Evolution - A serious question.

[PearlWatson]

Do you believe in an all-powerful God? If so, do you believe he created man in his own image? If so, how do you think he did that? Did he point his finger and *ZAP*, man was made, or did he/she use science to mold man into his image? I look at it like this: A master potter can create beautiful works of art from a lump of clay. That is, he takes that lump of clay (insert whatever scientific term you want to describe early humans) and over time, creates it/molds it into a finished product. Wouldn't an all powerful God do the same thing? I have a much easier time believing that God used evolution to create man than a magic finger *ZAP*, which is essentially what the Bible and other scriptures tell us.

Blech, I suck at trying to explain myself on here.

That's called Intelligent Design.

 

[PearlWatson]

We have something in common. I, too, am never wrong. And I am never too wordy, and since I am never wrong, well then you are.



FWIW I think evolution is a natural process that we do not really understand. There are lots of gaps in the fossil record. There are great leaps in many places that have to be made, and no really good explanations for the genetic differences among supposedly related species. I think it is too simplistic to explain genetic variation with mutation and natural selection alone. The odds of that ever yielding something worthwhile enough to create a new structure that gets passed along (since it is usually not enough to have a genetic mutation in one donor of genetic material) are just astronomical. But there is no doubt that mutation occurs (cancer is technically a mutation, specifically the part of the gene controlling cell division and death), and is likely a factor in the evolutionary processes.

I have a very different and radical idea concerning God and evolution. But I will wait until later in the discussion to decide if I want to share it.




Don't want to be too wordy you know, and overload poor trouts limited intellect.

In Darwin's theory it isn't just mutation, it is random mutation. The ability for a species to adapt to its environment would suggest that genetic mutations are anything but random.

 

[moevillini]

Yes, I believe in evolution and No Craig...

ok, I can get on board with that

 

[One Brow]

In Darwin's theory it isn't just mutation, it is random mutation. The ability for a species to adapt to its environment would suggest that genetic mutations are anything but random.

First, I like your new signature line. I hope you keep it for a while.

Second, why does adaptation suggest mutation is non-random? I'm not sure if you left out a few things in your description, and don't want to jump to a conclusion.

 

[moevillini]

It makes as much sense to ask if my beagles are descended from dogs. My beagles are dogs. Humans are apes....

Just the libtarded ones.

yep, 'cause the others are reptilian...

 

[One Brow]

There are lots of gaps in the fossil record.

More gaps appear almost every year.

There are great leaps in many places that have to be made,

Such as?

and no really good explanations for the genetic differences among supposedly related species.

"Really good" sounds like a highly subjective standard. What does it mean to you?

I think it is too simplistic to explain genetic variation with mutation and natural selection alone.

I agree. Mutation (in its various forms) and natural selection (in its various forms) makeup 8 or 9 of the 20+ different mechanisms of evolution.

The odds of that ever yielding something worthwhile enough to create a new structure that gets passed along (since it is usually not enough to have a genetic mutation in one donor of genetic material) are just astronomical.

I agree. That's why standard evolutionary theory doesn't use that mechanism.

 

[PearlWatson]

First, I like your new signature line. I hope you keep it for a while.

Second, why does adaptation suggest mutation is non-random? I'm not sure if you left out a few things in your description, and don't want to jump to a conclusion.

It is pointless to discuss anything with an ape.

 

[One Brow]

It is pointless to discuss anything with an ape.

I've had productive conversations with dozens of apes. Must be a problem for you.

 

[Scat]

It makes as much sense to ask if my beagles are descended from dogs. My beagles are dogs. Humans are apes.

Your Beagle is not descended from dogs, it is a dog. Just as are Chihuahuas and Great Danes. They are all the same specie.

A human being is a different and distinct specie from any of the other great apes. Now if we were the same specie and just selectively bred to look different or have different traits your example would work. As it stands it's a poor representation of you argument.

 

[The-Joker]

That's called Intelligent Design.

No it's not.

Literally the first line on intelligent design's wiki.

Intelligent design is the proposition that "certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection."[1][2]

 

[The-Joker]

In Darwin's theory it isn't just mutation, it is random mutation. The ability for a species to adapt to its environment would suggest that genetic mutations are anything but random.

Random doesn't mean ineffective... like everyother species had 5 noses and 3 legs. Random mutation is subtle, and occurs 1 in a Million based pairs, but when you add up all our base pairs it occurs a good amount of times. Sometimes mutation was beneficial, sometimes it wasn't. The ones it wasn't beneficial for died out, which is why we didn't see those bad mutations juxtaposed against good mutations when adaptation occurs.

Consider evolution like a game of blackjack where you have 1 billion players, each with 1 billion dollars and each player is consistently betting 1% of their worth. Each player represents a species. Each hand represents a new generation of that player. Every player starts the same, but overtime you would get players who are extremely poor and eliminated, and players who are extremely rich and doing quite well. This wouldn't occur because of a god-determined fate, this simply occurred because of probability.

You could liken an "environmental" change to the "casino" setting a cap floor of 50 Billion dollars , where all players without 50 billion dollars were eliminated. In this you would have some players who would scrape by barely and others who have no problem meeting the cap., but most would be eliminated. These players who met the cap, weren't determined by god, they were determined by probability (randomly) which was how well they did in each previous million hands.

Maybe you make an argument that god's plan was the casino and the blackjack dealer was god... but still ostensibly everything occurred randomly.

It's hard to look at the advancements of humans and say it occured randomly, but we're not talking about one blackjack hand that made everything work out. We're talking about literally billions of hands which determined anything from our height to our chemical reaction to a hormone.


How's that for trolling, Trout?

 

[One Brow]

Your Beagle is not descended from dogs, it is a dog. Just as are Chihuahuas and Great Danes. They are all the same specie.

Exactly!

A human being is a different and distinct specie from any of the other great apes.

Exactly! Note you even used "other great apes".

Now if we were the same specie and just selectively bred to look different or have different traits your example would work. As it stands it's a poor representation of you argument.

Really? Becaue you just repeated and agreed with my points. Curious.

Still, if you prefer, I can amend it to have both at a non-species level. For example, dogs would be canines, just as are wolves, foxes, coyotes, etc. Do you like this better?

It makes as much sense to ask if my beagles are descended from canines. My beagles are canines. Humans are apes.