Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,911 Year: 4,168/9,624 Month: 1,039/974 Week: 366/286 Day: 9/13 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evolution is not Abiogenesis
Granny Magda
Member
Posts: 2462
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007
Member Rating: 4.1


(3)
Message 44 of 251 (653643)
02-23-2012 11:11 AM
Reply to: Message 14 by Portillo
02-23-2012 12:05 AM


Evolution vs Evolution
Hi Portillo,
Is prebiotic evolution evolution?
Well that's an interesting question. One thing that might help is to take a look at defining our terms.
quote:
evolution (v-lshn, v-)
n.
1. A gradual process in which something changes into a different and usually more complex or better form. See Synonyms at development.
2.
a. The process of developing.
b. Gradual development.
3. Biology
a. Change in the genetic composition of a population during successive generations, as a result of natural selection acting on the genetic variation among individuals, and resulting in the development of new species.
b. The historical development of a related group of organisms; phylogeny.
Now if you're asking if prebiotic development is evolution 1, then I would say that it was not an exact fit, but close.
If you asked if prebiotic development were evolution 2, then I would say that yes it was.
If you asked if prebiotic development were evolution 3 however, I would have to say that it definitely wasn't. This sense of the word is completely wrong. The development of pre-genetic chemicals can't, by definition, be evolution
This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Portillo, posted 02-23-2012 12:05 AM Portillo has not replied

  
Granny Magda
Member
Posts: 2462
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007
Member Rating: 4.1


(1)
Message 124 of 251 (654162)
02-27-2012 11:30 AM
Reply to: Message 109 by marc9000
02-26-2012 8:59 PM


Re: Analogies
Hi marc,
How would any study of ID be affected if the designer was;
*The Christian God
*The Flying Spaghetti Monster
*Allah
*Spacemen from another planet
*Any other idea
Well, I note that the first three are essentially the same possibility three times; a supernatural deity. Also, numbers 1 and 3 are actually the same god. So they wouldn't differ much on account of being the same.
Certainly all three would have a huge effect upon ID, as they would all open the doors to the supernatural.
In the case of the FSM, we would see a very profound change. The FSM is an entity that we know is imagined. It was thought up by a bloke named Bobby Henderson as a satirical joke in 2005. That this could seem to be the case even whilst the FSM was found to be real would have profound effects on all science; we would have discovered that Bobby Henderson is a prophet who can divine the truth about the universe merely by thinking up silly jokes.
On the other hand, if the spacemen theory were true, it would both close off the possibility of magical effects and rule in the usefulness of space research in the search for the origins of life.
You've had quite a lot of replies for a question that evolutionists don't want to answer haven't you?
Mutate and Survive

This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by marc9000, posted 02-26-2012 8:59 PM marc9000 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