|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member Posts: 3945 From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior) Joined: Member Rating: 10.0 |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: John A. (Salty) Davison - The Case For Instant Evolution | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
derwood Member (Idle past 1902 days) Posts: 1457 Joined: |
quote: At the TalkOrigins board, he has written - and reiterated - that population genetics has nothing to do with evolution. Said it is a "smokescreen."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
derwood Member (Idle past 1902 days) Posts: 1457 Joined: |
quote: Sure. But the mere "birth" of a hopeful monster does not evolution make. As Paul mentions, it would first have to spread through/establish a population. Hopeful monsters are born not too rarely, but they seldom establish themselves. One needs the right circumstances. On another issue, chromosome polymorphisms do not necessarily result in speciation. I had posted some citations refuting Ilion's claims (which, of course, went ignored) in which it was observed that some species of horse can possess and pass on polymorphic n-number of chromosomes.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
derwood Member (Idle past 1902 days) Posts: 1457 Joined: |
quote: No.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
derwood Member (Idle past 1902 days) Posts: 1457 Joined: |
Interesting discussion cropping up on the manifesto here. Interesting is the post by Charlie D....
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
derwood Member (Idle past 1902 days) Posts: 1457 Joined: |
quote:http://EvC Forum: Terry at the Talk Origins board -->EvC Forum: Terry at the Talk Origins board Sorry, salty, I don't think your TalkOrigin's tactics will work very well here. You see, here there are several professional scientists. There are no overconfident "darwin attackers" like Ilion or know-nothings like Terry to offer virtual back pats to you. We can handle actual, non-censored, non-filtered disussion here. [This message has been edited by SLPx, 03-19-2003]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
derwood Member (Idle past 1902 days) Posts: 1457 Joined: |
quote: Hi John,I can understand why Judy van Houten would be uncomfortable with you after reading this. It is absurd on the face of it. Of course genetic changes take place in individuals. This is no revelation, and if you think it is, I suggest you become familiar with the writings of population geneticists. However, single 'mutant' individuals do not a new species make, whether we are talking gain, loss, or rearrangement of information. This should be fairly obvious. In order for there to be speciation, the 'mutant' must be able to reproduce and pass on its' traits. That is, its complement of unique alleles must get 'spread out' in a pre-existing population, or it must establish a new population of its own (hard to do, I would imagine). Thus, of course evolution and population genetics are intertwined. I am flabbergasted that you can, apparently with conviction, utterly deny so self-evident a fact. quote: That is right. And what do the individuals that result from this reproduction become part of? Why, a population. quote: Please define for us 'macroevolution.'quote: Your essay was nearly devoid of convincing scientific discourse. It consists primarily of unsupported assertion.The only times you mention 'biological information' is to claim that it already existed and that 'no new information' is added or needed. For example, you ask the rhetorical question: "...What is the origin of the preexisting information?" But you do not even attempt to answer. Following this question, you launch into a spiel about how God might fit into the picture. You write in the conclusion to this essay: "I find it fascinating that it is the physicists who postulate God while biologists typically remain atheists or agnostics." after having cited Einstein's famous quip about God not playing dice. I suggest you lookinto Einstein's other writings to discover what he really meant. Einstein was certainly do theist. Your essay amounts to little more than the usual anti-Darwinist fare. Some wild extrapolation, attempted argument from (dubious) authority, and assertion. Not impressed.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
derwood Member (Idle past 1902 days) Posts: 1457 Joined: |
Why do you assume that I am a "Darwinist"? Frankly, I do not even know what a "Darwinist" is. Maybe you can define it for us, Moose?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
derwood Member (Idle past 1902 days) Posts: 1457 Joined: |
Admin,
To salty, a radical anti-'Darwinist' (which we now see defined as anyone that does not agree with salty, for the most part) deserves to be insulted and therefore, insults are not really insults. I hope that clears things up. I was disappointed, however, that salty continues to claim that he wrote a "detailed" paper about biological information.
I read and critiqued some of it already. His "detailed" analysis of biological information was to claim that it was already there, as if by magic. Such is the science of the anti-"Darwian." [This message has been edited by SLPx, 03-20-2003]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
derwood Member (Idle past 1902 days) Posts: 1457 Joined: |
I wonder - did Broom, Huxley, and Grasse also think that population genetics were irrelevant to evolution, like l;ike-minded anti-Darwinian salty insists?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
derwood Member (Idle past 1902 days) Posts: 1457 Joined: |
..."armchair theoreticians like Sewell Wright, Sir Ronald Fisher, and J.B.S. Haldane"
Am I the only one that is shaking my head in disgust and disbelief? Admonish away, Admin, but this is pure crankery at its finest.... From an article by Gardner in SciAm:
quote:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
derwood Member (Idle past 1902 days) Posts: 1457 Joined: |
quote: And of what relevance is that to whether or not 'Darwinism' has merit?
quote: Yes, that does sound crazy. How do these mutations - which take a few seconds to physiucally occur in the germline - persist if not by spreading throughout a population? [This message has been edited by SLPx, 03-20-2003]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
derwood Member (Idle past 1902 days) Posts: 1457 Joined: |
quote: And yet you have offered no explanation whatsoever about where this 'original' information came from. Do you have one?quote: That is not magic. That is simple biology. That 'information' comes form the two parents. That is hardly analogous to where the 'original' information came from. On this, you are empirically silent.quote: And the fact that you and two "Intelligent Design" advocates agree is supposed to mean what, exactly? This reminds me of Dembski boasting about all of the accolades on his books' dust jackets. Looking at them, they are all from Discovery Institute fellows (to which Dembski belongs).quote: Marginalized because of your obvious dearth of knowledge of the field of evolutionary biology, yes, insulted, no. I'm afraid that is your area of expertise.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
derwood Member (Idle past 1902 days) Posts: 1457 Joined: |
quote: Yes, and Kimura demonstrated in 1961 that information can be added to genomes by mutation and selection. Continuing to ignore the published literature is not the act of someone trying to fing the 'truth.'
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
derwood Member (Idle past 1902 days) Posts: 1457 Joined: |
I don't think anyone cares what DeHaan and pals thinks. They are not here to discuss YOUR assertions, YOU are, and, of course, they are are just other anti-'Darwinists.'
You can stand by your claims all you want, the fact is, many of them have already been shown to be false or unwarranted extrapolations, if not somewhat bizarre. And again with the "yeah, but what aboiut the fertilized egg?" spiel. Yes, we all realize that 'all the information' for an adult resides in an egg, and yes, we all know where that information comes from. But you are making an erroneous analogy. Work on it. [This message has been edited by SLPx, 03-21-2003]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
derwood Member (Idle past 1902 days) Posts: 1457 Joined: |
quote: Spamming? No - he needs all the help he can get. Professional help, I believe...
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024