Evil-ution

[denim 5,000+ posts]

 

---------- Post added at 01:44 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:43 PM ----------

 

 

[modskwod 10+ year member]

Interesting thread.

P.S., pro-rabbit, a scientific theory is not just a guess, it's a well-documented and substantiated explanation for observations. Once something is called a theory in the scientific world it is about as close to proven as it can be...

 

[ahole-ic]

Now you're in the same boat as the other guy. You don't understand what you speak of. THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENS!! MOST MUTATIONS ARE NEGATIVE!!! Fortunately, the individuals which these mutations usually die and don't pass on the mutations. Look at cave dwelling species. They "DEVOLVE" eyes because they are no longer selected for in their dark environments.

Oh I clearly understand. The fact that it creates reasonable doubt in your theory means you have to attack it. I understand your disadvantageous position in the argument, but please don't stoop to pro rabbit's level. My insult of you earlier was purely satire to demonstrate a point to rabbit. Please explain how I don't understand what I speak of, yet what I said is exactly what happens? If I didn't have a clue, would I have been able to describe a scenario that is exactly what happens whether you believe it to be right or wrong? At some point you're going to have to realize you don't have more knowledge on the subject than I do, you just have a different perspective on the matter. Your entire argument is circumstantial. Someone else could come in and say that the organisms in your example live in caves because they don't have eyes. Which came first, the chicken or the egg? Until you have actual evidence to prove what you say, it's a guess. To proclaim it as scientific fact is ridiculous.

 

[denim 5,000+ posts]

Interesting thread.
P.S., pro-rabbit, a scientific theory is not just a guess, it's a well-documented and substantiated explanation for observations. Once something is called a theory in the scientific world it is about as close to proven as it can be...

 

[denim 5,000+ posts]

 

[ahole-ic]

Is there anyone in here arguing from a religious perspective or is denim just posting random images?

 

[denim 5,000+ posts]

 

---------- Post added at 01:56 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:55 PM ----------

 

Is there anyone in here arguing from a religious perspective or is denim just posting random images?

Not random when faith is mentioned. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif

 

[ahole-ic]

 

---------- Post added at 01:56 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:55 PM ----------

 

Not random when faith is mentioned. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif

That is factually untrue. It takes faith to believe in evolution since there is no evidence to substantiate it. It is circumstantial at best, which cotjones has proved quite nicely.

 

[pro-rabbit 5,000+ posts]

Interesting thread.
P.S., pro-rabbit, a scientific theory is not just a guess, it's a well-documented and substantiated explanation for observations. Once something is called a theory in the scientific world it is about as close to proven as it can be...

I understand fully what a theory is and how it is derived. However, if were to be proven any further it would be close to being a law at that point and no longer up for debate for the most part.

 

[denim 5,000+ posts]

 

[denim 5,000+ posts]

 

[cotjones 10+ year member]

Oh I clearly understand. The fact that it creates reasonable doubt in your theory means you have to attack it. I understand your disadvantageous position in the argument, but please don't stoop to pro rabbit's level. My insult of you earlier was purely satire to demonstrate a point to rabbit. Please explain how I don't understand what I speak of, yet what I said is exactly what happens? If I didn't have a clue, would I have been able to describe a scenario that is exactly what happens whether you believe it to be right or wrong? At some point you're going to have to realize you don't have more knowledge on the subject than I do, you just have a different perspective on the matter. Your entire argument is circumstantial. Someone else could come in and say that the organisms in your example live in caves because they don't have eyes. Which came first, the chicken or the egg? Until you have actual evidence to prove what you say, it's a guess. To proclaim it as scientific fact is ridiculous.

Lulz I'z sawee you're explanation for why things that live in caves look much like things that don't cept their eyes don't work iz much better than mine. Oh wait, you can't explain that.

 

[wickedwitt 10+ year member]

NO. the problem is you think you understand but you do not. I am half a semester from a BS in Biology after which i'll be going on to med school. NEVER I repeat NEVER have any of my professors or ANY of the articles I've researched posited that the goal of evolution is to make things more complex. You illustrate perfectly where your errors are. 80% huh, where'd ya get that stat? The exact same place you got your definition of evolution. (your ***) Perphaps you got this theory from your high school Bio teacher who obviously didn't understand the concepts enough to teach anything higher that HIGH SCHOOL. Reguardless, you don't understand the theories of evolution, that is blatantly obvious. Go research.
Again, you don't know what the mass community believes, you assume you do, but you're (from my perspective as a biology student, entirely wrong)

Strange, I went to college pre-med with an emphasis on biology. No where in zoology did we discuss "evolution" the way you've described it as being random, nor did we ever cover adaptations being a result of evolution. I don't know where you go to college, but I wouldn't hold that degree to much merit.

 

[wickedwitt 10+ year member]

Now you're in the same boat as the other guy. You don't understand what you speak of. THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENS!! MOST MUTATIONS ARE NEGATIVE!!! Fortunately, the individuals which these mutations usually die and don't pass on the mutations. Look at cave dwelling species. They "DEVOLVE" eyes because they are no longer selected for in their dark environments. The eyes give them no competitive advantage. However, in the daylight, blindness is a huge disadvantage, so populations maintain eyes.

1. You criticize me saying I have no idea what evolution even means.

2. You state that evolution is (in your words) "COMPLETELY 100% UNDENIABLY RANDOM" (ok I may have exaggerated a tad, but you get the idea)

3. You turn around in this statement and claim that evolution that proves to be without advantage is lost due to the "survival of the fittest" clause. A clause that merely a page ago you in a roundabout sense stated you didn't subscribe to, nor does it have anything to do with what you were trying to say.

4. You claim I have no idea what "adaptation" is, then give me (one of the many) wiki articles for "The ability to adapt". Adaptation and the capacity to adapt are two very separate things.

5. You quoted someone else's generalized opinion. That must mean you're smart.

 

[MANTI5 10+ year member]

Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed (2008) - IMDb

Saw that and it was pretty interesting.