Notices
Results 1 to 78 of 78
Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By Sealeaf

Thread: Evolution Theory

  1. #1 Evolution Theory 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    37
    Children at an early age will start learning connecting dots. Ah, it is a rabbit, it is a bear. Of course, some kids would connect the “wrong” dots, seeing a few clouds floating in the air or something else instead. They will have a hard time in schools and in society later in life.


    Connecting two dots with a line actually is a leap of faith, believing those dots can be connected by a line. A man standing at the edge of one side of the cliff cannot hold hand with the man standing at the edge on the other side of the cliff. They are so close, but so far. A bridge must be built first.


    Mathematicians use ingenious concepts and maneuvers like extrapolation, approximation, infinity, infinitesimal increment, imaginary number and so on to find solutions for an equation. These are all fine until scientists believe that what they find are close to the truth or indeed are the truth.


    Scientists advance their hypotheses by mathematic concepts to connect dots in the real world as they have been taught in kindergarten and schools. They often ignore the possibility that those dots cannot be truly connected with the knowledge they have on hand, or in their mind. They assume they can and very often they believe they can. But, they should not do so. You need those bridges to connect the dots.

    The continuity of anything should not be assumed, but must be proved with scientific methods and vigor. The man on this side of the cliff cannot simply just jump over the space and land on the other side of the cliff in order to shake hands with the second man. Scientists should demand scientific proofs that that cliff can be jumped over.


    Evolutionists have not been serious about the Evolution Theories. They have had some suggestive or positive scientific experiments reported, identifying some elements of the Evolution Theories here and there. They connected those few dots with straight lines, based on their beliefs or faiths, but not based on further proofs of the existence of those bridges across the cliffs in the landscape of the Evolution Theories.


    Same seems to be true in some of the other scientific disciplines. It is puzzling why my voice is so lonely out there. Or, could I possibly be wrong?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,670
    Quote Originally Posted by fcaltai View Post
    Or, could I possibly be wrong?
    Hard to say; it isn't very clear what your point is.

    Are you just saying that the scientific approach doesn't give us absolute certainty, "the truth". That is definitely the case.

    Or are you saying that the theory of evolution is wrong? In which case you are quite obviously wrong.


    Without wishing to overstate my case, everything in the observable universe definitely has its origins in Northamptonshire -- Alan Moore
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    37
    My point is that there are many, many theoretical and experimental gaps need to be addressed in the Evolution Theory. Our top Evolution theory proponents choose not to deal with. That is o.K.; it is their prerogative. But, children and grown ups all over the world are being taught the Evolution Theory as the truth already.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,670
    Quote Originally Posted by fcaltai View Post
    My point is that there are many, many theoretical and experimental gaps need to be addressed in the Evolution Theory.
    And that is true of all science. What particular "gaps" in the theory are you concerned about?

    Our top Evolution theory proponents choose not to deal with.
    What open questions are not being looked into by current research?

    But, children and grown ups all over the world are being taught the Evolution Theory as the truth already.
    Children, maybe. All science (and history and pretty much everything else) is taught at a simplistic "truth" level at school. That idea gets destroyed pretty soon if you study science (or anything else) seriously.
    Without wishing to overstate my case, everything in the observable universe definitely has its origins in Northamptonshire -- Alan Moore
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    37
    That's quite true We need to be taught in a very "simplistic truth" level. I held on to the Evolution views for many years and advocated it. Now I retired and start to dig into the Evolution Theory among others. Suddenly, I realized...

    It would be helpful if you would give me a couple of references of key scientific studies published (experimental evidences, not speculations or theoretical arguments) that have convinced you personally on the Evolution Theories. I will read it and get back to you. Thanks.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,670
    Quote Originally Posted by fcaltai View Post
    I held on to the Evolution views for many years and advocated it. Now I retired and start to dig into the Evolution Theory among others. Suddenly, I realized...
    Realized what? (Why so cryptic? It doesn't really aid clear communication.)

    Realized you didn't understand?

    Realized that thousands of scientists and peer-reviewed papers had it all wrong for decades?

    It would be helpful if you would give me a couple of references of key scientific studies published (experimental evidences, not speculations or theoretical arguments) that have convinced you personally on the Evolution Theories. I will read it and get back to you. Thanks.
    I'm not sure there a "a couple" of references. It is too big a subject. Dawkins' books are a good starting point.

    Or:

    (all backed up with references to the scientific literature)

    But it might be more productive if you explain what you don't understand or what you think the problems are with current evolutionary theory.
    Without wishing to overstate my case, everything in the observable universe definitely has its origins in Northamptonshire -- Alan Moore
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,670
    Quote Originally Posted by fcaltai View Post
    Connecting two dots with a line actually is a leap of faith, believing those dots can be connected by a line.
    But finding that millions of dots form a line is pretty convincing.
    Without wishing to overstate my case, everything in the observable universe definitely has its origins in Northamptonshire -- Alan Moore
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    37
    I'd hope to have 2 or 3 solids "points" (scientific experimental studies), the foundation stones of the mansion (the Evolution Theories), to start with. I'd try to review the pillars of the mansion, by understanding the lines that connect those few dots ("the bridges", as solid experimental studies). So, one solid "point" at a time, and one solid "bridge" at a time.

    This would be a positive approach, instead of going through negative campaigns of making arguments.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Ascended Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    3,408
    Quote Originally Posted by fcaltai View Post
    But, children and grown ups all over the world are being taught the Evolution Theory as the truth already.
    I don't really understand what else they are supposed to do? OK so Evolution may be far more complicated than our current understanding sure, but there's no credible evidence against it so it is both correct and justified to teach it to children and adults alike.

    There are many many things that as yet we cannot say we fully understand beyond doubt, especially in science, however we do use the knowledge that we have about them because the only alternative is to ignore it, and where would that get us if we just ignore things because we don't have all the answers.
    Everything has its beauty, but not everyone sees it. - confucius
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    37
    We can teach children that "the Evolution Theories are the current thinking that scientists have about what has been going on in this world. They have some evidences for the Theories, even though we still have a lot of problems with the Theories. More scientific studies will be done to sort this out..." Something like that.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,670
    Quote Originally Posted by fcaltai View Post
    I'd hope to have 2 or 3 solids "points" (scientific experimental studies), the foundation stones of the mansion (the Evolution Theories), to start with. I'd try to review the pillars of the mansion, by understanding the lines that connect those few dots ("the bridges", as solid experimental studies). So, one solid "point" at a time, and one solid "bridge" at a time.
    I don't really know what you are looking for. I suggest reading Dawkins' The Blind Watchmaker for a good background on the mechanisms of natural selection.
    Without wishing to overstate my case, everything in the observable universe definitely has its origins in Northamptonshire -- Alan Moore
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,670
    Quote Originally Posted by fcaltai View Post
    We can teach children that "the Evolution Theories are the current thinking that scientists have about what has been going on in this world. They have some evidences for the Theories, even though we still have a lot of problems with the Theories. More scientific studies will be done to sort this out..." Something like that.
    We could do that with all branches of science. I assume experts in education have found that it just confuses children if you do that.

    But why the theory of evolution, particularly? It is one of the best tested scientific theories we have. Presenting it as fact is not that much of exaggeration (and, of course, evolution itself is a fact).
    Without wishing to overstate my case, everything in the observable universe definitely has its origins in Northamptonshire -- Alan Moore
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    37
    I think scientists have the obligations to examine those solid "dots" and those solid "bridges" connecting those solid "dots". We, the scientists, ought to prove the structures (skeletons) of the Evolution Theories can stand solidly on the ground on its own, without "if", "conceivably", "presumably", relying "the seemly eternal time doing wonders (thus, making anything possible)", etc.

    To do that, we should start with the first solid "point" (scientifically sound experimental studies) that it would be one of the foundation stones of the mansion (the Evolution Theories" and work from the ground up.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    37
    Obviously, we should teach children, the teenagers, and young adults the true knowledge in different degree of depths so that we don't confuse them.

    Why choose the Evolution Theories? Well, we ought to examine other scientific branches in the same way, such as gravity, physics, Astrophysics (Big Bang Theory), Super String Theory, geology, biological sciences, just name a few. For example, electron is considered as an elementary particle with all the properties as "intrinsic properties" in physics. By doing that, scientists can proceed building the rest of physics theories without explaining how this "intrinsic properties" come along. This is o.k., but physicists should always remember that their theories started with some assumptions, a shaky ground.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,670
    Quote Originally Posted by fcaltai View Post
    I think scientists have the obligations to examine those solid "dots" and those solid "bridges" connecting those solid "dots".
    And that is what scientists do all the time. That is their job.
    Without wishing to overstate my case, everything in the observable universe definitely has its origins in Northamptonshire -- Alan Moore
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    37
    I don't know how to look for the 1st solid point. The field is too huge. I hope one of the people out there can help me to find the 1st point, then the 2nd, ... , then the 1st bridge, and so on.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,670
    Quote Originally Posted by fcaltai View Post
    I don't know how to look for the 1st solid point. The field is too huge. I hope one of the people out there can help me to find the 1st point, then the 2nd, ... , then the 1st bridge, and so on.
    From one of the links earlier, why not start with genetic and morphological change: 29+ Evidences for Macroevolution: Part 5

    In summary, genes define morphology, genes can change, morphology changes over time.
    Without wishing to overstate my case, everything in the observable universe definitely has its origins in Northamptonshire -- Alan Moore
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    37
    DNA sequence in our genes are encoded information, being transferred from generations to generations, are well protected against transcription errors and environmental effects. Mutations do happen and usually cause the individual vulnerable and less capable for survival and often death of the individual. Rarely, there is some positive effects. Mutation is not a driving force toward the well being of the individual. We also must understand that rules are rules, but there always are exceptions. Observing the occurrence of exceptions, regardless how frequent, does not make the exceptions as normal. That's why we see all kinds of distribution curves, the most often heard, the Gaussian Distribution. Gene changes can change morphology as it is supposed to, because the blueprint for the morphology is in the genes.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,670
    Quote Originally Posted by fcaltai View Post
    DNA sequence in our genes are encoded information, being transferred from generations to generations, are well protected against transcription errors and environmental effects. Mutations do happen and usually cause the individual vulnerable and less capable for survival and often death of the individual. Rarely, there is some positive effects.
    The vast majority of mutations are neutral. But apart from that, your comment is reasonably accurate.

    Mutation is not a driving force toward the well being of the individual.
    Of course not. It is important as a source of diversity in a population.

    We also must understand that rules are rules, but there always are exceptions. Observing the occurrence of exceptions, regardless how frequent, does not make the exceptions as normal. That's why we see all kinds of distribution curves, the most often heard, the Gaussian Distribution.
    I don't know what that means or why it is relevant.

    Gene changes can change morphology as it is supposed to, because the blueprint for the morphology is in the genes.
    Correct.
    Without wishing to overstate my case, everything in the observable universe definitely has its origins in Northamptonshire -- Alan Moore
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    37
    "The vast majority of mutations are neutral."

    Thanks. Please explain "neutral".
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    37
    "I don't know what that means or why it is relevant."

    I thought it was said quite clearly. If you don't understand, then you won't see the relevance. If you don't understand any part of it, please let me know so that I can try to say in a different way.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    37
    To: Chrisgorlitz "...however we do use the knowledge that we have about them because the only alternative is to ignore it, and where would that get us if we just ignore things because we don't have all the answers."

    I agree with you. We should not just ignore it and we will never understand anything in an absolute sense. Evolution,however, is a huge field and people get lost in there. I think the Evolutionists should provide a "skeleton/schematic presentation" (a simplified version with all essential components, no fan fairs), a bare construction of the Evolution Theory with solid scientific experimentally sound evidences and their connections (here again, evidences, not inferences, speculations, assumptions) from the ground up to the apex of the Theory.

    They claim the Evolution Theory is valid. Well, help us to understand that it is correct by identifying those "dots" and those "bridges". This will do our children and young scholars a great favor because we can then study those dots and bridges and the wonderful implications.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    You could start by reading On the Origin of Species. Have you done so? If not on what basis do you complain about the lack of evidence?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    37
    "Of course not. It is important as a source of diversity in a population."

    Diversity, yes, if the individual survives the mutations and pass these mutations onto the next generations, then it is called "inheritable diseases". We have plenty of those. If the individual does not survive, well, the story is over.

    Mutations must occur in the germ line cells of the individual so that the mutations will be go into the next generations. Somatic cell mutations don't. Most mutations are acquired somatic cell mutations.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    37
    "You could start by reading On the Origin of Species. Have you done so? If not on what basis do you complain about the lack of evidence?"

    I read probably more than you think. That is why I am confused and puzzled. May be someone can help me to understand than just scolding me.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    37
    The above message is for the moderator, John Galt. So, please help!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,670
    Quote Originally Posted by fcaltai View Post
    "The vast majority of mutations are neutral."

    Thanks. Please explain "neutral".
    Neutral: neither good nor bad. Most proteins can exist in slightly different forms that have only minor effects on their behaviour (think of blood groups for example). Therefore many changes to the genome just produce harmless variation. Furthermore, large parts of the genome do not seem to directly code for proteins or are not normally expressed; so changes there are also harmless and introduce more genetic variation into the population.

    The important point then is that this diversity in the population can be acted upon by selection, which is what drives evolution.
    Without wishing to overstate my case, everything in the observable universe definitely has its origins in Northamptonshire -- Alan Moore
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,670
    Quote Originally Posted by fcaltai View Post
    Diversity, yes, if the individual survives the mutations and pass these mutations onto the next generations, then it is called "inheritable diseases".
    Well, it is only called an "inheritable disease" if it causes disease.

    Mutations must occur in the germ line cells of the individual so that the mutations will be go into the next generations.
    I believe the great majority of mutations occur during reproduction. The replication process is not perfect.
    Without wishing to overstate my case, everything in the observable universe definitely has its origins in Northamptonshire -- Alan Moore
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    Comet Dust Collector Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    2,848
    Quote Originally Posted by fcaltai View Post
    "Of course not. It is important as a source of diversity in a population."

    Diversity, yes, if the individual survives the mutations and pass these mutations onto the next generations, then it is called "inheritable diseases". We have plenty of those. If the individual does not survive, well, the story is over.

    Mutations must occur in the germ line cells of the individual so that the mutations will be go into the next generations. Somatic cell mutations don't. Most mutations are acquired somatic cell mutations.
    Some mutations, by chance are beneficial for that individual in that environment. I would hardly consider that a "disease" if it gets passed on because that individual is more likely to survive.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    Comet Dust Collector Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    2,848
    I have moved this to Biology, since it clearly is not an introduction.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    37
    Quote Originally Posted by MeteorWayne View Post
    I have moved this to Biology, since it clearly is not an introduction.
    I'll be glad of changing my topic to suit you liking so that I can stay with you. Would that work? So, what's your favorite topic?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #32  
    Time Lord Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    5,003
    Quote Originally Posted by fcaltai View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by MeteorWayne View Post
    I have moved this to Biology, since it clearly is not an introduction.
    I'll be glad of changing my topic to suit you liking so that I can stay with you. Would that work? So, what's your favorite topic?
    He didnt ask you to change the topic, he just moved the area in which your topic was living from the the introductions subforum (where people first say hi) to the Biology subforum (for threads about biology).
    If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world. -Thorin Oakenshield

    The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  34. #33  
    Time Lord Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    5,003
    Quote Originally Posted by fcaltai View Post
    "I don't know what that means or why it is relevant."

    I thought it was said quite clearly. If you don't understand, then you won't see the relevance. If you don't understand any part of it, please let me know so that I can try to say in a different way.
    He was asking you to explain it differently.

    To be honest I think it would be easier for folks to understand your posts if you stopped trying to discuss everything in the form of metaphors.
    If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world. -Thorin Oakenshield

    The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  35. #34  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    37
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by fcaltai View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by MeteorWayne View Post
    I have moved this to Biology, since it clearly is not an introduction.
    I'll be glad of changing my topic to suit you liking so that I can stay with you. Would that work? So, what's your favorite topic?
    He didnt ask you to change the topic, he just moved the area in which your topic was living from the the introductions subforum (where people first say hi) to the Biology subforum (for threads about biology).
    Thanks, I understood. I appreciate you pointing this out Sorry to all.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  36. #35  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    37
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by fcaltai View Post
    "I don't know what that means or why it is relevant."

    I thought it was said quite clearly. If you don't understand, then you won't see the relevance. If you don't understand any part of it, please let me know so that I can try to say in a different way.
    He was asking you to explain it differently.



    To be honest I think it would be easier for folks to understand your posts if you stopped trying to discuss everything in the form of metaphors.
    I use metaphors because I don't have a handle to go on. If someone point out to me a solid scientific evidence for a foundation rock of the Evolution Theory, I will study the published papers of the studies and come back with sciences talks rather than metaphors. Of course, after that I will ask for the second rock so that I can look into the first bridge connecting those 2 foundation rocks.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  37. #36  
    Time Lord Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    5,003
    Im actually still waiting for you to clarify what parts of the Theory you are uncertain of. You were asked this earlier in the thread with no clear response.
    If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world. -Thorin Oakenshield

    The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  38. #37  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    37
    Introductions -

    Hi, I am a new member. I am in a "confused and puzzled" state, by so much information about the "Evolution Theories", with so many for and against. Hopefully, someone will help me out of this ignorance of mine.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  39. #38  
    Time Lord Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    5,003
    Ok, we have an intorduction.

    What (specific) parts of the Theory of Evolution confuse you?
    If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world. -Thorin Oakenshield

    The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  40. #39  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    37
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum View Post
    Im actually still waiting for you to clarify what parts of the Theory you are uncertain of. You were asked this earlier in the thread with no clear response.
    I wish I know how to answer this, If you would, please review my message you just responded to.

    "The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder."

    If this quote of yours has a message, then I guess I am in the wrong place. Or, did I get it wrong?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  41. #40  
    Time Lord Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    5,003
    I have read through the whole thread. So far all you have given us to work with is the general idea that you are confused by the Theory. We need more that just that if we are going to be able to try to clear up the confusion.

    The red and bold text at the bottom of my posts is just my signature and doe not have anything to do with any specific thread I post on.
    If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world. -Thorin Oakenshield

    The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  42. #41  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    37
    Quote Originally Posted by MeteorWayne View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by fcaltai View Post
    "Of course not. It is important as a source of diversity in a population."

    Diversity, yes, if the individual survives the mutations and pass these mutations onto the next generations, then it is called "inheritable diseases". We have plenty of those. If the individual does not survive, well, the story is over.

    Mutations must occur in the germ line cells of the individual so that the mutations will be go into the next generations. Somatic cell mutations don't. Most mutations are acquired somatic cell mutations.
    Some mutations, by chance are beneficial for that individual in that environment. I would hardly consider that a "disease" if it gets passed on because that individual is more likely to survive.
    Yes, I agree, of course, if those mutations are germ line mutations. If, however, those mutations are not germ line mutations, then the individual survives, but his offspring won't have any improved capability to survive the new environment.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  43. #42  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    37
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by fcaltai View Post
    Diversity, yes, if the individual survives the mutations and pass these mutations onto the next generations, then it is called "inheritable diseases".
    Well, it is only called an "inheritable disease" if it causes disease.

    Mutations must occur in the germ line cells of the individual so that the mutations will be go into the next generations.
    I believe the great majority of mutations occur during reproduction. The replication process is not perfect.
    In this case, the errors will be less likely being environmentally caused and have very little to do with evolution.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  44. #43  
    Time Lord Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    5,003
    Quote Originally Posted by fcaltai View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by fcaltai View Post
    Diversity, yes, if the individual survives the mutations and pass these mutations onto the next generations, then it is called "inheritable diseases".
    Well, it is only called an "inheritable disease" if it causes disease.

    Mutations must occur in the germ line cells of the individual so that the mutations will be go into the next generations.
    I believe the great majority of mutations occur during reproduction. The replication process is not perfect.
    In this case, the errors will be less likely being environmentally caused and have very little to do with evolution.
    While they may may not be caused by the environment, they may provide an advantage while allows for better survival and reproduction rates, which is part of evolution.
    If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world. -Thorin Oakenshield

    The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  45. #44  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    37
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum View Post
    I have read through the whole thread. So far all you have given us to work with is the general idea that you are confused by the Theory. We need more that just that if we are going to be able to try to clear up the confusion.

    The red and bold text at the bottom of my posts is just my signature and doe not have anything to do with any specific thread I post on.
    Thanks.

    I have been previously through discussions the way you suggested, even though I didn't participate in those discussions. I got more confused. So, I thought I would try this in the reverse way as I have been suggesting. I hope this positive, constructive way would shine more lights on my confusions.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  46. #45  
    Time Lord Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    5,003
    if you are not actually going to address the question of "what confuses you" what are you hoping to accomplish what with this thread?
    If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world. -Thorin Oakenshield

    The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  47. #46  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,670
    Quote Originally Posted by fcaltai View Post
    In this case, the errors will be less likely being environmentally caused and have very little to do with evolution.
    It doesn't matter what the cause of the mutation is. Most mutations are just random. They might be caused be environmental factors (e.g. radiation) or just transcription/replication errors. Doesn't really matter. Mutations are almost irrelevant; they are mainly important for producing population diversity.

    Evolution isn't caused or driven by mutation but rather by natural selection operating on populations.

    Also, if you focus on mutation you focus on individuals. And evolution operates on populations, not individuals.
    Without wishing to overstate my case, everything in the observable universe definitely has its origins in Northamptonshire -- Alan Moore
    Reply With Quote  
     

  48. #47  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    37
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by fcaltai View Post
    In this case, the errors will be less likely being environmentally caused and have very little to do with evolution.
    It doesn't matter what the cause of the mutation is. Most mutations are just random. They might be caused be environmental factors (e.g. radiation) or just transcription/replication errors. Doesn't really matter. Mutations are almost irrelevant; they are mainly important for producing population diversity.

    Evolution isn't caused or driven by mutation but rather by natural selection operating on populations.

    Also, if you focus on mutation you focus on individuals. And evolution operates on populations, not individuals.
    Random mutations in genome are rare events. Population diversity caused by mutations in genome is in very small scales. There aren't many options available for natural selection processes to work on because the diversity pool is limited. This is not like mathematics in which they can talk about infinity. So what you are saying makes good logic, but in true world it is much harsher. Natural selection does play some roles in evolution, but it is minor role.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  49. #48  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    37
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum View Post
    if you are not actually going to address the question of "what confuses you" what are you hoping to accomplish what with this thread?
    I thought said quite a few times already about what I need. Looks like I won't get it here
    Reply With Quote  
     

  50. #49  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    37
    Quote Originally Posted by MeteorWayne View Post
    I have moved this to Biology, since it clearly is not an introduction.
    I didn't know my way around here. Sorry for the earlier misunderstanding.

    If you would, please move this thread to "Evolution Theory - general discussions" area because my posting will probably go outside of biology and get into other scientific disciplines. Thanks.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  51. #50  
    Ascended Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    3,408
    I think your posting style is polite and respectful, though I must say it is becoming a little irritating, on the one hand you are saying, using your dots and bridges analogy, that you don't understand how scientists are claiming evolution is real because it's not perfectly mapped out how they understand it and on the other hand your agreeing with me that nothing is ever mapped out perfectly and that scientists and teachers should use the knowledge they have. To me at least, your point of veiw never mind actual message seems very confusing.
    Everything has its beauty, but not everyone sees it. - confucius
    Reply With Quote  
     

  52. #51  
    Time Lord Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    5,003
    Quote Originally Posted by fcaltai View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum View Post
    if you are not actually going to address the question of "what confuses you" what are you hoping to accomplish what with this thread?
    I thought said quite a few times already about what I need. Looks like I won't get it here
    You have said you need explanations, but not told us what areas of the theory you want explained.
    If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world. -Thorin Oakenshield

    The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  53. #52  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,670
    Quote Originally Posted by fcaltai View Post
    Random mutations in genome are rare events. Population diversity caused by mutations in genome is in very small scales.
    Yes. But populations are large and there have been thousands or even millions of years for diversity to be generated. Every person on earth is genetically different.

    There aren't many options available for natural selection processes to work on because the diversity pool is limited.
    On what basis do you say there are many options and the diversity pool is limited? How many options should there be? How diverse should the gene pool be?

    Natural selection does play some roles in evolution, but it is minor role.
    What is your evidence for that statement? For someone who claims not to understand evolution and to be looking for information, you are happy to make some pretty definitive statements.

    Actually, it depends on the species. Natural selection is the dominant driving force in most higher organisms. But in some, horizontal gene transfer, for example, is more important.
    Without wishing to overstate my case, everything in the observable universe definitely has its origins in Northamptonshire -- Alan Moore
    Reply With Quote  
     

  54. #53  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    37
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrisgorlitz View Post
    I think your posting style is polite and respectful, though I must say it is becoming a little irritating, on the one hand you are saying, using your dots and bridges analogy, that you don't understand how scientists are claiming evolution is real because it's not perfectly mapped out how they understand it and on the other hand your agreeing with me that nothing is ever mapped out perfectly and that scientists and teachers should use the knowledge they have. To me at least, your point of veiw never mind actual message seems very confusing.
    How true! Many theories in this world are confusing. I have my doubts on the Evolution Theories among others. Scientists argue back and forth, trying to win their arguments and ridiculize their opponents. They don't address those legitimate points raised by their opponents. I hope they would, then the readers can thus move forward and understand the Evolution Theories better. Since they don't deal with those thorny problems and those problems always stay there, I, as one of the readers, am left confused and puzzled. The more I read, the more I become helpless. This phenomena are not limited to the Evolution Theories. I may say the same things about the Big Bang Theory, the particle physics, geology and so on. Seems to me the scientific fields don't seriously deal with true sciences any more. I hate myself when I criticize others. That is why I propose to look at the solid sciences, with scientifically sound "foundation rock" one at a time and those connecting bridges. It sounds outrageous, but I don't know there is other way to work this out.

    Indeed, nothing can be perfectly mapped out. One of the reasons is that we human have limited brain size, restricted by our skull size, with only so many neurons, axons, dendrites, synapses, etc. and we have only 24 hours a day to use our brains. We are not capable of understand everything in every fine details to perfectly map out anything. So, there is a degree of "perfection" that is the maximum perfection we can reach and I believe that we scientists should go that far. In a way, scientist is a different breed and we have the desire, the emotion, and the dedication to find the truth.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  55. #54  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    37
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by fcaltai View Post
    Random mutations in genome are rare events. Population diversity caused by mutations in genome is in very small scales.
    Yes. But populations are large and there have been thousands or even millions of years for diversity to be generated. Every person on earth is genetically different.

    Everything is relative, isn't it? I stick to my statement that "gene errors during reproductions as you said" is small pools of population diversity for natural selection to work successfully, because random mutations in genome are rare events.

    Living higher organisms may have millions of years to evolve, but for that individual and his offspring they have only a life time, or just one day - today, to work out adaption skills to survive the new changing environment. I guess we put in different degree of optimisms in their adaptive abilities. I, for one, won't survive in the wildness, not for long enough for my children to be born and become strong enough to fend for themselves. And my children must do the same like me for his children, and on and on.
    There aren't many options available for natural selection processes to work on because the diversity pool is limited.
    On what basis do you say there are many options and the diversity pool is limited? How many options should there be? How diverse should the gene pool be?

    I said there were not many options. For me, the more options the better and the more diverse the gene pool is the better it is for natural selection to work successfully.

    Natural selection does play some roles in evolution, but it is minor role.
    What is your evidence for that statement? For someone who claims not to understand evolution and to be looking for information, you are happy to make some pretty definitive statements.

    Actually, it depends on the species. Natural selection is the dominant driving force in most higher organisms. But in some, horizontal gene transfer, for example, is more important.
    You are right. I should not use that definitive statement.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  56. #55  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    37
    oops, I still don't quite know how to use these tools. So, I am doing the "copy and paste" for the following replies.

    Everything is relative, isn't it? I stick to my statement that "gene errors during reproductions as you said" is small pools of population diversity for natural selection to work successfully, because random mutations in genome are rare events.


    Living higher organisms may have millions of years to evolve, but for that individual and his offspring they have only a life time, or just one day - today, to work out adaption skills to survive the new changing environment. I guess we put in different degree of optimisms in their adaptive abilities. I, for one, won't survive in the wildness, not for long enough for my children to be born and become strong enough to fend for themselves. And my children must do the same like me for his children, and on and on.

    I said there were not many options. For me, the more options the better and the more diverse the gene pool is the better it is for natural selection to work successfully.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  57. #56  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    37
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by fcaltai View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum View Post
    if you are not actually going to address the question of "what confuses you" what are you hoping to accomplish what with this thread?
    I thought said quite a few times already about what I need. Looks like I won't get it here
    You have said you need explanations, but not told us what areas of the theory you want explained.
    I said that I'd like someone to give me a scientific solid published study that is one of the 'foundation rock" of the Evolution Theory so that I can start my reading and understanding of that study. I don't need explanations right now.

    After my studying of it, if I have any questions, then I need explanations. This study can be biology, cell dynamics, astrophysics, quantum theory, geology or whatever. I'll study, learn, and ask questions.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  58. #57  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    37
    And, that published paper must be a "foundation rock" for the Evolution Theory.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  59. #58  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    37
    Also, the survival of an individual is important because a population is an arithmetic sum of those individuals. Usually an individual represents the norm for that group of population. If one cannot survive, another can't, and another can't, then there is no reason to believe the population will survive.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  60. #59  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,670
    Quote Originally Posted by fcaltai View Post
    I said there were [/I][/FONT][/COLOR]not[COLOR=#646464][FONT=Tahoma][I] many options. For me, the more options the better and the more diverse the gene pool is the better it is for natural selection to work successfully.
    Yes, I missed out the "not" in my reply. Sorry.

    Obviously there is a minimum amount of diversity required for evolution to work. One reason for extinction of species is that they don't have enough diversity to resist disease or other stresses.

    However, there is obviously enough diversity for selection to operate on in most cases because it does.
    Without wishing to overstate my case, everything in the observable universe definitely has its origins in Northamptonshire -- Alan Moore
    Reply With Quote  
     

  61. #60  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,670
    Quote Originally Posted by fcaltai View Post
    I said that I'd like someone to give me a scientific solid published study that is one of the 'foundation rock" of the Evolution Theory so that I can start my reading and understanding of that study.
    I am not aware of any such fundamental paper. It is too big a field.

    I guess Darwin's On the Origin of Species might be what you are looking for. But I have never read it so can't really say. (I see that John Galt has already recommended that and he knows more about evolution than I do.)

    Other than that, Dawkins' The Blind watchmaker is a good overview of the field.
    Without wishing to overstate my case, everything in the observable universe definitely has its origins in Northamptonshire -- Alan Moore
    Reply With Quote  
     

  62. #61  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,670
    Quote Originally Posted by fcaltai View Post
    Also, the survival of an individual is important because a population is an arithmetic sum of those individuals. Usually an individual represents the norm for that group of population. If one cannot survive, another can't, and another can't, then there is no reason to believe the population will survive.
    And that's the point. If one can't survive, maybe another can. Because they are different - faster, better eyesight, disease resistance, able to eat a wider range of foods, etc. - one may have an advantage that the other doesn't.
    Without wishing to overstate my case, everything in the observable universe definitely has its origins in Northamptonshire -- Alan Moore
    Reply With Quote  
     

  63. #62  
    Time Lord Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    5,003
    Quote Originally Posted by fcaltai View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by fcaltai View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum View Post
    if you are not actually going to address the question of "what confuses you" what are you hoping to accomplish what with this thread?
    I thought said quite a few times already about what I need. Looks like I won't get it here
    You have said you need explanations, but not told us what areas of the theory you want explained.
    I said that I'd like someone to give me a scientific solid published study that is one of the 'foundation rock" of the Evolution Theory so that I can start my reading and understanding of that study. I don't need explanations right now.

    After my studying of it, if I have any questions, then I need explanations. This study can be biology, cell dynamics, astrophysics, quantum theory, geology or whatever. I'll study, learn, and ask questions.
    Darwin would be the foundation rock you are looking for. The progression from there has been incremental based on myriads of small papers.

    I guess I am just confused by your statements that you "dont understand evolution" but are not able to say what you dont understand about it.
    If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world. -Thorin Oakenshield

    The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  64. #63  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    37
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by fcaltai View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by fcaltai View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum View Post
    if you are not actually going to address the question of "what confuses you" what are you hoping to accomplish what with this thread?
    I thought said quite a few times already about what I need. Looks like I won't get it here
    You have said you need explanations, but not told us what areas of the theory you want explained.
    I said that I'd like someone to give me a scientific solid published study that is one of the 'foundation rock" of the Evolution Theory so that I can start my reading and understanding of that study. I don't need explanations right now.

    After my studying of it, if I have any questions, then I need explanations. This study can be biology, cell dynamics, astrophysics, quantum theory, geology or whatever. I'll study, learn, and ask questions.
    Darwin would be the foundation rock you are looking for. The progression from there has been incremental based on myriads of small papers.

    I guess I am just confused by your statements that you "dont understand evolution" but are not able to say what you dont understand about it.

    I am sorry. I am able to say all those things, but I don't want to go there, because we will end up in the same place as all the other discussions/arguments/debts went. It's not going to be worthwhile for your time or my time. But, I do appreciate very much for your kindness and patience.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  65. #64  
    Time Lord Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    5,003
    *sigh*

    Then we are at an impasse. You keep asking for us to help you out, but are not providing the needed information to actually do this. Where and with whom did you try to get clarification? And why do you assume it will end the same this time?
    If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world. -Thorin Oakenshield

    The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  66. #65  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    city of wine and roses
    Posts
    6,222
    There are a few options here for fcaltai.

    1) Wiki. Evolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Scroll down to the various headings. Heredity, Variations, Mechanisms, Outcomes and see which particular items give you cause to pause - and to click, there are lots of useful links to further explanation. If you find something that needs a clearer or better explanation, ask that specific question and see if anyone here can help you.

    2) There are some excellent online resources. Potholer54's evolution series is pretty good. If you think you'll be annoyed by the snark he directs at creationists, use the series he's done for schools. 6 -- Natural Selection Made Easy (by potholer54) - YouTube is the link to Number 6 in the series.

    3) Other resources. At the moment there are 2 excellent documentary series running on Australian television. If you're lucky, you might be able to watch these online - don't know if geographic origin might get in the way.
    Origins of Us with Dr Alice Roberts from BBC2. BBC Two - Origins of Us
    How to Grow a Planet with Professor Iain Stewart from BBC Scotland. Episode 1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VNt0mwStZI

    I
    f any of these raise specific questions for you, I'm sure someone here will do their best to help.
    "Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen." Winston Churchill
    "nature is like a game of Jenga; you never know which brick you pull out will cause the whole stack to collapse" Lucy Cooke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  67. #66  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,670
    Quote Originally Posted by fcaltai View Post
    I am sorry. I am able to say all those things, but I don't want to go there, because we will end up in the same place as all the other discussions/arguments/debts went. It's not going to be worthwhile for your time or my time. But, I do appreciate very much for your kindness and patience.
    I would suggest you read Dawkins or Darwin, then come back with specific questions about the areas that do not make sense to you.

    Otherwise this is discussion is getting rather pointless: you ask for recommended reading, we give them to you, you say you are unsure and ask for recommended reading, we give them to you, you say you are unsure and ask for recommended reading, we give them to you, you say you are unsure and ask for recommended reading, we give them to you, you say you are unsure and ask for recommended reading, we give them to you, you say you are unsure and ask for recommended reading, we give them to you, you say you are unsure and ask for recommended reading, we give them to you, you say you are unsure and ask for recommended reading, we give them to you, you say you are unsure and ask for recommended reading, we give them to you, ....
    Without wishing to overstate my case, everything in the observable universe definitely has its origins in Northamptonshire -- Alan Moore
    Reply With Quote  
     

  68. #67  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,670
    Quote Originally Posted by fcaltai View Post
    Scientists argue back and forth, trying to win their arguments and ridiculize their opponents. They don't address those legitimate points raised by their opponents.
    I don't recognize that description of science. You don't mention "evidence", for example. There are a number of questions in evolution theory (as in any area of science) which different scientists are looking at using a variety of techniques and a number of different hypotheses.

    Since they don't deal with those thorny problems and those problems always stay there, I, as one of the readers, am left confused and puzzled.
    So what "thorny problems" are there in evolution theory that leave you confused and puzzled? I'm sure someone here will be able to provide an explanation.

    The more I read, the more I become helpless. This phenomena are not limited to the Evolution Theories. I may say the same things about the Big Bang Theory, the particle physics, geology and so on.
    Some of these areas are very complex and can only be fully understood after many years of study and with a good understanding of the appropriate mathematics. One problem that many intelligent non-experts have is that they read the simplified versions of these theories in popular science articles and books, and then they spot flaws in these explanations. But that is a flaw in the explanation, which are based on simplifications and analogies, rather than the theory.

    Seems to me the scientific fields don't seriously deal with true sciences any more.
    Why do you think that? Is it just because much of modern science has gone beyond the limits that an enthusiastic layman can follow? What do you mean by "true science"?
    Without wishing to overstate my case, everything in the observable universe definitely has its origins in Northamptonshire -- Alan Moore
    Reply With Quote  
     

  69. #68  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    I completely agree with Strange that your perception of how science and scientists work is very seriously flawed.

    I echo Paleoichnium's patient requests that you identify one specific thing that confuses you.

    You say you may have read more on evolution than we think, but you have not said whther you have read On the Origin of Species. Have you? If not will you now do so? Copies are available online to download at no charge.

    An alternative would be to read this : Daniel C. Dennett Darwin's Dangerous Idea Simon & Schuster 1995 ISBN:0-684-80290-2
    Reply With Quote  
     

  70. #69  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    37
    Since you are the moderator and "Only Galt can save us now", I just want to let you know that I should be leaving this place for everyone's sake. Sorry that I have irritated some of you. Thanks.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  71. #70  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,670
    Quote Originally Posted by fcaltai View Post
    Since you are the moderator and "Only Galt can save us now", I just want to let you know that I should be leaving this place for everyone's sake. Sorry that I have irritated some of you. Thanks.
    I don't think you have annoyed anyone (certainly not me). I just wanted to help clear up whatever misunderstandings you might have about evolution theory. (Tricky when you won't tell us what your doubts are though ...)
    Without wishing to overstate my case, everything in the observable universe definitely has its origins in Northamptonshire -- Alan Moore
    Reply With Quote  
     

  72. #71  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    37
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by fcaltai View Post
    Since you are the moderator and "Only Galt can save us now", I just want to let you know that I should be leaving this place for everyone's sake. Sorry that I have irritated some of you. Thanks.
    I don't think you have annoyed anyone (certainly not me). I just wanted to help clear up whatever misunderstandings you might have about evolution theory. (Tricky when you won't tell us what your doubts are though ...)
    It's hard to start on something specific. But, we two have a good round of academic exchange and it is intellectual, fun, and beneficial for me. But, a couple of new guys and more to come, I guess, and including the two moderators, are emotional and are quite rude.

    I don't need someone to scold me or shout at me. If I said something wrong, point it out, explain to me, give me your reasons or scientific evidences, I can deal with that. I have read more scientific papers or probably published more papers than those two moderators have done.

    I don't tolerate emotional charged accusations. They don't know who I am and they behave badly. I said I am "confused and puzzled", but that does not equal "not knowledgeable". Keep on throwing The Origin of Species at me, well, I read it probably before they were born.

    Paleoichneum, Chrisgorlitz and you have been nice.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  73. #72  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    37
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum View Post
    *sigh*

    Then we are at an impasse. You keep asking for us to help you out, but are not providing the needed information to actually do this. Where and with whom did you try to get clarification? And why do you assume it will end the same this time?
    Well, this morning when I was in bed, I was thinking, maybe you and I can do some academic discussions over the Evolution Theory or any other topics, just for fun. We can dance around the fire without playing the fire and get burned. I will back off from any right or wrong remarks. But, now I change my mind. This place is not a healthy place.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  74. #73  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,670
    Quote Originally Posted by fcaltai View Post
    But, a couple of new guys and more to come, I guess, and including the two moderators, are emotional and are quite rude.
    I haven't noticed anyone being emotional or rude. But, whatever ...

    If I said something wrong, point it out, explain to me, give me your reasons or scientific evidences, I can deal with that.
    I don't think you have said anything much wrong. You haven't said anything much. You have said a couple of things which suggest you don't really have much understanding of how evolution works (e.g. your focus on mutations, vague comments about their not being "enough" diversity, etc.) but nothing specific enough to say "here is what you have misunderstood and here is the evidence for that" (which is what I would like to do).

    Is natural selection the area that puzzles you?

    Or the causes and rates of mutations?

    Or the role of genetic drift?

    Or the relation between genotype and phenotype?

    Or the statistics of population genetics?

    Are there any of these areas that you have not seen adequate evidence for?

    Or ...

    Keep on throwing The Origin of Species at me, well, I read it probably before they were born.
    OK. We didn't know that. We are not mind readers. The first mention of that book was a question as to whether you had read it or not. Now we know you have.

    Have you read any of Dawkins' books?
    Without wishing to overstate my case, everything in the observable universe definitely has its origins in Northamptonshire -- Alan Moore
    Reply With Quote  
     

  75. #74  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    37
    I am leaving this place and Richard Dawkins now
    Reply With Quote  
     

  76. #75  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    984
    Quote Originally Posted by fcaltai View Post
    And, that published paper must be a "foundation rock" for the Evolution Theory.
    You don't need a published paper for the foundation of evolutionary theory. Evolution is based on simple "barnyard" observations. first; Like begets like, cats have kittens, not puppies. Chickens have chicks. not ducklings. Second: this process is not perfect. The kittens are not exact copies of their mother. There are variations generation by generation. These are 'mutations" literally "changes". Third: not all example of a particular type of living thing are equally strong or successful. Not all of any generation of any living thing succeed in having offspring. Fourth: If you don't have off spring then your inherited characteristis die with you. If your grandfather had no children, chances are high that you will not either.

    That's it. That is the foundation of Evolutionary theory. You don't need to know how mutations happen. It is obvious that they do. Details of DNA coding and such are interesting but incidental. The fossil record supports evolution but is not needed to prove it.
    John Galt likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  77. #76  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,670
    I suspect fcaltai has gone away with this doubts/prejudices confirmed: "I went to a science forum and they couldn't even answer my questions" ...
    Without wishing to overstate my case, everything in the observable universe definitely has its origins in Northamptonshire -- Alan Moore
    Reply With Quote  
     

  78. #77  
    Time Lord Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    5,003
    agreed, not for us not trying to help though
    If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world. -Thorin Oakenshield

    The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  79. #78  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Perhaps I shouldn't have been so rude and emotional.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Theory Of Evolution
    By TheWonderer in forum Biology
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: February 2nd, 2010, 08:28 AM
  2. Falsifiability of the theory of evolution
    By ufcarazy in forum Biology
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: September 12th, 2009, 10:37 PM
  3. The theory of evolution!!
    By DaBOB in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: November 12th, 2006, 01:46 PM
  4. Evolution of Species theory
    By alex_mtl in forum Biology
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: August 3rd, 2006, 09:18 AM
  5. Theory Of Evolution
    By alex_mtl in forum Pseudoscience
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: August 1st, 2006, 02:57 AM
Tags for this Thread

View Tag Cloud

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •