Evolution

[Juniper]

Hey pnt, what're you doing over there?

Oh me? Just starting the first debate thread on leahalalela.org!

Wow pnt, you're so cool, we all love you so much


so, evolution? Or should I say, "Evilution?" :go-on: does anyone have an opinion on the subject? Anything to say? If not, well that's just no fun.

[HasiraKali]

I support evolution.

Those of you who have me friended on Facebook have probably seen my pro-evolution/science statuses and pictures.

[Revo]

I accept evolution aswell. Not as if this horse hasn't been beaten to death enough times, though :lol:...

[Wide Eyed Wanderer]

I think even the most right wing religious followers are having to accept evolution for fear of being ridiculed. It's up there with the flat earth 'theory' as far as most people are concerned!

Frankly, why it is still called the 'Theory of Evolution' is beyond me; at least if it is called that then we should also have the 'Theory of Christianity' or the 'Theory of Islam'.
;)

[Azerane]

Woah, cracking out the big ones pnt ;) I like it! :D

I am 'yes' to evolution. Being keenly into wildlife and ecology, you kinda just learn about evolution along the way and it just makes sense, because well... it's just the way things seem to be. I was brought up christian, and still hold that somewhat close to me, yet I see no reason that the two can't co-exist. Just people being stubborn I guess.

To me, evolution makes too much sense to not be right. I think the problem is that people get shown that such a such primitive creature, evolvled into the such and such modern creature we see today. It's such a distant link that people just can't connect the two and accept them as an evolution. It's because people think about things on too small a time scale for things like evolution (in my opinion), you're trying to transform that primitive animal into the modern animal in a lifetime or two. But that's simply not how it works, it takes so much time and so many generations of development and mutations and natural selection and just everything!!

Evolution, baby! It's a winner!

[Revo]

Frankly, why it is still called the 'Theory of Evolution' is beyond me; at least if it is called that then we should also have the 'Theory of Christianity' or the 'Theory of Islam'.
;)
That has mostly do with the fact that the colloquial understanding a lot of people have about the definition of "theory" conflicts with what it actually means in scientific terms. The layman is prone to think that a theory is simply a suggested but as of yet untested or unproven explanation for a phenomenon. When in actuality a scientific theory doesn't get to be upgraded from a hypothesis into a theory before it has gone through the most rigorous and demanding trials and tribulations known to science. In terms of certainty, a theory is no less certain to be true than a law of physics for example. They are essentially the same thing, in the respect that both are explanations of a series of interrelated facts. But there was a point in history where the term law was deemed to be unsuitable for such explanations, having the connotation that they are something man-made. So something that would previously have been given the term law was preferred to be called a theory instead. So Newton's "Law of Gravity" and "Laws of Thermodynamics" are just as much theories as Einstein's "Theory of Relativity" or Darwin's "Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection", and vice versa.

So it is quite amusing when opponents of, say, evolution use the phrase "It's just a theory" to support their own position. When in fact that is the most noble compliment one can give to evolutionary biology, given how much it takes for a thing to become a theory.

[Sombolia]

I think even the most right wing religious followers are having to accept evolution for fear of being ridiculed. It's up there with the flat earth 'theory' as far as most people are concerned!

I wish that were the case, but if it was the case people wouldn't still be making a big stink about evolution being taught in school... :yuck:

Anyways, yes, I do 'believe' in evolution (I feel silly saying that; it's like saying you believe in the sun or something). What Revo said is true and something I wish more people would understand.

Anyway, you can't call Christianity or Islam a theory in the scientific sense because... well, they're not science.

[Sadiki]

I have always thought of evolution as pretty much the only logical way how life on earth has gotten to the point it's at. I'm not saying religions can't hold truth about somethings even if my believing about religion basically is that those have been created by people to understand their surrounding better, before there ever was science to proof things. I can't really use other religion as of too good example as I can use Christianity, but as if we think that God created the earth, the solar system, galaxies and all the living things, would God also have created things that we find traces of after millions if not hundreds of millions of years ago? I don't live in denial of any religion being true as I actually find many religions rather interesting, but when it comes down to either believe what is said in book of genesis or what Evolution theory is saying. I do say Evolution, in my opinion beats theory of being created hands down.

[Kihari]

Absolutely, of course.

I wonder that some people still disregard evolution, despite its general acceptance in science, just because it doesn't mesh with the literal, word-for-word retelling of creation in whatever religion they follow. Maybe it's out of fear, like considering that evolution has some merit might be "sinful" and make them "dirty," but there's definitely a brick wall in place there.

Remember, there are folks who think that the fossils of extinct species are booby traps placed here by God to test our faith, or trick us into disbelieving in him, or whatever.

It isn't like the mechanics behind evolution are too advanced for people to understand, or we can't come up with good analogies for them. I guess people are just going to believe for a fact whatever they want to be true, and that's all there is to it.

[Guntur]

Frankly, why it is still called the 'Theory of Evolution' is beyond me; at least if it is called that then we should also have the 'Theory of Christianity' or the 'Theory of Islam'.
;)
LOL. :lol:

In Islam it rely on spiritual belief about current affair of social and "political" life. ;) People should ask more about why don't dinosaur or pre-modern human aren't in the holy book! definitely GOD want us to "forget" the past and prepare for the future. That's what I believe! But for Evolution, the theory is there but we need more evidence on social, politic and religion of the past like when they handle a situation before Modern Human comes and rape the history away. Like a Holy scripture or history scripture on their time.

I'm talking about Human Evolution from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_antecessor to Modern Human. =)

[Twilight_Sparkle]

I support evolution because the evidence is in support of evolution. And what Revo said about the difference between the colloquial use and the scientific use of the term "theory" is also important. That seems to be a common misunderstanding with people.

[Judas]

I am a supporter of Evolution, as it's a proven scientific concept tied to the lives of every living organism on this planet. And very likely the entire universe.

Intelligent Design can go drown itself in acid, it's not even worth being called psudo-science.

[Utora]

I don't support Evolution. It has nothing to do with religion, as I hold no religious beliefs at present.


Take a frog, make him a prince; you have a fairytale. Add 5 Million years between the two and you have Evolution.

In college they lectured how spiders previously could not make a web but then learned to do this. I seriously began to question what would motivate any cell or being into evolution. No. I believe what species exists on Earth today is such a small percentage of what is left. In the past there was such a road spectrum of things.

I read, close to California in the 70's there was this slab on the side of a mountain showing, in great detail layer of crusts which was evidence of things through time. There was an earthquake that caused this layer formation to thrust up more exposing a tree. This tree was embedded in several layers at once. Obviously the tree didn't exist over billions of years, it'd been trapped in some lava and sediment in one event. There have also been records of TRex prints, a smilodan and a man's footprints in one river bed. All three existing at the same point in time, paralleled? Probably not, but that's just the point, there's these methods that don't prove anything to me honestly.

Logical? I see so many holes. Similar to religion. You know, all these scientists come up with the same stor, "We've found exactly what we were looking for!" and that's the first sign...they're looking for something specific, what they want. I believe this is the case with evolution. We want an answer that makes sense, and sure it does if you fit this this this and this here here and here but move it out of it's place and all these questions errupt that ..seem to be founded on more assumption than fact. Evolution is the battle of Faith VS Fact that's been going on since the dawn of time. Show me, now I believe. Don't show me, not worth my investment. This is an instinctive reaction actually. The man I'm with believes in evolution. I don't believe in it, I'm ok with the unknown, not knowing. For me, evolution is a type of colored glasses to life, it's a choice. Same with if a God has created me from the dust of the earth, or the trees walked together one day and made us from..fish...in the sea. Etc. It's irrelevant to present goings on. furthermore I find many people believing in evolution using it as a means to justify there more primitive nature which is a sorry excuse..but these are people you can detect easily and I'm not saying anyone here is this way.

I believe apes and man lived paralleled through the ages. There was no evolution, and like all things even going on presently, certain specifies became weeded out. Extinction is a natural process. I don't things are evolving or ever have. That's my opinion and that's all.

[Shadow]

evolution is the ****.

do i support it or not oh chirst:woe:

honestly though yes i think thats how it went down, but im one of those people with a " Where here couldent care less how we got here or how we are going to go, i just live in the time iv been opintent to"

it puzzles me that so many people would dedicate their whole life's to prove something as trivial as to how we got here, or how we will go just live in the now will ya, i mean even if you are right or wrong its not like ya can chance it can ya?:go-on:

[Revo]

Props to Utora for, in opposition of the grand majority, presenting a different view. ;)



it puzzles me that so many people would dedicate their whole life's to prove something as trivial as to how we got here, or how we will go just live in the now will ya, i mean even if you are right or wrong its not like ya can chance it can ya?:go-on:
Oh, but study of evolution is what makes a lot of modern discoveries in medical, mechanical and biological sciences possible :D. So in a way, a study of the past can help us live in the now. :p
Less puzzled?:thinks:

[Asikinari]

It's a pity that the unicorn didn't make it out to the 21'st century. I mean, it was mentioned in the Bible here and there. Lol.
But that's just me making snide remarks. I do believe in evolution.

[Guntur]

I don't support Evolution. It has nothing to do with religion, as I hold no religious beliefs at present.



In college they lectured how spiders previously could not make a web but then learned to do this. I seriously began to question what would motivate any cell or being into evolution. No. I believe what species exists on Earth today is such a small percentage of what is left. In the past there was such a road spectrum of things.

I read, close to California in the 70's there was this slab on the side of a mountain showing, in great detail layer of crusts which was evidence of things through time. There was an earthquake that caused this layer formation to thrust up more exposing a tree. This tree was embedded in several layers at once. Obviously the tree didn't exist over billions of years, it'd been trapped in some lava and sediment in one event. There have also been records of TRex prints, a smilodan and a man's footprints in one river bed. All three existing at the same point in time, paralleled? Probably not, but that's just the point, there's these methods that don't prove anything to me honestly.

Logical? I see so many holes. Similar to religion. You know, all these scientists come up with the same stor, "We've found exactly what we were looking for!" and that's the first sign...they're looking for something specific, what they want. I believe this is the case with evolution. We want an answer that makes sense, and sure it does if you fit this this this and this here here and here but move it out of it's place and all these questions errupt that ..seem to be founded on more assumption than fact. Evolution is the battle of Faith VS Fact that's been going on since the dawn of time. Show me, now I believe. Don't show me, not worth my investment. This is an instinctive reaction actually. The man I'm with believes in evolution. I don't believe in it, I'm ok with the unknown, not knowing. For me, evolution is a type of colored glasses to life, it's a choice. Same with if a God has created me from the dust of the earth, or the trees walked together one day and made us from..fish...in the sea. Etc. It's irrelevant to present goings on. furthermore I find many people believing in evolution using it as a means to justify there more primitive nature which is a sorry excuse..but these are people you can detect easily and I'm not saying anyone here is this way.

I believe apes and man lived paralleled through the ages. There was no evolution, and like all things even going on presently, certain specifies became weeded out. Extinction is a natural process. I don't things are evolving or ever have. That's my opinion and that's all.

I agree with the whole post and opinion of yours Utora.

[Shadow]

Props to Utora for, in opposition of the grand majority, presenting a different view. ;)


Oh, but study of evolution is what makes a lot of modern discoveries in medical, mechanical and biological sciences possible :D. So in a way, a study of the past can help us live in the now. :p
Less puzzled?:thinks:

Ahh very true, History and Arciolegy is very important, i guess i should have evaluted my response better, but taking in them factors, i guess i actually dont have a comeback rather then.

indeed, Less puzzled:evilgrin:

THOUGH lets look away for the sake off the argument, from these wounderful things, for lets say the commen man , what use is it then?:uhno:

[Juniper]

The theory of evolution is the foundation of modern biology and ecology. Understanding the organisms that fill niches, how they came to fill those niches, and how they interact with other organisms and their environment is based upon the foundation of evolutionary theory. We're not just talking about whether humans hail from apes -- evolutionary theory is absolutely integral to even our most basic understanding of genetics, conservation, and sociology.

As an example, if you've eaten a tomato larger than a plum, you've benefited from our understanding of genetics and selection. Tomatoes naturally have only two carpels (pockets of seeds) and are relatively small. A tomato with a mutation that makes it grow more than two carpels is larger than a wild-type tomato because it has to fit more carpels into the same fruit. By selecting for tomatoes that have more than two carpels, we can make those lovely fist-sized tomatoes we all love. This is basic genetics, which has its roots in our understanding of selection, competition, inheritance, mutation, etc... But that's just one example, there are millions.

Even indirectly, evolutionary theory has changed how biologists view the world. Just as changing conditions in the wild can select against certain creatures and lead to their extinction, we can develop chemotherapies to treat cancer patients by understanding that we can create an environment within the body that selects against cancerous cells while leaving other cells relatively unharmed. An example of this is thalidomide, which is used to treat multiple myeloma. Multiple myeloma is a bone marrow cancer that does not have a single tumor, but rather dozens or hundreds of small, inoperable tumors. Tumors are, for the most part, unable to be detected and destroyed by the body's immune system as they are so similar to normal tissue. One difference, however, is that small tumors grow lots and lots of capillary vessels very quickly, whereas the rest of the body typically does not need to grow capillaries as quickly. Knowing this, we can develop a drug that exploits this and hampers the growth of capillary blood vessels -- and we did, this drug is call Revlimid, and it has helped thousands of people with multiple myeloma. Understanding the basics of evolution lets us understand how to manipulate natural processes for our benefit.


As for me, I'm convinced that evolution is the best scientific explanation for the natural processes around us. I'm also Christian, but I don't see a contradiction with genesis, for various reasons. I guess I'm a theistic evolutionist? I try not to be contentious with other Christians on the subject, it's not something worth arguing and causing undue heartache. For what it's worth, evolution is more of a protestant issue which hails from certain later denominations insisting upon a literal interpretation of scripture (which is not historical in early protestantism or earlier christianity). The other major branches of Christianity are relatively indifferent as far as their official doctrine goes.

Oh, also, "Unicorn" is a poor interpretation of a hebrew word that is no longer used in any modern translations. Wild oxen/cattle have been recognized as the proper translation even by greek bishops of the third century.

[Azerane]

Logical? I see so many holes. Similar to religion. You know, all these scientists come up with the same stor, "We've found exactly what we were looking for!" and that's the first sign...they're looking for something specific, what they want. I believe this is the case with evolution. We want an answer that makes sense, and sure it does if you fit this this this and this here here and here but move it out of it's place and all these questions errupt that ..seem to be founded on more assumption than fact.

I like that point you make Utora, particularly because you are right. If you have a certain amount of puzzle with some things missing, you could think of a piece that would fit perfectly, and if you actually manage to find that, voila, it makes sense. But as much as you can hypothesise about what is actually missing from the evolution equation, we're not always going to be right, and we should be finding things that we're not expecting to find. Perhaps. Then again, if everything that we think we know about evolution is right, then we should actually be finding what we expect. So there's kind of two heads to that beast. But I do very much like your point. It's interesting.

[Twilight_Sparkle]

I seriously began to question what would motivate any cell or being into evolution.

I don't understand. Why would something needed to be motivated to evolve?


I read, close to California in the 70's there was this slab on the side of a mountain showing, in great detail layer of crusts which was evidence of things through time. There was an earthquake that caused this layer formation to thrust up more exposing a tree. This tree was embedded in several layers at once. Obviously the tree didn't exist over billions of years, it'd been trapped in some lava and sediment in one event. There have also been records of TRex prints, a smilodan and a man's footprints in one river bed. All three existing at the same point in time, paralleled? Probably not, but that's just the point, there's these methods that don't prove anything to me honestly.

You're referencing some rather shady examples against evolution (I believe the t-rex thing was shown to be a hoax). When talking about so called polystrate fossils (the tree through several layers), I am not convinced that any such fossils mean anything until it can be demonstrated that polystrate fossils discredit dating methods without being the result of rapid sedimentation or some sort of salt withdrawal. Whatever sources your're getting this information from is misleading you...

[shadowland]

I am a supporter of Evolution, as it's a proven scientific concept tied to the lives of every living organism on this planet. And very likely the entire universe.

Intelligent Design can go drown itself in acid, it's not even worth being called psudo-science.

This guy pretty much said it for me

[saitenyo]

It's not a matter of "support" or "belief" for me. It sounds silly to say that because that would be like saying "I support the fact that the Earth orbits the sun." Evolution exists. It happens. As someone else already said, unlike the colloquial definition of "theory" in science, a theory refers to an explanation which organizes a group of facts supported by evidence.

I think part of the problem is people uninformed on the topic so frequently view evolution as this mysterious historical event that created the modern world and stopped once it was all done. That's not what it is. It's simply a biological process that is still happening today. Arguing that it's not supported by enough evidence and citing only fossils as that "questionable" evidence neglects the fact that we can observe evolution happening in the modern day world.

The fact that we have dogs, descended from wolves (and a similar experiment performed recently with domestication of foxes)? That's evolution!

Evolution is simply genetic changes occurring over time in a species (or series of generational species) as a result of mutation and/or selective pressures (be they natural selection or human-controlled selection). It is a fact that this happens and anyone who denies this is, I'm sorry, just plain wrong. There are piles of proof.

The part that people bicker and debate about, that is more hypotheses and assumptions based on available evidence than observable fact, is simply what paths evolution has historically taken. We already know evolution happens, we can observe this today, but we must rely on fossils and an understanding of DNA to figure out how it shaped life in the past and produced the species we see today.

Some of this we have very strong evidence for, thanks to a very complete fossil record or the ability to trace mitochondrial DNA. We have a decent enough fossil record and understanding of human DNA to know a number of earlier hominid forms, but scientists are still debating about precise lineage and chronology, especially since new fossils are uncovered that add pieces to the puzzle.


In college they lectured how spiders previously could not make a web but then learned to do this. I seriously began to question what would motivate any cell or being into evolution.
It's not so much a matter of motivation, but selective pressures. The spiders weren't consciously motivated to learn new things out of nowhere. The way evolution works is some species is born with a genetic mutation, maybe even a slight one, that gives it an advantage over other members of its species. Because it is more skilled at survival thanks to this tiny change, it will produce more offspring and possibly even outcompete its less-adapted brethren. It has more chances to pass on its changed genetic code, until the species is made up more of that new DNA rather than the old, less successful DNA.

The mutation part is a matter of chance. As far as we know, mutations happen at random as gene-copy mistakes. Most of them are neutral, some are harmful, and some are helpful. Its those helpful mutations that spur great changes in the evolutionary process.

You say you don't think things are evolving or ever have...I'm not sure how you can say that when we have observable examples in the present day. Here's one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domesticated_Silver_Fox

I get the impression this just isn't a topic you've ever done very much reading on, and you've just dismissed it at face value without studying further to try to answer your questions or confusion, which is unfortunate.

I think you would benefit greatly from doing a little reading through this: http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/
It's an index of various claims and misconceptions about evolution, providing answers to them, with citations to articles, studies, and scientific journals. Everything you've asked so far can be found in there. For example:
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC101.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC332.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC332_2.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC335.html

I fully support the notion of people being skeptical and not just blindly buying into something (even a supported scientific concept) at face value. But I have a real problem with how often people dismiss a concept without actually learning about it in detail first. How can you say you don't believe in something when you haven't studied it to nearly the degree of detail as those who do believe in it? Could it not just be that the concept doesn't make sense to you because you don't know enough about it to fully understand it?

[Azerane]

^I'm sure you are right in that a lot of people, simply don't accept evolution as correct because they just don't know enough about it. Or simply because they just don't want to accept it, no matter how right it is. I agree with you though, evolution does happen, is happening, will always happen. What you are talking about with the foxes, is more selective, but it is essentially an accelerated human-selected form of evolution.

I think a lot of the problem lays with the fact that when people think of evolution, they think slime to human. You can't think about it like that. It's little changes over such a long period of time, that at the time, they would hardly be noticed but over longer periods of time they make great changes.