|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Simple to Complex - Reproduction | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dan Carroll Inactive Member |
So, I hear from Creationists a lot that it's just impossible (or at least too damn unlikely) that evolution could start with a single celled organism, and wind up with us. That a single celled organism is too simple to change over generations into something as complex as mankind, no matter how much time passes.
Now... maybe I'm being dense here, but isn't every single one of us the result of two extremely simple things complexifying into people? I'm not talking about evolution, I'm talking about the fact that each of us comes from sperm and ova. Starts really simple. Winds up really complex. Only takes nine months.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminNosy Administrator Posts: 4754 From: Vancouver, BC, Canada Joined: |
Where do you want this put (Santa )?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dan Carroll Inactive Member |
Hoof, I dunno. Biological Evolution, I guess? Maybe Miscellaneous Topics in C/E?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminNosy Administrator Posts: 4754 From: Vancouver, BC, Canada Joined: |
Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mammuthus Member (Idle past 6475 days) Posts: 3085 From: Munich, Germany Joined: |
I think one problem with the creationist argument is that "simple" organisms are not simple. Bacteria are extremely complex as they have evolved for billions of years and would not resemble bacteria from millions of years ago any more than we resemble dinosaurs. Bacteria have highly complex biochemistry and very complex interactions with one another including frequent horizontal transfer of genetic material which makes their population dynamics highly variable.
But your overall point is correct...a simple egg and sperm can very quickly form a much more complex set of differentiated tissues that work together to form an organism...in only 9 months...4 billion years gives it a bit more playing room.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
coffee_addict Member (Idle past 477 days) Posts: 3645 From: Indianapolis, IN Joined: |
Creationists often say that 3.8 billion years just isn't enough for evolution to occur through random mutation and natural selection. I posted this on another thread and I think it has some merits here.
Let's count the zeros. So, we believe that the first life on Earth came about say 3.8 billion years ago. That's 3,800,000,000. It is also important to note that the humans have the longest lifespans among the mammals. So, say that each generation is 50 years. 3,800,000,000 / 50 = 76,000,000 That's 76 million generations, and I'm being conservative, too. Up until 200 years ago, a human generation is only about 30 years. That would make 3.8 billion years to equal 126,666,666. That's about 130 million generations. But we know for a fact that the vast majority of organisms both in the past and present have much shorter lifespans, thus much more generations per unit time. Certain insects only have about 10 days per generation. So, for them 3.8 billion years mean 138,700,000,000 generations. That's 138.7 billion generations. But wait, that's not all. So far, I've only put into consideration a single family line. Especially insects and bacteria, there are literally trillions and trillions of organisms reproducing and mutating. Take 138.7 billion generations and multiply that by a a few trillions or so and you get to see the number for beneficial mutations to occur. The question is how often do you see this kind of number show up in your everday life? Another reason why you don't want to use common sense for something like this.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dan Carroll Inactive Member |
So, do any creationists wanna clear this up for me? By all appearances, the jump from simple to complex has happened to each and every one of us, not to mention the six billion-odd other people on the planet.
Why is it so impossible?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dan Carroll Inactive Member |
Damn double-posting, grumble, grumble...
This message has been edited by Dan Carroll, 12-16-2004 03:53 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1467 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
But, uh, intelligence! Yeah! And it's in, uh, the genes!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
If you begin at the most simple level is there any other way to go than towards increasing complexity?
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mike the wiz Member Posts: 4752 From: u.k Joined: |
But we come from complex.
So it's complex -> simple-> complex, It's easy if you have the information. What we don't believe - is that random mutation can gives us hearts, lungs and systems. I.e The information. But also - if you have to put in you have to put out, and how can all the exact mutations needed, come about? Don't tell me, chance right? Lam - you assume the present is the key to the past. But in Genesis, they lived for nearly a thousand years. So this is why your example is one of theoretical endeavour, add uniformitarianism. This message has been edited by mike the wiz, 12-16-2004 06:55 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
coffee_addict Member (Idle past 477 days) Posts: 3645 From: Indianapolis, IN Joined: |
Mikey Mouse writes:
"They" who? Humans? Insects? Mammals?
Lam - you assume the present is the key to the past. But in Genesis, they lived for nearly a thousand years. So this is why your example is one of theoretical endeavour, add uniformitarianism.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mike the wiz Member Posts: 4752 From: u.k Joined: |
Humans.
Lammy writes: But we know for a fact that the vast majority of organisms both in the past and present have much shorter lifespans, thus much more generations per unit time My point was in reference to this quote. I agree that in the present organisms have shorter lifespans. But vast crocs have been found in the fossils, and vast whitesharks etc. These critters lived longer as they were bigger and didn't stop growing. So you can see how your quote incorporates the present being the key to the past. This message has been edited by mike the wiz, 12-16-2004 07:11 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
These critters lived longer as they were bigger and didn't stop growing. That is a nonsense statement. But that logic a Great Dane lives longer than a Yorkie. Want to check the life expectancy of them? Come on Mike. First there is no supporting evidence that things lived longer during Biblical times than they do today. If you are going to drag in the ages of the Patriarchs then I will drag in the Gilgamesh Saga and show that the Biblical Patriarchs only lived about 1/10th. as long as those folk. There is no evidence to support complex--->simple---complex and until some can be placed on the table it belongs in the realm of belief, not science. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mike the wiz Member Posts: 4752 From: u.k Joined: |
You misunderstand;
Complex (male and female) -> then Dan's 9 months. Show me a pregnancy that requires no male and female, and no priori information whatsoever. Otherwise, this is far from ex nihilo, doc. Fact is that many, many fossils are found - of bigger organisms - they just don't voice it because evolutionists are looking for evolutionistic evidence. This message has been edited by mike the wiz, 12-17-2004 08:16 AM
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024