234 replies to this topic

[and then]

Rlyeh, on 08 January 2012 - 06:45 AM, said:

^
See this is why people say they don't believe in evolution, they get fed straw men about life coming from nothing or there has never been any evidence of speciation.

I'm completely willing to be educated.  But even with the little scientific knowledge I possess I can see that complex systems are not the result of random events.  I don't care enough about the issue to argue it. I think we all ought to be more concerned with how we're going to make our future rather than disagree over our distant past.

[Beckys_Mom]

and then, on 09 January 2012 - 02:49 AM, said:

I'm completely willing to be educated.  But even with the little scientific knowledge I possess I can see that complex systems are not the result of random events.  I don't care enough about the issue to argue it. I think we all ought to be more concerned with how we're going to make our future rather than disagree over our distant past.

That to me sounds like an honest answer..........  Some people just do not care enough about it to get too deep into it..  It is not an easy subject.. it can be complex and can bore a lot of people.. So I understand you...  I found watching videos on evolution over time helped me more.. To a point where i could understand more about what the books say... Because before hand, I found it too hard to get my head around it

You must be happy with how things are  and what you believe now.. and there is nothing wrong with that...

[aquatus1]

and then, on 09 January 2012 - 02:49 AM, said:

I'm completely willing to be educated.  But even with the little scientific knowledge I possess I can see that complex systems are not the result of random events.

I'm not sure that is your scientific knowledge giving you that conclusion, And Then.  Complexity is a natural result of randomness.  Indeed, the sign of intelligent engineering is not complexity, but rather simplicity.

Edited by aquatus1, 09 January 2012 - 08:14 AM.

[FurthurBB]

and then, on 09 January 2012 - 02:49 AM, said:

I'm completely willing to be educated.  But even with the little scientific knowledge I possess I can see that complex systems are not the result of random events.  I don't care enough about the issue to argue it. I think we all ought to be more concerned with how we're going to make our future rather than disagree over our distant past.

Without understanding this past we would not have 3/4 of the medical breakthroughs we have had over the last 50-60 years.  Evolution is a practical science.  See, I think the problem is that unless you truly study a field of biology you have a tendency to look at the big picture, which makes evolution seem impossible.  When you look at the intricate details, it makes anything else impossible.

Edited by FurthurBB, 09 January 2012 - 11:22 AM.

[Antilles]

I don't believe in evolution either.

Especially when I go to the local mall!

Knuckles scraping on concrete, people.  

[thewatchman7]

and then, on 09 January 2012 - 02:49 AM, said:

I'm completely willing to be educated.  But even with the little scientific knowledge I possess I can see that complex systems are not the result of random events.  I don't care enough about the issue to argue it. I think we all ought to be more concerned with how we're going to make our future rather than disagree over our distant past.

your right there not,

what they are, is coping mechanisms that furthered there species under the pressure of natural selection.

say for example you were immune to irradiation, you would survive fallout from a nuclear explosion, where as others wouldnt, thus propogating children with your immunity.

the longer necks of giraffes is a classic example.

[Mr Walker]

danydandan, on 09 January 2012 - 01:58 AM, said:

Just wondering what double maths is ?

Not trying to annoy you , just wondering

When  i did my final year of studies before university you had to do 7 subjects. I  studied maths 1 and 2, physics, geography, English and modern and ancient history.  

A double maths and English were compulsory pre university subjects, along with some science and some humanities. One half of maths was all the calculus, algebraic  stuff with tans cosines etc.  ALso polynomials and quadratics .We had to use slide rules and booklets of tables to work them out, with mental arithmetic learned in earlier school, because there were no such things as calculators, let alone computers; and memoerise all the equations.

The other maths was mostly euclidean geometry (  from memory although it mus thave included more than just that.) and all that involved;  from all the theorems throught to actually making a perfect right angle uisng a piece of string and working out the heigth of a building etc  .


Today kids do some of this maths a bit earlier and there have been further advances in maths. (The new maths came in just as i went through school, where we had to learn to use and convert from base 10 to diffent base numbers .) Ive found the grounding in maths very useful in life, but mostly in the more practical parts. For example I had to pass a semester of statistics in university as part of geographical studies, and maths helped in that.


I teach yr 12 (pre university) english and geography and history these days, and the courses require about one tenth of the work i had to do    You had to pass a 3 hour statewide exam on each subject at the end of the year (from year 10 of school to year 12) based on your knowledge, understanding, and memory, of what had been taught throughout the year. Your grades in this determined your success for the year.

I won scholarships at the end of year 10 and 11, and a govt scholarship to pay all my expenses(including living expenses) for 4 years of university at the end of yr 12. I worked 10 hours every  week day on my school work and  one day and one evening each weekend .  I enjoyed learning, and i stil had time for surfing motorbike riding and lots of  beach /water based recreational activities involving girls and alcohol.(in my last couple of years)

Edited by Mr Walker, 09 January 2012 - 12:27 PM.

[angi chiesa]

I understand that our DNA is very close to a rat. This makes sense because at one time rat like animals were the only animals on the planet.So all animals alive today owe their ancestory to a marsupial. So if you dont believe we are closely related to an Ape,you surely wont accept that you are an ancestor of a rat

[thewatchman7]

angi chiesa, on 09 January 2012 - 12:50 PM, said:

I understand that our DNA is very close to a rat. This makes sense because at one time rat like animals were the only animals on the planet.So all animals alive today owe their ancestory to a marsupial. So if you dont believe we are closely related to an Ape,you surely wont accept that you are an ancestor of a rat

this is incorrect, i beleive.

both species had a common ancestor is all.

[Rlyeh]

and then, on 09 January 2012 - 02:49 AM, said:

I'm completely willing to be educated.  But even with the little scientific knowledge I possess I can see that complex systems are not the result of random events.

Like the weather system?
Not sure what you mean by random events, chaotic would be more appropriate.

[Seeker79]

spud the mackem, on 07 January 2012 - 11:42 PM, said:

Anyone can ramble on about this subject like some which I have just read,but my opinion is that humans did not evolve from primates,although we have similarities,the same as lions are similar to tigers,Perhaps one day we shall find out the truth.

Lions and tigers can mate with each other. The offpring is called a liger. Is that not evidence of their evolutionary convergence? Or did god just intend for their DNA to be  be Similar enough to mate to throw us off?

There is no clear fossil record of one species changing into another........... Because THERE HAS NEVER BEEN A CLEAR ABRUPT CHANGE!!!!!  it's like a rainbow. There is no clear change from one color to another it's a gradual blending millions of years long. Imagine a rainbow a million miles thick. Where is the line of division. There is none.

Edited by Seeker79, 10 January 2012 - 08:57 AM.

[thewatchman7]

Seeker79, on 10 January 2012 - 08:54 AM, said:

Lions and tigers can mate with each other. The offpring is called a liger. Is that not evidence of their evolutionary convergence? Or did god just intend for their DNA to be  be Similar enough to mate to throw us off?

There is no clear fossil record of one species changing into another........... Because THERE HAS NEVER BEEN A CLEAR ABRUPT CHANGE!!!!!  it's like a rainbow. There is no clear change from one color to another it's a gradual blending millions of years long. Imagine a rainbow a million miles thick. Where is the line of division. There is none.

this is correct, and well said.

the thing is people that dont beleive in evolution see every species as never changing. look at domesticated dogs, when was the last wolf the first dog? there is no clear point.

the common ancestor that we and came from didnt instantly pop into the human form we see today. it took a long time.

... then theres retrovirus'

[over9millionyearsold]

Saying you don't believe in evolution is like saying:

"I don't believe that the Earth orbits the sun."
"I don't believe that the Earth is round."
"I don't believe in gravity."

Evolution is a scientific theory, not some nonsense conjecture. Evolution is a fact as much as the fact that the Earth is spherical and that it orbits the sun. If there is any scientific theory that you would point to as being the most verified and tested it would be evolution. Every discovery since Darwin's proposal has only made the theory even stronger. Evolution is a fact and as such does not require your or anyone's belief to be true.

I also read that someone said that we have "evolved too fast". Thank you for your opinion on the matter. I'm sure the scientists who dedicate their entire lives to this subject are humbled by your powerful insight granted by your extraordinary intuition gained from years of scientific inquiry into this matter.

Honestly I cannot help but feel offended, as a scientist, when I see things like this. It is utterly insulting to see people that think injecting their, "because I feel/believe/think", conjectures into a well established field is a valid and insightful argument. Practically everyone has heard of evolution, but at the same time have absolutely no actual knowledge about the subject. I don't see the same people debating physicists about relativity or the standard model. Evolutionary biology is just as demanding. People think they need a PhD to argue the physics; well I have some news for you: evolution is no different. Barring that, unless you have actual data and verifiable evidence, there is no debate simply based on qualification.

EDIT:

Evolution is not a debate and as such doesn't belong in a Spirituality vs. Skepticism forum.

Edited by over9millionyearsold, 10 January 2012 - 01:10 PM.

[J. K.]

over9millionyearsold, on 10 January 2012 - 01:07 PM, said:

Evolution is a scientific theory, not some nonsense conjecture.

Is the Scientific Method I learned in school still is use (a hypothesis is created, then tested)?  You must have a control group and a variable group.  Any changes are observed, recorded, and compared to the hypothesis.  Science teachers, please forgive me if I'm not using the correct vocabulary.

My question would be:  how can the Scientific Method be used to test evolution?  We are unable to hang around and observe millions of years of changes.

[FurthurBB]

J. K., on 10 January 2012 - 04:58 PM, said:

Is the Scientific Method I learned in school still is use (a hypothesis is created, then tested)?  You must have a control group and a variable group.  Any changes are observed, recorded, and compared to the hypothesis.  Science teachers, please forgive me if I'm not using the correct vocabulary.

My question would be:  how can the Scientific Method be used to test evolution?  We are unable to hang around and observe millions of years of changes.

You can observe the results and make a hypothesis based on that, and observe by looking for those results in a multitude of places or reintroducing mutations, oh and you are forgetting predictions.  Also, you are not talking about evolution which can be directly observed and manipulated, you are talking about some of the long reaching theories of evolution.

Edited by FurthurBB, 10 January 2012 - 10:33 PM.