Lines of Evidence

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

It's tough being a theistic evolutionist here, you get crap from both the atheists and the creationists.

 

[lasthero]

It's tough being a theistic evolutionist here, you get crap from both the atheists and the creationists.

Really? Aside from consol, most of the atheists around here always seemed okay with theistic evolutionists. Two of my favorite posters on here - not including you - fall into that category, sfs and rick123.

 

[TLK Valentine]

I'm a recovering KJO-YEC

I got very poor marks for Grade 12 Biology (in 1982), but am very keen to learn all I can about these lines of evidence for E V O L U T I O N

Please choose "one" and help me understand it?

I known I could search out the answer, but then this wouldn't be a discussion - it'd be a boring old lecture.

So, let's chat.

Not a scientist by trade, but I'll take a crack at "speciation events."

A speciation event is the point where one species becomes two. This most commonly happens when members of one species are separated from the rest, and are forced to live in a different environment, under different conditions, from the others.

According to Natural Selection, it's pressures from the environment which guide a species' evolution. Therefore, if two members of the same species are forced to live in different environments, they would evolve along different paths.... a fork in the road, as it were

Eventually, the paths would diverge so far from one another that members of one group would not be able to breed with members of the other -- which is more or less the sign of a separate species... that point would be the "speciation event."

There are plenty of real-life examples one could Google, but as my strength is more in literature, let me try a literary example:

Have you ever read The Time Machine, by H.G. Wells, or seen either of the movies? Long story short, in the future after WWIII, many humans fled underground to escape the cataclysm, while the rest took their chances on the surface.

The ones who stayed on the surface were known as the Eloi, and looked and behaved very much like the humans we are familiar with.

(Photos from the 1960 film and 2002 remake, respectively)

The ones who stayed underground, however, were the Morlocks, who had changed considerably -- hundreds, if not thousands, of generations living underground will have an effect on you.

Now, could Eloi and Morlocks interbreed? The story never addresses that, IIRC, but if not, then the point where they no longer could -- the generation of Morlock that was was so divergent from Eloi that cross-breeding would no longer produce a viable offspring -- would be the speciation event.

Again, there are plenty of real-world cases which parallel this, but in all fairness, it is a good movie.

Make sense?

 

[bhsmte]

Why do I smell religion?

Are you one who claims well evidenced science is a religion?

If so, any learning you will embark upon, will be tainted by this view.

 

[EternalDragon]

(Photos from the 1960 film and 2002 remake, respectively)

The ones who stayed underground, however, were the Morlocks, who had changed considerably -- hundreds, if not thousands, of generations living underground will have an effect on you.

Now, could Eloi and Morlocks interbreed? The story never addresses that, IIRC, but if not, then the point where they no longer could -- the generation of Morlock that was was so divergent from Eloi that cross-breeding would no longer produce a viable offspring -- would be the speciation event.

Again, there are plenty of real-world cases which parallel this, but in all fairness, it is a good movie.

Make sense?

Science fiction. Yep, that pretty much sums up Darwinian evolution.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Science fiction. Yep, that pretty much sums up Darwinian evolution.

The alternative being...?

 

[EternalDragon]

The alternative being...?

Special creation of kinds of creatures, by an intelligent designer,
which then produced variety through natural selection, within their
species.

You do know something does not come from nothing, right?

 

[TLK Valentine]

Special creation of kinds of creatures, by an intelligent designer,
which then produced variety through natural selection, within their
species.

Oh, wait, I've heard this story too:

Xel'naga - StarCraft and StarCraft II Wiki

In the Starcraft video game series, The Xel'naga were a spacefaring race whose proto-genetic experiments created the two alien races in the game: the Protoss, or "First Born," which were designed specifically to have a "purity of form":

And the insect-like Zerg, created for "Purity of Essence":

The Xel'naga's original plan was for these two species to interbreed, thus creating the perfect organism.... but neither of their creations were all that keen on the idea.


Funny -- I thought you didn't like science fiction?

You do know something does not come from nothing, right?

But according to you, some things don't need to come from anything at all... so where does that get us?

 

[Strathos]

Really? Aside from consol, most of the atheists around here always seemed okay with theistic evolutionists. Two of my favorite posters on here - not including you - fall into that category, sfs and rick123.

Well a lot of times they try to harass you whenever you defend anything in the Bible, or try to defend faith as a virtue.

 

[lasthero]

Special creation of kinds of creatures,

What's a kind?

 

[bhsmte]

Well a lot of times they try to harass you whenever you defend anything in the Bible, or try to defend faith as a virtue.

Those are two separate issues though.

Defending scripture in the bible, is not the same as a theist who simply agrees with evolution, which has boatloads of evidence to support it.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Well a lot of times they try to harass you whenever you defend anything in the Bible, or try to defend faith as a virtue.

On the other hand, it's the hard core Creationists with "Evolution requires more faith than the Bible!" that try to turn "faith" into a pejorative term.

 

[TLK Valentine]

What's a kind?

And why is it "special" creation? What makes it so "special"?

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

Are you one who claims well evidenced science is a religion?

If so, any learning you will embark upon, will be tainted by this view.

I certainly hope that's not the sort of idea, that I've communicated here.

What I am objecting to, is the belief in Evolution which stands outside the scientifically held position (i.e. Scientism)

'Unlike the use of the scientific method as only one mode of reaching knowledge, scientism claims that science alone can render truth about the world and reality. Scientism's single-minded adherence to only the empirical, or testable, makes it a strictly scientifc worldview, in much the same way that a Protestant fundamentalism that rejects science can be seen as a strictly religious worldview. Scientism sees it necessary to do away with most, if not all, metaphysical, philosophical, and religious claims, as the truths they proclaim cannot be apprehended by the scientific method. In essence, scientism sees science as the absolute and only justifiable access to the truth.'

Glossary Definition: Scientism

refer back to Fancy123's comment: here

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

Not a scientist by trade, but I'll take a crack at "speciation events."

A speciation event is the point where one species becomes two. This most commonly happens when members of one species are separated from the rest, and are forced to live in a different environment, under different conditions, from the others.

According to Natural Selection, it's pressures from the environment which guide a species' evolution. Therefore, if two members of the same species are forced to live in different environments, they would evolve along different paths.... a fork in the road, as it were

Eventually, the paths would diverge so far from one another that members of one group would not be able to breed with members of the other -- which is more or less the sign of a separate species... that point would be the "speciation event."

There are plenty of real-life examples one could Google, but as my strength is more in literature, let me try a literary example:



Make sense?

Kinda -- At first I thought the photographs were from Planet of the Apes

Here's a little science from Berkley:

'Speciation is a lineage-splitting event that produces two or more separate species. ....'
Evolution 101: Speciation

So what's wrong with the fruit-fly example?

 

[TLK Valentine]

Kinda -- At first I thought the photographs were from Planet of the Apes

Here's a little science from Berkley:

'Speciation is a lineage-splitting event that produces two or more separate species. ....'
Evolution 101: Speciation

So what's wrong with the fruit-fly example?

Nothing at all. The different species of fruit flies can no longer breed with one another, which is precisely what makes them different species.

Now, before someone says "But they're still flies! Call me when they turn into dogs or cats!" the point is that they're still the same genus, just different species. We'd have to go a lot further back to see where they split from one genus to another... and further still to see.... well, you get the idea.

 

[AV1611VET]

Please choose "one" and help me understand it?

Sure.

I choose FOSSIL RECORD, and I contend that the fossil record points to creationism.

If you lined photographs of all the fossils in existence side by side, they would make an fps show for "sudden appearance."

 

[AV1611VET]

Perhaps because you don't know what you're talking about?

By the way, I like the phrase 'recovering king james original - young earth creationist'. It draws a parallel with alcoholics and other desperate addicts who like to call their affliction a 'disease', which is why they are 'recovering'.

Your parallel can take a hike then.

Recovering alcoholics and other desperate addicts must know and admit to what they are.

Since KJO means KING JAMES ONLY, not KING JAMES ORIGINAL, you wouldn't be ready for the recovery program yet.

Acting like you know what it is you're railing against should only get you considered a scientific methodist by those in my camp.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Alas, AV, your efforts to drive the OP away from Biblical Literalism/Creationism are somewhat redundant -- as you can see, he's already renounced such beliefs without the need for you to demonstrate them.

 

[bhsmte]

I certainly hope that's not the sort of idea, that I've communicated here.

What I am objecting to, is the belief in Evolution which stands outside the scientifically held position (i.e. Scientism)

'Unlike the use of the scientific method as only one mode of reaching knowledge, scientism claims that science alone can render truth about the world and reality. Scientism's single-minded adherence to only the empirical, or testable, makes it a strictly scientifc worldview, in much the same way that a Protestant fundamentalism that rejects science can be seen as a strictly religious worldview. Scientism sees it necessary to do away with most, if not all, metaphysical, philosophical, and religious claims, as the truths they proclaim cannot be apprehended by the scientific method. In essence, scientism sees science as the absolute and only justifiable access to the truth.'

Glossary Definition: Scientism

refer back to Fancy123's comment: here

On this particular topic, I believe Francis Collins, the physician, geneticist, devout Christian and former head of the human genome project explains the evidence for evolution very well:

Francis Collins: The evidence is overwhelming. And it is becoming more and more robust down to the details almost by the day, especially because we have this ability now to use the study of DNA as a digital record of the way Darwin’s theory has played out over the course of long periods of time.

Darwin could hardly have imagined that there would turn out to be such strong proof of his theory because he didn’t know about DNA - but we have that information. I would say we are as solid in claiming the truth of evolution as we are in claiming the truth of the germ theory. It is so profoundly well-documented in multiple different perspectives, all of which give you a consistent view with enormous explanatory power that make it the central core of biology. Trying to do biology without evolution would be like trying to do physics without mathematics

Francis Collins and Karl Giberson Talk about Evolution and the Church, Part 2 | The BioLogos Forum