Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 58 (9175 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: sirs
Post Volume: Total: 917,652 Year: 4,909/9,624 Month: 257/427 Week: 3/64 Day: 1/2 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Who Owns the Standard Definition of Evolution
K.Rose
Member (Idle past 93 days)
Posts: 140
From: Michigan
Joined: 02-02-2024


Message 107 of 698 (915026)
02-09-2024 12:10 PM
Reply to: Message 102 by Tanypteryx
02-08-2024 6:21 PM


I’ll accept that Evolutionism includes a broad category of studies, but there are a couple of essential components in in the Evolutionary process that go beyond mere natural selection and variance within like lifeforms. The notion of a random, non-directed, continuing common ancestry for all life forms is the most critical of these, critical in that it is the prerequisite for refuting Biblical Creation.
My effort here is to understand the evidence showing that this is possible. How does one life form evolve into another? What is the mechanism? Can or has it been observed? Can it be reproduced in the laboratory?
Scientists and Engineers understand the importance of observation and experimentation/testing, and the proper presentation of conclusions and their Certainty, including the Margin of Error, Probability, and Confidence, all derived using standard statistical methods. Note that Scientific Fact has a pretty high Certainty bar: Zero Error, 100% Probability, 100% Confidence.
If measurable testing and observation cannot be performed, then there is no opportunity to substantiate the validity-certainty of a technical proposition. Great minds spending great resources on great explanations is a reasonable start, but it cannot supplant repeatable demonstration.
These days the Great Deceit of many scientific theories lies in their presentation to the public as implied fact, and in allowing the misconception of factuality to stand.
If Evolutionism can meet the high bar of Scientific Fact, then it should be presented as such. If not, then the Certainty of Evolutionary conclusions must be divulged front and center.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by Tanypteryx, posted 02-08-2024 6:21 PM Tanypteryx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 112 by AZPaul3, posted 02-09-2024 1:54 PM K.Rose has replied
 Message 113 by Tanypteryx, posted 02-09-2024 2:10 PM K.Rose has not replied
 Message 117 by Granny Magda, posted 02-09-2024 3:38 PM K.Rose has not replied
 Message 120 by ICANT, posted 02-09-2024 4:17 PM K.Rose has not replied
 Message 139 by Taq, posted 02-09-2024 6:36 PM K.Rose has not replied
 Message 183 by Percy, posted 02-09-2024 8:45 PM K.Rose has replied
 Message 202 by dwise1, posted 02-10-2024 6:04 AM K.Rose has replied
 Message 229 by dwise1, posted 02-10-2024 2:00 PM K.Rose has replied

  
K.Rose
Member (Idle past 93 days)
Posts: 140
From: Michigan
Joined: 02-02-2024


Message 108 of 698 (915027)
02-09-2024 12:25 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by Tangle
02-08-2024 5:42 PM


What I'm doing is asking questions, prickly though they may be.
Confident Engineers and Scientists are generally eager to explain their hypotheses and address questions, if only to show their knowledge and reinforce their ideas. The good ones can break it down to terms their audience can understand, rather than launching into arcane technospeak.
I have had some thoughtful responses, some a bit impatient, and a great many disdainful. To paraphrase a few: "you don't know what you're talking about", "your questions are nonsensical", "go take a class", "...usual lying", "go away".
The defensiveness and reluctance to engage are quite telling. When you're over the target you'll take a lot of flak.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by Tangle, posted 02-08-2024 5:42 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 109 by Tangle, posted 02-09-2024 1:05 PM K.Rose has not replied
 Message 114 by AZPaul3, posted 02-09-2024 2:15 PM K.Rose has not replied
 Message 122 by Granny Magda, posted 02-09-2024 4:29 PM K.Rose has not replied
 Message 151 by dwise1, posted 02-09-2024 6:57 PM K.Rose has replied
 Message 184 by Percy, posted 02-09-2024 9:04 PM K.Rose has not replied

  
K.Rose
Member (Idle past 93 days)
Posts: 140
From: Michigan
Joined: 02-02-2024


Message 143 of 698 (915062)
02-09-2024 6:40 PM
Reply to: Message 112 by AZPaul3
02-09-2024 1:54 PM


If the random, non-directed evolution of one life form to another has been observed in operation and reproduced in the lab then please share the details.
Fact is absolute certainty - 100%! Granted there is probably no scientific proposition that can quite reach this point, but that's the target and the benchmark to measure against. If we're not 100%, then how close are we?
I'll accept that Evolution is well-documented and well-studied, but how accurate is it, what is its certainty? For example, if we take one of the evolution diagrams showing the myriad life forms emanating from a common ancestor, how certain are we of its accuracy?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by AZPaul3, posted 02-09-2024 1:54 PM AZPaul3 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 146 by Taq, posted 02-09-2024 6:50 PM K.Rose has replied
 Message 156 by AZPaul3, posted 02-09-2024 7:15 PM K.Rose has not replied
 Message 195 by Theodoric, posted 02-09-2024 10:57 PM K.Rose has not replied
 Message 215 by Percy, posted 02-10-2024 9:33 AM K.Rose has replied

  
K.Rose
Member (Idle past 93 days)
Posts: 140
From: Michigan
Joined: 02-02-2024


Message 200 of 698 (915122)
02-10-2024 5:24 AM
Reply to: Message 146 by Taq
02-09-2024 6:50 PM


The Macroevolution link you provided, unintelligible to most laymen, discusses common materials found across lifeforms, which is as much or more of an argument for a Creator. Much as a refrigerator or bicycle manufacturer would re-use favorable design features across various products.
Besides, at issue is the key dynamic of evolution, the linchpin, the one that is foisted ubiquitously on the public, which asserts that one higher lifeform (mammal, reptile) can eventually procreate to a completely different higher life form. Where is the evidence and certainty for that presented, beyond the explanation "Life Form A shares traits with Life Form B and somewhere in-between is where the evolution happened"?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 146 by Taq, posted 02-09-2024 6:50 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 201 by PaulK, posted 02-10-2024 5:55 AM K.Rose has not replied
 Message 203 by dwise1, posted 02-10-2024 6:31 AM K.Rose has not replied
 Message 245 by Percy, posted 02-10-2024 6:36 PM K.Rose has not replied
 Message 349 by Taq, posted 02-12-2024 7:38 PM K.Rose has replied

  
K.Rose
Member (Idle past 93 days)
Posts: 140
From: Michigan
Joined: 02-02-2024


Message 211 of 698 (915134)
02-10-2024 8:33 AM
Reply to: Message 183 by Percy
02-09-2024 8:45 PM


There is much we have learned about biological make-up, chromosomes, DNA, et al., and this has all been accomplished through the painstaking work of sincere scientists. I suspect the majority of the knowledge that has been amassed is observable and, effectively, factual.
This notion that biological similarity equals some type of ancestral link between all lifeforms - the linchpin of evolutionary theory - has not been proven nor disproven empirically. Keep searching for this if the will and the resources are there, but presenting this evolution "linchpin" as just another factual biological observation is, simply, disingenuous.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 183 by Percy, posted 02-09-2024 8:45 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 213 by Percy, posted 02-10-2024 8:43 AM K.Rose has replied
 Message 352 by Taq, posted 02-12-2024 7:45 PM K.Rose has not replied

  
K.Rose
Member (Idle past 93 days)
Posts: 140
From: Michigan
Joined: 02-02-2024


Message 214 of 698 (915137)
02-10-2024 8:59 AM
Reply to: Message 213 by Percy
02-10-2024 8:43 AM


There's a great deal we know about DNA, and any legitimate scientist will concede there's a great deal we don't know.
Ancestry.com can tell people whatever they want - who's to argue?
We can take a set of known parents and their off spring, compare their DNA, and draw conclusions - this is legitimate experimentation with hard, empirical data
- but extrapolating these conclusions and extending them to all past and present lifeforms is mere supposition.
All I would ask of scientists is to maintain overt separation between biological fact and evolutionary supposition.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 213 by Percy, posted 02-10-2024 8:43 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 216 by PaulK, posted 02-10-2024 9:40 AM K.Rose has replied
 Message 218 by Percy, posted 02-10-2024 9:51 AM K.Rose has replied

  
K.Rose
Member (Idle past 93 days)
Posts: 140
From: Michigan
Joined: 02-02-2024


Message 217 of 698 (915140)
02-10-2024 9:51 AM
Reply to: Message 151 by dwise1
02-09-2024 6:57 PM


It appears that there is a danger within Scientific disciplines, that when factuality as determined by empirically demonstrable conclusion cannot be had, an arrogant fervor takes hold and the group simply declares as fact the opinion of the most credentialed within the group.
A little more on this in Messages 211 and 213.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 151 by dwise1, posted 02-09-2024 6:57 PM dwise1 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 219 by Percy, posted 02-10-2024 10:32 AM K.Rose has replied
 Message 221 by PaulK, posted 02-10-2024 11:14 AM K.Rose has replied
 Message 224 by AZPaul3, posted 02-10-2024 12:19 PM K.Rose has replied
 Message 355 by Taq, posted 02-12-2024 7:50 PM K.Rose has not replied

  
K.Rose
Member (Idle past 93 days)
Posts: 140
From: Michigan
Joined: 02-02-2024


Message 240 of 698 (915167)
02-10-2024 5:42 PM
Reply to: Message 216 by PaulK
02-10-2024 9:40 AM


Where does the extrapolation cease to be valid? Good question, and it will remain a good question so long as the ancestry in question is/was not available for proper measurement and observation.
I accept that Evolutionary biologists read common ancestry into the genetics evidence; however, all genetic evidence points to a Creator.
Please not that I would not conspire to prevent biologists from pursuing the common ancestry conclusion, nor would I forcibly prevent them from pursuing this, nor intimidate them into abandoning the pursuit, nor force-feed them my views.
Also, the fact that you have drawn a conclusion from a set of evidence does not make that conclusion fact.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 216 by PaulK, posted 02-10-2024 9:40 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 242 by Tanypteryx, posted 02-10-2024 6:06 PM K.Rose has replied
 Message 243 by Tangle, posted 02-10-2024 6:08 PM K.Rose has replied
 Message 259 by Percy, posted 02-10-2024 8:26 PM K.Rose has not replied
 Message 272 by PaulK, posted 02-11-2024 1:20 AM K.Rose has not replied

  
K.Rose
Member (Idle past 93 days)
Posts: 140
From: Michigan
Joined: 02-02-2024


Message 241 of 698 (915168)
02-10-2024 5:56 PM
Reply to: Message 215 by Percy
02-10-2024 9:33 AM


Agreed, 100% can never/almost never be attained. Offhand I can't think of anything that does, nor anything that might potentially do so.
Regarding morphology, relatedness, and species designations: The concept of common ancestry - maybe this is better described as something else, perhaps? - is the part of evolutionary biology that put its supporters at such stark, sometimes virulent odds with the Creationists.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 215 by Percy, posted 02-10-2024 9:33 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 244 by Tanypteryx, posted 02-10-2024 6:17 PM K.Rose has not replied
 Message 260 by Percy, posted 02-10-2024 8:33 PM K.Rose has not replied
 Message 273 by PaulK, posted 02-11-2024 1:25 AM K.Rose has not replied
 Message 274 by DrJones*, posted 02-11-2024 1:41 AM K.Rose has not replied

  
K.Rose
Member (Idle past 93 days)
Posts: 140
From: Michigan
Joined: 02-02-2024


Message 246 of 698 (915175)
02-10-2024 6:51 PM
Reply to: Message 218 by Percy
02-10-2024 9:51 AM


It's important to recognize that the unknown outweighs the known. This is the purpose for empirical testing - it's a big step in removing the unknown as a factor.
As a starting point it's reasonable to assume that past life has been lived much as it is today, in general, and albeit in much less physical/material comfort and with far mor day-to-day threat to life and health.
But the unknown outweighs the known. We can take the scraps of data that we do have and put together an explanation of how it all went down, giving meticulous consideration to each data point. But, absent any proper record-keeping, we can never really be certain of how accurate that explanation really is.
- Ancestry.com may be one of the foremost DNA experts, I don't know. But based on the timing and presentation of their product hey seem to be more oriented toward curious pre-neophytes, rather than actual biologists.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 218 by Percy, posted 02-10-2024 9:51 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 261 by Percy, posted 02-10-2024 8:52 PM K.Rose has not replied

  
K.Rose
Member (Idle past 93 days)
Posts: 140
From: Michigan
Joined: 02-02-2024


Message 247 of 698 (915176)
02-10-2024 7:04 PM
Reply to: Message 219 by Percy
02-10-2024 10:32 AM


Throughout this string I have requested empirical testing that demonstrates common ancestry for all life forms. I have yet to see it. However, here is an aggregate summary of the responses I have received:
"Many highly knowledgeable scientists have been working on this for a very long time, and this explanation represents their conclusions. Anyone who challenges this explanation is either uneducated in the matter or willfully ignorant."
Again, with no empirical test data presented, and no accounting for the unknowns.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 219 by Percy, posted 02-10-2024 10:32 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 262 by Percy, posted 02-10-2024 9:00 PM K.Rose has not replied
 Message 269 by Theodoric, posted 02-11-2024 12:30 AM K.Rose has replied
 Message 270 by Theodoric, posted 02-11-2024 12:30 AM K.Rose has not replied
 Message 271 by AZPaul3, posted 02-11-2024 1:08 AM K.Rose has not replied
 Message 276 by PaulK, posted 02-11-2024 1:57 AM K.Rose has not replied

  
K.Rose
Member (Idle past 93 days)
Posts: 140
From: Michigan
Joined: 02-02-2024


Message 249 of 698 (915178)
02-10-2024 7:12 PM
Reply to: Message 221 by PaulK
02-10-2024 11:14 AM


It is supposition, that's why it is prefaced with "It appears".
See Message 247 for an example of why it appears this way, a.k.a, Fact as Established by the Concurrence of the Credentialed.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 221 by PaulK, posted 02-10-2024 11:14 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 277 by PaulK, posted 02-11-2024 2:08 AM K.Rose has not replied

  
K.Rose
Member (Idle past 93 days)
Posts: 140
From: Michigan
Joined: 02-02-2024


Message 251 of 698 (915180)
02-10-2024 7:20 PM
Reply to: Message 224 by AZPaul3
02-10-2024 12:19 PM


I don't mind that there are those that there are those who disagree with me vehemently. I have come to expect this on every front of life. So I choose my battles very carefully.
In this matter a large-scale misrepresentation is being foisted on the public, even though it may be as subtle as "it is" vs. "it seems to be".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 224 by AZPaul3, posted 02-10-2024 12:19 PM AZPaul3 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 264 by AZPaul3, posted 02-10-2024 10:33 PM K.Rose has not replied
 Message 295 by Percy, posted 02-11-2024 7:28 AM K.Rose has not replied

  
K.Rose
Member (Idle past 93 days)
Posts: 140
From: Michigan
Joined: 02-02-2024


Message 252 of 698 (915181)
02-10-2024 7:26 PM
Reply to: Message 229 by dwise1
02-10-2024 2:00 PM


Yes 100% is a high bar, and in other posts I have addressed the fact that this essentially unachievable. But it remains the goal, the thing against which we can track the progress of our efforts.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 229 by dwise1, posted 02-10-2024 2:00 PM dwise1 has not replied

  
K.Rose
Member (Idle past 93 days)
Posts: 140
From: Michigan
Joined: 02-02-2024


Message 253 of 698 (915182)
02-10-2024 7:32 PM
Reply to: Message 242 by Tanypteryx
02-10-2024 6:06 PM


You are correct, I do not have any empirical test data that conforms to the Scientific Method.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 242 by Tanypteryx, posted 02-10-2024 6:06 PM Tanypteryx has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024