Evolution Vs. Creationism

[LuisDantas]

So, the question is: Did the salmon's ability to harness energy from water turbulence come about by chance? or was it designed?

I guess you might say it was designed by the selective pressure. Natural Selection is not random, you know.

 

[Maury83]

So you are saying that by mere chance (natural selection) the salmon came to life, decided one day to swin against the current and adapted itself to the pressure.
Just as through a violent explosion, the universe, earth and planets came into existance and with them all the seasons, the perfect cycles that keep the earth healthy and of course humans with their amazing brains and capabilities......I see your point

 

[DeistPrimate]

And according to wiki there is A LOT! “There are typically 40 million bacterial cells in a gram of soil and a million bacterial cells in a millilitre of fresh water; in all, there are approximately five nonillion (5×1030) bacteria on Earth,[3] forming much of the world's biomass.”

So if Wiki says evolution is a fact (which it does) will you then accept that?

 

[DeistPrimate]

just because the world was created does not mean that there was not an evolution and just because there was an evolution does not mean there was no creation. this statment refutes any possible (currently existing) arguments (based on scientific means) so that means that neither side has enough evidence. THE ANSWER IS C. NOT ENOUGH INFORMATION

There are reems of information supporting the existence of biological evolution and not one shred supporting a contention of biblical style creationism or any form of direct design by fiat in the natural world.

 

[Maury83]

All interesting facts that I totally support, but Wiki would also need to tell me where the first particle of matter was found and how it came to be there in the first place

 

[Sunstone]

You are committing the logical fallacy of false dilemma here.

Since when does the Theory of Evolution suggest traits come about entirely by chance?

Have you even studied evolution? And if so, please name three of the text books you used in your study of evolution.

I reckon he was looking for easier questions.

 

[LuisDantas]

So you are saying that by mere chance (natural selection) the salmon came to life, decided one day to swin against the current and adapted itself to the pressure.

That is a bit of an oversimplification. Natural selection is not aleatory.

It is instead guided by the circunstances of the environment, often referred to by the name of Selective Pressure.

By the same token, salmons didn't come into being by mere chance either. They evolved from other fish species. And of course, they kept reproducing for many generations since.

Just as through a violent explosion, the universe, earth and planets came into existence and with them all the seasons, the perfect cycles that keep the earth healthy and of course humans with their amazing brains and capabilities......I see your point

If you do, you may be trying to fool me. After all, Biological Evolution has no connection to Cosmology. Nor is your appeal to the Anthropic Principle convincing or well-founded, but that is another matter entirely.

Fine-tuned Universe - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[McBell]

Did the salmon's ability to harness energy from water turbulence come about by chance? or was it designed?

False Dilemma

 

[conrad beckman]

There is no conflict. Evolution is one the tools god uses to make us as we are.

 

[xanaticus]

Evolution is one the tools god uses to make us as we are.

evolution is proven fact, while there is no evidence any god made us...

 

[fantome profane]

evolution is proven fact, while there is no evidence any god made us...

But still conrad becman is correct, there is no conflict between those two ideas.

 

[xanaticus]

I see no conflict too
But it becomes a conflict when some people want to teach in schools at Biology that mankind and all life on Earth was created by a higher being. This belongs to Religion, being at wrong place anywhere else

 

[fantome profane]

I see no conflict too
But it becomes a conflict when some people want to teach in schools at Biology that mankind and all life on Earth was created by a higher being.

I completely agree.

 

[tumbleweed41]

I think the newly discovered DRD4 (liberal) gene indicates that not only physically, but on a spiritual plane, we are products of natural selection. Societies require morals, and natural selection allows this to happen.

If so, then it is a completely separate matter from biological evolution. Maybe you are refering to the Meme concept.

Either way, do you happen to have a source? I never heard of that gene.

DRD4 is a Dopamine receptor that some geneticists believe is more common in those with a more progressive attitude as adults.
DRD4 is also one of the most variable genes, containing a large number of DNA sequences that differ slightly from individual to individual.
Although it is not a "newly discovered" gene, the current research into it's links to progressive thinking is relatively new. It has also been recently linked to ADHD under certain variations. Past links to alcoholism, schizophrenia and "novelty seeking" have not been repeatable or verifiable.

 

[DeistPrimate]

All interesting facts that I totally support, but Wiki would also need to tell me where the first particle of matter was found and how it came to be there in the first place

Apparently Wikipedia is your major source of research?

 

[Autodidact]

Ok I get it, you just want to hear what tickles your ears; what suits you the most. I won't take the Bible into account, I ill just consider a few examples of things in nature with details not found in the Bible:
I am an executive chef and I love food.... Let's talk about "Salmon":
In order to breed, many salmon species swim upstream, facing turbulent waters along the way. How are they able to endure a grueling jurney without succumbing to exhaustion?Instead of being overwhelmed by the rough water, these fishe actually take advantage of it. They conserve energy by using vortices, or miniature whirlpools, that form where the water flow is disturbed by rocks, branches, or other objects. As the vortices form on alternating sides of an object, the fish curve their bodies from side to side and glide between the pockets of turbulence. Some schools of fish use the vortices created by the fish swimming in front of them, effectively riding in their wake. The fish can even take advantage of the turbulence created by their own bodies!! Researches hope to borrow from the salmon's efficient swimming style to harvest energy from slow moving water. Traditional hydropower equipment usually generates electricity in water flowing at a rate of 5 knots or faster. Now a prototype using vortex-induced vibrations can generate electricity from water creeping along at 2 knots. The technology, is nowhere near the level of sophistication found in such fish as salmon. Professor Michael Bernitsas of the university of Michigan said "we are not as smart as fish at this point"!
So, the question is: Did the salmon's ability to harness energy from water turbulence come about by chance? or was it designed?

Neither. It's a result of evolution. If you don't understand why, my guess is you don't know what evolution is or how it works.

 

[Autodidact]

So you are saying that by mere chance (natural selection) the salmon came to life, decided one day to swin against the current and adapted itself to the pressure.
Just as through a violent explosion, the universe, earth and planets came into existance and with them all the seasons, the perfect cycles that keep the earth healthy and of course humans with their amazing brains and capabilities......I see your point

Natural selection is not random.

It sounds like you have absolutely no idea what the Theory of Evolution is or what it says. Do you want to learn, or do you prefer to remain confused and ignorant, all while refusing to accept modern science?

 

[Autodidact]

All interesting facts that I totally support, but Wiki would also need to tell me where the first particle of matter was found and how it came to be there in the first place

Why? What does it have to do with evolution?

I repeat, you don't seem to know what the Theory of Evolution (ToE) is. Do you want to learn?

 

[Gloone]

So if Wiki says evolution is a fact (which it does) will you then accept that?

This why evolution has it's flaws, due to overgeneralizing. Full article here on overgeneralizing.

Charles Darwin saw a pattern that governs the evolution of all life on earth. Quite a generalization! From that single generalization, new understandings about diseases were discovered that greatly improved the effectiveness of doctors. In fact, whole new sciences have issued from that single generalization.
What I’m trying to say is: The mistakes our brains tend to make (like overgeneralizing) are the inevitable by-products of our great intelligence.
Your ability to recognize a face comes from your brain’s ability to complete a pattern with minimal clues. It has been exceedingly difficult to create computers that can do it, and they still aren’t as good at it as you are on a bad day without even trying. Your brain recognizes faces without any effort on your part. Your brain is so good at completing a pattern that, even in dim light — even if you can only see half of the face — you recognize immediately who it is.
But this amazing ability also sometimes causes us to see patterns that don’t really exist. We see a man in the moon. We see a horse in the clouds. We see the big dipper, the little dipper, Orion’s belt. Our brains can take the most scant clues and see a pattern, without us making even the smallest effort to do so.
But especially given our brains’ bias toward negativity, we also see patterns that create pessimism, cynicism, and defeatism — patterns our brains have created out of minimal clues — patterns that don’t actually exist.
The woman I used to work with who had two failed marriages concluded, “All men are pigs.” From only two examples, she created a generalization that included three billion men! Her cynicism, her unwillingness to allow any men to get close to her, was the side-effect of two common mistakes our brains tend to make: 1) the brain’s amazing ability to see a pattern with minimal clues, and 2) our brain’s tendency to look for evidence that confirms an already-existing conclusion. In other words, your brain tends to overgeneralize and then the world seems to prove you’re right about it.
The two primary mistakes that turn generalizations into overgeneralizations are:

1. Holding the generalization as a fact rather than an hypothesis. Any generalization you make is a guess. You will have some degree of certainty about your guess — you can be quite certain your guess is correct, you can be very uncertain about your guess, or anywhere in between. When you have more certainty about your generalization than the facts justify, it is an overgeneralization. You’ve gone too far.
2. Generalizing from too few instances. Researchers have discovered that people don’t have a very accurate sense of what “chance sequences” look like. People expect sequences of coin flips, for example, to alternate more than they actually do. So truly random sequences can often look like a pattern to us.
​

 

[slowbreath]

it might be helpful to remember that evolution is just a theory...the theory of evolution, it has never ever been a principle and the theory of evolution is not the same as darwinism.
the idea of the god of the bible creating everything doesnt have a shred of evedence either, its something that is simply believed to be true by some, and thats called faith, actually the theroy of evolution can be believed by faith too.