Intelligent Design / Evolution

[3rdHeaven]

Evidence.

Have we not covered this already? Evidence? Every shred of evidence provided has been tossed so far. No prove/proof is a better word as it would settle the matter. It also should show that is not possible for either side!

 

[CabVet]

Have we not covered this already? Evidence? Every shred of evidence provided has been tossed so far. No prove/proof is a better word as it would settle the matter. It also should show that is not possible for either side!

What evidence has been tossed? "Proof" is not a term used in science, and even if it was, there is not a single thing that creationists here would accept as "proof".

 

[3rdHeaven]

What evidence has been tossed? "Proof" is not a term used in science.

Well then we should let scientist know that because I constantly read about proofs and tests prove etc.

Evidence is subjective wouldn't you agree?

 

[AV1611VET]

The only thing I got from the OP was that it trashed and ridiculed evolution. I don't see how that has anything to do with an intelligent designer.

Surely you don't expect ID to be evolution-friendly, do you?

 

[CaliforniaSun]

Well then we should let scientist know that because I constantly read about proofs and tests prove etc.

Evidence is subjective wouldn't you agree?

No, evidence is not subjective.

 

[CaliforniaSun]

Surely you don't expect ID to be evolution-friendly, do you?

Of course not. The "wedge" document made that abundantly clear.

 

[AV1611VET]

ToE is supported by 150 years of research the world over, and enjoys MILEs of evidence. In fact, the ToE is the only theory supported by the evidence, there is no competing theory - not one. Surely, as a man who accepts ToE, you were aware of that?

If I remember correctly, a theory has to have the potential for falsifiablility, does it not?

 

[AV1611VET]

Of course not. The "wedge" document made that abundantly clear.

Big deal -- you guys are way ahead of us with your Humanist Manifesto III.

 

[CaliforniaSun]

If I remember correctly, a theory has to have the potential for falsifiablility, does it not?

It does.

Must be able to make predictions as well.

 

[CaliforniaSun]

Big deal -- you guys are way ahead of us with your Humanist Manifesto III.

Thanks for bringing this to my attention. I hadn't read that yet. A very reasonable and insightful perspective.

"Humanism is a progressive philosophy of life that, without supernaturalism, affirms our ability and responsibility to lead ethical lives of personal fulfillment that aspire to the greater good of humanity.

The lifestance of Humanism—guided by reason, inspired by compassion, and informed by experience—encourages us to live life well and fully. It evolved through the ages and continues to develop through the efforts of thoughtful people who recognize that values and ideals, however carefully wrought, are subject to change as our knowledge and understandings advance."

 

[AV1611VET]

Thanks for bringing this to my attention. I hadn't read that yet. A very reasonable and insightful perspective.

"Humanism is a progressive philosophy of life that, without supernaturalism, affirms our ability and responsibility to lead ethical lives of personal fulfillment that aspire to the greater good of humanity.

The lifestance of Humanism—guided by reason, inspired by compassion, and informed by experience—encourages us to live life well and fully. It evolved through the ages and continues to develop through the efforts of thoughtful people who recognize that values and ideals, however carefully wrought, are subject to change as our knowledge and understandings advance."

I do not see why man should not be just as cruel as nature. -Adolf Hitler

 

[CaliforniaSun]

I do not see why man should not be just as cruel as nature. -Adolf Hitler

Quoting Catholics now, are we?*





*Goodwin's law.

 

[Elendur]

Quoting Catholics now, are we?*





*Goodwin's law.

Heh, I read about Goodwin's law yesterday, didn't think I would get an example this fast

 

[Lion Hearted Man]

Well then we should let scientist know that because I constantly read about proofs and tests prove etc.

Evidence is subjective wouldn't you agree?

Evidence is not subjective, but all conclusions in science are made to a certain statistical degree. Whenever you read results in a scientific paper, it is always reported with confidence intervals, p values, etc. No one uses the word "proof".

"Proof" is only used in math.

It's the difference between inductive and deductive reasoning, essentially, if you're familiar with those.

 

[Belk]

You want to know but you won't read? Can't help ya M8. binthere donethat.

Did you write the articles you linked? If not why would I expect to find your opinion contained there in? Why should I dig through a bunch of links when you could just state it plainly in answer to my question?

 

[Split Rock]

HGT is used to account for problems in the tree. It has nothing to do with inherited traits, so renders descent useless at the bottom of the dead tree.

If genes transferred horizontally are later inherited, how can you claim it has nothing to do with inherited traits? True, it does make determing inheritance difficult at the base of the tree.... so what? That's just reality. Are you now claiming the "tree is dead" because of this?

Please point me to the "plenty" of transitional fossils we have already discussed? post the post #'s.

Post 629. We have mostly discussed whales, but there are plenty of others. The reptile-mammal transition is particularly well preserved, including species showing the transition from reptile jaw joint to mammalian jaw joint.
CC215: Reptile-mammal transition
Jaws to ears in the ancestors of mammals

And we are to take your word for this? and that it relates to common descent how?

It gives us a tool to measure the time between divergences.
Molecular clock - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"No, sorry it isn't." Brilliant! I post several papers, and news articles saying it is, and come back with "No, sorry it isn't"?

You posted several papers showing the phylogenetic tree is dead? Post# please.

Post #637, and that dismal Whale thread.

The only "dismal" aspect was your use of Falsehoods like:
1. Ambulocetus was a crocodile.
2. Gingerich claimed Rodhocetus couldn't swim.

Please use I.D. to explain the fact that these early whales (including Basilosaurus and Durodon) had four legs.

Now don't go all emotional on me and blowing things out of proportion. Not every step, but more than a couple would be a good start.

He have more than "a couple." Give me ONE for I.D.

Constant evolution except for the stasis of no change that is the rule?

Even under stabilizing selection for some traits, others are changing. They may change in a cyclic fashion, or in small ways, but populations are always changing. This expalins why nature does not produce "species," as I have explained more than once to you. Now, please use I.D. to explain why populations undergo such variation.

There you go again. I didn't say logic was bad. It just isn't a basis for proving your position. You have been screaming for evidence this whole thread, but require non to defend your position? The OP of this thread has a list of posts and the major information I have not stated.

So, logic is OK, but I shouldn't use logic to prove my position??? I guess that makes sense for you, since you don't use any logic in your arguments. Sorry, but I will continue using logic.

"Yes, and we see how fast speciation occurs in nature" Really? where? how? again, no cite, no source, just commentary. in posts 65, and 467, I discussed speciation.

You were given some examples earlier by another poster. But I will repeat some here:
Cichlid evolution in Lake Victoria, all within 12,000 years
The Evolution of Cichlids
http://www.eawag.ch/lehre/schools/f...ecture/Kocher2004_Nature_Reviews_Genetics.pdf

Some others:
BMC Evolutionary Biology | Full text | Rapid speciation in a newly opened postglacial marine environment, the Baltic Sea
Rapid speciation « Science Notes

I asked you several times now to show us your calculations determining the minimum times required for any evolutionary event. Where are they???

"There are volumes of it" So I keep hearing. The problem is the volumes are for variation within species, small changes that just lead to more variation. Non that point to common descent. Please list the post # where I have refused to listen to all this evidence. List any posts that are something other than opinions and hear say? That will really bring the number down.

You want a list of observed speciations?
Here:
Observed Speciation - Originally posted by Lucaspa

Speciation in Insects
1. G Kilias, SN Alahiotis, and M Pelecanos. A multifactorial genetic investigation of speciation theory using drosophila melanogaster Evolution 34:730-737, 1980. Got new species of fruit flies in the lab after 5 years on different diets and temperatures. Also confirmation of natural selection in the process. Lots of references to other studies that saw speciation.
2. JM Thoday, Disruptive selection. Proc. Royal Soc. London B. 182: 109-143, 1972.
Lots of references in this one to other speciation.
3. KF Koopman, Natural selection for reproductive isolation between Drosophila pseudobscura and Drosophila persimilis. Evolution 4: 135-148, 1950.
4. LE Hurd and RM Eisenberg, Divergent selection for geotactic response and evolution of reproductive isolation in sympatric and allopatric populations of houseflies. American Naturalist 109: 353-358, 1975.
5. Coyne, Jerry A. Orr, H. Allen. Patterns of speciation in Drosophila. Evolution. V43. P362(20) March, 1989.
6. Dobzhansky and Pavlovsky, 1957 An incipient species of Drosophila, Nature 23: 289- 292.
7. Ahearn, J. N. 1980. Evolution of behavioral reproductive isolation in a laboratory stock of Drosophila silvestris. Experientia. 36:63-64.
8. 10. Breeuwer, J. A. J. and J. H. Werren. 1990. Microorganisms associated with chromosome destruction and reproductive isolation between two insect species. Nature. 346:558-560.
9. Powell, J. R. 1978. The founder-flush speciation theory: an experimental approach. Evolution. 32:465-474.
10. Dodd, D. M. B. and J. R. Powell. 1985. Founder-flush speciation: an update of experimental results with Drosophila. Evolution 39:1388-1392. 37. Dobzhansky, T. 1951. Genetics and the origin of species (3rd edition). Columbia University Press, New York.
11. Dobzhansky, T. and O. Pavlovsky. 1971. Experimentally created incipient species of Drosophila. Nature. 230:289-292.
12. Dobzhansky, T. 1972. Species of Drosophila: new excitement in an old field. Science. 177:664-669.
13. Dodd, D. M. B. 1989. Reproductive isolation as a consequence of adaptive divergence in Drosophila melanogaster. Evolution 43:1308-1311.
14. de Oliveira, A. K. and A. R. Cordeiro. 1980. Adaptation of Drosophila willistoni experimental populations to extreme pH medium. II. Development of incipient reproductive isolation. Heredity. 44:123-130.15. 29. Rice, W. R. and G. W. Salt. 1988. Speciation via disruptive selection on habitat preference: experimental evidence. The American Naturalist. 131:911-917.
30. Rice, W. R. and G. W. Salt. 1990. The evolution of reproductive isolation as a correlated character under sympatric conditions: experimental evidence. Evolution. 44:1140-1152.
31. del Solar, E. 1966. Sexual isolation caused by selection for positive and negative phototaxis and geotaxis in Drosophila pseudoobscura. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (US). 56:484-487.
32. Weinberg, J. R., V. R. Starczak and P. Jora. 1992. Evidence for rapid speciation following a founder event in the laboratory. Evolution. 46:1214-1220.
33. V Morell, Earth's unbounded beetlemania explained. Science 281:501-503, July 24, 1998. Evolution explains the 330,000 odd beetlespecies. Exploitation of newly evolved flowering plants.
34. B Wuethrich, Speciation: Mexican pairs show geography's role. Science 285: 1190, Aug. 20, 1999. Discusses allopatric speciation. Debate with ecological speciation on which is most prevalent.

Speciation in Plants
1. Speciation in action Science 72:700-701, 1996 A great laboratory study of the evolution of a hybrid plant species. Scientists did it in the lab, but the genetic data says it happened the same way in nature.
2. Hybrid speciation in peonies Speciation through homoploid hybridization between allotetraploids in peonies (Paeonia)
3. Scruffy little weed shows Darwin was right as evolution moves on new species of groundsel by hybridization
4. Butters, F. K. 1941. Hybrid Woodsias in Minnesota. Amer. Fern. J. 31:15-21.
5. Butters, F. K. and R. M. Tryon, jr. 1948. A fertile mutant of a Woodsia hybrid. American Journal of Botany. 35:138.
6. Toxic Tailings and Tolerant Grass by RE Cook in Natural History, 90(3): 28-38, 1981 discusses selection pressure of grasses growing on mine tailings that are rich in toxic heavy metals.
7. Clausen, J., D. D. Keck and W. M. Hiesey. 1945. Experimental studies on the nature of species. II. Plant evolution through amphiploidy and autoploidy, with examples from the Madiinae. Carnegie Institute Washington Publication, 564:1-174.
8. Cronquist, A. 1988. The evolution and classification of flowering plants (2nd edition). The New York Botanical Garden, Bronx, NY.
9. P. H. Raven, R. F. Evert, S. E. Eichorn, Biology of Plants (Worth, New York,ed. 6, 1999).
10. M. Ownbey, Am. J. Bot. 37, 487 (1950).
11. M. Ownbey and G. D. McCollum, Am. J. Bot. 40, 788 (1953).
12. S. J. Novak, D. E. Soltis, P. S. Soltis, Am. J. Bot. 78, 1586 (1991).
13. P. S. Soltis, G. M. Plunkett, S. J. Novak, D. E. Soltis, Am. J. Bot. 82,1329 (1995).
14. Digby, L. 1912. The cytology of Primula kewensis and of other related Primula hybrids. Ann. Bot. 26:357-388.
15. Owenby, M. 1950. Natural hybridization and amphiploidy in the genus Tragopogon. Am. J. Bot. 37:487-499.
16. Pasterniani, E. 1969. Selection for reproductive isolation between two populations of maize, Zea mays L. Evolution. 23:534-547.

Speciation in microorganisms
1. Canine parovirus, a lethal disease of dogs, evolved from feline parovirus in the 1970s.
2. Budd, A. F. and B. D. Mishler. 1990. Species and evolution in clonal organisms -- a summary and discussion. Systematic Botany 15:166-171.
3. Bullini, L. and G. Nascetti. 1990. Speciation by hybridization in phasmids and other insects. Canadian Journal of Zoology. 68:1747-1760.
4. Boraas, M. E. 1983. Predator induced evolution in chemostat culture. EOS. Transactions of the American Geophysical Union. 64:1102.
5. Brock, T. D. and M. T. Madigan. 1988. Biology of Microorganisms (5th edition). Prentice Hall, Englewood, NJ.
6. Castenholz, R. W. 1992. Species usage, concept, and evolution in the cyanobacteria (blue-green algae). Journal of Phycology 28:737-745.
7. Boraas, M. E. The speciation of algal clusters by flagellate predation. EOS. Transactions of the American Geophysical Union. 64:1102.
8. Castenholz, R. W. 1992. Speciation, usage, concept, and evolution in the cyanobacteria (blue-green algae). Journal of Phycology 28:737-745.
9. Shikano, S., L. S. Luckinbill and Y. Kurihara. 1990. Changes of traits in a bacterial population associated with protozoal predation. Microbial Ecology. 20:75-84.

New Genus
1. Muntzig, A, Triticale Results and Problems, Parey, Berlin, 1979. Describes whole new *genus* of plants, Triticosecale, of several species, formed by artificial selection. These plants are important in agriculture.

Invertebrate not insect
1. ME Heliberg, DP Balch, K Roy, Climate-driven range expansion and morphological evolution in a marine gastropod. Science 292: 1707-1710, June1, 2001. Documents mrorphological change due to disruptive selection over time. Northerna and southern populations of A spirata off California from Pleistocene to present.
2. Weinberg, J. R., V. R. Starczak and P. Jora. 1992. Evidence for rapid speciation following a founder event with a polychaete worm. . Evolution. 46:1214-1220.

Vertebrate Speciation
1. N Barton Ecology: the rapid origin of reproductive isolation Science 290:462-463, Oct. 20, 2000. Science Magazine: Sign In
2. G Vogel, African elephant species splits in two. Science 293: 1414, Aug. 24, 2001. www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/293/5534/1414
3. C Vila` , P Savolainen, JE. Maldonado, IR. Amorim, JE. Rice, RL. Honeycutt, KA. Crandall, JLundeberg, RK. Wayne, Multiple and Ancient Origins of the Domestic Dog Science 276: 1687-1689, 13 JUNE 1997. Dogs no longer one species but 4 according to the genetics. http://www.idir.net/~wolf2dog/wayne1.htm
4. Barrowclough, George F.. Speciation and Geographic Variation in Black-tailed Gnatcatchers. (book reviews) The Condor. V94. P555(2) May, 1992
5. Kluger, Jeffrey. Go fish. Rapid fish speciation in African lakes. Discover. V13. P18(1) March, 1992.
6. Genus _Rattus_ currently consists of 137 species [1,2] and is known to have
originally developed in Indonesia and Malaysia during and prior to the Middle
Ages[3].
[1] T. Yosida. Cytogenetics of the Black Rat. University Park Press, Baltimore, 1980.
[2] D. Morris. The Mammals. Hodder and Stoughton, London, 1965.
[3] G. H. H. Tate. "Some Muridae of the Indo-Australian region," Bull. Amer. Museum Nat. Hist. 72: 501-728, 1963.
7. Stanley, S., 1979. _Macroevolution: Pattern and Process_, San Francisco,
W.H. Freeman and Company. p. 41
Rapid speciation of the Faeroe Island house mouse, which occurred in less than 250 years after man brought the creature to the island.

 

[FreethinkerWWJD]

So, logic is OK, but I shouldn't use logic to prove my position??? I guess that makes sense for you, since you don't use any logic in your arguments. Sorry, but I will continue using logic.

It's fun taking apart creationist claims piece by piece isn't it? It's like playing Jenga except when it all finally falls and crashes all around them, they still claim that it's still standing.

 

[CaliforniaSun]

It's fun taking apart creationist claims piece by piece isn't it? It's like playing Jenga except when it all finally falls and crashes all around them, they still claim that it's still standing.

It's more like playing chess.

"Debating creationists on the topic of evolution is rather like trying to play chess with a pigeon; it knocks the pieces over, craps on the board, and flies back to its flock to claim victory."

- Scott D. Weitzenhoffer

 

[idscience]

Oops, drug resistant bacteria not due to "evolution". This article shows bacteria resistant to even synthetic drugs. Time to take the new poster child, nylon eating bacteria of the lecture circuit.


Antibiotic-resistant bacteria found in 4-million-year-old cave - HealthPop - CBS News

• "The cave, which is coated in the ancient bacteria, has never encountered modern medicine. Amazingly, these bacteria can still fight off different kinds of antibiotics, including synthetic drugs...According to Wright's new study, published in the April 11 issue of PLoS One, 93 types of bacteria found in the cave were tested against 26 different antibiotics. Seventy percent were able to resist three or four kinds of antibiotics. Three anthrax-related bacteria resisted 14 different types of antibiotics."

 

[idscience]

This is journal worthy? Total fantasy!

• "New scientific research raises the possibility that advanced versions of T. rex and other dinosaurs -- monstrous creatures with the intelligence and cunning of humans -- may be the life forms that evolved on other planets in the universe...."We would be better off not meeting them," concludes the study, which appears in the Journal of the American Chemical Society. ... Breslow describes evidence supporting the idea that the unusual amino acids carried to a lifeless Earth by meteorites about 4 billion years ago"

Could 'advanced' dinosaurs rule other planets?

talking dinosaurs and panspermia all in one article.