Evolution, maybe someone can explain?

[TagliatelliMonster]

I'm referring to the average Joe who came from a failed educational system and accepts whatever science is being foisted on him this week. They had bad science classes they didn't understand and think scientists are all geniuses. Most of these individuals think they do understand science and Peers are its priests.

Who are these mysterious individuals you speak off?

They believe Evolution is settled science

Evolution is pretty much settled in the sense that we know that evolution occurred.

and anyone who doesn't accept it is a fool, flat earther, or fundamentalist.

Or just plain ignorant.
But most of the time, they are in fact fundamentalist theists who insist on a literal reading of their religious creation myth, yes.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

What tests are there for evolution, may I ask?

Every DNA string sequenced.
Evolution predicts a nested hierarchical structure as a pattern of the collective DNA sequences in living things.

And it's exactly what we find.
Every new genome sequenced has the potential to break that pattern.
So far, it never happened.

Remember -- you said science observes (did it observe the mutational changes said to have occurred over the millions of years). Tests? What tests did science perform demonstrating mutational changes in animals leading to new species? Now one might speculate, which is what science does...

This is like asking someone to provide a photograph of their face of every second since they were born till today to demonstrate that they are in fact aging.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Why define "fitness" if it can just be defined as the cause of speciation?

That's not what fitness is. More evidence that you don't have a clue what fitness is about in context of evolutionary biology.

Who needs God at all if there's a well understood mechanism for life to arise and flourish? When you have all the answers there is no need for outside agents or unknowns.

This is a fallacious implication. You are implying that having no answers somehow makes "outside agents" more plausible or likely or credible.
This is sheer argument from ignorance.

False. The only way to make "outside agents" more plausible / likely / credible, is to properly define them in testable ways and then provide independently verifiable evidence for them.

Certainly mutations can lead to speciation but we know it occurs without mutation as well through observation and experiment.

No.

People just want simple answers.

Yeah, like "gods dun it"

 

[YoursTrue]

Friend , i am asking you nicely to not do this interpretation about my belief.
Just ask me and i will answer you.
In my prayer to God , Marry can be the intercesor.

intercessor is someone who prays, petitions, or begs God in favor of another person.

Read my previous answer , please!

Let's change the subject for a moment, please. Do you believe in the concept of "natural selection" regarding evolution, and if so, can you explain it?

 

[YoursTrue]

It very much does as most fundamentalists believe in scriptural inerrancy and more literalistic interpretations. The fundamentalist movement started in the 1800's in response against "Modernism" [liberal].



It comes from early Church tradition whereas the living can pray for the dead and vice versa. Whether that concept is true or not is well beyond my pay grade.

oh, thank you. So you don't know about prayer now to Mary, if there is evidence of whether she hears prayers, then or now. Interesting, I won't ask if you pray at all and I do not know if Spinoza prayed either. very interesting.
Well, I'm onto the idea of "natural selection" to see what others may believe about it or how it is defined. And what "evidence" there is of the concept of natural selection and if it's true...insofar as the bast concept of evolution is concerned. From the beginning...

 

[YoursTrue]

The evidence points in that direction.

So they think they know the exact species of fish that began the evolution from fish to landlubbers?
(OK, never mind Metis--you have been very kind in your responses and I thank you for that...)

 

[YoursTrue]

You've been here seven years and routinely involved in discussions about evolution and the theory of evolution. I know, since I was involved in them as well. You say you have understood the theory since you were in high school. You read articles and books about it. I'm not sure why you need these answers or another thread.

What do you hope to gain by endlessly rolling the dice going over the same ground that you have covered so many times before?

I suppose someone else may want to go through all of this with you one more time, but I don't see any reason to.

Good luck.

Yes but do you think scientists know how genes came about?

 

[metis]

So you don't know about prayer now to Mary, if there is evidence of whether she hears prayers, then or now.

How could we possibly know.

Interesting, I won't ask if you pray at all and I do not know if Spinoza prayed either. very interesting.

Yes, but I use a mostly meditative form and only occasionally a prayer of supposition. I don't recall what form if any Spinoza used, but I gotta feeling it was mostly meditative.

Well, I'm onto the idea of "natural selection" to see what others may believe about it or how it is defined. And what "evidence" there is of the concept of natural selection and if it's true

The evidence is overwhelming, but nothing is ever 100%. IOW, we obviously still have to do research-- a lot of it!

insofar as the bast concept of evolution is concerned. From the beginning...

If you mean abiogenesis, that's only a hypothesis.

 

[YoursTrue]

Yes but do you think scientists know how genes came about?

(Maybe I missed the answer, can't read everything)

 

[YoursTrue]

How could we possibly know.



Yes, but I use a mostly meditative form and only occasionally a prayer of supposition. I don't recall what form if any Spinoza used, but I gotta feeling it was mostly meditative.



The evidence is overwhelming, but nothing is ever 100%. IOW, we obviously still have to do research-- a lot of it!



If you mean abiogenesis, that's only a hypothesis.

I thank you for your reasonable answer.

 

[metis]

So they think they know the exact species of fish that began the evolution from fish to landlubbers?

That's not my area of specialization as in physical anthropology we concentrate on human ape evolution, although we also study the primate line in general since some of us [not me] specialize in this area as well.

 

[YoursTrue]

I thank you for your reasonable answer.

Except I no longer agree that what is deemed as evidence is verifiable. As evidence. Naturally proof is out of the question but then I go back to high school wonderment even though at the time I believed everything they taught about evolution. Now I do not.

 

[cladking]

Logically, exactly how would one go about proving there are no deities?

It's simple. All you have to do is to know everything just like many atheists and most believers in science.

In science, we rely exclusively on the "scientific method" period!!!

No. "We" don't do anything. Individuals do everything. All knowledge, all ideas, and all understanding is individual.

There is no "scientific method" set in stone. Many people believe "Peer review" is the 7th step but the fact is there are no set number of steps and the opinion of peers and Peers is irrelevant to science and its understanding. Some people are methodical in inventing hypotheses but most use intuition or insight. Some people use induction and some deduction. Some people remember the definitions and axioms when they interpret experiment but many do not. Some people don't even want to believe Darwin had beliefs and prejudices. They don't want to believe that his axioms and definitions determined his conclusions or affected them in any way.

You want to believe you know everything. I know I know nothing. But I can recognize a good pattern when it bites me on the nose. This is what I do; seek patterns. As a metaphysician and generalist all I care about are patterns as disclosed by deduction and experiment.

Oh, so how in the world could you possibly know this?

Everyone is doing what he thinks is right and makes sense all the time. Everyone acts on his beliefs and lives in accordance with what he thinks is right. It's not so much that some "Godless" people use this as an excuse to to wrong so much as it is that when science is wrong it leads the whole world astray. Of COURSE everyone is an individual so when the whole world goes astray it's many individuals (most of whom believe in science or who purchase science as a weapon) who lead us astray.

Science has become dangerous and has been since Darwin invented Survival of the Fittest. Now with modern technology and materials it gets more dangerous. Perhaps plastic will kill us all soon enough. You do know that longevity is crashing right. This is not symptomatic of a robust and healthy science and economy. It is symptomatic of rot at every level. I predicted in 1994 that it would crash because that is when our leaders announced there were too many people (deplorables) in flyover country. Of course it's not widely understood why longevity is crashing and there are numerous obvious causes like a healthcare system in shambles and an educational system that has been dysfunctional since the late-'40's. We even have food intentionally contaminated with all manner of chemicals and biological agents as well as products intentionally designed to fail after a few years. But thew rich get richer and live longer so it's all good. If you don't want to die young you should just pick yourself up by the bootstraps and become a billionaire. Get off your fanny and go get a job dispensing pink slime at a fast food restaurant. Anyone can do it if he just rents the right congresscritter. Don't worry be happy.

Why do you think the world is imploding? There are fewer religious people than ever and they have less input than ever before. The world is being run by purchased science so things should be improving.

 

[YoursTrue]

How could we possibly know.



Yes, but I use a mostly meditative form and only occasionally a prayer of supposition. I don't recall what form if any Spinoza used, but I gotta feeling it was mostly meditative.



The evidence is overwhelming, but nothing is ever 100%. IOW, we obviously still have to do research-- a lot of it!



If you mean abiogenesis, that's only a hypothesis.

Insofar as abiogenesis goes, how do scientists figure the first form of life began the process of evolving?

 

[cladking]

Science has become dangerous and has been since Darwin invented Survival of the Fittest. Now with modern technology and materials it gets more dangerous. Perhaps plastic will kill us all soon enough. You do know that longevity is crashing right. This is not symptomatic of a robust and healthy science and economy. It is symptomatic of rot at every level. I predicted in 1994 that it would crash because that is when our leaders announced there were too many people (deplorables) in flyover country. Of course it's not widely understood why longevity is crashing and there are numerous obvious causes like a healthcare system in shambles and an educational system that has been dysfunctional since the late-'40's. We even have food intentionally contaminated with all manner of chemicals and biological agents as well as products intentionally designed to fail after a few years. But thew rich get richer and live longer so it's all good. If you don't want to die young you should just pick yourself up by the bootstraps and become a billionaire. Get off your fanny and go get a job dispensing pink slime at a fast food restaurant. Anyone can do it if he just rents the right congresscritter. Don't worry be happy.

Drat. I forgot to mention the joys of "Gain of Function". But no matter because only the weak and sick will perish and the fittest will breed a better, stronger, and richer race. Meanwhile the sales of very expensive home filtration systems will keep men working some of whom have good union jobs. We all win. If we die the consolation is that at least we couldn't afford a home filtration system and our death will allow a fitter individual to fill our spot in the niche. How could anyone worry about science when it's win- win - win across the board.

 

[metis]

It's simple. All you have to do is to know everything just like many atheists and most believers in science.

Complete unadulterated nonsense using mindless stereotypes. You are your own worst enemy when you post such idiocy.

No. "We" don't do anything. Individuals do everything. All knowledge, all ideas, and all understanding is individual.

Oh, so using collective "we" bothers you?

there is no "scientific method" set in stone.

In science it is.

You want to believe you know everything.

WOW, and you think childish and cheap shots liker this is going to win supporters over?

Science has become dangerous and has been since Darwin invented Survival of the Fittest.

He didn't "invent" it-- he observed some of its results.

Why do you think the world is imploding?

It's not.

There are fewer religious people than ever and they have less input than ever before.

Maybe it's "religion's" fault at times.

The world is being run by purchased science so things should be improving.

In many ways it has improved.

 

[YoursTrue]

How could we possibly know.



Yes, but I use a mostly meditative form and only occasionally a prayer of supposition. I don't recall what form if any Spinoza used, but I gotta feeling it was mostly meditative.



The evidence is overwhelming, but nothing is ever 100%. IOW, we obviously still have to do research-- a lot of it!



If you mean abiogenesis, that's only a hypothesis.

Oh, ok, while not the subject of this thread, perhaps when I have time a discussion can be about what Jesus told his disciples to pray for. But then -- I guess a discussion would be had to figure if Jesus really said what he said and did what he did. (sigh...oh well...but people believe in the unproven and virtually unevidenced theory of evolution. By that I mean nothing to show the "in-btweens" in exactitude as if maybe tiktaalik suddenly appeared from "natural selection" maybe? of some kind of fish...
sigh. oh well and thank you really.

 

[cladking]

Evolution is pretty much settled in the sense that we know that evolution occurred.

No! We know species change. That doesn't mean they changed gradually because of survival of the fittest.

That's not what fitness is. More evidence that you don't have a clue what fitness is about in context of evolutionary biology.

You said yourself that defining "fitness" was unnecessary. It's just something you need to survive.

You can define it on a broader level if you wish but then you are obligated to show that consciousness and individuality are irrelevancies. You can't just assume that every individual has the exact same genome but some are fitter than others. Your logic is unsound.

You are assuming the conclusion just as Darwin assumed that populations are stable. And this despite the fact that every observed change in species involves rapid effective decreases in population.

No.

Now you don't believe in Evolution!

Yeah, like "gods dun it"

There are no simple answers but this is what is seen by many people in science.

That God created reality et al is not really a simple answer because the question becomes what is the nature of God and how it was done. Surely nobody would stop the search if we did learn "gods dun it".

 

[YoursTrue]

My family, while being Jewish, used to sit around and listen to the Perry Como show years ago. He had a nice voice, was a pleasant personality. But he always sang the "Lord's Prayer" at each show. I had no idea what it really meant at the time except I knew it wasn't a Jewish prayer...but we listened to it and he had a nice voice.

 

[cladking]

Oh, so using collective "we" bothers you?

Why yes, it does when used in such manner. "We" implies state of the art but state of the art certainly is not that there is only one way to do science.

In science it is.

Now you double down on your error.

If it's so simple why don't you explain this method to me.

In many ways it has improved.

Longevity is crashing. Education is still getting worse. 99% of the population got a 2% decrease in wages last year while the wealthy got a 21% increase. Food quality is still dropping. Many people are taking all manner of drugs to cope. Many are always worried about money and increasing prices.

I see a lot of widespread deterioration in quality of life, infrastructure, and processes.