Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,814 Year: 3,071/9,624 Month: 916/1,588 Week: 99/223 Day: 10/17 Hour: 6/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Creation vs Evolution music! Gotta hear this!
Sylas
Member (Idle past 5260 days)
Posts: 766
From: Newcastle, Australia
Joined: 11-17-2002


Message 31 of 33 (195108)
03-29-2005 12:33 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by Destinylab
03-28-2005 11:41 PM


Re: about this song...
Evolution is a fact? It is admittedly unobservable, lacking fossil evidence, dependent upon scientific consensus, and essentially a belief system about past life on Earth. The following quotes are from leading and well known scientists and researchers.
It is observable just fine, in the present, and in traces of the past; in the lab and in the field. There is heaps of fossil evidence. This evidence is patchy, in various ways. Fossilisation rates are not uniform, either in time, or in location, or in sampling of the organisms; but there is still a heap of evidence which shouts evolution and for which there is no other explanation on the table.
(Classic creationism is refuted by fossil evidence quite definitely. The so-called "Intelligent Design" alternative is vague to the point of being totally useless. In fact, there is one stream of intelligent design that sees God setting up initial conditions, and leaving the rest to evolution; there is another that sees evolution itself as a designed consequence of a universe finely tuned for complexity.)
Your quotes are an example of what is called a "quote mine". It is a series of quotes misunderstood or misrepresented in some way so as to obscure the real views of the person quoted.
I'll focus on the first, because I know it well.
You start off with an classic misrepresentation of SJ Gould. The quote is accurate, but it is not saying anything remotely in support of your first paragraph if you read the article. Here is the quote as you present it.
"The absence of fossil evidence for intermediary stages between major transitions in organic design, indeed our inability, even in our imagination, to construct functional intermediates in many cases, has been a persistent and nagging problem for gradualistic accounts of evolution."
Stephen Jay Gould (Professor of Geology and Paleontology, Harvard University), "Is a new and general theory of evolution emerging?" Paleobiology, vol. 6(1), January 1980, p. 127
Gould is a major evolutionary biologist (recently deceased). This article is early in the debate about punctuated equilibrium. He is refering to "gradualistic" accounts, by which he means in this context a roughly uniform rate of change over time. Gould proposes a more episodic model of change. There's a lot more we could say about this, but it is another topic entirely. Your inference that Gould would support the views you express in the first paragraph is wrong, and a misunderstanding of what Gould says in this quote and what Gould is meaning by gradualism in this context.
But here is another more directly relevant quote, which explains what Gould means by gradualism, what he thinks is refuted, and his anger at creationists who distort this to misrepresent the actual state of evidence for evolution.
From "Evolution as Fact and Theory" by SJ Gould writes:
I count myself among the evolutionists who argue for a jerky, or episodic, rather than a smoothly gradual, pace of change. In 1972 my colleague Niles Eldredge and I developed the theory of punctuated equilibrium. We argued that two outstanding facts of the fossil recordgeologically "sudden" origin of new species and failure to change thereafter (stasis)reflect the predictions of evolutionary theory, not the imperfections of the fossil record. In most theories, small isolated populations are the source of new species, and the process of speciation takes thousands or tens of thousands of years. This amount of time, so long when measured against our lives, is a geological microsecond. It represents much less than 1 per cent of the average life-span for a fossil invertebrate speciesmore than ten million years. Large, widespread, and well established species, on the other hand, are not expected to change very much. We believe that the inertia of large populations explains the stasis of most fossil species over millions of years.
We proposed the theory of punctuated equilibrium largely to provide a different explanation for pervasive trends in the fossil record. Trends, we argued, cannot be attributed to gradual transformation within lineages, but must arise from the different success of certain kinds of species. A trend, we argued, is more like climbing a flight of stairs (punctuated and stasis) than rolling up an inclined plane.
Since we proposed punctuated equilibria to explain trends, it is infuriating to be quoted again and again by creationistswhether through design or stupidity, I do not knowas admitting that the fossil record includes no transitional forms. Transitional forms are generally lacking at the species level, but they are abundant between larger groups. ...
(Quote from Evolution as Fact and Theory May 1981; in print in Hen's Teeth and Horse's Toes, (W. W. Norton & Co, 1994, pp. 253-262). Caution. The link seems not to be working at present.
Your second quote is forty years old, from Ronald West. Never heard of him before this. I don't know if the quote is out of context, or if Ronald is simply wrong. More to the point; I bet you don't either. If you are cutting and pasting material from another website, you are required to acknowledge it. Even when quoting a quote mine.
Cheers -- Sylas
This message has been edited by Sylas, 03-29-2005 04:21 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Destinylab, posted 03-28-2005 11:41 PM Destinylab has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 32 of 33 (195122)
03-29-2005 3:50 AM
Reply to: Message 27 by Destinylab
03-29-2005 12:16 AM


Re: about this song...
Yer funny! If evolution is a fact then prove it. Facts are proveable and observable right? Why don't you educate me?
If you are serious then you have come to the right place.
First, let me assure you that there is no connection between either Evolution or the Theory of Evolution and atheism. That is simply a lie, that is put out by those that use Biblical Creationism to further their own agenda. In fact most Christian Churches support teaching the Theory of Evolution and oppose teaching Creationism.
As you can see from the number of responses that this single message generated there are many people here willing to help with your education. That often leads to someone such as yourself getting overwhelmed.
Can I suggest that you help us by working within a format, taking one issue at a time?That will keep you from feeling piled upon.
What would you say is the biggest reason you think evolution didn't happen? If you can pick one issue, we will try to stick to that one issue before moving to the next one.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Destinylab, posted 03-29-2005 12:16 AM Destinylab has not replied

Adminnemooseus
Administrator
Posts: 3974
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 33 of 33 (195128)
03-29-2005 5:24 AM


Carrying on a debate in "Links and Information" now gone on long enough
Earlier I gave my blessing to such. That is over.
Active themes are now disconnected from the original theme of the topic, and belong elsewhere.
Closing down.
As I see it, this topic closing is not open to debate.
Adminnemooseus

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024