Poll: Is evolution tested
Yes
Not yet
[Show Results]
 
Testabel Evolution
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
20-03-2013, 04:00 PM
RE: Testabel Evolution
Another impressive evidence for evolution is Aron Ra's lecture. He's a taxonomist by hobby. Any time you get asked about the transitional forms, link this video, it shows evolution of the turtle. Arons presents the transitional forms that begin as a "lizard" of some kind and gradually end up in a turtle as we know it. (go to the minute 24 or so)




I'd like to see more of species like that, there's supposed to be many transitional forms. Perhaps too many to sum them up anywhere.

If you claim there are nuances to principles, there are no nuances to getting arrested or shot for disobeying the power.
The Venus Project
FreeDomain Radio - The greatest philosophy show on the web!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-03-2013, 08:51 PM (This post was last modified: 20-03-2013 09:07 PM by Full Circle.)
RE: Testabel Evolution
(19-03-2013 10:55 AM)Ghost Wrote:  I am staunch Darwinist. My understanding has always been that evolution has not been proven. Indeed, to this day, I've never heard of "the experiment that irrefutably proves evolution." Similarly, E=MC2 has never been proven.
Evolution of E.coli in lab, peer reviewed with published findings.
http://myxo.css.msu.edu/ecoli/

Synopsis on RationalWiki
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Lenski_resu...reationism

"Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.” ~ Ambrose Bierce
“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man's reasoning powers are not above the monkey's." - Mark Twain in Eruption
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-03-2013, 09:12 PM
RE: Testabel Evolution
Discovery mag posted this list of current evolutionary changes in species taking place.

http://news.discovery.com/human/evolutio...ection.htm

"Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.” ~ Ambrose Bierce
“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man's reasoning powers are not above the monkey's." - Mark Twain in Eruption
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-03-2013, 10:01 PM
RE: Testabel Evolution
Hey, Full.

Please understand that I am in no way trying to disprove evolution (the climate is such these days that such prefaces seem necessary).

There's tons of evolution experiments. The Russian fox one is one of my favourites. And then there's dog breeding. And bacterial evolution like your study or superbugs that are immune to anti-biotics.

But my understanding, and I must admit it's spotty, is that there is nothing that proves the grand shebang idea. To be honest, I don't know what is needed, but it's my understanding that it's not there.

Like, the study you posted is akin to someone studying falling rocks off the cliffs of Dover as a method of proving gravity. Seems too satelite.

No one so far has posted that one thing that irrefutably proves evolution that everyone championing evolution really should be able to point at.

Does anyone know if there is such a thing?

Peace and Love and Empathy,

Matt
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-03-2013, 01:46 AM (This post was last modified: 21-03-2013 07:38 AM by DLJ.)
RE: Testabel Evolution
(20-03-2013 10:01 PM)Ghost Wrote:  ...
nothing that proves the grand shebang idea.
...

You say that you don't know what is needed but maybe we can work on that.

I'm thinking it's about defining the "grand shebang" or showing how evolution fits into the wider rules a la Conway's 'game of life' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conway's_Game_of_Life

My gut (not v. scientific, I know) tells me that the rules regarding 'merge vs. acquire' / 'symbiosis vs. predator' / chemically bond vs whatever the chemical version of 'consume' might be / life-partner vs supplier etc. and then produce / reproduce etc. might be rules that are applicable at all scales of existence.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-03-2013, 02:14 AM
RE: Testabel Evolution
(20-03-2013 10:01 PM)Ghost Wrote:  To be honest, I don't know what is needed, but it's my understanding that it's not there.

No one so far has posted that one thing that irrefutably proves evolution that everyone championing evolution really should be able to point at.

Does anyone know if there is such a thing?
What in the world is missing?

Leaving out "Where did the first one-celled organisms come from?" because that is NOT evolution, we can trace evolution right from those cells to humans. Do we have a fossil of every creature on that evolutionary path? No, of course not. Fossils are extremely rare. For example, there are living, recorded creatures observed by humans that we've never discovered in the fossil record, so clearly, it could have and certainly did happen that other creatures evolved and became extinct without any lucky few being fossilized (and found). But we do have the full path showing thousands of evolutionary stages. This means that the Theory of Evolution is a thorough model of how life evolved.

Want more?

Not just humans. The Theory of Evolution explains all life, all of it, people, animals, plants, fungus, coral, germs, etc. And it shows exactly how all of us are related. Yep, you're related to fungus and carrots and the AIDS virus and me and everything else alive, and biologists can prove it. This means that the Theory of Evolution is a complete model of how life evolved.

Want more?

Select any few connected stages, just a half dozen or so, taken at random, and any biologist can use those to predict the next stage, even if he's never seen what comes next. Then compare his predictions to what we know and, unless the biologist was an idiot, he's going to be correct. This has happened countless thousands of times in the last century alone with almost 100% success (hey, we're human, sometimes mistakes get made). This means that the Theory of Evolution is a predictable model which any scientific theory must be.

Want more?

Recent breakthroughs in DNA have allowed scientists to figure out a lot more in the last 20 years or so that nobody could figure out before. But before these DNA breakthroughs, biologists predicted things they couldn't prove and, using DNA, those predictions almost always proved to be true (again, some humans make occasional mistakes, but they were all demonstrated to be human error, not flawed evolution). This means that the Theory of Evolution is as reliable as any other theory in all of science, more reliable than many other fully accepted scientific theories.

Want more?

Every biologist with only a very few exceptions agrees that the Theory of Evolution is the correct explanation for how we got from single-cell life to today's myriad of complex life forms on this planet. In fact, the Theory of Evolution is more fully accepted by experts in all related fields than any other scientific theory (the others have more reputable scientists who support alternatives than the Theory of Evolution does) including Germ Theory, the Theory of Gravity, the Theory of Relativity, and every other theory you've ever heard of. Any remaining debate among biologists is just hashing out trivial details of what goes where in the evolutionary paths - none of them are debating whether evolution happens. This means that the Theory of Evolution is the best-supported of all scientific theories - best supported by experts who should know their business.

I really don't know what more anyone could want.

I submit, if you're not convinced, then you just haven't investigated it enough - when you do, you'll be convinced too. Your current lack of knowledge is not a cornerstone upon which to build an argument against the thing about which you lack knowledge. At the very least, you need to define just what it is that you deem to be missing, and then go research that. I'm pretty sure, since you're a reasonable fellow, that you'll find what you're looking for.

"Whores perform the same function as priests, but far more thoroughly." - Robert A. Heinlein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-03-2013, 05:42 AM
RE: Testabel Evolution
Hey, Asp.

You're preaching to the converted.

I know what evolution does. That's not the issue.

You said THAT biologists accept it. You're wrong. Evolution is accepted by way more people than just biologists.

But this isn't a question of THAT, it's a question of WHY.

If there was some definitive proof for evolution, then why can't all of us lovers of evolution just point to it? Seems like we all would have gotten the memo on that one.

So does that thing exist?

Here's an exercise. Does that exist for:
-Gravity?
-Thermodynamics?
-The electromagnetic spectrum?

Peace and Love and Empathy,

Matt
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-03-2013, 06:58 AM
RE: Testabel Evolution
(21-03-2013 05:42 AM)Ghost Wrote:  Hey, Asp.

You're preaching to the converted.

I know what evolution does. That's not the issue.

You said THAT biologists accept it. You're wrong. Evolution is accepted by way more people than just biologists.

But this isn't a question of THAT, it's a question of WHY.

If there was some definitive proof for evolution, then why can't all of us lovers of evolution just point to it? Seems like we all would have gotten the memo on that one.

So does that thing exist?

Here's an exercise. Does that exist for:
-Gravity?
-Thermodynamics?
-The electromagnetic spectrum?

Peace and Love and Empathy,

Matt

I honestly don't understand what you think is missing. The totality of the evidence is the convincing proof.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-03-2013, 07:11 AM
RE: Testabel Evolution
Hey, Chas.

Do evolutionary biologists say that biological evolution is proven? If so, what do they point to?

Like, if you are a physicist and I ask you if gravity is proven, you say what and point to what?

This isn't my beef. Me and evolution, we tight. I'm just asking the question.

Peace and Love and Empathy,

Matt
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-03-2013, 07:22 AM
RE: Testabel Evolution
(21-03-2013 07:11 AM)Ghost Wrote:  Hey, Chas.

Do evolutionary biologists say that biological evolution is proven? If so, what do they point to?

Like, if you are a physicist and I ask you if gravity is proven, you say what and point to what?

This isn't my beef. Me and evolution, we tight. I'm just asking the question.

Peace and Love and Empathy,

Matt

And I ain't beefing with you, Matt; just trying to understand.

Many evolutionary biologists state that evolution is a fact. What are they pointing to? The sum of the evidence.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: