Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Any practical use for Universal Common Ancestor?
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 1366 of 1385 (866649)
11-14-2019 4:05 AM
Reply to: Message 1365 by RAZD
11-13-2019 9:37 AM


Re: Another useful application of evolutionary theory
the problem is that the genetics isn't studied in order to check out what I'm saying. My theory goes like this: A species has only certain genetic stuff and even if mutations change things they can't change it to something outside what the genetic stuff does: even the most drastic mutations don't change the parts of a fruit fly, they just rearrange them. They don't create some other kind of creature or even a part of some other kind of creature. The enormous number of generations of e coli in Lensky's experiments never even suggested anything other than a version of e coli. The genetic stuff of each species appears to be built into its genome. Evolution, mutations, can rearrange it but can't make something new out of it.
Normal microevolution brings out new versions of the traits that are built into the genome. It's always the same creature but it may be bigger or smaller or have dramatically different coloring or markings, some modification of the basic structure but without ever changing beyond what is clearly defined as that particular species. All these differences are built into the genome. There are many genes for some traits like fur coloring and so on, and whatever there are genes for is all the change you can possibly get. So no, all life is NOT related, simply genetically can't be.
And there is nothing like trial and error in all of this either, though trial and error would be needed to get from one species to another because basic structures have to change, which doesn't happen in normal microevolution.
AND, you'll never recognize it I guess, but I'm very sure that as a species changes in a certain genetic direction it will eventually run out of genetic diversity and be unable to change any further. Which basically means the defining characteristics will all be homozygous, all fixed loci, which is what we see in drastically bottlenecked species like the cheetah and elephant seal. And once the majority of their characteristics are fixed loci they cannot evolve any further. Presumably a mutation might come along and allow for it but that doesn't seem to happen. If they can be bred with other cats or seals then they can survive, but they won't be the same animal. Something like this genetlcally depleted condition must be what happens in breeding programs -- a "purebred" is defined as having fixed loci for its main characteristics. It doesn't vary from generation to generation as species with high genetic diversity do. Evolution has a natural end point in other words, you can't get anything new at all, not even a variation on the breed, let alone something toward an entirely new species.
Trilobites are OBVIOUSLY the same species, humans and apes are not.
This is not the OP topic unfortunately.
AbE: OR, did you actually mean to identify a useful application of evolutionjary theory that I missed? And if so could you condense it down to a brief statement so I can get what you had in mind?
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1365 by RAZD, posted 11-13-2019 9:37 AM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1367 by RAZD, posted 11-14-2019 9:06 AM Faith has replied
 Message 1371 by PaulK, posted 11-14-2019 1:26 PM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 1368 of 1385 (866661)
11-14-2019 9:17 AM
Reply to: Message 1367 by RAZD
11-14-2019 9:06 AM


Re: Another useful application of evolutionary theory
What you call "evidence," particularly in relation to the fossil record, is really just interpretation that can't be verified, in other words it's just the Evo fantasy.
And by the way you have shown no useful application whatever.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1367 by RAZD, posted 11-14-2019 9:06 AM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1370 by RAZD, posted 11-14-2019 9:43 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 1372 by Sarah Bellum, posted 12-29-2019 9:20 PM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 1369 of 1385 (866662)
11-14-2019 9:31 AM
Reply to: Message 1367 by RAZD
11-14-2019 9:06 AM


Re: Another useful application of evolutionary theory
Just like everybody else here you love to tit for tat. So you use my term "ideology" absolutely incorrectly, you have no idea how I use it or that it doesn't belong in your post.
However, I just want to comment on another thing you got wrong, wshich rally amounts to a straw man. I never said that a single generation would lead to the inability to evolve further, I said "eventually," meaning after a number of such generations, and to be more precise, a number of reproductively isolated genreations like ring specieds. But I don't expect you to get anything I say so I'm not even talking to you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1367 by RAZD, posted 11-14-2019 9:06 AM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 1373 of 1385 (869405)
12-29-2019 10:17 PM
Reply to: Message 1372 by Sarah Bellum
12-29-2019 9:20 PM


The unwitnessed (prehistoric) past
With history we often have docments by different sources we can check out, and we may also have documents about those sources, at least references IN documents, so we DO have witnesses to history. We DON'T have any kind of witness at all of prehistoric geological events. Unless you want to count Noah and those to whom he told the story of the Flood, or Gilgamesh for that matter, and I would count them myself, but as for purely science-based theories, nada, it's ALL nothing but interpretation with no way to test it.
Electrons and other atomic phenomena, and the motion of the earth, have measurable effects in many other phenomena IN THE PRESENT that can be used to study them. Again, this is a different situation from geological phenomena that occurred in the unwitnessed/prehistoric past. I personally think there's plenty of evidence of the Flood in the strata and the fossils and other phenomena I've spent a fair amount of time talking about here but I can't prove that either.
Nice to see you back, you've been gone quite a while.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1372 by Sarah Bellum, posted 12-29-2019 9:20 PM Sarah Bellum has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1374 by PaulK, posted 12-30-2019 3:11 AM Faith has replied
 Message 1379 by Sarah Bellum, posted 12-30-2019 10:12 AM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 1375 of 1385 (869409)
12-30-2019 8:35 AM
Reply to: Message 1374 by PaulK
12-30-2019 3:11 AM


Re: The unwitnessed (prehistoric) past
Let it be noted again that forensic evidence has information from the present to work with.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1374 by PaulK, posted 12-30-2019 3:11 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1376 by PaulK, posted 12-30-2019 8:42 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 1377 by jar, posted 12-30-2019 9:31 AM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 1380 of 1385 (869416)
12-30-2019 10:41 AM
Reply to: Message 1379 by Sarah Bellum
12-30-2019 10:12 AM


Re: The unwitnessed (prehistoric) past
Yes, sorry I don't get everything said that needs to be said in one post, and I forget things I've said years ago. Whatever. The thing about the geological phenomena is that most of it is one time events that occurred in the Prehistoric past -- I sometimes say "historical" but that implies there are records available when I'm tryhing to talk about a past for which there are no records of any kind, which after all would be "witnesses." But I also don't want to rest any of this specifically on witnesses either because there are sciences that rely on indirect information, whichis what I was referring to about atomic phenomena and the mostion of the Earth and so on. There is no direct witnessing but there are measuruable AND REPEATABLE effects that can be used to study them. REPEATABLE is another important concept. The prehistoric geological past is about ONE TIME events, Unwitnessed in any sense of that word, and UNREPEATABLE. And for all I know I'm leaving out other criteria.
It's not that we can't know SOME things about that past, such as that fossils were once living creatures -- but that was not known to those who originally studied them as they came up with all sorts of outlandish ideas about them because they didn't have anything to compare them too. That's the ONE-TIME-EVENT phenomenon. Even that can be resolved as it was in the case of the fossils by a more reasonable interpretation.
But as for explaining the causes of the strata and the fossils, that's where we are getting into territory I'm arguing isn't so easily knowable, because of course I'm objecting to the standard interprreation of it which I consider to be let's say irrational? Time periods attached to slabs of rock by dating methods that don't even date the rocks themselves. Slabs of rock that couldn't ever possibly form from a landscape in a time period anyway. Fossils that form under rare conditions occurring in amazing abundance in these rocks, and sorted BY the rocks too. That's supposedly evidence of the time periods interpretation but once you see that a rock can't represent a time period the whole idea comes crashing down. And so on.
But really this discussion ought to be on the Flood thread anyway.
But

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1379 by Sarah Bellum, posted 12-30-2019 10:12 AM Sarah Bellum has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1381 by PaulK, posted 12-30-2019 11:08 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 1382 by Sarah Bellum, posted 12-30-2019 11:08 AM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 1383 of 1385 (869429)
12-30-2019 11:20 AM
Reply to: Message 1382 by Sarah Bellum
12-30-2019 11:08 AM


Re: The unwitnessed (prehistoric) past
Right now I've only been touching on Flood related concepts so I think I'll take my last post over to the thread "Did the Flood Really Happen" for now anyway. If more general evolution ideas come up we can move them again.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1382 by Sarah Bellum, posted 12-30-2019 11:08 AM Sarah Bellum has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1384 by Sarah Bellum, posted 12-30-2019 11:31 AM Faith 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