Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The phrase "Evolution is a fact"
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2106 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 16 of 217 (487635)
11-02-2008 8:12 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by Cold Foreign Object
11-02-2008 7:02 PM


More nonsense
"Evolution" (defined briefly as speciation) is an interpretation of scientific evidence. Since the interpretation is false there is no evidence of evolution.
More nonsense. Unsupported nonsense at that.
Just because creationists choose to ignore the evidence for speciation doesn't make it go away.
In addition to all of the other examples, we can see evidence for speciation in a number of living species called ring species. In ring species, between the endpoints you can also see any number of transitionals (another thing creationists claim--incorrectly--do not exist). Here is one example.
But if you ignore any data that goes contrary to your religious belief you can support just about any belief, no matter how much it is contradicted by the evidence.
And that's why they call it creation "science," as opposed to real science.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 11-02-2008 7:02 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by Beretta, posted 11-26-2008 5:48 AM Coyote has not replied

  
Beretta
Member (Idle past 5597 days)
Posts: 422
From: South Africa
Joined: 10-29-2007


Message 17 of 217 (489300)
11-26-2008 5:48 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by Coyote
11-02-2008 8:12 PM


Salamanders
You may see transitional salamanders and variety -you may even see what could be termed new species -but let's face it, they are all still clearly salamanders. How do we know that, given enough time, they will be anything other than types of salamanders?
Bacteria, given more than enough generations of laboratory testing and mutating, are never anything but bacteria -how do we know that they can ever be anything other than bacteria? Same for fruitflies- only more fruitflies are ever produced. Fossils can't count because we don't know that any one kind of organism changed into any of the others - we can only imagine that it is possible based on our philisophical preconceptions about what may have happened historically.
Fact (variation within a kind) vs fiction (changing of one kind of creature into another.)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Coyote, posted 11-02-2008 8:12 PM Coyote has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by Wounded King, posted 11-26-2008 6:45 AM Beretta has replied
 Message 20 by bluescat48, posted 11-26-2008 8:06 AM Beretta has not replied
 Message 22 by Rrhain, posted 11-26-2008 8:45 AM Beretta has replied
 Message 23 by Fosdick, posted 11-26-2008 11:29 AM Beretta has replied
 Message 28 by Taz, posted 11-27-2008 11:39 PM Beretta has not replied

  
Wounded King
Member
Posts: 4149
From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 18 of 217 (489305)
11-26-2008 6:45 AM
Reply to: Message 17 by Beretta
11-26-2008 5:48 AM


How many generations have you calculated are 'enough'
Bacteria, given more than enough generations of laboratory testing and mutating, are never anything but bacteria
Could you show us your working on this? Because it sounds like complete nonsense.
Are you saying that the change from prokaryote to eukaryote took less than a century? I'd be fascinated to know how you came by this knowledge.
If not then just what are you trying to say?
TTFN,
WK

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Beretta, posted 11-26-2008 5:48 AM Beretta has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 11-26-2008 8:10 AM Wounded King has not replied
 Message 32 by Beretta, posted 11-28-2008 6:31 AM Wounded King has not replied

  
ikabod
Member (Idle past 4493 days)
Posts: 365
From: UK
Joined: 03-13-2006


Message 19 of 217 (489306)
11-26-2008 6:47 AM
Reply to: Message 14 by Deftil
11-02-2008 4:50 PM


True, there's many things that are considered as facts that haven't been directly observed. But few, if any of them, are found to be as directly in conflict with people's religious beliefs as common ancestry. Therefore I can "reasonably understand" why some of those people might not regard it as a "fact", while I personally disagree with them
I would disagree , its not just evolution , much of modern science/ knowledge conflicts with religious belief .....
Just think about geology, planetolgy , cosmology, archaeology , particle physics , genetics ..etc etc

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Deftil, posted 11-02-2008 4:50 PM Deftil has not replied

  
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4189 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 20 of 217 (489316)
11-26-2008 8:06 AM
Reply to: Message 17 by Beretta
11-26-2008 5:48 AM


Re: Salamanders
How do we know that, given enough time, they will be anything other than types of salamanders?
To put it bluntly, salamander is not a scientific term. Are all butterflies the same? How about lobsters or mice or starfish or kelp?
Common names lead to more disknowledge. What is a dog? Cat? Rat? Fly?

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002
Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Beretta, posted 11-26-2008 5:48 AM Beretta has not replied

  
DevilsAdvocate
Member (Idle past 3101 days)
Posts: 1548
Joined: 06-05-2008


Message 21 of 217 (489317)
11-26-2008 8:10 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by Wounded King
11-26-2008 6:45 AM


Re: How many generations have you calculated are 'enough'
Bacteria, given more than enough generations of laboratory testing and mutating, are never anything but bacteria
Without a natural selective pressure in nature to do otherwise they will remain bacteria.
As far as the laboratory how do you know that enough generations of laboratory testing have been conducted? Again we have not placed bacteria in a petri dish for long enough duration to do this (maybe what 50-60 years of serious bacteria related research in which strains have been subjected to various outside stimuli). What is the longest continuously cultivated bacteria strain we have?

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Dr. Carl Sagan

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Wounded King, posted 11-26-2008 6:45 AM Wounded King has not replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 22 of 217 (489319)
11-26-2008 8:45 AM
Reply to: Message 17 by Beretta
11-26-2008 5:48 AM


Beretta writes:
quote:
How do we know that, given enough time, they will be anything other than types of salamanders?
Because the fossil record clearly shows that happening. Others have talked about the time scale and indeed, humans have only been actively looking at the phylogenetics of organisms directly for the past 100 years or so. To go beyond that, we need to look at the results of the experiment that has been going over the entire course of life's history: The fossil record.
The fossil record is quite literally overflowing with transitional fossils. We can watch the species shift right in front of our eyes (and sometimes even higher up the taxonomic tree), but to go to the really big changes, all we have to do is look at the fossils. We can literally watch the bones of the reptilian jaw move and repurpose to become the bones of the mammalian ear. We can see Hyracotherium change over time to become modern Equus. We can see the changes in the whales as they adapt from land-dwelling ungulates to sea-dwelling cetaceans.
You seem to be on the verge of demanding a full geneology of every single organism, complete with videotape of every single act of reproduction, before you would accept what evolution says.
Well, we're never going to have that. But for you to then insist that evolution is unjustified because of that lack, then you're going to have to throw out the entire field of forensics. Until you accept that the very same process that we use to determine "whodunnit" even though we weren't there to directly see it happen is what we use to determine the evolutionary history of life, there will never be any evidence that you accept.
You want ostriches from alligator eggs. Evolution doesn't allow for that.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Beretta, posted 11-26-2008 5:48 AM Beretta has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by Beretta, posted 11-28-2008 6:13 AM Rrhain has replied

  
Fosdick 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5500 days)
Posts: 1793
From: Upper Slobovia
Joined: 12-11-2006


Message 23 of 217 (489337)
11-26-2008 11:29 AM
Reply to: Message 17 by Beretta
11-26-2008 5:48 AM


Re: Salamanders
Beretta writes:
Fact (variation within a kind) vs fiction (changing of one kind of creature into another.)
Beretta, I can't find a good reference for changing alligators into ostriches, but would changing one species of bacteria into another impress you? This has been done artificially in Craig Venter's lab when they managed to produce digitally designed life (see thread Digital Life Design”What a concept!).
”FTF

I can see Lower Slobovia from my house.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Beretta, posted 11-26-2008 5:48 AM Beretta has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by Peg, posted 11-27-2008 10:47 PM Fosdick has not replied
 Message 44 by Beretta, posted 11-29-2008 1:12 AM Fosdick has replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 24 of 217 (489509)
11-27-2008 10:41 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by subbie
10-31-2008 2:02 PM


subbie writes:
Change in the population of various organisms across generations has been directly observed
yes, there is a wide variety seen within each species. that is a fact

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by subbie, posted 10-31-2008 2:02 PM subbie has not replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 25 of 217 (489510)
11-27-2008 10:47 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by Fosdick
11-26-2008 11:29 AM


Re: Salamanders
could they have mutated the bacteria?
has the bacteria began to form into life other then bacteria? Or is still a bacteria?
could it not simply be a variation of bacteria bought on by genetic changes, like a pony is a variation of a horse?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Fosdick, posted 11-26-2008 11:29 AM Fosdick has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by NosyNed, posted 11-27-2008 11:12 PM Peg has not replied
 Message 27 by bluescat48, posted 11-27-2008 11:31 PM Peg has not replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 26 of 217 (489517)
11-27-2008 11:12 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by Peg
11-27-2008 10:47 PM


still bacteria
In some sense, Peg, we are still bacteria.
We're just a collection of bacteria that first got together to form a more complex kind of partnership and then clustered together to make a big lump of bacteria.
But it would be confusing to call everything by one name so we, to make things a bit easier and give us chapter headings in biology books group things by other names.
So our kind of bacteria we call eukaryotes. But that is too big a pile to deal with too so we call a smaller pile of bacteria (the ones that didn't partner with green algae) animals.
Of course, we would still be fish too if we didn't want to have smaller groupings so we called some of the fish that didn't stay wet tetrapods. We are, you should note, still 4 'legged' we just do funny things with 2 of them.
And so on and so on. The major groupings of life are all for convenience.
Btw, you should note that there are single celled organisms that cross over to being multicellular. The divides that you think are there aren't so hard and fast after all.
and:
Yes a pony is a variation of horse, which is a variation of an mammal, which is a variation of a vertebrate, which is a variation of an animal, and so on and so on.
The facts are, Peg, life on earth consists of things which are all variations of one thing.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Peg, posted 11-27-2008 10:47 PM Peg has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by Fosdick, posted 11-28-2008 1:16 AM NosyNed has replied

  
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4189 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 27 of 217 (489522)
11-27-2008 11:31 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by Peg
11-27-2008 10:47 PM


Re: Salamanders
has the bacteria began to form into life other then bacteria? Or is still a bacteria?
You are missing the point. Changes from one species to another over time by natural selection or punctuated equilibrium may create a new species within a particular genus or create a new genus much of which is in relation to a number of factors. for example in the class insecta there are so many different species that almost any new species would result in a new genus, while a new species of tardigrate might only result in a new species within the genus. Saying that a particular new species is still whatever means nothing. A lion and a tiger are both cats but different species. a butterfly & a dragonfly are both insects but from different orders. A frog & a turtle are both tetrapods but in different classes. Common names mean little in reference to classification. Also note bacteria is plural, bacterium is the singular.

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002
Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Peg, posted 11-27-2008 10:47 PM Peg has not replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3291 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 28 of 217 (489524)
11-27-2008 11:39 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by Beretta
11-26-2008 5:48 AM


Re: Salamanders
Beretta writes:
You may see transitional salamanders and variety -you may even see what could be termed new species -but let's face it, they are all still clearly salamanders. How do we know that, given enough time, they will be anything other than types of salamanders?
I'm curious to what you think about the turtle they recently found that had teeth and only had the bottom shell?
{There is a new topic:
"transitional" turtle found
Adminnemooseus}
Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Off-topic banner and following message.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Beretta, posted 11-26-2008 5:48 AM Beretta has not replied

  
Fosdick 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5500 days)
Posts: 1793
From: Upper Slobovia
Joined: 12-11-2006


Message 29 of 217 (489534)
11-28-2008 1:16 AM
Reply to: Message 26 by NosyNed
11-27-2008 11:12 PM


Re: still bacteria
NosyNed writes:
The facts are, Peg, life on earth consists of things which are all variations of one thing.
I like this. It is profoundly true and hard to overemphasize. Why not two, or three, or more? Because the first ones to pop out ate all the late comers? No, there's got to be a better explanation.
”FTF

I can see Lower Slobovia from my house.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by NosyNed, posted 11-27-2008 11:12 PM NosyNed has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by NosyNed, posted 11-28-2008 2:46 AM Fosdick has not replied
 Message 63 by Rrhain, posted 11-29-2008 2:50 PM Fosdick has replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 30 of 217 (489546)
11-28-2008 2:46 AM
Reply to: Message 29 by Fosdick
11-28-2008 1:16 AM


There can be only one....
Yea, why does there appear to be only one lineage. Maybe there is only one way to do it? Maybe what we see now is a combination of several lineages? Maybe the others are there but we haven't noticed them yet? Maybe we are just the descendants of the meanest, ugliest kids on the block?
I'd like to know but I don't know how the question will be answered. Probably not soon enough.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by Fosdick, posted 11-28-2008 1:16 AM Fosdick 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