Poll: Is evolution tested
Yes
Not yet
[Show Results]
 
Testabel Evolution
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
21-03-2013, 08:09 AM
RE: Testabel Evolution
Hey, Chas.

I know you aint pickin a fight, I just mean I'm not the one who needs this question answered. I'm good without it, but it's a good question to have answered.

So your response would be "the evidence"?

If I ask, "is the round earth theory proven," "the evidence" is a shitty answer. "An Egyptian did some crazy math involving shadows in different cities, here's the mathematical proof," or, "we have a photo of it from space, here's the photo," are good answers.

If I ask, is D=RT proven, "yes, if you have any two variables you can calculate the third, it will correspond to any measurements we take without fail, here's some examples and here's how you can do it on your own," seems like a good answer to me.

So what's the answer for evolution?

Peace and Love and Empathy,

Matt
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-03-2013, 08:20 AM
RE: Testabel Evolution
I am no expert but I think the proof of evolution lies in not one experiment or species or anything else but an ammalgamation of data from fossils to observation to gene mapping to etc. I am reading "Why evolution is true" at the moment to get an understanding of the many legged stool that supports evolution.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-03-2013, 06:56 PM
RE: Testabel Evolution
Instead of wading through 5 pages...... to the OP:

Evolution has in the past and continues to be observed constantly. Some specific examples: The peppered moth in the UK several decades ago(you'll have to look this one up). This past week: http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/...d_highways

Bacteria and viruses are constantly evolving defenses to our best drugs, hence the anti-biotic scare currently happening.

These are observed instances. From a "testable" standpoint, what do you think dog breeding is? For example, Springer Spaniels and Cocker Spaniels were not distinct breeds at the beginning of the 20th century. Through artificial evolutionary pressure via selective breeding practices, man produced two separate breeds that continue to grow farther apart in their characteristics. Their size, appearance, and behavioral traits are all quite distinct now.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-03-2013, 07:29 PM
RE: Testabel Evolution
(21-03-2013 08:09 AM)Ghost Wrote:  Hey, Chas.

I know you aint pickin a fight, I just mean I'm not the one who needs this question answered. I'm good without it, but it's a good question to have answered.

So your response would be "the evidence"?

If I ask, "is the round earth theory proven," "the evidence" is a shitty answer. "An Egyptian did some crazy math involving shadows in different cities, here's the mathematical proof," or, "we have a photo of it from space, here's the photo," are good answers.

If I ask, is D=RT proven, "yes, if you have any two variables you can calculate the third, it will correspond to any measurements we take without fail, here's some examples and here's how you can do it on your own," seems like a good answer to me.

So what's the answer for evolution?

Peace and Love and Empathy,

Matt

All of life shares the same mechanism of heritability and development - RNA/DNA.
The same genes show up across all kingdoms of life showing commonality of origin/descent.

That is sufficient evidence. And there is so much more.

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
27-03-2013, 07:34 AM
Re: Testabel Evolution
The lines of evidence are many, but the key thing is the phylogenetic tree in its many forms and the agreement between those forms.
We have a morphological tree from the fossil record. We have a distribution of key traits that successively define the groups that make up life as we know it. These trees already "proved" evolution but when DNA was discovered there were ample opportunities for evolution to be disproven but instead we found more matching versions of the same tree (within the margin of error). These trees can be seen in many coding and non coding regions of the genome where we can clearly see how closely related species have closely related alleles for a given gene while distantly related species have more different alleles.
Even retroviruses come along for the party where inactive retrovirus DNA is in identical places in related species' genomes.

The key properties of these trees are that they they are derived independently, they agree closely with each other, that specialised features such as feathers or mammalian hair are only found in their specific branches and the versions of all traits are closely related for closely related branches. Moreover, for any two groups that exist it is possible to identify a species that appears to be ancestral to both in that its distinguishing traits are a superset of those of the two groups.

So far I have seen creationists claim there is some set of specially created kinds that all modern species derive from. What I have never seen is a creationist who can name what those kinds are. In order to unseat evolution that must be the first step.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: