Evolution happens

[sjastro]

We don't have to make something up.

We can support what we believe with Scripture, and you guys will say the Scripture reference was made up.

For example, we can talk about the Exodus, and you'll say the Exodus is a myth.

We have already heard of your comments regarding Exodus in a thread you were responsible for closing down; your disgraceful posts in claiming academics were not only responsible in perpetrating Exodus being a myth but also in making up anti semitism.

 

[Astrid]

.

 

[Buzzard3]

Evolution happens.[

Please explain.

It has been happening a long time

... according to atheist folklore, at least.

Evolution is not atheism.

Evolution is poor science but it is nevertheless a very popular bedtime story for atheists.

Nor does it invalidate christianity.

Not so sure about that.

 

[Yttrium]

Please explain.

At the risk of sounding like a broken record...

Biologic evolution is the change in frequency of alleles in a population over time/generations. Mutation and selection. We see this happening all the time and nature, and can observe it in laboratory conditions. So yeah, evolution happens.

The Theory of Evolution is the idea that all living things on Earth share common ancestors. This is the "evolution" that you have a hard time with. The Theory of Evolution should not be confused with the process of evolution, which is an observed scientific fact. When you just say "evolution", people familiar with the science are generally going to assume you're talking about the process, not the theory.

 

[Buzzard3]

Biologic evolution is the change in frequency of alleles in a population over time/generations. Mutation and selection. We see this happening all the time and nature, and can observe it in laboratory conditions. So yeah, evolution happens.

Yes, thank you, I know that, but I want to know what the poster means by "evolution", because it can mean different things to different people. Is he referring to observable microevolution, or is he referring to the unobserved tale of macroevolution?

The Theory of Evolution is the idea that all living things on Earth share common ancestors.

There seems to be different definitions of "the Theory of Evolution". Some would say that "all living things on Earth share common ancestors" is a not the ToE, but a conclusion of ToE.

This is the "evolution" that you have a hard time with.

True, I do have a hard time with poor science masquerading as good science and a theory that is passed off as a fact.

The Theory of Evolution should not be confused with the process of evolution, which is an observed scientific fact. When you just say "evolution", people familiar with the science are generally going to assume you're talking about the process, not the theory.

Yes, but this is not a strict science forum. Posters here may not be familiar with normative scientific terminology and therefore what they mean by "evolution" can be unclear ... hence my request for the poster to explain what he means by "Evolution happens".

 

[Yttrium]

Yes, thank you, I know that, but I want to know what the poster means by "evolution", because it can mean different things to different people.

Okay, that's good.

True, I do have a hard time with poor science masquerading as good science and a theory that is passed off as a fact.

Passing any scientific theory off as fact is dangerous business. I mean, one could say that a given theory is fact by a preponderance of the evidence, but that's shaky at best, as it uses the term "fact" a little loosely. But keep in mind that a scientific theory has to fit the known evidence. If there are sizable gaps in the evidence, that doesn't make the theory or the science bad. We try to find more evidence and, and if we do, we then either improve, replace, or further justify the theory.

 

[Shemjaza]

Yes, thank you, I know that, but I want to know what the poster means by "evolution", because it can mean different things to different people. Is he referring to observable microevolution, or is he referring to the unobserved tale of macroevolution?

Macroevolution is commonly used as a term for any evolution beyond the species level. Speciation and the interaction of species in ring-species systems demonstrate that level of evolution.

However, I assume you mean the development of more distinct forms and species over a longer period of time.

However we have evidence from multiple fields of study that can be repeatedly studied and found and independently validate macro evolution well beyond the species or genus level.

There seems to be different definitions of "the Theory of Evolution". Some would say that "all living things on Earth share common ancestors" is a not the ToE, but a conclusion of ToE.

I think the theory applies to life on Earth, not merely individual examples. So common ancestry is a part of it.

True, I do have a hard time with poor science masquerading as good science and a theory that is passed off as a fact.

Supported by the available evidence seems like a good definition of fact.

Do you have any specifics about the bad science associated with evolution?

Yes, but this is not a strict science forum. Posters here may not be familiar with normative scientific terminology and therefore what they mean by "evolution" can be unclear ... hence my request for the poster to explain what he means by "Evolution happens".

Reasonable if asked in good faith.

 

[Buzzard3]

Macroevolution is commonly used as a term for any evolution beyond the species level. Speciation and the interaction of species in ring-species systems demonstrate that level of evolution.

Yeah right ... Green Warblers speciating into more Green Warblers is "macroevolution". That's a laugh.

It's going to take more than word-games to convince me that it's possible for humans to evolve from a fish.

 

[Buzzard3]

Passing any scientific theory off as fact is dangerous business. I mean, one could say that a given theory is fact by a preponderance of the evidence, but that's shaky at best, as it uses the term "fact" a little loosely. But keep in mind that a scientific theory has to fit the known evidence. If there are sizable gaps in the evidence, that doesn't make the theory or the science bad. We try to find more evidence and, and if we do, we then either improve, replace, or further justify the theory.

I accept that evolution is the best scientific explanation for the history of life on earth ... but that doesn't mean I think it's a good or convincing theory.

A great many scientists believe bacteria-human evolution to be a fact.

 

[SelfSim]

I accept that evolution is the best scientific explanation for the history of life on earth ... but that doesn't mean I think it's a good or convincing theory.

That's not really relevant though .. is it(?)

A great many scientists believe bacteria-human evolution to be a fact.

All beliefs are optional.

 

[Shemjaza]

Yeah right ... Green Warblers speciating into more Green Warblers is "macroevolution". That's a laugh.

It's going to take more than word-games to convince me that it's possible for humans to evolve from a fish.

Can you describe the mechanism that creates an ultimate barrier?

Populations of life can diverge to the point where they no longer breed. Without some mechanism there is no reason to assume this divergence can't continue.

In fact we have both fossil and genetic evidence to indicate that this divergence has continued.

Nested hierarchies are a prediction of evolution, and are not necessary for intelligent design.

 

[Aussie Pete]

Even if your argument is valid, it does not necessarily follow that the creator is the god of Christianity or Judaism.

I agree with you. However, for a being to have the kind of wisdom, knowledge, intelligence and power to create such a stunning variety of life, it sounds an awful lot like the God of the Bible. I can see no reasonable alternative.

 

[Aussie Pete]

Can you describe the mechanism that creates an ultimate barrier?

Populations of life can diverge to the point where they no longer breed. Without some mechanism there is no reason to assume this divergence can't continue.

In fact we have both fossil and genetic evidence to indicate that this divergence has continued.

Nested hierarchies are a prediction of evolution, and are not necessary for intelligent design.

Plant breeders will tell you that there is a limit to what they can do with a particular plant type. The barrier is genetics. It's one that cannot be crossed.

 

[Mr Laurier]

We don't have to make something up.

We can support what we believe with Scripture, and you guys will say the Scripture reference was made up.

For example, we can talk about the Exodus, and you'll say the Exodus is a myth.

You do have to make up stuff thought.
Like your King James McGraw Hill Science Textbook.

And scripture it not science.
Its religion.

Evidence matters.

 

[Mr Laurier]

Please explain.

Imperfect genetic replication has been repeatedly observed in the real world.

... according to atheist folklore, at least.

Alas, there is no such thing, Atheism is not a cultural or ethnic heritage. It has no folklore.
No traditional tales of the first atheists.
No moral tales of the adventures of early atheists.
Not a single story shared by all atheists to say "This is who we are"

Evolution is poor science but it is nevertheless a very popular bedtime story for atheists.

This despite having never been a bedtime story for anybody.
Trying to use it at a bedtime story, would be pointless. There is no hero. No protagonist/character. No story arc. No adventure, or drama.
Its just a boring process.

 

[AV1611VET]

You do have to make up stuff thought.
Like your King James McGraw Hill Science Textbook.

What's this then?

 

[BNR32FAN]

Whenever it has been misused for dishonest purposes

Is that a fact or an assumption?

 

[ruthiesea]

Please explain.

... according to atheist folklore, at least.

Evolution is poor science but it is nevertheless a very popular bedtime story for atheists.

Not so sure about that.

Evolution is excellent science and has nothing to do with atheism. It isn’t either/or. I accept evolution for what it is: a valid scientific theory that has all of the attributes of any valid theory. However, I am not an atheist. I absolutely believe in G-d.

 

[Buzzard3]

Imperfect genetic replication has been repeatedly observed in the real world.

Evolution through imperfections ... sounds like an oxymoron.

 

[Buzzard3]

Imperfect genetic replication has been repeatedly observed in the real world.

So, the human brain is the result of genetic imperfections. That's hilarious!

And genetic imperfections are somehow responsible for producing eyes that somehow produced nerves that somehow connected to a brain, which is also the result of genetic imperfections. Wow, that's some theory!