So what selection pressure do I have to watch out for, that might make me a monkey?

[crjmurray]

No, that is not testable or repeatable. You just find a bone in the dirt/layer and say it is "repeated/tested". That's not science. That's just an observation.

Testing and repeating is when you actually turn a monkey into a human. Or a dinosaur into a bird.

Please show us your experiments that you have done to test and repeat turning monkeys into humans or dinosaurs into birds.

You know what, just show us an experiment where you created life out of a rock (not 1 or 2 amino acids)

Not for this thread and no....just no

 

[katerinah1947]

Not for this thread

Hi,
I accept your critique that I am off topic. I was just trying to help. I will exit now.
LOVE,
...Katherina.,

 

[Kylie]

People who get on Gottservant's case about "individuals don't evolve, populations do" are just showing their ignorance about religious beliefs.

Something I've learned to expect around here.

But they are showing a great deal of knowledge about reality. That's the thing about reality - it doesn't care what your religious beliefs are.

 

[Kylie]

According to wikipedia, Science is....

Tell me how evolution can be observed, tested, repeated etc. If it isn't science according to the definiton of science, it's religion.

Here you go.

29+ Evidences for Macroevolution: The Scientific Case for Common Descent

 

[Gottservant]

If it changed, it could change back.

That's all I'm saying.

 

[AV1611VET]

But they are showing a great deal of knowledge about reality.

Is intimitating that someone is lying because the intimator doesn't know where the intimatee is coming from also a part of reality?

Is telling me I hate science or never explained myself also a part of reality?

Is harping on us about not using the scientific method, when the harper won't even use a calculator, or investigate before they communicate, a part of reality also?

That's the thing about reality - it doesn't care what your religious beliefs are.

Reality can take a hike.

 

[[serious]]

If it changed, it could change back.

That's all I'm saying.

can you also unbake a muffin?

 

[pgp_protector]

can you also unbake a muffin?

Doubt it, but you can un-boil(*) an egg

 

[RealityCheck01]

...

Sorry, morse86, but inane questions about physically impossible experiments do not belong in any place in the forum !
No one is stupid enough to try to personally run experiments that take millions of years to finish. Demanding that they do is not rational. Luckily the world has done that for us many times and we can see the tested repeated results.

 

[Gottservant]

can you also unbake a muffin?

A muffin doesn't evolve from the dust, it is made - are you saying God made Evolution?

 

[Gene2memE]

Gott,

Do you understand the differences between inorganic chemistry and organic chemistry? Are you aware that you can produce organic molecules from inorganic compounds.

 

[Kylie]

Is intimitating that someone is lying because the intimator doesn't know where the intimatee is coming from also a part of reality?

Care to give a specific example of this? I personally think of someone as a liar if they tell me something which a) disagrees with what I know to be true and b) is something they have been previously corrected on. If it's just a), then I just consider them mistaken.

How about you?

Is telling me I hate science or never explained myself also a part of reality?

I don't think you hate science. I think you see science as a tool you can use to press your conclusions and make them appear valid. You don't see science as the way to actually reach those conclusions. Therefore, you are sciencing wrong.

Is harping on us about not using the scientific method, when the harper won't even use a calculator, or investigate before they communicate, a part of reality also?

I think it would be more accurate to say that they harp on about you ignoring the use of a tool which has provided very accurate information because you figure you won't like the answers it gives.

Reality can take a hike.

Are you saying that your beliefs don't apply to reality?

 

[Gottservant]

Gott,

Do you understand the differences between inorganic chemistry and organic chemistry? Are you aware that you can produce organic molecules from inorganic compounds.

You will have to be more specific about the relevance of this, I fail to see where you are going.

 

[Ophiolite]

Gott,

Do you understand the differences between inorganic chemistry and organic chemistry? Are you aware that you can produce organic molecules from inorganic compounds.

I advise caution. By some definitions organic molecules are those that contain carbon. Organic is not the same as biological. On that basis you cannot take an inorganic compound (i.e. one without carbon) and turn it into an organic compound (i.e one with carbon).

 

[Radagast]

I advise caution. By some definitions organic molecules are those that contain carbon.

Well, to be picky, carbonates, cyanides, cyanates, carbides, etc. are typically considered inorganic.

Hence the significance of Friedrich Wöhler's 1828 synthesis of urea (organic) from ammonium cyanate (inorganic).

 

[[serious]]

A muffin doesn't evolve from the dust, it is made - are you saying God made Evolution?

Same as the rest of the natural laws.

But even if i was strictly adhering to an atheistic evolution position, why would it matter? Surely you don't reject the idea of irreversible processes in nature. Can a volcano un-erupt? can a tree un-fall? Even if you plant a new tree in the same spot that grows up looking superficially similar, it isn't the same tree from before.

 

[Gottservant]

Same as the rest of the natural laws.

But even if i was strictly adhering to an atheistic evolution position, why would it matter? Surely you don't reject the idea of irreversible processes in nature. Can a volcano un-erupt? can a tree un-fall? Even if you plant a new tree in the same spot that grows up looking superficially similar, it isn't the same tree from before.

Yes, but how is that (irreversibility) Evolution?

Please, describe the relationship?

 

[[serious]]

Yes, but how is that (irreversibility) Evolution?

Please, describe the relationship?

Not even sure what you are asking here. I was illustrating that there exist processes that can't be reversed (baking a muffin) to which you replied saying that's a directed action. I pointed out that undirected actions (like a tree dying or a volcano erupting) can also be irreversible.

Maybe try rephrasing your question?

 

[mzungu]

Oh, Hi gott, I see you are posting about evolution. Before we continue, a few reminders about what evolution is and isn't. These should all look familiar, because you've been told them before. Many, many times.

1. Evolution is the change in allele frequency in a population over time.
2. We don't choose to, or not to, evolve
3. Populations evolve, individuals don't.
4. Evolution is a description of real world events, not a theory of morality. It does not proscribe any action on our part.
5. There is no such thing as "completely evolved." Evolution is a process, not an end point.
6. All modern day creatures have been evolving for the same amount of time and are thus equally evolved.
7. Non living things don't evolve
8. "Belief" is not a genetic trait. Belief does not evolve in the biological sense.
9. We do not expect all populations to solve all problems in the exact same way. (ex. The fact that birds evolved wings does not mean we expect all creatures to evolve wings)
10. Adding the "evolved" or "evolutionarily" doesn't make what ever you are saying relevant to evolution. (ex. "what's the best pizza topping, evolutionarily speaking" makes no sense because pizza toppings are unrelated to evolution.)
11. Not knowing how something works doesn't keep it from working.

Ditto:

 

[Gottservant]

Not even sure what you are asking here. I was illustrating that there exist processes that can't be reversed (baking a muffin) to which you replied saying that's a directed action. I pointed out that undirected actions (like a tree dying or a volcano erupting) can also be irreversible.

Maybe try rephrasing your question?

No, you asked me a question, and I asked you a counter question, rather than go down the rabbit trail of working out which actions are directed and which are not.

The point is you have to show that there is a relationship between Evolution and irreversibility, logically one that evolves (since this is preferable at the very least).

Reality can have all the irreversibility it wants, it operates according to the laws of physics, you are trying to show that something further emerges from the laws of physics (but you are not showing that a relationship to irreversibility exists).