Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9028 total)
52 online now:
dwise1, jar, kjsimons, PaulK, Pollux, Rahvin, Tanypteryx, xongsmith (8 members, 44 visitors)
Newest Member: Michael MD
Post Volume: Total: 884,198 Year: 1,844/14,102 Month: 212/624 Week: 96/95 Day: 25/15 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 47 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 3 of 1311 (806552)
04-26-2017 9:31 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by CRR
04-26-2017 4:11 AM


It's being spun off into it's own thread to see if evolutionists can defend it.

We did, so that's a yes.

As you had no comeback, the question is now whether you can make so much as a token effort to refute it.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by CRR, posted 04-26-2017 4:11 AM CRR has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 47 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 6 of 1311 (806632)
04-26-2017 11:22 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by CRR
04-26-2017 11:15 PM


After all scientists were making sense of biology long before Darwin's theory of evolution appeared.

That's debatable. They were accumulating facts, but were they making sense of them?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by CRR, posted 04-26-2017 11:15 PM CRR has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by Chiroptera, posted 04-27-2017 9:12 AM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 47 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 15 of 1311 (806775)
04-27-2017 7:53 PM


Let me add what I posted on the other thread.

A lot in biology makes perfect sense without evolution. E.g. the physical adaptations of the giraffe to cope with its height are functional requirements ...

Further to my previous remarks, I would point out that only evolution makes sense of the fact that these are adaptations. Why should the neck of the giraffe, which is long and goes up, bear such a striking resemblance to the neck of, say, a pig, which is short and goes along?

(If we found two analogous designed objects, such as a footbridge across a short stream and a radio mast, which had the same basic plan, which were so obviously variations on the same theme, this would not make sense to us, we would be deeply puzzled.)

Now evolution does make perfect sense of the pig and the giraffe: they have common ancestry, they are adaptations of the same thing, and per the theory of evolution, evolution cannot scrap a design and go back to the drawing board.

Without evolution, how would you make sense of it? A creationist might get as far as "God chose to do it that way for some reason", but what is the reason?

---

This is a particularly good example because it is CRR's. He had the whole of nature to choose from to find one thing that does make sense without evolution, and he chose something that flagrantly doesn't.

Should we tell him about the recurrent laryngeal nerve?


  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 47 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 24 of 1311 (807197)
05-01-2017 11:32 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by CRR
05-01-2017 6:47 AM


Darwin's "Origin of Species" was published in 1859. The term biology in its modern sense appears to have been introduced independently by Thomas Beddoes (in 1799), Karl Friedrich Burdach (in 1800), Gottfried Reinhold Treviranus (Biologie oder Philosophie der lebenden Natur, 1802) and Jean-Baptiste Lamarck (Hydrogéologie, 1802). [wikipedia]

I think it was still considered a branch of Natural Science in Darwin's day.

However the study of biology goes back to Aristotle and Galen in ancient Greece, and probably goes much further back in less formal format. Observation and reasoning about the natural world goes back to the beginning of man.

Sure, but did people back then make sense of biological facts, or did they merely accumulate them?

People looked at rainbows for thousands of years too, but they didn't make sense before we had a theory of optics. (Of course, people had explanations back then too, usually variants on "God did it by magic", but that didn't actually make sense of the rainbow 'cos of being wrong.)

Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by CRR, posted 05-01-2017 6:47 AM CRR has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 47 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 25 of 1311 (807198)
05-01-2017 11:36 AM
Reply to: Message 20 by CRR
05-01-2017 6:57 AM


Re: What are you arguing?
Several people have posted specific examples that they think only make sense in the light of evolution. These would support position b) but not a).

Well, the burden of proof is on someone who disputes a generalization: it's up to them to find a counterexample.

You gave an example of something you thought did make sense without evolution, namely the anatomy of the giraffe. You were wrong. Would you like to try again?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by CRR, posted 05-01-2017 6:57 AM CRR has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 47 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 33 of 1311 (807415)
05-03-2017 1:50 AM
Reply to: Message 32 by Dredge
05-03-2017 12:49 AM


I still don't understand what Darwin did to advance biology.

No, you don't.

Are you saying that without him, biologists would not be aware, for example, that the interplay between mutations and natural selection can produce heritable changes in a population? Animal and plant breeders had been aware of such things for thousands of years.

No, they hadn't really understood it. Natural selection was seen as exerting only conservative pressures.

Without Darwin, would biologists have discovered drift, lateral gene transfer, recombination, etc, etc? Of course they would have.

No-one said otherwise.

If Darwin is responsible for nothing more than coming up with the theory that all life evolved from a common ancestor, then he has not contributed anything at all to the advancement of biology - all he's done is come up with a useless idea that is, at best, a curiosity of history. I mean, of what practical use is it to belief that whales evolved from some deer-like creature over a period of 50 million years?

No-one claimed that making sense of biology is invariably of practical use, just that one can't make sense of it except in the light of evolution.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by Dredge, posted 05-03-2017 12:49 AM Dredge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by Dredge, posted 05-03-2017 2:33 AM Dr Adequate has responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 47 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 35 of 1311 (807428)
05-03-2017 2:55 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by Dredge
05-03-2017 2:33 AM


What is "evolution"?

Heritable change. We've been through this.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Dredge, posted 05-03-2017 2:33 AM Dredge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by Dredge, posted 05-03-2017 3:04 AM Dr Adequate has responded
 Message 50 by Astrophile, posted 05-03-2017 6:22 PM Dr Adequate has responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 47 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 37 of 1311 (807431)
05-03-2017 3:17 AM
Reply to: Message 36 by Dredge
05-03-2017 3:04 AM


Yes, sorry; your defintion of evolution is heritable change in a population. So what's this got to do Darwin? Heritable changes in a population has been a known fact for thousands of years.

But people barely knew anything about it.

Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Dredge, posted 05-03-2017 3:04 AM Dredge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by Dredge, posted 05-03-2017 3:27 AM Dr Adequate has responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 47 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 39 of 1311 (807433)
05-03-2017 3:28 AM
Reply to: Message 38 by Dredge
05-03-2017 3:27 AM


If I said that nothing in the dynamics of the Solar System made sense except in the light of gravity, and acclaimed Newton as a brilliant scientist, would you reply: "So what's this got to do with Newton? Gravity has been a known fact for thousands of years."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by Dredge, posted 05-03-2017 3:27 AM Dredge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by Dredge, posted 05-03-2017 3:43 AM Dr Adequate has responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 47 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 41 of 1311 (807435)
05-03-2017 3:47 AM
Reply to: Message 40 by Dredge
05-03-2017 3:43 AM


Your straw man doesn't answer my question.

You should really find out what "straw man" means --- unless it is your mission in life to make a damn fool of yourself, in which case please do carry on as you are.

If there is still something which, having read my posts, you don't understand, or wish to pretend not to understand, perhaps you could ask me politely to explain it to you.

Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by Dredge, posted 05-03-2017 3:43 AM Dredge has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 47 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 42 of 1311 (807437)
05-03-2017 4:06 AM


No?

Goodnight then.


  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 47 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 52 of 1311 (807548)
05-03-2017 8:31 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by Astrophile
05-03-2017 6:22 PM


Perhaps one could say 'continuous and irreversible heritable change'.

It doesn't have to be.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by Astrophile, posted 05-03-2017 6:22 PM Astrophile has acknowledged this reply

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 47 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 54 of 1311 (807697)
05-05-2017 12:12 AM
Reply to: Message 53 by CRR
05-04-2017 7:48 PM


Not content with mere fallacious argument, you conclude with a brazen falsehood.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by CRR, posted 05-04-2017 7:48 PM CRR has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 47 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 95 of 1311 (807866)
05-06-2017 9:35 AM
Reply to: Message 81 by Dredge
05-06-2017 1:38 AM


Poor Tangle, you keep throwing up this line, but it's simply a mindless regurgitation of something you learn in atheist Sunday school. You have obviously never stopped to consider it's validity ...

What odd lies you tell. Do you actually hope to deceive Taq when you lie to him like that, or is it just a gratuitous display of dishonesty?

But you need to first realise that Darwinism is a cult. It hides itself under the cloak of science, but it is a full-blown cult nevertheless.

Try this exercise (which I would recommend to every member of the cult of Darwinism) - write out 30 times every day, "Mr. Charles Darwin is really Mr. Useless", and then, "Evolution = biology + the atheist cult of Darwinism" 30 times, and then, "Evolution is not a fact" 30 times.

"You've joined a cult! This is bad. Here, let me prescribe you some religious mantras that you should recite 30 times daily."


This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by Dredge, posted 05-06-2017 1:38 AM Dredge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 144 by Dredge, posted 05-09-2017 1:46 AM Dr Adequate has responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 47 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 112 of 1311 (807963)
05-07-2017 11:51 AM
Reply to: Message 110 by Davidjay
05-07-2017 8:51 AM


Re: Evolutionists have no time frames
Remember evolutionists have no timelines, time means nothing to them and they fear discussing their history.

That's a very stupid lie you just told.

Whom do you hope to deceive?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by Davidjay, posted 05-07-2017 8:51 AM Davidjay has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 113 by Davidjay, posted 05-07-2017 12:00 PM Dr Adequate has responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2021