Hello, new to this forum because of a debate on evolution
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
26-04-2017, 12:23 PM
Hello, new to this forum because of a debate on evolution
Hey, I was debating a religious person online (a family member) and they were saying that evolution isn't real because there are no observable instances of Darwinian evolution. After googling it I came across this site, which provided some help but not much, so I wanted to share my answer back with the people here. I'll post back to the original thread, but my answer was this:

Darwinian evolution is by definition a slow and gradual process by which a species adapts to its surroundings through genetic variation and environment pressures over successive generations. Quoting Darwin: "…Natural selection acts only by taking advantage of slight successive variations; she can never take a great and sudden leap, but must advance by short and sure, though slow steps." So, the theory itself basically says its not observable to a human in its lifetime, so it's unfair to use that argument against it. Whether or not its 'observable' shouldn't be the basis on which it is judged as true or false, as probable or improbable. The theory can explain so much about our observations of nature. Sure it's technically not an objective fact, hence why it's called a theory, but it's more probable than all other explanations. Just like you can't directly 'observe' an electron, scientific theories can predict properties/behaviours of electrons and use that to explain observations of electricity in nature or in a lab. So again, whether or not something is directly observable or not shouldn't be the basis on which it is judged as true or false.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes gkamps's post
26-04-2017, 12:28 PM
RE: Hello, new to this forum because of a debate on evolution
Welcome!

I moved your thread to our creationism sub section since you're asking questions about that.


But as if to knock me down, reality came around
And without so much as a mere touch, cut me into little pieces

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-04-2017, 12:35 PM
RE: Hello, new to this forum because of a debate on evolution
Evolution is a fact. It has been been observed. That's why you get a different flu shot every year, and also why it might not work. Your creationist family member doesn't believe it because they have been convinced that if evolution is true we should be seeing things like this walking around.

[Image: Crocoduck.jpg]

But the only people that think that's the way evolution is supposed to work are the creatotards.

Save a life. Adopt a greyhound.

[Image: anigrey.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Popeye's Pappy's post
26-04-2017, 12:57 PM
RE: Hello, new to this forum because of a debate on evolution
Your family member has been lied to, or simply doesn't like scientific fact conflicting with their old book of myth.

The reason they cant grasp it is because they stupidly think of generational reproduction as mixing, and that is not what evolution is doing long term.

Dawkins says we should describe DNA more like shuffling a deck of cards. The back of the deck, the uniform part is what all life shares as far as DNA. The face cards are the slight changes. Shuffle the deck, meaning the DNA sequence, flip the top card over, it looks slightly different.

In evolution you not only have that universal back part, the DNA all life shares, but you shuffle that deck, the next generation looks slightly different, that generation has many offspring, they look slightly different, and have enough splits in that deck, those create slightly different decks, more like the off shoot branches of a bush, not a straight line.

It is really not hard to understand. It merely amounts to tiny changes in the DNA sequence over long periods of time. Nobody is claiming that a monkey can give birth to a human. What evolution backed up by DNA proves is that you go back far enough in time we looked more similar. It is also why today we call both domestic house cats and big cats like lions and tigers all are called cats. Because going back far enough in time the DNA proves they had common ancestors. It is just that the DECK has been shuffled slightly over time and the generations create so many different individual families, with enough time that shuffle in the DNA sequence makes them look different. TIME and spitting and shuffling over long periods.

It is also why your human cousins look slightly different but don't die out because their parents got old and died. It is also why someone born in China has slightly different eye shape than someone born in Africa and different skin tone too.

It is also why we have to make new flu vaccines every year. The DNA sequence has tiny changes over long periods of time.

Poetry by Brian37(poems by an atheist) Also on Facebook as BrianJames Rational Poet and Twitter Brianrrs37
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-04-2017, 01:17 PM
RE: Hello, new to this forum because of a debate on evolution
Hi and welcome!

Evolution has definitely been observed, as Popeye's Pappy said. I would provide some sourcing for you, but I'm at work and only have a few minutes free time. That's definitely not something you should concede, though.

Also, the scientific definition of a theory is a different standard than the general use definition. Scientific theories are testable and have not shown be to false. As opposed to a hypothesis, which is an idea- a proposition- that hasn't been tested yet.

Here is what Wikipedia has to say about a scientific theory:
Quote:A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment. Such fact-supported theories are not "guesses" but reliable accounts of the real world.

Here is what Live Science has to say about the scientific hypothesis:
Quote:A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment. Such fact-supported theories are not "guesses" but reliable accounts of the real world.

Try not to engage the ideas of theory on a creationist's terms. They simply mean to discredit the whole idea of evolution based on an equivocation fallacy. Remember, gravity is "just a theory", too!

Hope this helps! Best wishes and good luck in your debate! Smile
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Emma's post
26-04-2017, 01:21 PM
RE: Hello, new to this forum because of a debate on evolution




EVERY SINGLE major higher educational institution in the world teaches the Theory of Evolution, in 2017, (well maybe except Biola and Liberty Facepalm ).

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
26-04-2017, 03:23 PM
RE: Hello, new to this forum because of a debate on evolution
There is a strain of Staphylococcus Aureus that has undergone evolution in front of the scientific community so that it is resistant to Methicillin...

It is now called MRSA or Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus. You could then point them to a simple Wikipedia Article.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methicilli...cus_aureus

In terms of origins, get really Sciency on them and mention a soft phyllosilicate clay called, Montmorillonite, which seems to sequence basic molecules into proteins.

I'll actually provide links for this one.
https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/...102203.php
http://www.hhmi.org/news/clays-may-have-...dial-cells
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montmorillonite

Once you're done mentioning it, mention that this is immediately the preferred explanation for abiogenesis by the scientific community at large, rather than, 'God did it,' until we come up with a better one, and regardless of what they would like to think of it.

Rocks cause chemical reactions... who knew? Tongue

Regards! Smile

~ The Universe is under no obligation to make sense to you ~
-Neil Degrasse Tyson
[Image: stairway_to_heaven_by_tomtr.png]
~ 0 ~
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Cosmo's post
26-04-2017, 03:36 PM
RE: Hello, new to this forum because of a debate on evolution
[Image: oAnfA.jpg]

---
Flesh and blood of a dead star, slain in the apocalypse of supernova, resurrected by four billion years of continuous autocatalytic reaction and crowned with the emergent property of sentience in the dream that the universe might one day understand itself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like Paleophyte's post
26-04-2017, 03:41 PM
RE: Hello, new to this forum because of a debate on evolution
(26-04-2017 03:23 PM)Cosmo Wrote:  There is a strain of Staphylococcus Aureus that has undergone evolution in front of the scientific community so that it is resistant to Methicillin...

It is now called MRSA or Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus. You could then point them to a simple Wikipedia Article.

yabut, that's just MICRO evolution
Drinking Beverage












Facepalm

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like unfogged's post
26-04-2017, 03:54 PM
RE: Hello, new to this forum because of a debate on evolution
(26-04-2017 12:23 PM)gkamps Wrote:  Hey, I was debating a religious person online (a family member) and they were saying that evolution isn't real because there are no observable instances of Darwinian evolution. After googling it I came across this site, which provided some help but not much, so I wanted to share my answer back with the people here. I'll post back to the original thread, but my answer was this:

Darwinian evolution is by definition a slow and gradual process by which a species adapts to its surroundings through genetic variation and environment pressures over successive generations. Quoting Darwin: "…Natural selection acts only by taking advantage of slight successive variations; she can never take a great and sudden leap, but must advance by short and sure, though slow steps." So, the theory itself basically says its not observable to a human in its lifetime, so it's unfair to use that argument against it. Whether or not its 'observable' shouldn't be the basis on which it is judged as true or false, as probable or improbable. The theory can explain so much about our observations of nature. Sure it's technically not an objective fact, hence why it's called a theory, but it's more probable than all other explanations. Just like you can't directly 'observe' an electron, scientific theories can predict properties/behaviours of electrons and use that to explain observations of electricity in nature or in a lab. So again, whether or not something is directly observable or not shouldn't be the basis on which it is judged as true or false.

I would advise against ever saying "It's not fair" even in the innocuous way you used it. Any sign of weakness (and that would be interpreted as such) will be used to obfuscate the real issue.

Instead call it for what it is. It's not that it is unfair to use that argument, it's that that argument is flawed and invalid.

DLJ Wrote:And, yes, the principle of freedom of expression works both ways... if someone starts shit, better shit is the best counter-argument.
Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like JesseB's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: