Does evolution have a purpose?

[YoursTrue]

Not exactly. I consider them population variants derived from normal reproductive variation acted upon by natural selection.
You should look up some information on natural selection, as well. The two work hand-in-hand.

Q: May I ask where you looked up this information? I have not known you to be particularly inquisitive when it involves outside sources.

Passed out of existence without evolving? Why without evolving?
Just about everything evolves. Some faster, some slower, depending mainly on selective pressures from environmental changes. Why a particular species goes extinct can be due to hundreds of different factors.

If the species, etc., "passed out of existence," they no longer evolved. They were dead. Not alive. Not able to reproduce. Again -- (no proof).

 

[YoursTrue]

Not exactly. I consider them population variants derived from normal reproductive variation acted upon by natural selection.
You should look up some information on natural selection, as well. The two work hand-in-hand.

Q: May I ask where you looked up this information? I have not known you to be particularly inquisitive when it involves outside sources.

...

I often look at "outside sources." From one source explaining about mutations, it says, "A mutation is a change in a DNA sequence. Mutations can result from DNA copying mistakes made during cell division, exposure to ionizing radiation, exposure to chemicals called mutagens, or infection by viruses. Germ line mutations occur in the eggs and sperm and can be passed on to offspring, while somatic mutations occur in body cells and are not passed on." (italics mine...)
So...somatic mutations occur but are not passed on while germ line mutations can be passed on to offspring.
Mutation

 

[YoursTrue]

Gppd answer!!

Except -- when do you know (and I mean really 'know' beyond conjecture) that fish became organisms that moved from water existence only to organisms like dogs that cannot survive submerged continuously in water? Where is the fossil evidence showing the slow...transition? Disappeared in the ground somehow?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I often look at "outside sources." From one source explaining about mutations, it says, "A mutation is a change in a DNA sequence. Mutations can result from DNA copying mistakes made during cell division, exposure to ionizing radiation, exposure to chemicals called mutagens, or infection by viruses. Germ line mutations occur in the eggs and sperm and can be passed on to offspring, while somatic mutations occur in body cells and are not passed on." (italics mine...)
So...somatic mutations occur but are not passed on while germ line mutations can be passed on to offspring.
Mutation

You are doing the creationist two step. You are looking at variation, but ignoring selection. Here is why a mutation of the sort that you brought up is not evolution. Detrimental mutations are selected against. It does not take any intelligence to do so, it only takes nature. And nature can seem to be quite cruel. The kind of mutations that you have been harping on would result in the animal either not reaching adulthood, or if it did it probably could not find a mate. Its mutation would disappear as a result.

There are other factors besides natural selection and variation, but if you cannot understand the incredibly simple ones you will never be able to understand the more complex modifiers.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Except -- when do you know (and I mean really 'know' beyond conjecture) that fish became organisms that moved from water existence only to organisms like dogs that cannot survive submerged continuously in water? Where is the fossil evidence showing the slow...transition? Disappeared in the ground somehow?

No. We have very good fossil evidence of this. Why do you think that it does not exist?

 

[shunyadragon]

Except -- when do you know (and I mean really 'know' beyond conjecture) that fish became organisms that moved from water existence only to organisms like dogs that cannot survive submerged continuously in water? Where is the fossil evidence showing the slow...transition? Disappeared in the ground somehow?

Thisareallybazzare statement not understanding evolution that takes place over billions of years. Not worth responding to.

 

[shunyadragon]

Except that -- there are gaps. Big ones. So now I guess (?) we go back to the different branches of the tree? Such as wolves and gorillas? Fish and humans? Different branches? Maybe not...

Except that -- there are gaps. Big ones. So now I guess (?) we go back to the different branches of the tree? Such as wolves and gorillas? Fish and humans? Different branches? Maybe not...

No there are not big gaps. Your lack of knowledge of the science concerning evolution is appalling. Your questions have become more and more meaningless and not worth responding to.

Get educated and ask meaningful questions.

 

[YoursTrue]

No there are not big gaps. Your lack of knowledge of the science concerning evolution is appalling. Your questions have become more and more meaningless and not worth responding to.

Get educated and ask meaningful questions.

lol you make me laugh, it's good to laugh. lol!

 

[YoursTrue]

Thisareallybazzare statement not understanding evolution that takes place over billions of years. Not worth responding to.

uh huh, yeah sure. meantime you have no proof. Period. And I'm smiling.

 

[YoursTrue]

Thisareallybazzare statement not understanding evolution that takes place over billions of years. Not worth responding to.

Except -- when do you know (and I mean really 'know' beyond conjecture) that fish became organisms that moved from water existence to organisms like dogs that cannot survive submerged continuously in water? Where is the fossil evidence showing the slow...transition? Disappeared in the ground somehow? Yes, what happened to the ... proof beyond fossils and conjecturing that these things evolved? There is no substantial real proof. None whatsoever. Get educated. And be truthful.

 

[Subduction Zone]

uh huh, yeah sure. meantime you have no proof. Period. And I'm smiling.

We have endless evidence. You simply are not educated enough to even get the simplest of basics. You actually appear to be working not to understand.

There is a reason that creationists lose in court, even with conservative judges. Judges, unlike creationists, have to be able to understand the concept of evidence. That is why they have to always side with the only argument that is supported by evidence.

 

[metis]

..could be a look-a-like

I'm not that good looking.

Maybe there were lots of non-human apes who made tools etc.

Some modern apes make tools , but nothing like Homo erectus made. And if one sees the anatomy of one [or a reconstruction], there is no way that one could ever confuse them with being an ape.

Thus, it's clearly obvious you didn't spend any time whatsoever to actually look up "Homo erectus" as I suggested. Here, I'll make it simple for ya: Homo erectus - Wikipedia

For me, it is a Biblical one. We are not just "glorified animals".

But we still are animals nevertheless.

 

[metis]

Why don't you pay up? I mean after all, is "Mother Teresa" is heaven body AND soul -- or is it her body, or her soul? Which is it? Do you know?

By the way, after you discuss Mother Teresa if you can, as to whether her "soul" and/or her body, and/or her body and soul is in heaven, perhaps you can help out with your knowledge of what the soul is

We cannot objectively determine nor describe what a "soul" is, therefore your questions are unanswerable from that perspective.

Theologically, a "soul" is often referred to as having a piece of God within us that helps us connect to Him, such as the Society of Friend's ("Quakers") name of being our "Inner Light".

 

[Dan From Smithville]

lol you make me laugh, it's good to laugh. lol!

You continually complain about being insulted on here, yet you make posts like this all the time.

Openly laughing at someone of knowledge sharing that knowledge with honesty, sincerity and conviction is not insulting then?

What would Jesus do?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I often look at "outside sources." From one source explaining about mutations, it says, "A mutation is a change in a DNA sequence. Mutations can result from DNA copying mistakes made during cell division, exposure to ionizing radiation, exposure to chemicals called mutagens, or infection by viruses. Germ line mutations occur in the eggs and sperm and can be passed on to offspring, while somatic mutations occur in body cells and are not passed on." (italics mine...)
So...somatic mutations occur but are not passed on while germ line mutations can be passed on to offspring.
Mutation

Your source is correct. In evolution, the heritable genetic mutations are what is of interest and where the action is, although, somatic mutations can impact fitness. Sometimes drastically, depending on the expression. A two-headed snake is very unlikely to be highly successful at reproducing.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Some modern apes make tools , but nothing like Homo erectus made. And if one sees the anatomy of one [or a reconstruction], there is no way that one could ever confuse them with being an ape.

Bonnggg [ bang the gong ]

Human beings ARE apes , are they not?

Biologists have traditionally used the term "ape" to mean a member of the superfamily Hominoidea other than humans, but more recently to mean all members of Hominoidea. So "ape"—not to be confused with "great ape"—now becomes another word for hominoid including humans
-wiki-

 

[Subduction Zone]

Bonnggg [ bang the gong ]

Human beings ARE apes , are they not?

Biologists have traditionally used the term "ape" to mean a member of the superfamily Hominoidea other than humans, but more recently to mean all members of Hominoidea. So "ape"—not to be confused with "great ape"—now becomes another word for hominoid including humans
-wiki-

Yes, technically he should have said "Non-human extent ape". But that is such a mouthful that his sentence is acceptable.-

 

[Valjean]

Except -- when do you know (and I mean really 'know' beyond conjecture) that fish became organisms that moved from water existence to organisms like dogs that cannot survive submerged continuously in water? Where is the fossil evidence showing the slow...transition? Disappeared in the ground somehow? Yes, what happened to the ... proof beyond fossils and conjecturing that these things evolved? There is no substantial real proof. None whatsoever. Get educated. And be truthful.

But there are air breathing fish, and fish that can leave the water and walk, even today.

 

[metis]

Bonnggg [ bang the gong ]

Human beings ARE apes , are they not?

Biologists have traditionally used the term "ape" to mean a member of the superfamily Hominoidea other than humans, but more recently to mean all members of Hominoidea. So "ape"—not to be confused with "great ape"—now becomes another word for hominoid including humans
-wiki-

Technically, no, and that's because in English we do separate the two: thus "ape" and "human".

 

[Valjean]

Technically, no, and that's because in English we do separate the two: thus "ape" and "human".

But we're speaking biology, not English.