Evidence For And Against Evolution

[YoursTrue]

Why do you go to these detours that only prove you to be wrong and refuse to learn from them?

It doesn't prove me wrong. What scientists figure is that there was a bottleneck somewhere way back in time, and today's population emerged from about 18,000 "breeding" individuals.

 

[YoursTrue]

Um.....okay.

That's right. When there's a flood, things on the ground move. I mean like when there was a tsunami recently, logs and all kinds of stuff were floating out in sea.

 

[YoursTrue]

In most animal species, the majority of the population never breeds successfully. Modern humans are a rarity in that.

The scientists were talking about a bottleneck. Of human types. From 18,000 or so came billions. So they say. I guess they knew there were 18,000 or so breeding persons at that time.

 

[YoursTrue]

I answered that. The time slices are larger when we take later time slices. That is what it *means* to expand.

The Earth expands as we move up from the south pole until we get to the equator, then contracts again until the north pole.

So do you think or surmise there is a limit to the expanse? Like the 'edge of the universe'?

 

[YoursTrue]

I answered that. The time slices are larger when we take later time slices. That is what it *means* to expand.

The Earth expands as we move up from the south pole until we get to the equator, then contracts again until the north pole.

Yeah, well, then there's the time periods throughout the earth. Maybe they expand, too. You think?

 

[YoursTrue]

No, saying they 'just happened' implies a process. They just *are*, for all of space and time.


Time existed long before humans. It is a fundamental aspect of our universe. And causality is tightly tied with the notion of time. Your ramble about God is rather beside the point. Calendars are how *we* measure time, but if there is change, there is time. The earth spins, stars emit energy, atoms interact: all these are indications of time.

But one aspect here is that you are thinking of time as a separate thing. It is part of the universe. Just like latitude and longitude are part of the geometry of the Earth, space and time are part of the geometry of our universe. And just like the Earth is curved, spacetime can be curved. And that curvature produces the effects we call gravity.

But more to the point, if we consider the universe to be *all* of space and *all* of time, as a single thing, then it just simply exists. It didn't 'come from' anywhere because it *is* everything. It isn't caused because all causality is *within* it. It didn't come into being because it *is* all that is and 'to come into being' implies time, which is part of it.

Time existed you say long before humans. Time is inconsequential when it comes to anything other than humans.

 

[YoursTrue]

So how do you get from "humans are different" to "therefor god"?

ps: you are aware that every single species is unique, right? It's that uniqueness that kind of makes them a seperate species... If there were no difference between chimps and gorilla's, we wouldn't have different words for them

Humans are quite unique. Humans think about what will happen in the future. I don't think gorillas wonder about -- evolution -- time/space theories, or building houses on the moon or Mars. Yep, humans are exponentially different in a big way from other forms of life. A way that only conjecture and imagination can explain the brainwise difference.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It doesn't prove me wrong. What scientists figure is that there was a bottleneck somewhere way back in time, and today's population emerged from about 18,000 "breeding" individuals.

It does, but you do not understand why.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Humans are quite unique. Humans think about what will happen in the future. I don't think gorillas wonder about -- evolution -- time/space theories, or building houses on the moon or Mars. Yep, humans are exponentially different in a big way from other forms of life. A way that only conjecture and imagination can explain the brainwise difference.

This is called a special pleading fallacy. That ability is a product of evolution, not evidence of a creator.

 

[Polymath257]

Time existed you say long before humans. Time is inconsequential when it comes to anything other than humans.

Why in the world would you say that? Time is relevant to every single physical process in the universe. It is relevant to the orbits of planets, to the energy release of stars, to the frequencies of light, etc.

Yeah, well, then there's the time periods throughout the earth. Maybe they expand, too. You think?

You aren't getting the analogy. Spacetime is a four dimensional structure (three of space and one of time). The surface of the Earth is a two dimensional structure (latitude and longitude). Different times are analogous to different latitudes. To say that space 'expands' means that later cross sections of space time a re larger than previous ones.

 

[YoursTrue]

So?

So? So flooding does things. Changes topography, in case you can't understand these things. Including things like layering of rocks and then drying out sometimes. Yup. Big time does it change things. Like cities found under water. And buried archaelogical discoveries under the present soil.

 

[YoursTrue]

This is called a special pleading fallacy. That ability is a product of evolution, not evidence of a creator.

LOL, so you say. And now, I read, (from scientists) that humankind is about to extinct itself.

 

[Polymath257]

So do you think or surmise there is a limit to the expanse? Like the 'edge of the universe'?

No. Every location is the 'center of expansion'. There is no 'edge' to the expansion because the universe isn't expanding 'into' anything (except, of course, the future).

 

[Polymath257]

The scientists were talking about a bottleneck. Of human types. From 18,000 or so came billions. So they say. I guess they knew there were 18,000 or so breeding persons at that time.

That is an estimate from the genetic variances we see today, yes.

 

[YoursTrue]

Why in the world would you say that? Time is relevant to every single physical process in the universe. It is relevant to the orbits of planets, to the energy release of stars, to the frequencies of light, etc.



You aren't getting the analogy. Spacetime is a four dimensional structure (three of space and one of time). The surface of the Earth is a two dimensional structure (latitude and longitude). Different times are analogous to different latitudes. To say that space 'expands' means that later cross sections of space time a re larger than previous ones.

Again -- time is inconsequential in examining it except to humans. Maybe you think they'll build habitation on Mars or the moon before humankind exterminates itself?

 

[YoursTrue]

No. Every location is the 'center of expansion'. There is no 'edge' to the expansion because the universe isn't expanding 'into' anything (except, of course, the future).

OK, so there's nowhere you say where there are no planets, no moons, no suns, no stars, is that right? (And you know this, how?)

 

[Polymath257]

So? So flooding does things. Changes topography, in case you can't understand these things. Including things like layering of rocks and then drying out sometimes. Yup. Big time does it change things. Like cities found under water. And buried archaelogical discoveries under the present soil.

And geologists understand *how* water affects things. And how it does not. For example, the way liquid water affects things is different than the way ice affects things. And that is different than the way wind affects things. So, using these differences, we can tell which processes were active in the past.

 

[YoursTrue]

That is an estimate from the genetic variances we see today, yes.

Yes, I figure. I'll explain the point, since you obviously didn't get it. You see -- it happened that from apparently what scientists figure, from 18,000 plus a few more, came billions.

 

[YoursTrue]

And geologists understand *how* water affects things. And how it does not. For example, the way liquid water affects things is different than the way ice affects things. And that is different than the way wind affects things. So, using these differences, we can tell which processes were active in the past.

That's fine. I also have a feeling that water can dissolve or disintegrate things.

 

[YoursTrue]

This is called a special pleading fallacy. That ability is a product of evolution, not evidence of a creator.

So evolutionists say. What an explosion, hmmm, from the bonobo's brain (or the "common ancestor") to the human brain, hmm?