Home | Be a Christian | Devotionals | Join Us! | Forums | Rules | F.A.Q.


Go Back   Christian Forums > Discussion and Debate > Physical & Life Sciences > Creation & Evolution
Register BlogsPrayersJobsArcade Calendar Mark Forums Read

Creation & Evolution Forum for the discussion of this important topic. This forum is open to non-believers. There is a Christians-only forum in the Christians-only section too.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 2nd August 2012, 05:43 PM
Elendur's Avatar
Gamer and mathematician

Gender: Male Faith: Agnostic Country: Sweden Member For 2 Years
 
Join Date: 27th February 2012
Location: Sweden - Umeċ
Posts: 2,263
Blessings: 1,365
My Mood Thinking
Blog Entries: 14
Reps: 59,882,673,295,010,168 (power: 59,882,673,295,015)
Elendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond repute
Elendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond repute
There is plenty of arguments raised due to 'macroevolution'.
Some classical ones like 'a dog will aways be a dog', some complaining about speciation, etc etc.
All that has got me thinking.

Fruit fly that will be used (just for generation information, the fact that they're usually used etc):
Drosophila melanogaster - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia





I was just thinking about a hypothetical situation where we have:
  1. A population of fruit flies that has all they need to survive and breed.
  2. A habitat with walls and ceiling that is specially prepared to keep the fruitflies from walking around on them (they shouldn't be able to).
  3. When the population reach a certain number there are two additional areas opened, one area that is at floor height, one area that is a few decimeters above.
  4. These two areas are designed to be accessed by two different groups in the fruit fly population, the lower for flies who won't fly as high, the higher for flies who flies higher.
  5. The flies who flies into the higher area will be separated from the population.
  6. The steps 3-5 will be repeated until a pre-determined time, generation or goal has been reached.
So what I'm really interested in is:

What do you think would happen and why?
What time, generation or goal would you set for step 6?
What additional step, of your choice, would you like to add or remove, if any?

Is there any other question that would interest you?


Cheers Elendur

Edit: Replaced "for" with "until".

Last edited by Elendur; 2nd August 2012 at 07:24 PM.
Reply With Quote
Become a CF Site Supporter Today and Make These Ads Go Away!

  #2  
Old 3rd August 2012, 02:39 AM
CabVet's Avatar
Question everything

Gender: Male Married Faith: Agnostic Party: US-Others Country: United States Member For 2 Years
 
Join Date: 7th December 2011
Location: Los Altos, CA
Posts: 10,979
Blessings: 16,350,526
My Mood Amused
Reps: 266,872,530,234,893,312 (power: 266,872,530,234,906)
CabVet has a reputation beyond reputeCabVet has a reputation beyond reputeCabVet has a reputation beyond reputeCabVet has a reputation beyond reputeCabVet has a reputation beyond reputeCabVet has a reputation beyond reputeCabVet has a reputation beyond reputeCabVet has a reputation beyond reputeCabVet has a reputation beyond reputeCabVet has a reputation beyond reputeCabVet has a reputation beyond reputeCabVet has a reputation beyond reputeCabVet has a reputation beyond reputeCabVet has a reputation beyond reputeCabVet has a reputation beyond repute
CabVet has a reputation beyond reputeCabVet has a reputation beyond reputeCabVet has a reputation beyond reputeCabVet has a reputation beyond reputeCabVet has a reputation beyond reputeCabVet has a reputation beyond reputeCabVet has a reputation beyond reputeCabVet has a reputation beyond reputeCabVet has a reputation beyond reputeCabVet has a reputation beyond reputeCabVet has a reputation beyond reputeCabVet has a reputation beyond reputeCabVet has a reputation beyond reputeCabVet has a reputation beyond reputeCabVet has a reputation beyond repute
There were several experiments that were done exactly like that, and changes were visible in morphology and mating preferences of Drosophila.

The real problem is that creationists will just keep saying that even if speciation is observed in a human generation time, those will just be "flies". If they become different genera, they will still "just" be the same family. If they become different families, they will be the same order, and so on. Hundreds of years from now, if we could "evolve" a fish into a mammal in the lab, they would still say that they were all "vertebrates". After almost a year in this forum I am really lost as to what to propose to try to convince these guys.
__________________
"I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours" — Stephen H. Roberts

"I see only with deep regret that God punishes so many of His children for their numerous stupidities, for which only He Himself can be held responsible; in my opinion, only His nonexistence could excuse Him." — Albert Einstein
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 3rd August 2012, 03:30 AM
Mr Strawberry's Avatar
Newbie

Gender: Male Faith: Atheist Country: United Kingdom Member For 2 Years
 
Join Date: 20th January 2012
Location: Great Britain
Posts: 3,446
Blessings: 16,045,758
Reps: 156,627,243,140,200,704 (power: 156,627,243,140,206)
Mr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond repute
Mr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by CabVet View Post
There were several experiments that were done exactly like that, and changes were visible in morphology and mating preferences of Drosophila.

The real problem is that creationists will just keep saying that even if speciation is observed in a human generation time, those will just be "flies". If they become different genera, they will still "just" be the same family. If they become different families, they will be the same order, and so on. Hundreds of years from now, if we could "evolve" a fish into a mammal in the lab, they would still say that they were all "vertebrates". After almost a year in this forum I am really lost as to what to propose to try to convince these guys.
Well, the thing is, they aren't actually listening. They already know they're right so you can talk to them until you're blue in the face and it will all just go in one ear and out the other. They aren't listening and they aren't thinking about what is being explained to them. We can all name creationists who have been on this forum years and still don't understand evolution. How many times have we seen creationists have their favourite argument/pet theory/distortion of the facts torn to pieces in front of them only to see them trot it out afresh a week later as if nothing had happened. How could they not have learned anything, we wonder. Because none of it registered, that's how. Why not? Because they weren't listening. All the careful explanations fell on deaf ears. They beam at you indulgently as you try to explain for the twentieth time the massive holes, errors and misunderstandings in their posts and it all sails straight past them because all they are thinking about is what their pastor said in church last Sunday or about how much Jesus loves them or how sad it is that you will be going to hell.

Last edited by Mr Strawberry; 3rd August 2012 at 03:57 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 3rd August 2012, 07:49 AM
Elendur's Avatar
Gamer and mathematician

Gender: Male Faith: Agnostic Country: Sweden Member For 2 Years
 
Join Date: 27th February 2012
Location: Sweden - Umeċ
Posts: 2,263
Blessings: 1,365
My Mood Thinking
Blog Entries: 14
Reps: 59,882,673,295,010,168 (power: 59,882,673,295,015)
Elendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond repute
Elendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by CabVet View Post
There were several experiments that were done exactly like that, and changes were visible in morphology and mating preferences of Drosophila.
Cool I expected that to be honest but I just felt that some 'anti-evolutionists' would be able to chip in if I made the thread in this form. (You know the old saying, "It's a trap!")

Could you link any study like that? (Just out of curiosity)

Originally Posted by CabVet View Post
The real problem is that creationists will just keep saying that even if speciation is observed in a human generation time, those will just be "flies". If they become different genera, they will still "just" be the same family. If they become different families, they will be the same order, and so on. Hundreds of years from now, if we could "evolve" a fish into a mammal in the lab, they would still say that they were all "vertebrates". After almost a year in this forum I am really lost as to what to propose to try to convince these guys.
Mr Strawberry explained it quite nicely.
__________________
For those who're interested:

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 3rd August 2012, 08:44 AM
Newbie

Gender: Male Married Faith: Christian Member For 2 Years
 
Join Date: 13th June 2012
Posts: 283
Blessings: 5,830
Reps: 204,245,723,177,359 (power: 204,245,723,180)
rush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond repute
rush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by CabVet View Post
There were several experiments that were done exactly like that, and changes were visible in morphology and mating preferences of Drosophila.
Yeah, but they were still just flies

The real problem is that creationists will just keep saying that even if speciation is observed in a human generation time, those will just be "flies". If they become different genera, they will still "just" be the same family. If they become different families, they will be the same order, and so on. Hundreds of years from now, if we could "evolve" a fish into a mammal in the lab, they would still say that they were all "vertebrates".
Hey, if science can evolve a fly into a bee or a fish into a mammal in the lab, I'll be the first one on the scene to call it whatever it happened to turn into and add our scientific ability to manipulate life to that degree to my ever growing list of evidence that it was all designed.

On a side note, I've always thought it strange that Dawkins uses the 50,000 generation bacteria experiment in The Greatest Show on Earth as an example of evolution in action, even though they are still just bacteria
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 3rd August 2012, 09:08 AM
loktai's Avatar
Newbie

Gender: Male Faith: Humanist Member For 2 Years
 
Join Date: 26th June 2012
Posts: 237
Blessings: 16,414
My Mood Bahahaha
Reps: 302,318,846,730,052 (power: 302,318,846,733)
loktai has a reputation beyond reputeloktai has a reputation beyond reputeloktai has a reputation beyond reputeloktai has a reputation beyond reputeloktai has a reputation beyond reputeloktai has a reputation beyond reputeloktai has a reputation beyond reputeloktai has a reputation beyond reputeloktai has a reputation beyond reputeloktai has a reputation beyond reputeloktai has a reputation beyond reputeloktai has a reputation beyond reputeloktai has a reputation beyond reputeloktai has a reputation beyond reputeloktai has a reputation beyond repute
loktai has a reputation beyond reputeloktai has a reputation beyond reputeloktai has a reputation beyond reputeloktai has a reputation beyond reputeloktai has a reputation beyond reputeloktai has a reputation beyond reputeloktai has a reputation beyond reputeloktai has a reputation beyond reputeloktai has a reputation beyond reputeloktai has a reputation beyond reputeloktai has a reputation beyond reputeloktai has a reputation beyond reputeloktai has a reputation beyond reputeloktai has a reputation beyond reputeloktai has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by rush1169 View Post

Hey, if science can evolve a fly into a bee or a fish into a mammal in the lab, I'll be the first one on the scene to call it whatever it happened to turn into and add our scientific ability to manipulate life to that degree to my ever growing list of evidence that it was all designed.
How would that possibly constitute evidence for design?

The above experiment would either prove or refute evolution. If nothing changed in the flies then it casts doubt on ToE. If the flies changed then it proves consistent with the ToE in testable and reproducible conditions.

I fail to see how this either proves or refutes the idea of a creator, the evidence here is simply irrellevant.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 3rd August 2012, 09:45 AM
Newbie

Gender: Male Married Faith: Christian Member For 2 Years
 
Join Date: 13th June 2012
Posts: 283
Blessings: 5,830
Reps: 204,245,723,177,359 (power: 204,245,723,180)
rush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond repute
rush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond reputerush1169 has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by loktai View Post
The above experiment [of artificially evolving a bee into a fly or a fish into a mammal] would either prove or refute evolution.
So what's the verdict?

If nothing changed in the flies then it casts doubt on ToE. If the flies changed then it proves consistent with the ToE in testable and reproducible conditions.
I'm confused. Are we talking about anything changing or talking about a fly into a bee or a fish into a mammal?

I fail to see how this either proves or refutes the idea of a creator, the evidence here is simply irrellevant.
How I see it: Before our advancement of science, humans had the biblical Genesis account to explain origins. That account is timeless and sufficient for all human levels of intellect and knowledge. Today, science is quickly understanding how it all works together as a system. Back in the "old days" the creation paradigm was such that God created one thing, paused, created another thing, paused, created another thing, paused, created another thing and continued with successive creation events, one-at-a-time over the course of time. What science is revealing is that the creation events were fewer and further between. "In the beginning" was a Big Bang (the creation event) that included everything needed for nature to run it's course and result in you, me, and this day we live.

I'm much more impressed that everything that is and will be was incorporated into that one creation event than I was when I thought God used a series of individual events over time to get to where we are today. As an analogy, I'd be much more impressed if humans could build a machine that you feed hydrogen atoms and out comes whatever you tell it (a car, for example) than I am compared to the way we do it now (which is still pretty neat, but pales in comparison).

Last edited by rush1169; 3rd August 2012 at 09:53 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 3rd August 2012, 12:08 PM
Elendur's Avatar
Gamer and mathematician

Gender: Male Faith: Agnostic Country: Sweden Member For 2 Years
 
Join Date: 27th February 2012
Location: Sweden - Umeċ
Posts: 2,263
Blessings: 1,365
My Mood Thinking
Blog Entries: 14
Reps: 59,882,673,295,010,168 (power: 59,882,673,295,015)
Elendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond repute
Elendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond reputeElendur has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by rush1169 View Post
I'm confused. Are we talking about anything changing or talking about a fly into a bee or a fish into a mammal?
If you're confused about what loktai means with the change you would need to brush up on what ToE really says.

Evolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
__________________
For those who're interested:

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 3rd August 2012, 12:15 PM
Loudmouth's Avatar
Contributor

Gender: Male Faith: Agnostic Country: United States Member For 5 Years
 
Join Date: 26th August 2003
Posts: 26,364
Blessings: 26,280,300
Reps: 949,888,933,730,122,880 (power: 949,888,933,730,160)
Loudmouth has a reputation beyond reputeLoudmouth has a reputation beyond reputeLoudmouth has a reputation beyond reputeLoudmouth has a reputation beyond reputeLoudmouth has a reputation beyond reputeLoudmouth has a reputation beyond reputeLoudmouth has a reputation beyond reputeLoudmouth has a reputation beyond reputeLoudmouth has a reputation beyond reputeLoudmouth has a reputation beyond reputeLoudmouth has a reputation beyond reputeLoudmouth has a reputation beyond reputeLoudmouth has a reputation beyond reputeLoudmouth has a reputation beyond reputeLoudmouth has a reputation beyond repute
Loudmouth has a reputation beyond reputeLoudmouth has a reputation beyond reputeLoudmouth has a reputation beyond reputeLoudmouth has a reputation beyond reputeLoudmouth has a reputation beyond reputeLoudmouth has a reputation beyond reputeLoudmouth has a reputation beyond reputeLoudmouth has a reputation beyond reputeLoudmouth has a reputation beyond reputeLoudmouth has a reputation beyond reputeLoudmouth has a reputation beyond reputeLoudmouth has a reputation beyond reputeLoudmouth has a reputation beyond reputeLoudmouth has a reputation beyond reputeLoudmouth has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by rush1169 View Post
Yeah, but they were still just flies
Humans and bears are mammals, as was our common ancestor. It is mammals evolving into mammals. Are you saying that this doesn't count as an example of evolution because we can use the same name for all of these species?

Hey, if science can evolve a fly into a bee or a fish into a mammal in the lab, I'll be the first one on the scene to call it whatever it happened to turn into and add our scientific ability to manipulate life to that degree to my ever growing list of evidence that it was all designed.
Evolution doesn't cause species to evolve into already existing species.

On a side note, I've always thought it strange that Dawkins uses the 50,000 generation bacteria experiment in The Greatest Show on Earth as an example of evolution in action, even though they are still just bacteria
See example above.
__________________
“Because they know not the forces of nature, and in order that they may have comrades in their ignorance, they suffer not that others should search out anything, and would have us believe like rustics and ask no reason...But we ask in all things a reason must be sought.” --William of Conches (c. 1090 – after 1154)
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 3rd August 2012, 12:23 PM
Mr Strawberry's Avatar
Newbie

Gender: Male Faith: Atheist Country: United Kingdom Member For 2 Years
 
Join Date: 20th January 2012
Location: Great Britain
Posts: 3,446
Blessings: 16,045,758
Reps: 156,627,243,140,200,704 (power: 156,627,243,140,206)
Mr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond repute
Mr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond reputeMr Strawberry has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by rush1169 View Post
On a side note, I've always thought it strange that Dawkins uses the 50,000 generation bacteria experiment in The Greatest Show on Earth as an example of evolution in action, even though they are still just bacteria
It is worth noting that for the first 2.5 billion years of the 3.5 billion year history of life on Earth, all life was single celled. Some consclusions can be drawn from that.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Return to Creation & Evolution

Thread Tools
Display Modes


 
Become a CF Site Supporter Today and Make These Ads Go Away!


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:42 PM.