Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 77 (8905 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 04-21-2019 4:28 PM
25 online now:
JonF, kjsimons, marc9000, PaulK, Tanypteryx, Theodoric (6 members, 19 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 849,997 Year: 5,034/19,786 Month: 1,156/873 Week: 52/460 Day: 52/91 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1234
5
67Next
Author Topic:   Evolution is random! Stop saying it isn't!
Percy
Member
Posts: 18370
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.0


Message 61 of 99 (415990)
08-13-2007 9:15 AM
Reply to: Message 59 by epo5
08-13-2007 1:13 AM


Re: Got it.
I can only echo what Doddy said. Your initial message touched on many different topics. Pick one and submit a thread proposal at the Proposed New Topics forum.

Messages aren't usually deleted at EvC Forum.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by epo5, posted 08-13-2007 1:13 AM epo5 has not yet responded

    
epo5
Junior Member (Idle past 4178 days)
Posts: 13
Joined: 08-12-2007


Message 62 of 99 (416009)
08-13-2007 10:38 AM
Reply to: Message 60 by Doddy
08-13-2007 4:09 AM


Re: Got it.
Thanks for the recommendation on the new threads. I have to look at it again to decide what to do.

As far as you're response on mutation is concerned, unless I'm missing something, what you're saying makes no sense. If mutation cannot account for life, there is nothing to "select."

Furthermore, "selection" eliminates the bad and leaves the good. The point of that piece was that all the mutations that allegedly led to life on erath would have had to produce many deformed organisms that would have been "selected" out of life on earth. The fossil records show that there are no such massive number of deformed species. This does absolutely disprove evolution.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by Doddy, posted 08-13-2007 4:09 AM Doddy has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by EighteenDelta, posted 08-13-2007 12:04 PM epo5 has not yet responded
 Message 64 by crashfrog, posted 08-13-2007 12:05 PM epo5 has not yet responded
 Message 65 by bdfoster, posted 08-13-2007 12:25 PM epo5 has not yet responded

    
EighteenDelta
Inactive Member


Message 63 of 99 (416019)
08-13-2007 12:04 PM
Reply to: Message 62 by epo5
08-13-2007 10:38 AM


Re: Got it.
'Good' and 'bad' mutations is kind of a poor description. The environmental conditions will determine what's good and bad often times, and these environmental changes mean genetic preference changes. Cold weather, hot weather, or increased or decreased sunlight or rain Increased rain and decreased sunlight for example means tree become predominant and increased sunlight with decreased rain leads to grasses becoming predominant for example. Whats beneficial for one generation might prove disastrous to the next, and the mutation that proved fatal so many times before may provide the tool for exploiting a new environmental niche to the next.

The lack of fossils is as ridiculous an argument as the Kirk Cameron argument for the lack of a 'crocaduck' as evidence against evolution. Utterly ridiculous. You really need to understand how few animals have ever been fossilized then realize how many species will never be represented in the fossil records.

Edited by EighteenDelta, : No reason given.


"I refuse to prove that I exist," says God, "for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing."

"But," says Man, "the Babel fish is a dead giveaway isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves that You exist, and so therefore, by Your own arguments, You don't. Q.E.D."

"Oh dear," says God, "I hadn't thought of that," and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.

"Oh, that was easy," says Man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets himself killed on the next zebra crossing.

--------------

"Debate is an art form. It is about the winning of arguments. It is not about the discovery of truth. There are certain rules and procedures to debate that really have nothing to do with establishing fact — which creationists have mastered. Some of those rules are: never say anything positive about your own position because it can be attacked, but chip away at what appear to be the weaknesses in your opponent's position. They are good at that. I don't think I could beat the creationists at debate. I can tie them. But in courtrooms they are terrible, because in courtrooms you cannot give speeches. In a courtroom you have to answer direct questions about the positive status of your belief. We destroyed them in Arkansas. On the second day of the two-week trial we had our victory party!"
-Stephen Jay Gould

----------------

“ I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. ”
—Stephen F. Roberts


This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by epo5, posted 08-13-2007 10:38 AM epo5 has not yet responded

  
crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 64 of 99 (416020)
08-13-2007 12:05 PM
Reply to: Message 62 by epo5
08-13-2007 10:38 AM


Re: Got it.
The point of that piece was that all the mutations that allegedly led to life on erath would have had to produce many deformed organisms that would have been "selected" out of life on earth. The fossil records show that there are no such massive number of deformed species.

Your problem here is that you radically misunderstand both the nature of mutation and what tends to lead to deformities.

You, yourself, have almost 100 mutations of your very own.

Are you deformed?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by epo5, posted 08-13-2007 10:38 AM epo5 has not yet responded

  
bdfoster
Member (Idle past 2985 days)
Posts: 60
From: Riverside, CA
Joined: 05-09-2007


Message 65 of 99 (416023)
08-13-2007 12:25 PM
Reply to: Message 62 by epo5
08-13-2007 10:38 AM


Re: Got it.
quote:
Furthermore, "selection" eliminates the bad and leaves the good. The point of that piece was that all the mutations that allegedly led to life on erath would have had to produce many deformed organisms that would have been "selected" out of life on earth. The fossil records show that there are no such massive number of deformed species. This does absolutely disprove evolution.

I've been away from this thread for a while, but to this I just have to say, no, no, no!!! You're missing the point. Words like deformed, or it's more objective partner, non-functional, imply that there is a proper form or function. In a changing environment something that we think is "deformed" may have a survival advantage. Whatever random mutation caused the "deformity" is selected for (the opposite of randomness), and now the ones without the mutation are "deformed". Trilobites look pretty deformed to me.

As for natural selection being random, I suppose we could play word games and come up with a definition for random that would include natural selection. But I prefer to stick with the standard english definition where biased and random are near antonyms. There is a real world difference between a truly random selection of a population, and a selection naturally biased toward fittness. That difference is the driving force behind evolution.


Brent
This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by epo5, posted 08-13-2007 10:38 AM epo5 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by Doddy, posted 08-13-2007 7:13 PM bdfoster has responded

  
epo5
Junior Member (Idle past 4178 days)
Posts: 13
Joined: 08-12-2007


Message 66 of 99 (416029)
08-13-2007 1:01 PM


Fossil record PROVES Darwinian evolution never happened
I find it strange that you all pretty much say I missed the point. I, on the other hand, KNOW you all miss the point here.

I deliberately used the non-technical words good and bad because they're broad terms that describe it to even lay people who might be reading this.

You're all pointing out things that are common knowledge to anyone, including myself, who even delve into this topic. I know very well that the fossil record will not record everything.

You people are completely, totally missing what's being said here. If random mutations, meaning a series of accidents caused all these life forms to develop, there should have a been thousands of life forms wich did not work out and were eliminated by natural selection. These "unfit" life forms should have far out numbered the "successful" life forms and should have been represented in the fossil record in proportion to the relative numbers they were -- which had to be huge -- even if the fossil records are not complete.

They are not represented in the fossil record in any significant degree. They never happened. And if they never happened, you people are talking about a genetic design or blueprint that directed life. I don't care what name you want to give that, but that's not the scientific concept of evolution. Whether you admit it or not, you people actually believe that some Super Power directed life.

Yes, the fossil record does PROVE Darwinian evolution never happened.


Replies to this message:
 Message 68 by EighteenDelta, posted 08-13-2007 1:11 PM epo5 has responded
 Message 69 by bdfoster, posted 08-13-2007 1:29 PM epo5 has not yet responded
 Message 70 by crashfrog, posted 08-13-2007 1:33 PM epo5 has not yet responded

    
epo5
Junior Member (Idle past 4178 days)
Posts: 13
Joined: 08-12-2007


Message 67 of 99 (416030)
08-13-2007 1:05 PM


Correction
Correction: "should have a been thousands of life forms wich did not work out"

Should say: "should have been thousands of life forms which did not work out for every one that did"


    
EighteenDelta
Inactive Member


Message 68 of 99 (416032)
08-13-2007 1:11 PM
Reply to: Message 66 by epo5
08-13-2007 1:01 PM


Re: Fossil record PROVES Darwinian evolution never happened
First I's like to say, thanks for condescending to all of us.

Second I'd like to submit this to you, The fossil records are in fact full of 'unfit' species. The vast majority are extinct, and not without cause. Do you mean to complain at the lack of mutated monstrosities that fill horror movies? Two head snakes? What are you asking to find in the records? Crocaducks?

Edited by EighteenDelta, : No reason given.

Edited by EighteenDelta, : No reason given.


"I refuse to prove that I exist," says God, "for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing."

"But," says Man, "the Babel fish is a dead giveaway isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves that You exist, and so therefore, by Your own arguments, You don't. Q.E.D."

"Oh dear," says God, "I hadn't thought of that," and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.

"Oh, that was easy," says Man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets himself killed on the next zebra crossing.

--------------

"Debate is an art form. It is about the winning of arguments. It is not about the discovery of truth. There are certain rules and procedures to debate that really have nothing to do with establishing fact — which creationists have mastered. Some of those rules are: never say anything positive about your own position because it can be attacked, but chip away at what appear to be the weaknesses in your opponent's position. They are good at that. I don't think I could beat the creationists at debate. I can tie them. But in courtrooms they are terrible, because in courtrooms you cannot give speeches. In a courtroom you have to answer direct questions about the positive status of your belief. We destroyed them in Arkansas. On the second day of the two-week trial we had our victory party!"
-Stephen Jay Gould

----------------

“ I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. ”
—Stephen F. Roberts


This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by epo5, posted 08-13-2007 1:01 PM epo5 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by epo5, posted 08-13-2007 3:17 PM EighteenDelta has not yet responded

  
bdfoster
Member (Idle past 2985 days)
Posts: 60
From: Riverside, CA
Joined: 05-09-2007


Message 69 of 99 (416036)
08-13-2007 1:29 PM
Reply to: Message 66 by epo5
08-13-2007 1:01 PM


Re: Fossil record PROVES Darwinian evolution never happened
epo5 writes:

I find it strange that you all pretty much say I missed the point. I, on the other hand, KNOW you all miss the point here.
I deliberately used the non-technical words good and bad because they're broad terms that describe it to even lay people who might be reading this.

You're all pointing out things that are common knowledge to anyone, including myself, who even delve into this topic. I know very well that the fossil record will not record everything.

You people are completely, totally missing what's being said here. If random mutations, meaning a series of accidents caused all these life forms to develop, there should have a been thousands of life forms wich did not work out and were eliminated by natural selection. These "unfit" life forms should have far out numbered the "successful" life forms and should have been represented in the fossil record in proportion to the relative numbers they were -- which had to be huge -- even if the fossil records are not complete.

They are not represented in the fossil record in any significant degree. They never happened. And if they never happened, you people are talking about a genetic design or blueprint that directed life. I don't care what name you want to give that, but that's not the scientific concept of evolution. Whether you admit it or not, you people actually believe that some Super Power directed life.

Yes, the fossil record does PROVE Darwinian evolution never happened.

It's not that good and bad are non-technical, they literally have no meaning at all in this context. The words assign value to utterly valueless physical observations.

And you're right, there should be thousands, countless numbers even, of life forms which did not work out and were eliminated by natural selection. These would have existed for relatively few generations, maby a few thousand years. A snapshot of geologic time. To expect these to be preserved in appreciable numbers is unreasonable. That issue has been addressed by Eldridge and Gould and other PE theorists.


Brent
This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by epo5, posted 08-13-2007 1:01 PM epo5 has not yet responded

  
crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 70 of 99 (416038)
08-13-2007 1:33 PM
Reply to: Message 66 by epo5
08-13-2007 1:01 PM


Re: Fossil record PROVES Darwinian evolution never happened
If random mutations, meaning a series of accidents caused all these life forms to develop, there should have a been thousands of life forms wich did not work out and were eliminated by natural selection.

But there are. 99%+ of all the species that have ever existed are extinct. The fossil record, largely, is a record of extinct organisms.

Weren't they naturally selected against, if they're extinct now?

They are not represented in the fossil record in any significant degree.

Why do you say that, when more than 99% of all species have gone extinct? The fossil record is almost entirely composed of species that are now extinct.

Weren't they the species you're talking about? The ones that you say aren't there?

Yes, the fossil record does PROVE Darwinian evolution never happened.

How can it, when what you say isn't there actually is?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by epo5, posted 08-13-2007 1:01 PM epo5 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by bdfoster, posted 08-13-2007 1:56 PM crashfrog has responded

  
bdfoster
Member (Idle past 2985 days)
Posts: 60
From: Riverside, CA
Joined: 05-09-2007


Message 71 of 99 (416041)
08-13-2007 1:56 PM
Reply to: Message 70 by crashfrog
08-13-2007 1:33 PM


Re: Fossil record PROVES Darwinian evolution never happened
Don't want to speak for epo5 but I think he was talking about the unsucessful evolutionary experiments. The tiny little thorns on the tree of life. It's true that most of the species represented in the fossil record are now extinct. But most were very sucessful. Trilobites are extinct now but were very successful, and occupied a large branch on the tree of life. But there undoubtedly countless evolutionary experiments that didn't work and amounted to aborted little buds on the tree of life that had no hope of ever being represented in the fossil record.


Brent
This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by crashfrog, posted 08-13-2007 1:33 PM crashfrog has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by EighteenDelta, posted 08-13-2007 2:27 PM bdfoster has not yet responded
 Message 73 by crashfrog, posted 08-13-2007 3:15 PM bdfoster has responded

  
EighteenDelta
Inactive Member


Message 72 of 99 (416048)
08-13-2007 2:27 PM
Reply to: Message 71 by bdfoster
08-13-2007 1:56 PM


Re: Fossil record PROVES Darwinian evolution never happened
There may well be examples of these evolutionary dead ends already filling the cabinets of palaeontologists. There are fossils represented by single examples, while the vast majority of those are surely not the kinds of 'failed experiments' you are talking about, certainly some of them could. Even in our own branch of that tree we have evolutionary dead ends, like the Homo floresiensis. That seems to fit the description of what Epo5 is asking for pretty well.

Edited by EighteenDelta, : No reason given.


"I refuse to prove that I exist," says God, "for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing."

"But," says Man, "the Babel fish is a dead giveaway isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves that You exist, and so therefore, by Your own arguments, You don't. Q.E.D."

"Oh dear," says God, "I hadn't thought of that," and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.

"Oh, that was easy," says Man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets himself killed on the next zebra crossing.

--------------

"Debate is an art form. It is about the winning of arguments. It is not about the discovery of truth. There are certain rules and procedures to debate that really have nothing to do with establishing fact — which creationists have mastered. Some of those rules are: never say anything positive about your own position because it can be attacked, but chip away at what appear to be the weaknesses in your opponent's position. They are good at that. I don't think I could beat the creationists at debate. I can tie them. But in courtrooms they are terrible, because in courtrooms you cannot give speeches. In a courtroom you have to answer direct questions about the positive status of your belief. We destroyed them in Arkansas. On the second day of the two-week trial we had our victory party!"
-Stephen Jay Gould

----------------

“ I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. ”
—Stephen F. Roberts


This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by bdfoster, posted 08-13-2007 1:56 PM bdfoster has not yet responded

  
crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 73 of 99 (416054)
08-13-2007 3:15 PM
Reply to: Message 71 by bdfoster
08-13-2007 1:56 PM


Re: Fossil record PROVES Darwinian evolution never happened
Don't want to speak for epo5 but I think he was talking about the unsucessful evolutionary experiments.

If the 99% of species that went extinct aren't "unsuccessful", exactly what are they?

Every individual is an evolutionary experiment. The ones that fail are the ones who die without having offspring. Surely it should be sufficiently obvious that some individuals die without having offspring.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by bdfoster, posted 08-13-2007 1:56 PM bdfoster has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by EighteenDelta, posted 08-13-2007 3:20 PM crashfrog has not yet responded
 Message 83 by bdfoster, posted 08-13-2007 5:47 PM crashfrog has not yet responded

  
epo5
Junior Member (Idle past 4178 days)
Posts: 13
Joined: 08-12-2007


Message 74 of 99 (416056)
08-13-2007 3:17 PM
Reply to: Message 68 by EighteenDelta
08-13-2007 1:11 PM


Crocaducks
"Do you mean to complain at the lack of mutated monstrosities that fill horror movies? Two head snakes? What are you asking to find in the records? Crocaducks?"

This exactly what I'm asking to find. I don't see how making light of it impacts the fact that they should have existed. I see your ridicule, I don't see your argument.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by EighteenDelta, posted 08-13-2007 1:11 PM EighteenDelta has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by crashfrog, posted 08-13-2007 3:30 PM epo5 has not yet responded
 Message 79 by RAZD, posted 08-13-2007 4:51 PM epo5 has responded

    
EighteenDelta
Inactive Member


Message 75 of 99 (416058)
08-13-2007 3:20 PM
Reply to: Message 73 by crashfrog
08-13-2007 3:15 PM


Re: Fossil record PROVES Darwinian evolution never happened
It's just the usual Loki's Wager maneuvering. Science will never be able to provide enough transitional species to satisfy those who don't want to be satisfied and there will never be enough examples of 'failed experiments' given to satisfy those who don't want to be convinced.


"I refuse to prove that I exist," says God, "for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing."

"But," says Man, "the Babel fish is a dead giveaway isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves that You exist, and so therefore, by Your own arguments, You don't. Q.E.D."

"Oh dear," says God, "I hadn't thought of that," and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.

"Oh, that was easy," says Man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets himself killed on the next zebra crossing.

--------------

"Debate is an art form. It is about the winning of arguments. It is not about the discovery of truth. There are certain rules and procedures to debate that really have nothing to do with establishing fact — which creationists have mastered. Some of those rules are: never say anything positive about your own position because it can be attacked, but chip away at what appear to be the weaknesses in your opponent's position. They are good at that. I don't think I could beat the creationists at debate. I can tie them. But in courtrooms they are terrible, because in courtrooms you cannot give speeches. In a courtroom you have to answer direct questions about the positive status of your belief. We destroyed them in Arkansas. On the second day of the two-week trial we had our victory party!"
-Stephen Jay Gould

----------------

“ I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. ”
—Stephen F. Roberts


This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by crashfrog, posted 08-13-2007 3:15 PM crashfrog has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 80 by epo5, posted 08-13-2007 4:55 PM EighteenDelta has not yet responded

  
Prev1234
5
67Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019