Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 84 (8913 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 06-16-2019 1:30 AM
16 online now:
DrJones* (1 member, 15 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Arnold Wolf
Post Volume:
Total: 853,783 Year: 8,819/19,786 Month: 1,241/2,119 Week: 1/576 Day: 1/50 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
1
23456
...
9Next
Author Topic:   What is evolution?
subbie
Member
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 1 of 122 (455921)
02-14-2008 2:40 PM


In another thread, ICANT wrote

I know what evolution is.

I also know what is being preached as evolution.

Probably the number one biggest complaint most of us have about creos is that they in fact don't know what the ToE says, and usually end up arguing against a misunderstanding, rather than the real thing. I assume everyone would agree with me that it's counterproductive to argue against evolution based on what it doesn't say.

I would like give you creos an opportunity to prove that you in fact do know both "what evolution is" and "what is being preached as evolution."

Tell us.

I'm not asking you to provide any evidence for or against any theory. I'm not asking you to argue for or against it. In fact, I'd rather you not argue against it in this thread. I just want you to describe what you think the ToE says. Moreover, if you think you understand evolution (macro, micro or otherwise) but think that it contradicts with what the ToE says, please describe that conflict.

I would much prefer that you cite a source for your understanding. I'd also much prefer that you cite a scientific source for your understanding. If you can only find creationist sites that support your understanding of what the ToE is, you might seriously want to consider that your understanding is flawed.

In any event, please tell me what you think the ToE is.


Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin

We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat


Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by Admin, posted 02-15-2008 8:58 AM subbie has responded
 Message 6 by Hill Billy, posted 02-16-2008 12:40 PM subbie has not yet responded
 Message 7 by ICANT, posted 02-16-2008 1:52 PM subbie has not yet responded
 Message 63 by Buckfan328, posted 05-13-2008 4:37 PM subbie has not yet responded
 Message 73 by IamJoseph, posted 05-16-2008 8:55 AM subbie has not yet responded

Admin
Director
Posts: 12600
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 2 of 122 (456060)
02-15-2008 8:58 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by subbie
02-14-2008 2:40 PM


This is a legitimate proposal, but there will be rampant drift as purported definitional flaws are discussed. How do you propose responding to the offered definitions without getting into potentially detailed discussions of the true nature of evolutionary theory?


--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by subbie, posted 02-14-2008 2:40 PM subbie has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by subbie, posted 02-15-2008 4:02 PM Admin has responded

  
subbie
Member
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 3 of 122 (456130)
02-15-2008 4:02 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by Admin
02-15-2008 8:58 AM


I'm guessing there will be a great deal of work to be done on the basics before we get anywhere near discussing details.

My impression has been that things are more likely to get off topic the more different folks there are tossing their two cents worth in. I guess my suggestion for this thread would be perhaps for the science types to avoid piling on and trying to limit it to one or two people discussing each different proposed description. I don't think it will be necessary to impose any particular restrictions on the thread. If science types support their points with outside resources, I suspect that will in effect keep it from getting too crowded.


Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin

We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat


This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by Admin, posted 02-15-2008 8:58 AM Admin has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by Admin, posted 02-16-2008 7:35 AM subbie has not yet responded

Admin
Director
Posts: 12600
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 4 of 122 (456196)
02-16-2008 7:35 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by subbie
02-15-2008 4:02 PM


I'm going to promote this because it has a good chance of stimulating some valuable discussion, but if the thread starts to wander over too many different topics within evolution then we'll have to refocus it more narrowly.


--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by subbie, posted 02-15-2008 4:02 PM subbie has not yet responded

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12600
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 5 of 122 (456197)
02-16-2008 7:36 AM


Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.
  
Hill Billy
Member (Idle past 3516 days)
Posts: 163
From: The hills
Joined: 01-26-2008


Message 6 of 122 (456224)
02-16-2008 12:40 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by subbie
02-14-2008 2:40 PM


Whats the difference between a duck?
I would like give you creos an opportunity to prove that you in fact do know both "what evolution is"

Tell us.

Ok, I'll try, isn't evolution the theory that says living things change , through reproduction, over time? That one type of critter, after generations of reproduction may become a different type of critter? That certain types of critters will be unable to reproduce and their "coding" will be lost to the pool, while others will increase in numbers due to "favorable conditions" ? That the make up of a critter will change with reproduction?

I believe that's a simplistic version of the theory.

"what is being preached as evolution."

Some of the things being preached are that this theory proves conclusively that every living thing originated with one single living thing which originated with no living thing and that relatively simple things can become extremely complex things just by reproduction and selection. It is also being preached that all this living originated with nothing living and to ask how is a nonsense question.

Edited by Hill Billy, : for clairity


The years tell what the days never knew.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by subbie, posted 02-14-2008 2:40 PM subbie has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by Dr Adequate, posted 02-16-2008 1:57 PM Hill Billy has responded
 Message 10 by Percy, posted 02-16-2008 2:10 PM Hill Billy has responded

ICANT
Member
Posts: 6187
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 7 of 122 (456236)
02-16-2008 1:52 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by subbie
02-14-2008 2:40 PM


Re: I Know
Hi subbie,

subbie writes:

In another thread, ICANT wrote

I know what evolution is.

I also know what is being preached as evolution.

Probably the number one biggest complaint most of us have about creos is that they in fact don't know what the ToE says, and usually end up arguing against a misunderstanding, rather than the real thing. I assume everyone would agree with me that it's counterproductive to argue against evolution based on what it doesn't say.

I stated: "I know what evolution is".

Simply put evolution is change.

Webster says:http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/evolution

1: one of a set of prescribed movements

2 a: a process of change in a certain direction :
unfolding b: the action or an instance of forming and giving something off :
emission c (1): a process of continuous change from a lower, simpler, or worse to a higher, more complex, or better state :
growth (2): a process of gradual and relatively peaceful social, political, and economic advance
d: something evolved

3: the process of working out or developing

4 a: the historical development of a biological group (as a race or species) :
phylogeny b: a theory that the various types of animals and plants have their origin in other preexisting types and that the distinguishable differences are due to modifications in successive generations; also : the process described by this theory

5: the extraction of a mathematical root

6: a process in which the whole universe is a progression of interrelated phenomena

I said: "I also know what is being preached as evolution.

Using my definition of evolution what is being preached is:

About 13+ billion years ago there was something about the size of a pea. It was very, very, very hot. It was very compact as it contained everything you see in the universe and everything you cannot see.

We can not say anything about the origin of that pea sized universe as GR breaks down at this point and Science can not tell us anything about it. Where it came from, how it formed if it came from something that had existed before, or if it came from an absence of anything.

This universe began to expand and from this time forward we have a theory that explains the changes that took place. the Big Bang Theory.

About 4.5 billion years ago the earth was formed, and it was very, very hot. It cooled to the point that life appeared from the absence of anything. Now the TOE explains how all life came from this single cell life form. We do not attempt to find out how it formed we just believe it happened.
This single cell lifeform began to change and formed multi cell lifeforms. These multi cell lifeform changed enough over time to produce every living and extinct lifeform that has ever existed on earth and exist today.

Don't ask us to produce proof of anything, because in Science nothing is a proven fact, even though we believe it. Don't ask us for evidence, we will show you what little we have then blow all kinds of smoke to fill in the millions of years between what we can present. Besides we know what we are talking about so you should just accept what we say.

Now I have sat in the pew of your church for over a year and I have listened to many messages from many different preachers and this is the message I hear preached about evolution.

So you can jump up and down and scream and shout no, no, no, all you want. That is not going to change my mind about what I see being preached.

If you want to change my mind I suggest you do as admin has tried to tell us over the last few weeks. Cut out the bickering, personal attacks, arguing and get to debating the evidence that is available concerning evolution.

I think it is a cop out when evolutionist say we only want to debate Biological evolution.

It is all evolutiion from that small pea sized universe.

subbie writes:

In any event, please tell me what you think the ToE is.

A creationist is supposed to tell an evolutionist what the ToE is when evolutionist can't agree on what it is. There is a 216 message thread here: www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=5&t=771&m=1 -->www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=5&t=771&m=1">http://www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=5&t=771&m=1
A 121 message Great Debate here: www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=8&t=153&m=1 -->www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=8&t=153&m=1">http://www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=8&t=153&m=1

subbie's definition:

quote:
Populations change over time, mostly due to selective pressures to which the populations are subject, which enable those offspring better adapted to the environment to reproduce at a higher rate than those which are not. This change occurs because those organisms that are better adapted tend to pass on more of their genetic make up to the next generation.

Message 5 of www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=5&t=771&m=1#5 -->www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=5&t=771&m=1#5">http://www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=5&t=771&m=1#5

This is a definition of Biogenesis.

RAZD www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=5&t=771&m=1 -->www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=5&t=771&m=1">http://www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=5&t=771&m=1

quote:
Evolution is the (hereditary) change in species over time.

This is the definition of Biogenesis.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/biogenesis
biogenesis:
1 : the development of life from preexisting life
2 : the synthesis of chemical compounds or structures in the living organism

My definition:

The Theory of Evolution is a change over time where all living things came from a pea sized universe that expanded into what we see and what we do not see today. The Big Band Theory tries to explain what happened in the material universe from T=O+ until present. The Theory of Abiogenesis tries to explain how life came into being on a lifeless planet. Once this life appeared the Theory of Biogenesis tries to explain how all living lifeforms extinct and living today came from this first or many life cells.

The beginning (origin) of the universe is a fairy tale.

The beginning (origin of life) is a fairy tale.

Remember you asked for my definition of the ToE this is it and I don't expect you to like it. But it is what it is.

God Bless,


"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by subbie, posted 02-14-2008 2:40 PM subbie has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by Dr Adequate, posted 02-16-2008 2:05 PM ICANT has responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16095
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 8 of 122 (456237)
02-16-2008 1:57 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by Hill Billy
02-16-2008 12:40 PM


Re: Whats the difference between a duck?
Ok, I'll try, isn't evolution the theory that says living things change , through reproduction, over time? That one type of critter, after generations of reproduction may become a different type of critter? That certain types of critters will be unable to reproduce and their "coding" will be lost to the pool, while others will increase in numbers due to "favorable conditions" ? That the make up of a critter will change with reproduction?

I believe that's a simplistic version of the theory.

It is simplistic, but at least you're vaguely in the right ball-park, or at least within sight of the ticket office.

You could increase your accuracy by looking at a biology textbook sometime.

Some of the things being preached are that this theory proves conclusively that every living thing originated with one single living thing which originated with no living thing and that relatively simple things can become extremely complex things just by reproducing. It is also being preached that all this living originated with nothing living and to ask how is a nonsense question.

No, that's just some rubbish that you've made up in your head.

Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Hill Billy, posted 02-16-2008 12:40 PM Hill Billy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by Hill Billy, posted 02-16-2008 2:45 PM Dr Adequate has responded

Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16095
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 9 of 122 (456238)
02-16-2008 2:05 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by ICANT
02-16-2008 1:52 PM


Re: I Know
My definition:

The Theory of Evolution is a change over time where all living things came from a pea sized universe that expanded into what we see and what we do not see today. The Big Band Theory tries to explain what happened in the material universe from T=O+ until present. The Theory of Abiogenesis tries to explain how life came into being on a lifeless planet. Once this life appeared the Theory of Biogenesis tries to explain how all living lifeforms extinct and living today came from this first or many life cells.

The thing is, that in the English language, the phrase "theory of evolution" has a meaning. And that is not it.

You might as well say that your defintion of "pineapple" is "small tree-dwelling marsupial". You are free, of course, to follow your private whims in this respect, but if you then go around telling people that pineapples carry their young in pouches, they will think that you are ignorant or stupid or crazy or a liar.

And if you know perfectly well that in English, the word "pineapple" does not indicate a marsupial, then the last of these options will be the case. You would be a liar telling a stupid lie.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by ICANT, posted 02-16-2008 1:52 PM ICANT has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by ICANT, posted 02-16-2008 3:22 PM Dr Adequate has responded

Percy
Member
Posts: 18470
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 10 of 122 (456239)
02-16-2008 2:10 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by Hill Billy
02-16-2008 12:40 PM


Re: Whats the difference between a duck?
Interesting. You open with a rational and mostly correct paragraph, then close with mostly wrong one.

I'm not going to comment on the first paragraph, because if I'm correct in my understanding of what you were trying to say then it is fine.

About the last paragraph:

Hill Billy writes:

Some of the things being preached are that this theory proves conclusively that every living thing originated with one single living thing which originated with no living thing and that relatively simple things can become extremely complex things just by reproducing.

What happened to the selection part of the process ("certain types of critters will be unable to reproduce") that you mentioned in the first paragraph? You can't claim that selection is part of the process, and that reproduction comprises the entire process - that's a contradiction, and the second paragraph is wrong.

It is also being preached that all this living originated with nothing living and to ask how is a nonsense question.

Evolution and abiogenesis are both areas of study within biology. No one would ever say that abiogenesis is a nonsense question, but they will tell you that abiogenesis and evolution are separate areas of study. And they are.

If someone were to claim that Christians say that the life that ended at the resurrection began with the virgin birth but that to ask how is a nonsense question, you'd consider that a pretty gross distortion, right?

I'm reserving my right to moderate this thread. This is a science thread. Any descent into wise-guy mode will bring an instant suspension.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Hill Billy, posted 02-16-2008 12:40 PM Hill Billy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by Hill Billy, posted 02-16-2008 2:41 PM Percy has not yet responded

  
Hill Billy
Member (Idle past 3516 days)
Posts: 163
From: The hills
Joined: 01-26-2008


Message 11 of 122 (456244)
02-16-2008 2:41 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by Percy
02-16-2008 2:10 PM


Re: Whats the difference between a duck?
Percy

What happened to the selection part of the process ("certain types of critters will be unable to reproduce") that you mentioned in the first paragraph? You can't claim that selection is part of the process, and that reproduction comprises the entire process - that's a contradiction,

Your right. I've edited for clarity.

Evolution and abiogenesis are both areas of study within biology. No one would ever say that abiogenesis is a nonsense question, but they will tell you that abiogenesis and evolution are separate areas of study. And they are.
Yes, however the second part of the question was, "what is being preached." and what I wrote is the jist of many of the " sermons " that I have heard or read. I was not commenting on the truth of the sermons, only the content. I find the "preaching " of evolution often crosses the line into other disciplines. Including outright fantasy.

The questions were, what is the theory and what is being preached. My answer is -two distinctly different things.

Any descent into wise-guy mode will bring an instant suspension.
I fear you may have set the bar impossibly high as I'm a wise guy by nature but yer the boss and I'll do my best.


The years tell what the days never knew.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Percy, posted 02-16-2008 2:10 PM Percy has not yet responded

Hill Billy
Member (Idle past 3516 days)
Posts: 163
From: The hills
Joined: 01-26-2008


Message 12 of 122 (456245)
02-16-2008 2:45 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by Dr Adequate
02-16-2008 1:57 PM


Re: Whats the difference between a duck?
No, that's just some rubbish that you've made up in your head.

Um, no, thats rubbish someone else made up in their head and I am repeating in order to answer a question. Go back and read the OP. "What is being preached? "


The years tell what the days never knew.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Dr Adequate, posted 02-16-2008 1:57 PM Dr Adequate has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by Dr Adequate, posted 02-16-2008 4:22 PM Hill Billy has not yet responded

ICANT
Member
Posts: 6187
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 13 of 122 (456249)
02-16-2008 3:22 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by Dr Adequate
02-16-2008 2:05 PM


Re: I Know
Hi Dr.

Dr Adequate writes:

And if you know perfectly well that in English, the word "pineapple" does not indicate a marsupial, then the last of these options will be the case. You would be a liar telling a stupid lie

Remember subbie asked for my definition of the ToE.
He did not ask for the definition of evolution.

Glad to see you still in rare form preaching your garbage.
I told subbie he wouldn't like my definition and I didn't think any other evolutionist would either.

AS I said you guys can't even agree among yourselves.

You care to enlighten us with your version?

God Bless,


"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Dr Adequate, posted 02-16-2008 2:05 PM Dr Adequate has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by Granny Magda, posted 02-16-2008 4:08 PM ICANT has not yet responded
 Message 15 by Dr Adequate, posted 02-16-2008 4:18 PM ICANT has responded

  
Granny Magda
Member (Idle past 53 days)
Posts: 2380
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007


Message 14 of 122 (456255)
02-16-2008 4:08 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by ICANT
02-16-2008 3:22 PM


Re: I Know
Remember subbie asked for my definition of the ToE.
He did not ask for the definition of evolution.

So why did you immediately start talking about the "Big Band" Theory, as you call it? You have a damn cheek.

Using my definition of evolution what is being preached is:

About 13+ billion years ago there was something about the size of a pea. It was very, very, very hot. It was very compact as it contained everything you see in the universe and everything you cannot see.

What has that got to do with the ToE? Physicists do not base the Big Bang theory on biological evolution you know. This is just another example of creationist goalpost shifting and question dodging.
I also notice that you have made a reasonably long post without even once attempting to do what Subbie asked you to, namely to define the ToE for our general edification. If all you can do is quote Webster's (a lousy dictionary by the way) and whine about biogenesis, then we must assume that you are unable to define the ToE on your own merit and we can close up this thread.

I think it is a cop out when evolutionist say we only want to debate Biological evolution.

Don't be a child. The topic of this debate is "What is Evolution" and Subbie made it quite clear that he had the ToE and biological evolution in mind. This is the biological evolution thread. To complain that one is expected to discuss biological evolution in the biological evolution thread is ridiculous. If you want to discuss the Big Bang, you know where the appropriate thread is.

AS I said you guys can't even agree among yourselves.

That gave me a giggle. It is especially rich coming from a creationist, since we all know that there are dozens of flavours of creationism, as opposed to near universal agreement amongst biologists as to what the ToE means. Pot. Kettle. Get a grip.


Mutate and Survive
This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by ICANT, posted 02-16-2008 3:22 PM ICANT has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by AZPaul3, posted 02-16-2008 4:51 PM Granny Magda has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16095
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 15 of 122 (456256)
02-16-2008 4:18 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by ICANT
02-16-2008 3:22 PM


Re: I Know
Remember subbie asked for my definition of the ToE.
He did not ask for the definition of evolution.

Which is why I criticized your inaccurate definition of "theory of evolution".

Glad to see you still in rare form preaching your garbage.
I told subbie he wouldn't like my definition and I didn't think any other evolutionist would either.

It would make any honest man disgusted.

AS I said you guys can't even agree among yourselves.

What a strange lie.

By the way, when are you guys going to agree on whether the universe is 6,000 years old or 13,000,000,000 years old?

You care to enlighten us with your version?

I plan to explain it more carefully to Hill Billy. I am not inclinded to do so for your benefit, because I suspect that you do know roughtly what the phrase "theory of evolution" means, and are just getting it wrong because you know that silly mistakes on this subject annoy the educated.

Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by ICANT, posted 02-16-2008 3:22 PM ICANT has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by ICANT, posted 02-16-2008 4:50 PM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

1
23456
...
9Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019