trial and error, you actually have nothing more than a random walk, which is even more nothing at all like evolution.
    )

  6. Every single change must be the result of a mutation. (Wrong! There are other sources for change and for variation; eg:
    • Recombination. When germ cells are formed in meiosis, sections of the chromosome pairs can get swapped within the pair, such that a gene that was associated with particular genes on one member of the pair will now be associate with different genes on the other chromosome in the pair.
    • Allele frequency within the population having changed through natural selection.
    • Nothing. That is to say that the normal expression of genes can be "changed" as a result of physical changes caused by other means (eg, mutation, recombination, allele frequency). For example you recently made much of changes in the "flesh" (AKA "soft body parts") of the chimp foot to make it human claiming that that required mutations. Not so. Tendons and ligaments have attachment points on bone as determine by the genotype. If the bone length changes, then those attachment points will have moved. You do not need further changes in the genotype to get the tendons and ligaments to "move" along with their attachment points, but rather the same old genotypic code will still have them attach to those moved attachment points.
    )
  7. A mutation is any change, be it physical or genetic (but preferably physical). (Wrong! In these discussions, mutations are purely genetic. Further, the only mutations of any interest in evolution are those that show up in the germ cells, which makes them heritable; if a mutation is not heritable, then it serves no purpose in evolution.
    When we speak of physical changes, then we are talking about the expression of changes in the genotype regardless of the source of those changes (which could be mutations or not). Furthermore, many mutations will not even show up as physical changes. A further complication is that genetic and physical changes are not proportional: a small amount of genetic change could create a lot of physical change, while a lot of genetic change could amount to little if any physical change -- each individual case is different.)
That is a list of the best guesses I can make of what the hell you are talking about. It details many of the questions that you must answer in order for us to figure out just what the hell you are talking about.
If any of my guesses are incorrect (which is likely, since you are forcing us into a guessing game), then you must provide us with corrections. Not just a say-nothing "nope, not what I said", but rather an actual explanation of what you are actually saying.
Obviously, if any of my guesses are correct, then you must acknowledge that fact.
And if you refuse to do either and just remain silent, then I will have to assume that I was correct on every count and that your entire "model" has nothing to do with evolution.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 379 by Faith, posted 01-19-2020 2:54 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 386 by Faith, posted 01-19-2020 5:31 PM dwise1 has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 386 of 830 (870442)
01-19-2020 5:31 PM
Reply to: Message 385 by dwise1
01-19-2020 4:59 PM


Why species to species evoluton requires mutations
I'm not going to spend any time on this right now. Just one thing: selection of normal variation just gets you normal variation within a species, if artificially selected it gets you new breeds; it's what I'm always talking about as what eventually leads to the point where further evolution is impossible as it leads to fixed loci.
Evolution that could get from species to species HAS to be based on mutations, therefore, and that means bazillions of trials, because the variability is NOT built in, it's all random, the changes have to be created from scratch as it were. And as I've thought it through the errrors involved and the numbers of trials required are impossible; evolution is simply impossible.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 385 by dwise1, posted 01-19-2020 4:59 PM dwise1 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 387 by PaulK, posted 01-20-2020 3:02 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 388 by NosyNed, posted 01-20-2020 8:37 AM Faith has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 387 of 830 (870445)
01-20-2020 3:02 AM
Reply to: Message 386 by Faith
01-19-2020 5:31 PM


Re: Why species to species evoluton requires mutations
quote:
Just one thing: selection of normal variation just gets you normal variation within a species, if artificially selected it gets you new breeds; it's what I'm always talking about as what eventually leads to the point where further evolution is impossible as it leads to fixed loci.
It would if mutations did not occur. But they do. In large numbers. We’ve been telling you that for years.
quote:
Evolution that could get from species to species HAS to be based on mutations...
And I’ve been telling you that for years.
quote:
and that means bazillions of trials, because the variability is NOT built in, it's all random, the changes have to be created from scratch as it were. And as I've thought it through the errrors involved and the numbers of trials required are impossible; evolution is simply impossible.
You haven’t really thought through it though. You have no real idea of the number required or the number that actually occur. All you have is another uninformed opinion. That isn’t something that should carry much weight at all.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 386 by Faith, posted 01-19-2020 5:31 PM Faith has not replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 388 of 830 (870450)
01-20-2020 8:37 AM
Reply to: Message 386 by Faith
01-19-2020 5:31 PM


Number of trials
And as I've thought it through the errrors involved and the numbers of trials required are impossible; evolution is simply impossible.
What is your estimate of the number of trails actually conducted in the human population over a 10 yr period? Note: this is not "what is required" which you should be able to supply but rather a simpler number -- the trials actually conducted.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 386 by Faith, posted 01-19-2020 5:31 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 389 by Faith, posted 01-20-2020 10:54 AM NosyNed has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 389 of 830 (870452)
01-20-2020 10:54 AM
Reply to: Message 388 by NosyNed
01-20-2020 8:37 AM


Re: Number of trials
Actually conducted? Make it per generation rather than ten years. And of course I don't know but what I think would have to occur to get any kind of evolutionary change is thousands per gene at least, and getting a beneficial change just in one gene wouldn't accomplish much anyway, you still have to have beneficial mutations in all the other genes. And even defining a change as beneficial is very iffy until you have the whole genome changed in a new beneficial direction.
Here's an interesting article I found that tries to compute how many mutations occurred in the human population over some time period or other but I haven't been able to read the whole thing.
We would like to comment on the rates of evolution that must have occurred under the accepted model of geologic time. First we present an oversimplified analysis that illustrates some problems with evolution. Then we correct this analysis and show that many of these problems can be solved. Finally we show that there are interesting and problematical consequences of this corrected analysis for the theory of evolution.
To me it's basically open and shut that such trial and error which is the only possible thing that COULD bring about evolution from one species to another, is impossible. The usual idea that normal variation with natural selection is sufficient is utterly ridiculously impossible. All you can ever get is the same species, and eventually you do run out of genetic diversity which makes further evolution absolutely impossible.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 388 by NosyNed, posted 01-20-2020 8:37 AM NosyNed has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 390 by PaulK, posted 01-20-2020 11:31 AM Faith has replied
 Message 393 by NosyNed, posted 01-20-2020 6:12 PM Faith has replied
 Message 398 by caffeine, posted 01-21-2020 4:15 PM Faith has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 390 of 830 (870456)
01-20-2020 11:31 AM
Reply to: Message 389 by Faith
01-20-2020 10:54 AM


Re: Number of trials
quote:
Here's an interesting article I found that tries to compute how many mutations occurred in the human population over some time period or other but I haven't been able to read the whole thing.
That’s an article written by a Creationist Computer Scientist. At the least you should be reading articles by researchers working in the field.
My correction, it’s a laughable article written by a hopelessly ignorant Creationist Computer Scientist who thinks that every base pair has to be added by an individual mutation. Someone tell him about gene duplication!
Edited by PaulK, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 389 by Faith, posted 01-20-2020 10:54 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 391 by Faith, posted 01-20-2020 11:34 AM PaulK has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024