Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 86 (8915 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 07-20-2019 10:51 PM
23 online now:
DrJones*, dwise1, edge, Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus) (4 members, 19 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Upcoming Birthdays: anglagard
Post Volume:
Total: 857,225 Year: 12,261/19,786 Month: 2,042/2,641 Week: 551/708 Day: 110/135 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Can you disprove this secular argument against evolution?
vimesey
Member
Posts: 967
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011
Member Rating: 6.6


(2)
Message 49 of 293 (803730)
04-04-2017 4:28 AM
Reply to: Message 48 by forexhr
04-04-2017 3:14 AM


Once you start messing up with the information on how to build a specific organ or a protein fold you won't end up with another functional organ or protein fold

Not every time, no. But every so often you will - you'll end up with essentially the same organ with the same functionality, but with a small mutation, which doesn't impair the organ's function. And every so often, the mutation (or more likely a sequence of them) proves beneficial and is naturally selected as a more beneficial variant.

Do this often enough, over millions of years and even more generations, and you may end up with an organ that is so different from what it was millions of years before, that we give it a different name from the original organ. It doesn't change in one impossible leap - it changes over millions of years, by way of millions and millions of small changes, each one of which is pretty likely, given the small change involved, and the tendency towards small mutations.


Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by forexhr, posted 04-04-2017 3:14 AM forexhr has not yet responded

    
vimesey
Member
Posts: 967
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011
Member Rating: 6.6


Message 100 of 293 (804091)
04-07-2017 7:04 AM
Reply to: Message 98 by forexhr
04-07-2017 6:57 AM


This is just the collection of unfalsifiable mental fantasies, just so stories and anecdotes that is totally unrelated to biological reality.

A good description of every one of the religious creation myths.

Except for the "unfalsifiable" bit.


Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by forexhr, posted 04-07-2017 6:57 AM forexhr has not yet responded

    
vimesey
Member
Posts: 967
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011
Member Rating: 6.6


Message 158 of 293 (804681)
04-12-2017 6:04 AM
Reply to: Message 157 by forexhr
04-12-2017 4:33 AM


Re: Predictions and Discoveries
the idea of evolution aims to explain the development of real biological structures that we observe around us. It does not aim to explain the development of your mental targets.

Your particular brand of snake oil, however, relies upon waiting for evolution to hit a point on a wall with a near infinite number of possible strike points, and then drawing a target around the strike point and calculating the chances of it hitting that particular point.

Evolution is not a theory which anticipates the arrival at the precise forms of life we see today, from its starting point billions of years and trillions of generations ago. It is a theory which explains the pathways which life happens to have taken, to get to the point it happens to have got to.

You're right that evolution isn't terribly concerned with possible evolutionary outcomes that didn't occur. Instead, that is something which has to be pointed out to someone who is trying to sell an argument founded on the Texas sharpshooter fallacy.

The pack of cards is the best way to demonstrate this. I can take a pack of cards, choose one at random 52 times, and put them in a pile. The chances of the pile being in that particular sequence of cards is 1 in 52! . The chances of a well shuffled deck of cards is 1 in 1. Nothing in evolutionary theory says that the end sequence has to be the sequence we see today - that's just how it worked out. I could have had 6 legs, 10 photo sensitive buds on stalks and glinkwurbles instead of hands. As it happens, I don't - no biggie.

Edited by vimesey, : Autocorrect error


Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 157 by forexhr, posted 04-12-2017 4:33 AM forexhr has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 160 by forexhr, posted 04-12-2017 7:41 AM vimesey has not yet responded

    
vimesey
Member
Posts: 967
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011
Member Rating: 6.6


Message 179 of 293 (804822)
04-13-2017 10:30 AM
Reply to: Message 178 by Percy
04-13-2017 10:01 AM


Indeed.

Forexhr's sharpshooter fallacy assumes that the phrase "Methinks it is like a weasel" is the only possible outcome. The thing is, of course, that the program would work just as well with any phrase.


Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 178 by Percy, posted 04-13-2017 10:01 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 182 by dwise1, posted 04-13-2017 10:40 AM vimesey has not yet responded

    
vimesey
Member
Posts: 967
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011
Member Rating: 6.6


Message 209 of 293 (804964)
04-14-2017 5:29 PM
Reply to: Message 196 by forexhr
04-14-2017 8:48 AM


Origin of a thing and modification of a thing are two entirely different concepts.

You're setting up a false dichotomy, for the purposes of your snake oil.

When it comes to evolution, trying to distinguish between origin and modification is irrelevant. It's all a continuum of billions of incremental changes - simple as.


Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 196 by forexhr, posted 04-14-2017 8:48 AM forexhr has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 210 by vimesey, posted 04-14-2017 5:36 PM vimesey has not yet responded

    
vimesey
Member
Posts: 967
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011
Member Rating: 6.6


Message 210 of 293 (804965)
04-14-2017 5:36 PM
Reply to: Message 209 by vimesey
04-14-2017 5:29 PM


More completely, it's all a myriad of continua of incremental changes.

Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 209 by vimesey, posted 04-14-2017 5:29 PM vimesey has not yet responded

    
vimesey
Member
Posts: 967
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011
Member Rating: 6.6


Message 225 of 293 (805354)
04-18-2017 3:09 AM
Reply to: Message 224 by forexhr
04-18-2017 1:58 AM


Re: Lambda hits Target with spectacular speed.
all these functions in biology arise from the interactions of the proper 3D shapes. Non of the 3D shapes where changed in the experiment that produced those 4 mutations.

Are you seriously expecting anyone, with even the most rudimentary understanding of evolution, to go along with such a blatantly simplistic attempt to discredit it ? To attempt to argue that evolution must be false, because it can't, in a few lab experiments, produce the dramatic physiological changes which took place when, say, a gill based respiratory system became lung based - when evolution incorporates, at its most fundamental level, billions of incremental changes over billions of years ?

You will run away from this point, and try to hide behind mathematical symbols and scientific terminology, in order to try to impress your target audience. But with your above quotation, you have completely laid bare your utter misunderstanding of the field.


Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 224 by forexhr, posted 04-18-2017 1:58 AM forexhr has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 226 by forexhr, posted 04-18-2017 3:58 AM vimesey has responded

    
vimesey
Member
Posts: 967
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011
Member Rating: 6.6


Message 228 of 293 (805368)
04-18-2017 7:42 AM
Reply to: Message 226 by forexhr
04-18-2017 3:58 AM


Re: Lambda hits Target with spectacular speed.
Evolution only requires two resources from its organisms - the tendency to reproduce, and the tendency to mutate on reproduction. The environment does not supply these resources - instead it exerts selection pressures.

Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 226 by forexhr, posted 04-18-2017 3:58 AM forexhr has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 229 by forexhr, posted 04-18-2017 8:51 AM vimesey has responded

    
vimesey
Member
Posts: 967
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011
Member Rating: 6.6


Message 239 of 293 (805398)
04-18-2017 11:44 AM
Reply to: Message 229 by forexhr
04-18-2017 8:51 AM


This is impossible because the particles have the potential to form nearly infinite number of different 3D shapes (10^3271 for only a 1000 particles)

Your are aware how life reproduces aren't you ?

I mean, there are uncountable ways in which the atoms making the human body could combine, and yet my ex and I made a fully functioning human being not once, but twice !! What are the odds ?

Edited by vimesey, : Realised I probably needed to make it even clearer.

Edited by vimesey, : No reason given.


Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 229 by forexhr, posted 04-18-2017 8:51 AM forexhr has not yet responded

    
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019