Is evolution true?

For discussing anything related to physics, biology, chemistry, mathematics, and their practical applications.

Moderator: Flannel Jesus

Re: Is evolution true?

Postby Kriswest » Wed Feb 22, 2017 11:15 pm

humunculus wrote:
Kriswest wrote:According to different science sites that I just read, evolution is the process and speciation is the end results. (That is the simplified version of what I read.)

Maybe a little oversimplified. How can there be an "end result" to an ongoing process?

Taxonomy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxonomic_rank is simply a way of classifying biological entities as we observe them in the present.
If a specimen is mistakenly classified as one species, because its outward characteristics resemble those of a closely related genus in its family, but on closer examination, its genetic code reveals it to belong to another branch of the same family, it gets reclassified. No big deal. The whole system of ranking is for the purpose of keeping tidy books. It doesn't in any way affect the process of random mutation, natural selection, adaptation and survival.

Speciation is a concept some creationists have got the wrong end of and keep trying to milk, even though it's a male.

Dude at some point you have to call a Poodle a Poodle. The average brain does not give a crap that 109 years from now Poodles will be something else. Sure we all know there is no end but, there must be categories.
I will be bitchy, cranky, sweet, happy, kind, pain in the ass all at random times from now on. I am embracing my mentalpause until further notice. Viva lack of total control!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This is not a test,,, this is my life right now. Have a good day and please buckle up for safety reasons,, All those in high chairs, go in the back of the room.
User avatar
Kriswest
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 20508
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 2:26 pm
Location: stuck in permanent maternal mode.

Re: Is evolution true?

Postby Kriswest » Wed Feb 22, 2017 11:20 pm

humunculus wrote:
Ecmandu wrote:Evolution (not growth, not adaptation) is SOLELY defined by speciation.

I keep asking you: According to whom?

"Origin of SPECIES". Remember???

Yes, I do, even though that title was chosen a century and half ago. There were some chapters inside.
Chapter I - Variation under Domestication.
Causes of Variability—Effects of Habit—Correlation of Growth—Inheritance—Character of Domestic Varieties—Difficulty of distinguishing between Varieties and Species—Origin of Domestic Varieties from one or more Species—Domestic Pigeons, their Differences and Origin—Principle of Selection anciently followed, its Effects—Methodical and Unconscious Selection—Unknown Origin of our Domestic Productions—Circumstances favourable to Man's power of Selection7–43
CHAPTER II. -Variation under Nature.
Variability—Individual Differences—Doubtful species—Wide ranging, much diffused, and common species vary most—Species of the larger genera in any country vary more than the species of the smaller genera—Many of the species of the larger genera resemble varieties in being very closely, but unequally, related to each other, and in having restricted ranges 44–59
CHAPTER III. -Struggle for Existence.
Bears on natural selection—The term used in a wide sense—Geometrical powers of increase—Rapid increase of naturalised animals and plants—Nature of the checks to increase—Competition universal—Effects of climate—Protection from the number of individuals—Complex relations of all animals and plants throughout nature—Struggle for life most severe between individuals and varieties of the same species; often severe between species of the same genus—The relation of organism to organism the most important of all relations Page 60–79
CHAPTER IV. - Natural Selection.
Natural Selection—its power compared with man's selection—its power on characters of trifling importance—its power at all ages and on both sexes—Sexual Selection—On the generality of intercrosses between individuals of the same species—Circumstances favourable and unfavourable to Natural Selection, namely, intercrossing, isolation, number of individuals—Slow action—Extinction caused by Natural Selection—Divergence of Character, related to the diversity of inhabitants of any small area, and to naturalisation—Action of Natural Selection, through Divergence of Character and Extinction, on the descendants from a common parent—Explains the Grouping of all organic beings 80–130
CHAPTER V. - Laws of Variation.
Effects of external conditions—Use and disuse, combined with natural selection; organs of flight and of vision—Acclimatisation—Correlation of growth—Compensation and economy of growth—False correlations—Multiple, rudimentary, and lowly organised structures variable—Parts developed in an unusual manner are highly variable: specific characters more variable than generic: secondary sexual characters variable—Species of the same genus vary in an analogous manner—Reversions to long-lost characters—Summary 131–170
CHAPTER VI. - Difficulties on Theory.
Difficulties on the theory of descent with modification—Transitions—Absence or rarity of transitional varieties—Transitions in habits of life—Diversified habits in the same species—Species with habits widely different from those of their allies—Organs of extreme perfection—Means of transition—Cases of difficulty—Natura non facit saltum—Organs of small importance—Organs not in all cases absolutely perfect—The law of Unity of Type and of the Conditions of Existence embraced by the theory of Natural Selection Page 171–206
CHAPTER VII. - Instinct.
Instincts comparable with habits, but different in their origin—Instincts graduated—Aphides and ants—Instincts variable—Domestic instincts, their origin—Natural instincts of the cuckoo, ostrich, and parasitic bees—Slave-making ants—Hive-bee, its cell-making instinct—Difficulties on the theory of the Natural Selection of instincts—Neuter or sterile insects—Summary 207–244
CHAPTER VIII. - Hybridism.
Distinction between the sterility of first crosses and of hybrids—Sterility various in degree, not universal, affected by close interbreeding, removed by domestication—Laws governing the sterility of hybrids—Sterility not a special endowment, but incidental on other differences—Causes of the sterility of first crosses and of hybrids—Parallelism between the effects of changed conditions of life and crossing—Fertility of varieties when crossed and of their mongrel offspring not universal—Hybrids and mongrels compared independently of their fertility—Summary 245–278
CHAPTER IX. -On the Imperfection of the Geological Record.
On the absence of intermediate varieties at the present day—On the nature of extinct intermediate varieties; on their number—On the vast lapse of time, as inferred from the rate of deposition and of denudation—On the poorness of our palæontological collections—On the intermittence of geological formations—On the absence of intermediate varieties in any one formation—On the sudden appearance of groups of species—On their sudden appearance in the lowest known fossiliferous strata Page 279–311
CHAPTER X. - On the Geological Succession of Organic Beings.
On the slow and successive appearance of new species—On their different rates of change—Species once lost do not reappear—Groups of species follow the same general rules in their appearance and disappearance as do single species—On Extinction—On simultaneous changes in the forms of life throughout the world—On the affinities of extinct species to each other and to living species—On the state of development of ancient forms—On the succession of the same types within the same areas—Summary of preceding and present chapters 312–345
CHAPTER XI. - Geographical Distribution.
Present distribution cannot be accounted for by differences in physical conditions—Importance of barriers—Affinity of the productions of the same continent—Centres of creation—Means of dispersal, by changes of climate and of the level of the land, and by occasional means—Dispersal during the Glacial period co-extensive with the world 346–382
CHAPTER XII. - Geographical Distribution—continued.
Distribution of fresh-water productions—On the inhabitants of oceanic islands—Absence of Batrachians and of terrestrial Mammals—On the relation of the inhabitants of islands to those of the nearest mainland—On colonisation from the nearest source with subsequent modification—Summary of the last and present chapters Page 383–410
CHAPTER XIII. - Mutual Affinities of Organic Beings: Morphology: Embryology: Rudimentary Organs.
Classification, groups subordinate to groups—Natural system—Rules and difficulties in classification, explained on the theory of descent with modification—Classification of varieties—Descent always used in classification—Analogical or adaptive characters—Affinities, general, complex and radiating—Extinction separates and defines groups—Morphology, between members of the same class, between parts of the same individual—Embryology, laws of, explained by variations not supervening at an early age, and being inherited at a corresponding age—Rudimentary Organs; their origin explained—Summary 411–458
CHAPTER XIV. - Recapitulation and Conclusion.
Recapitulation of the difficulties on the theory of Natural Selection—Recapitulation of the general and special circumstances in its favour—Causes of the general belief in the immutability of species—How far the theory of natural selection may be extended—Effects of its adoption on the study of Natural history—Concluding remarks 459–490

And that was all a hundred years before the electron microscope.
Have you really not read anything since? If you won't read anything more recently, at least you could do Darwin the courtesy of getting past the title.

In order for bacteria to speciate, new bacterium have to only be able to exchange DNA with each other, and no other bacterium on earth.

So, you just cannot get it through your head that bacteria don't fuck?
What will you make of Saccharomyces pastorianus vs Agaricus bisporus, which also don't fuck, and are nevertheless very different species? And then there's potatoes, which do both!

Bacteria does not procreate but, they can combine then split into a new. Bacteria also adapts.
By combining one takes over another and the result is adaptations which creates new. Now I do not have the scientific jargon correct but, it is close.
I will be bitchy, cranky, sweet, happy, kind, pain in the ass all at random times from now on. I am embracing my mentalpause until further notice. Viva lack of total control!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This is not a test,,, this is my life right now. Have a good day and please buckle up for safety reasons,, All those in high chairs, go in the back of the room.
User avatar
Kriswest
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 20508
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 2:26 pm
Location: stuck in permanent maternal mode.

Re: Is evolution true?

Postby humunculus » Thu Feb 23, 2017 12:14 am

Kriswest wrote:Dude at some point you have to call a Poodle a Poodle.

That's all taxonomy is. What you call things - as you find them in the present. It tells you something about their past evolution, if you know enough about how the names are arrived-at, but the average brain doesn't need to know. You accept the manes, or you don't. The name, species, genus, family or class of a poodle will tell you nothing at all about army ants or chestnut trees.
The only thing people defend more fiercely than their illusion is their denial.
humunculus
 
Posts: 430
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 12:01 am

Re: Is evolution true?

Postby humunculus » Thu Feb 23, 2017 12:46 am

Kriswest wrote:Bacteria does not procreate

Bacteria procreate like crazy They just don't do it through sexual means. They do it by fission.
but, they can combine then split into a new.

They don't need to combine. Each one can split, yes, into two new ones. And then each of the two identical offspring split again, and again, and again, really fast.
In the instance of a mutation that benefits the bacterium that possess it, that one odd bacterium will split and split and split, and soon outnumber the ones that don't have the favourable mutation.
That's one way they adapt to environmental conditions.
Another way is through exchange of chromosomes by direct cell-to-cell contact or by a bridge-like connection. Or by hoovering up and incorporating debris from dead bacteria. Or being invaded by viruses.
Bacteria do lots of interesting things that are completely unlike what poodles and bears can do.

Do any of these things somehow negate their ability to evolve? I should think, rather the opposite.
The only thing people defend more fiercely than their illusion is their denial.
humunculus
 
Posts: 430
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 12:01 am

Re: Is evolution true?

Postby ravencry4all » Thu Feb 23, 2017 1:46 am

Kriswest wrote:According to different science sites that I just read, evolution is the process and speciation is the end results. (That is the simplified version of what I read.)


. . .and again . . .
Members of a philosophy forum refuse to understand or just to accept that evolution is not something restricted to Earth.
Ergo evolution is even more than a simple process because we can reasonable assume that it applies across the universe the same way as on earth and it also applies to any and all other species of life and possible, also very reasonable not just to life. This makes Evolution an essential characteristic of the Universe.

Arguing about how many bacteria and how many genes is such a limited vision that one must assume it is nothing more than a deliberate distraction in order to reduce it to a stepping stone to creationism.
Artificial Intelligence of today is neither artificial nor intelligence.
The solution of all AI projects today, to the questions of our time result in a single number : 1984.

AI is just another fake solution like Y2K, Armageddon. Mission Mars or Zukerberger.
User avatar
ravencry4all
Thinker
 
Posts: 895
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 4:48 pm

Re: Is evolution true?

Postby Kriswest » Thu Feb 23, 2017 1:55 am

unmmm, when did this conversation speak of the universe? Planet or universe. Finger or body. If you have a cut on your finger do you say "My cut on my body hurts" or do you say" the cut on my finger hurts" ?????
I will be bitchy, cranky, sweet, happy, kind, pain in the ass all at random times from now on. I am embracing my mentalpause until further notice. Viva lack of total control!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This is not a test,,, this is my life right now. Have a good day and please buckle up for safety reasons,, All those in high chairs, go in the back of the room.
User avatar
Kriswest
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 20508
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 2:26 pm
Location: stuck in permanent maternal mode.

Re: Is evolution true?

Postby ravencry4all » Thu Feb 23, 2017 2:24 am

When did this conversation was about bacteria or toes?

The title is : Is evolution true?
If by true you apply real, then the answer if Yes.
Our understanding of practical workings of evolution, though an interesting subject, has no effect on the visible effects and results of evolution itself.

When Semmelweis discovered that frequent hand washing reduces infection rates he was unable to explain exactly why, but reasonable assumed that there is something invisible gets transported that way.
The ability to see with our mind what we do not see with our eyes is also a result of evolution.
But the real beauty of recognizing evolution is that we are morally obliged to improve ourselves and try to go where no one has gone before.
Artificial Intelligence of today is neither artificial nor intelligence.
The solution of all AI projects today, to the questions of our time result in a single number : 1984.

AI is just another fake solution like Y2K, Armageddon. Mission Mars or Zukerberger.
User avatar
ravencry4all
Thinker
 
Posts: 895
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 4:48 pm

Re: Is evolution true?

Postby Ecmandu » Thu Feb 23, 2017 2:52 am

Man, you guys are pissed. I get pissed as well, just about different things.

Yes, there are different species of bacterium, and quote me where I EVER said they have sex.

The issue is... We don't know how to speciate them through anything but forcing genetic manipulation at the genetic level.

Nobody has ever seen speciation.

For some reason these rabid evolutionists define species as adaptation, and then say that because Bob farted differently, evolution has been proven. It's absurd.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6825
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: Is evolution true?

Postby humunculus » Thu Feb 23, 2017 4:32 am

It's absurd.
The only thing people defend more fiercely than their illusion is their denial.
humunculus
 
Posts: 430
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 12:01 am

Re: Is evolution true?

Postby Ultimate Philosophy 1001 » Thu Feb 23, 2017 5:57 pm

I don't give a hoot about evolution. If it is real, I hate it all the same.

It is evolution that created modernity and cultural degredation, why do I have to respect natural selection? It is natural selection that made Tesla a virgin and breeds and breds idiots. I say take evolution into your own hands
trogdor
User avatar
Ultimate Philosophy 1001
BANNED
 
Posts: 8312
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2015 10:57 pm

Previous

Return to Science, Technology, and Math



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users