|
|
|
jmcginn
Skeptic Friend
343 Posts |
 Posted - 01/09/2003 : 09:16:50 [Permalink]
|
Doomar,
Your understanding of science is pitiful.quote:
Evolution is a theory yet to be proven by the most modern scientific means.
Evolution is both a fact and a theory just like gravity is both a fact and a theory. Examples:
1. Gravity happens, we observe its effect every day and know the mathematical formula behind it.
2. The theory of gravity explains why gravity happens.
1. Evolution happens, we observe its effects every day and we observe it happening every day. We can also observe that life on this planet has changed over time, numerous species have went extinct, and new species continuously appear over the 3.5 billion years of life history on this planet.
2. The theory of evolution explains why this happens.
Next no theory is ever proven. Look here for where I explain how basic science works, something you have a terrible understanding of.
http://www.skepticfriends.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1579&whichpage=4quote:
Many scientists are creationists also.
The majority of creationists are engineers hardly what I would call scientists working on issues of life and species origins. Behe doesn't really count (a biochemist) since he concedes that without a doubt man evolved from ape ancestors he just wants to put a little God in the gaps to help things along.
I have went to 2 major colleges and one smaller one now.
Texas A&M, Morehead State U, and U of Colorado at Boulder and I have yet to meet one creationists amongst the scientific faculty at any of these universities. In fact several have discussed creationists with quite a bit of disgusts for their unscientific attack on valid science. Others have dismissed them as jokes but not one has taken them serious. This despite the fact I have taken close to 20 biology classes, around 10 chemistry classes, and close to a dozen anthropology classes under quite a few professors.quote:
In actual mutation experimentation, mutants have been found to be mostly harmful and many times naturally repaired by the organism. Those that aren't usually wind up dead.
Another lie. Here is just one experiment showing this to be a lie.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12399371&dopt=Abstract
and here are a bunch more:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Display&dopt=pubmed_pubmed&from_uid=12399371quote:
The odds of a single living cell forming from nucleotides and amino acids in the very simplest of bacterium are nearly beyond comprehension.
Obviously you haven't been paying attention.
#1. The first living cells were not simple bacteria. They were simpler.
#2. They reproduced and passed on inheritance and competed and thus evolved.
#3. Evolution via natural selection eliminates astronomical odds by selecting for the more fit organism.
#4. Evolution happens to simple proto cells as I discussed earlier. There are no astronomical odds.quote:
The odds of positive mutations numbering in the amounts past the ability to express (one by one)
We know the basic rate of mutation (although this seems to fluctuate) and we know the percentage with some organisms that are beneficial, in fact we have observed multiple beneficial mutations accumulating in single populations in a lab. This without the benefit of thousands or millions of populations in the wild.
I am beginning to think you are Kacey in return, your arguments are typical and have no substance. |
 |
|
|
jmcginn
Skeptic Friend
343 Posts |
Posted - 01/09/2003 : 09:18:00 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Yeah, and I have a story about "Bwana Jim in the Congo bongo jungle".
You are obviously not interested in serious dialog. By the way scenarious have to fit the data at hand or they are dismissed. So yes they are backed up by valid science. Eye evolution has been backed up by the methods I have stated, the process of evolution has been verified as being able to create complex organs over and over again and again.quote:
yet they think by chance it just happened
More garbage. No evolutionary biologists worth his weight thinks it happens by chance. This is the typical creationists straw man that is thrown about. Natural selection removes the "just by chance" part and adds a "selection part". When you flip a coin you will get heads or tails by "chance". If you flip 10 coins, what are the odds all will turn up heads? Pretty low. But add selection to the process by keeping heads and reflipping tails and you end up with all heads pretty quick.quote:
Wow, have you swallowed a big one
No I have studied and learned and examined the evidence. I have also learned to identify liars such as yourself who are totally uneducated on the subject of evolution but make numerous claims as if they are. |
|
|
|
Infamous
Skeptic Friend
85 Posts |
Posted - 01/09/2003 : 09:41:02 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by jmcginn
1. Evolution happens, we observe its effects every day and we observe it happening every day.
Since when has evolution actually been observed?
And about the eye again...I understand how rods and cones evolved and how the eyespots evolved into their proper shapes. But what about the lens? The lens is essentially a foreign object. What kind of mutation would cause a foreign object to be produced in the eye? It would be like a baby born with a mutation that caused a piece of metal to form in his brain. |
|
|
|
jmcginn
Skeptic Friend
343 Posts |
Posted - 01/09/2003 : 10:31:03 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Infamous
quote:
Originally posted by jmcginn
1. Evolution happens, we observe its effects every day and we observe it happening every day.
Since when has evolution actually been observed?
And about the eye again...I understand how rods and cones evolved and how the eyespots evolved into their proper shapes. But what about the lens? The lens is essentially a foreign object. What kind of mutation would cause a foreign object to be produced in the eye? It would be like a baby born with a mutation that caused a piece of metal to form in his brain.
We have observed numerous examples of evolution in the last 50 years from lab populations of bacteria, to wild populations such as AIDS, invading plant species, Rock Wallaby's in Hawaii, etc. We have observed quite a few examples of speciation as well.
What in the world do you think the lens is made of???? It is not a foreign object, but the product of cells.
http://www.tedmontgomery.com/the_eye/index.html
Additionally primitive lenses would have been simpler and less refined then the lens of the human eye and I already described how those could arise via a single mutation in the development of the eye. |
|
|
|
jmcginn
Skeptic Friend
343 Posts |
|
|
tw101356
Skeptic Friend
USA
333 Posts |
Posted - 01/09/2003 : 10:47:24 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Infamous
quote:
Originally posted by jmcginn
1. Evolution happens, we observe its effects every day and we observe it happening every day.
Since when has evolution actually been observed?
And about the eye again...I understand how rods and cones evolved and how the eyespots evolved into their proper shapes. But what about the lens? The lens is essentially a foreign object. What kind of mutation would cause a foreign object to be produced in the eye? It would be like a baby born with a mutation that caused a piece of metal to form in his brain.
Lotsa good stuff here on observed speciation and evolution:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/04/
Even includes an excerpt from a book that gives one idea on how
the lens might have evolved.
As far as a mutation that forms a piece of metal in the brain,
that could increase the child's chance of surviving to adulthood
without the need for an aluminum foil hat lining, or might
increase the adult's chance of reproduction because potential mates
would be more attracted to a person who wasn't wearing aluminum
foil on their head
-- Henry |
- TW
|
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 01/09/2003 : 11:07:16 [Permalink]
|
| Infamous, do you think that the lens in your eye is made out of glass? |
-------
I learned something ... I learned that Jehovah's Witnesses do not celebrate Halloween. I guess they don't like strangers going up to their door and annoying them.
-Bruce Clark
There's No Toilet Paper...on the Road Less Traveled |
|
|
|
Infamous
Skeptic Friend
85 Posts |
Posted - 01/09/2003 : 11:13:31 [Permalink]
|
| I see...I had been under the impression that the lens was an inorganic secretion produced by cells, rather than a structure composed of proteins which you have demonstrated to be the case. So basically the lens evolved because of the beneficial effects of a mutation that caused these modified proteins to be produced, correct? And this lens gradually became more complex and more useful over successive generations. |
|
|
|
jmcginn
Skeptic Friend
343 Posts |
Posted - 01/09/2003 : 11:23:05 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Infamous
I see...I had been under the impression that the lens was an inorganic secretion produced by cells, rather than a structure composed of proteins which you have demonstrated to be the case. So basically the lens evolved because of the beneficial effects of a mutation that caused these modified proteins to be produced, correct? And this lens gradually became more complex and more useful over successive generations.
YES!!! In very simple terms I think you are starting to grasp it. Of course we have many different types of lenses and eyes for that matter so it is not a linear progression but a big old bush with stems all over the place with all different kinds of eyes and eye pieces.
You also correctly noticed that it was a modified protein not a protein created from nothing!
Proteins are interesting creatures since they for the most part control how are body functions. They are the direct product of genes (genes code for proteins). They are big old chains of amino acids and the types and sequences of those amino acids determines their function and abilities. Basically the chain folds up into a 3D ball based on the amino acids it has and this determines its properties and wheter it is useful or not.
Thus a change to an amino acid in a protein (or a change to a single codon in a gene by a single point mutation) can change the shape and function of a protein. This happens all the time. In fact it is estimated that the average human will accumulate 30 mutations during their lifetime, so you may already have a few unique proteins not found in other humans. Of course allot of those mutations may be on non coding areas of DNA which do not produce proteins and you won't pass these mutations on unless they happened in one of your gametes (sperm / eggs depending on gender) or to the early developing cells when you were first conceived. |
|
|
|
Infamous
Skeptic Friend
85 Posts |
Posted - 01/09/2003 : 11:42:15 [Permalink]
|
So there would be trillions of unique mutations within a single species alone. And with that many mutations, some of them are certain to be beneficial.
Well that basically destroys any of those "the odds are nearly impossible" arguments. In fact, the odds are very good. |
|
|
|
Doomar
SFN Regular
USA
714 Posts |
Posted - 01/09/2003 : 14:12:30 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by jmcginn
Doomar,
Your understanding of science is pitiful.quote:
Evolution is a theory yet to be proven by the most modern scientific means.
Evolution is both a fact and a theory just like gravity is both a fact and a theory. Examples:
1. Gravity happens, we observe its effect every day and know the mathematical formula behind it.
2. The theory of gravity explains why gravity happens.
Sorry, I must reverse the tables with some definitions.
FACT: something that has been objectively verified.
LAW: a formulation of the observed recurrance, order, relationship, or interaction of natural phenomena: the laws of motion...or the LAW OF GRAVITY
THEORY OF EVOLUTION: the theory that groups of organisms, as species, may change with passage of time so that descendants differ morphologically and physiologically from their ancestors.
1. Evolution happens, we observe its effects every day and we observe it happening every day.
True.
EVOLUTION: A gradual process in which something changes into a significantly different, especially more complex or more sophisticated, form. (not to be confused with the other, specific theory that did not exist prior to Darwin.)
We can also observe that life on this planet has changed over time, numerous species have went extinct, and new species continuously appear over the 3.5 billion years of life history on this planet.2. The theory of evolution explains why this happens.
This is an unverified postulate (something assumed without proof as being self-evident or generally accepted, especially when used as a basis for an argument), not to be confused with fact.
Next no theory is ever proven.
All laws of science began as theories. As they were verified by experiment and observation and other analysis, they became laws.
Look here for where I explain how basic science works, something you have a terrible understanding of.
http://www.skepticfriends.org/forum/topic.asp?
I think I have more reliable sources for that.
SCIENTIFIC: Broadly, having or appearing to have an exact, objective, factual, systematic, or methodological basis.
One key word being "objective".
I have went to 2 major colleges and one smaller one now.
Texas A&M, Morehead State U, and U of Colorado at Boulder and I have yet to meet one creationists amongst the scientific faculty at any of these universities. In fact several have discussed creationists with quite a bit of disgusts for their unscientific attack on valid science. Others have dismissed them as jokes but not one has taken them serious. This despite the fact I have taken close to 20 biology classes, around 10 chemistry classes, and close to a dozen anthropology classes under quite a few professors.
A thorough brainwashing I see. I, too, had no creationist professors that I was aware of. That simply says most of them are in the real world doing work. It also says that a theory is being taught as fact, in middle school, high school, and in college, thus the uproar by many in various states wanting a more balanced instruction curriculum including creationism.
In actual mutation experimentation, mutants have been found to be mostly harmful and many times naturally repaired by the organism. Those that aren't usually wind up dead.
Another lie. Here is just one experiment showing this to be a lie.
These experiments were regarding mutation of a life form in regard to a particular environment. Such mutation is proven fact and not incredible. Mutation resulting in slow increments of change turning one species into another, however is quite the opposite. That is the experimentation I referred to, that you quickly discredited by your misunderstanding. |
Mark 10:27 (NKJV) 27But Jesus looked at them and said, “With men it is impossible, but not with God; for with God all things are possible.”
www.pastorsb.com.htm |
|
|
|
jmcginn
Skeptic Friend
343 Posts |
Posted - 01/09/2003 : 16:00:37 [Permalink]
|
Doomar,
Whoosh, that is the sound of the explanation of science I gave you going over your head. Even your own definitions agree with me.quote:
FACT: something that has been objectively verified.
That evolution or life has changed on this planet and continues to change with old species going extinct and new ones gradually appearing is an objectively verified fact.quote:
LAW: a formulation of the observed recurrance, order, relationship, or interaction of natural phenomena: the laws of motion...or the LAW OF GRAVITY
(Emphasis mine). That a law is nothing more than an observation or a fact also agrees with what I said. You do know that the law of gravity is nothing more than a mathematical formula that explains an observation of gravity don't you? You do know that there is also a theory of gravity that explains why gravity works? For some reason I really doubt it.quote:
This is an unverified postulate (something assumed without proof as being self-evident or generally accepted, especially when used as a basis for an argument), not to be confused with fact.
No this is a summary of a bunch of facts known as the geological record, recent extinctions and new species that have recently evolved all combined. There is nothing "self-evident" here, our museums are chocked full of the numerous facts that support this summary. For instance: In sediments older than 1 billion years old you will not find one dinosaur, in sediments between 248 and 65 mya you will find a wide range of dinosaur species that gradually appear and then go extinct with a group of them surviving to 65 mya where they all went extinct. Even if you don't agree with the dates you can't disregard their positioning in the strata. This is an example of the fact that life on this planet has changed and continues to change by new species appearing and old species going extinct. This is the fact of evolution as I previously stated. Your ability to ignore the facts does not make them go away.quote:
All laws of science began as theories. As they were verified by experiment and observation and other analysis, they became laws.
NO THEORY EVER BECOMES A LAW. A law as your definition clearly states is an observation such as the laws of gravity or the laws of motion. They do not explain anything. A theory is an explanation of many related facts including laws. Theories and laws are totally separate entities and I will guarantee that you cannot give one theory that ever became a law. In fact a verified theory is the ultimate goal in science.quote:
I think I have more reliable sources for that.
And that would explain why you think a theory becomes a law. The fact is you don't know the basics of how science works, but here you are telling us "how it is". That is clearly evident by you thinking a theory becomes a law. A common fallacy of those who don't know squat about the scientific method.quote:
That simply says most of them are in the real world doing work.
You have lost all credibility as far as I am concerned. To say that professors doing real research and teaching are not doing real work shows your true character. Its easy to stand on the sidelines and throw random pot shots at those doing the real work, but none of them will step in to the lion's den.
Your drivel about mutations also fails to handle the cases where speciation has been identified such as here:
http://talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html and here
http://talkorigins.org/faqs/speciation.html
Your admittance to the mechanics of evolution (after denying first) but not to the point of speciation is laughable especially considering we have observed quite a few new species evolve in the last 150 years.
This is sad, a person who thinks that a theory becomes a law is trying to lecture to us on the probability of the theory of evolution, a guy who thinks Darwin wrote on abiogenesis is trying to lecture us on the probability of abiogenesis. A guy who dismisses a huge laundry lists of facts from physics, geology, chemistry, and biology is trying to tell us the Earth just sprang into existence a few thousand years ago.
Sorry but I have through this more then enough. I have facts to back up the theories I support, you do not. End of discussion. |
|
|
|
jmcginn
Skeptic Friend
343 Posts |
Posted - 01/09/2003 : 16:17:23 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Infamous
So there would be trillions of unique mutations within a single species alone. And with that many mutations, some of them are certain to be beneficial.
Well that basically destroys any of those "the odds are nearly impossible" arguments. In fact, the odds are very good.
Over a short period of time, yes. For instance the mutation rate for E. coli is ~ .00025 per genome multiplication. Which is about 1 in every 4000 cell divisions there will be a mutation under normal conditions with no mutagens around. So in your average population of E. coli where there are far more than 4000 individuals you will end up with quite a few mutations per generation.
In multicelled organisms such as your and I again, it is per cell division in our body and our body is full of trillions of cells so we have quite a few mutations during our lifetime. Most are weeded out by selection, but some persists for our lifetime (thus the 30 per person estimate) and additionally some are produced in our gametes and our passed down to our children. |
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 01/09/2003 : 17:00:22 [Permalink]
|
Well that basically destroys any of those "the odds are nearly impossible" arguments. In fact, the odds are very good.
Exactly right, in fact it's a sure thing. This is a fact that I'm sure Creationists understand. They know that they are dealing with large numbers and vast amounts of time. I really question their honesty.
It's like if the odds against "X" happening to a person were a billion to one that would make it seem to the casual listener that they were impossible odds. But in reality that would mean that in China alone in the last decade "X" would have happened to nearly five thousand people. |
-------
I learned something ... I learned that Jehovah's Witnesses do not celebrate Halloween. I guess they don't like strangers going up to their door and annoying them.
-Bruce Clark
There's No Toilet Paper...on the Road Less Traveled |
|
|
|
Doomar
SFN Regular
USA
714 Posts |
Posted - 01/09/2003 : 18:43:07 [Permalink]
|
Jc,
Maybe you should have taken a few more logic courses along with some interpersonal relationship courses. To attack an opponent in an argument is an obvious sign of the weakness of your argument. That's a well known ploy of debate. Since you don't seem to even understand the different types of evolution, or comprehend the difference between theory and fact, I think I'm just gonna move along. I think I'm wasting my time here. This will be my last post. |
Mark 10:27 (NKJV) 27But Jesus looked at them and said, “With men it is impossible, but not with God; for with God all things are possible.”
www.pastorsb.com.htm |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
