|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Junior Member (Idle past 5060 days) Posts: 1 From: Austin, TX, US Joined: |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Problems with evolution? Submit your questions. | |||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6412 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
shadow71 writes:
I don't like the expression "rely on natural selection." However, natural selection would be as much involved here as with anything else.I understand this to mean that the TRANSITION TO COMPLEX LIFE was a unique event that did not rely on natural selection. I don't have a time machine to go back and see what happened. And I'm not even a biologist. However, assuming that symbiosis was involved, it is most likely that there were casual symbiotic unions that formed. At some stage a change occurred which might have been a relatively small DNA change, such as allowed the two components of such a symbiotic union to synchronize their reproductive activity, so that the next generation inherited a similar symbiotic structure. We see a big change, in terms of the effect on the biosphere. But we cannot rule out that it might well have occurred in small genetic steps. You can't even conclude that it was a unique event. Something similar might have happened on many occasion, with only one line surviving through the background of natural selection. Jesus was a liberal hippie
|
|||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6412 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
mike the wiz writes:
I'm sorry to see it, mike, but you seem to have lost your wizness.There are over 200 geochronometers that suggest a young earth. Some of them are; The amount of mud at the mouth of major riversLight not being a constant The amount of dust on the moon Satelites that should have expired Polystrate fossils Examples of rapid layers being created in days (Mt St Helens) I won't go into it all, but it's nothing to do with scientific prowess. Also, potassium argon dating gave rocks found at new volcanoes dates of millions of years. Jesus was a liberal hippie
|
|||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6412 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
mike the wiz writes:
I'm not concerned with what you believe. That's for you to decide. It's the quality of your arguments that I find troubling.Would it mean I was any less mike if I believed in a young earth rather than an old one? Jesus was a liberal hippie
|
|||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6412 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
nwr writes: I don't like the expression "rely on natural selection." However, natural selection would be as much involved here as with anything else. shadow71 writes:
Personally, I am not a pan-selectionist. I tend to think that there is too much emphasis placed on selection. However, even those who do emphasize selection usually avoid talking in terms of "rely on natural selection."
Nick Lane says in his paper "The transition to COMPLEX LIFE(My emphasis) on Earth was a UNIQUE event that hinged on a bioenergetic jump afforded by spatially combinatorial relations between two cells and two genomes (endosymbiosis) rather than natural slection actilng on mutations..." I think he is pretty clear that natural selection was not involved in the transition to complex life. That this was jump and not a gradual transition. shadow71 writes:
I haven't read Lane's paper, so I'm going by your quotes from it.I think he is pretty clear that natural selection was not involved in the transition to complex life. That this was jump and not a gradual transition. The idea that one organism jumped inside another, leading to a sudden transition, is surely mistaken. There had to be a lot of mutual adaptation before that was possible, and natural selection would have been involved in that mutual adaptation. If the point you are making is that endosymbiosis doesn't quite fit in the typical neo-Darwinist picture, then I agree with that. And most neo-Darwinists would probably also agree. I don't see that as a problem with evolution. Jesus was a liberal hippie
|
|||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6412 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6412 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
shadow71 writes:
I'm getting a "page not found" error on that link."Feeling the Future: Experimential evidence for anomalous retroactive influences on cognition and affect." Daryl J. Bem Page Not Found Is this one of science's great explanations for things that used to be credited to the supernatural? A google search did turn up http://dbem.ws/FeelingFuture.pdf which I presume is the same paper (perhaps an early draft). Count me as skeptical. I've seen these kinds of reports before, but attempts to replicate them usually fail. Jesus was a liberal hippie
|
|||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6412 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
shadow71 writes:
I agree that's a bad criticism. Science doesn't have to wait for mechanism.What concerns me are several quotes about the paper. This from the NY times on 1-6-2011 In response to the publisher stating we decided to publish the paper "...even though there was no mechanism by which we could understand the results." Bem's results show an effect only a little better than chance. If he had shown a far stronger effect, and if others could reproduce it, then this would be good science. As it is, however, the effects reported are marginal though they test as significant. My concern would be on whether there were methodological errors that allowed a bias to creep in. As for whether the journal should have accepted the paper - I leave that to the editors. It's not entirely unreasonable to publish uncertain results, and then expect other scientists to attempt to replicate the work. The journal cannot be expected to run its own lab and attempt to replicate before accepting. On the other hand, there's a long history of such psychic claims, with marginally positive results. And there's an equally long history of failure to replicate such claims. I'll admit to being surprised that the paper was accepted. Incidentally, Jerry Coyne has posted about this on his blog: Psychic paper provokes backlash Jesus was a liberal hippie
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024