Irony of the evolutionary belief

[John53]

Everyone keeps telling me that the fit survive but each generation isn't fitter than the last and that each generation is the same species as its parents.

If everyone keeps telling you this it should be easy for you to show 5 or 6 examples as evidence.

 

[Willamena]

Everyone keeps telling me that the fit survive but each generation isn't fitter than the last and that each generation is the same species as its parents.

Come on... ...anyone should see how illogical and impossible this is.

Nothing about Evolution makes sense. It sounds OK if you ignore all the evidence and the fossil record. But it's not OK in any way. Just because we know species change it doesn't mean they mustta changed gradually by survival of the fittest.

Do you mean "must have?" or has vocabulary evolved?

 

[cladking]

or has vocabulary evolved?

It mustta.

My experience is the biggest leaps of imagination are prefaced with "it mustta been this way". "They mustta used ramps". Species mustta evolved gradually through survival of the fittest but each generation is no more fit than the last.

It's usually pronounced "mustive" but this is less parseable so I use "mustta".

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Everyone keeps telling me that the fit survive

They do. You just don't understand and don't want to understand.

but each generation isn't fitter

Show me. Stop saying this and show me.

than the last and that each generation is the same species as its parents.

The theory does not claim that each generation will be a different species. Why do keep bringing this up as if it tells us something? Individuals in a population have different fitness without being different species. Why do you think that variation in fitness means speciation? It doesn't look like you have a sound understanding of species and speciation.

Come on... ...anyone should see how illogical and impossible this is.

It isn't illogical and you haven't shown it to be with your non sequiturs, moving goal posts, arguments from ignorance and empty claims.

In a population of numerous individuals, there will be variation in the genotype and phenotype unless they are all perfect clones.

You are basically saying that this variation makes no functional difference without demonstrating that and against what is observed. Animal and plant breeders use this to their advantage to breed new varieties that are still the same species.

Nothing about Evolution makes sense.

To you. But that is well-recognized by those of us that have read your posts.

It sounds OK if you ignore all the evidence and the fossil record.

That makes no sense. The evidence, including the fossil record demonstrates evolution.

But it's not OK in any way. Just because we know species change it doesn't mean they mustta changed gradually by survival of the fittest.

The evidence supports the legitimacy of the theory even though you don't understand it and don't want to understand it in favor of what you want to believe.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

It mustta.

My experience is the biggest leaps of imagination are prefaced with "it mustta been this way". "They mustta used ramps". Species mustta evolved gradually through survival of the fittest but each generation is no more fit than the last.

It's usually pronounced "mustive" but this is less parseable so I use "mustta".

It isn't be supported the way you claim. It is based on logic, reason and evidence. It is observed. You can deny it all you like, but that won't magically change the facts to favor your imagined view.

 

[YoursTrue]

spoken like typical creationist.

What so sad is that you think you know everything about biology from high school science…as if that all you need to judge Evolution. it is really absurd.

Biology was never my thing in high school...it was physics & chemistry for me, so I didn’t do Years 10, 11 & 12, so all I had was just basic biology (mostly human anatomy) with only basic genetics, but nothing on Evolution. And that was in the late 70s & early 80s.

I did however did a stint with biology of trees, as woods were one of materials used in design and construction (my college days doing civil engineering). It wasn’t until 2003 that I bothered to read up on Evolution, because of another forum I had joined that included Religion section, where people start threads about evolution and creationism.

From 2003 to the present, I am still learning. Not that I am expert, but I do read what interests me…but that included other physics and astronomy subjects. Particularly particle physics, relativity, quantum physics & the Big Bang theory.

I am 57, but I still want to learn more.

what really sad is that people like you, you think you have nothing else to learn as long as you have the Bible.

I have learned as much as I can from the Bible, I am sure there are much to learn here too, however there are not much values in the Bible in this day and age.

If you can define what you think a creationist is, that would be appreciated.

 

[Willamena]

It mustta.

My experience is the biggest leaps of imagination are prefaced with "it mustta been this way". "They mustta used ramps". Species mustta evolved gradually through survival of the fittest but each generation is no more fit than the last.

Thing is, "must have" is the same species as its parents "must" and "have" strung together. And "mustta" is the same species. It's spelled different, but not a different species. A change has been made, but not enough to make it incomprehensible. But then you have "masa," assuming a world where masa arises. Someone new to that world may wonder what the heck is "masa?" If it fails to portray the English language (at least ostensibly) but is utilized in a new language in the same way, you have a genuine new species of that word.

It's rocket science.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

If everyone keeps telling you this it should be easy for you to show 5 or 6 examples as evidence.

I've never seen him post one example for anything he claims except when the examples are wrong, life fish-farming beavers, homo madeupensis, or the incorrect assumption of stable populations.

 

[John53]

I've never seen him post one example for anything he claims except when the examples are wrong, life fish-farming beavers, homo madeupensis, or the incorrect assumption of stable populations.

On that note I think I'll go for an old man nap. The dog will probably jump on the bed with me and we may evolve into homo canis.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Everyone keeps telling me that the fit survive but each generation isn't fitter than the last and that each generation is the same species as its parents.

Come on... ...anyone should see how illogical and impossible this is.

Nothing about Evolution makes sense. It sounds OK if you ignore all the evidence and the fossil record. But it's not OK in any way. Just because we know species change it doesn't mean they mustta changed gradually by survival of the fittest.

It isn't everyone telling you. It is you telling everyone else. And they must believe you without any evidence or reason to do so or they are called "believers" or under the yoke of some conspiracy of something referred to as Peers.

You routinely make claims about a supposed ancient race of people some 40,000 years ago and some ancient form of science used by those people. You've never demonstrated these people, that science or anything related to any of that. You just keep telling everyone about it as if it were some real thing.

You claim that all change in all living things is sudden. You have never provided a demonstration of this. You have ignored all the evidence that refutes the claim. And you keep telling everyone that all change in all living things is sudden.

And it goes on and on and on and on with you telling people about things that you never demonstrate. You never provide one bit of observational or experimental evidence to show others.

You just keep repeating it as if all of your claims were a well and widely established body of facts that needs nothing for support.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

On that note I think I'll go for an old man nap. The dog will probably jump on the bed with me and we may evolve into homo canis.

Me too. I predict that we will see further posts appealing to fallacies and twisting what others have presented and not much more. No reason to stick around for that.

 

[Willamena]

Wait, is this like the future scientist? I love the future scientists.

 

[F1fan]

Every individual is the same species as its parents and no more fit than its grandparents!!!!!!!!

You do realize that fitness as a species is not at the individual level. Numbers in a population are fit. And you don't seem to understand what fitness means.

This is illogic of the greatest degree. People believe fitness breed success but the off spring are no more fit and always the same species!!!!!!

You don't seem to realize that the color of an organism can be fitness if it is an advantage for survival.

Of course no experiment can show this and nobody can predict which individuals will succeed because this is all so illogical.

I predict you as an individual wouldn't succeed in 7th grade science class unless you read the text because your beliefs are contrary to what is understood about evolution. No wonder you hate science, you don't know it.

 

[F1fan]

Everyone keeps telling me that the fit survive but each generation isn't fitter than the last and that each generation is the same species as its parents.
Come on... ...anyone should see how illogical and impossible this is.

Nothing about Evolution makes sense.

So it makes sense to experts but not to you. What you write reveals you don't understand evolution, notably fitness. So to the rest of us we understand why you are confused.

It sounds OK if you ignore all the evidence and the fossil record.

But the fossil record illustrates evolution. It is evidence of evolution. How can you say ignoring the fossil record helps accept evolution? More of your confusion.

But it's not OK in any way. Just because we know species change it doesn't mean they mustta changed gradually by survival of the fittest.

But fitness is what populations have when they survive and reproduce as the environment stresses them. Sharks have remained about the same for 25 million years because there are few stressors on them as a set of species. Antibiotics have pressured bacteria to change rapidly in our lifetimes. The more you write the more it's evident you don't understand evolution.

 

[Little Dragon]

So you're telling me faster rabbits don't have faster offspring? Stronger bulls don't breed stronger offspring and smarter dogs don't have smarter pups.

Not saying that at all.

Faster Rabbits, will more likely survive to have faster offspring, if and only if, there is a selection pressure to weed out the slower rabbits. If there are no foxes or wolves to chase and eat the bunnies, then being faster offers no survival advantage and so, faster bunnies will be just as likely to reproduce as slow bunnies, all other things being equal. Meaning conversely, slow bunnies will be just as likely to reproduce as fast bunnies.
There is no inherent direction, toward fast bunnies, unless those bunnies are in ecosystems that favour fast bunnies.

 

[Little Dragon]

@cladking is oddly slightly right, depending on what his intent was. In contemporary biology and taxonomy, the boundaries between species and subspecies are not as clear as previously thought. Today evolution takes place in populations with genetic diversity responding to changes in the environment that include subspecies and sometimes what may be called closely related species.

Lumpers and splitters will argue. Also a species is defined by geographical isolation. For examples wolves are considered a separate species to domestic canines, dogs. Since they are geographically isolated from each other. Even though, dogs and wolves can breed and produce viable offspring.

 

[cladking]

The phrase grasping at straws suddenly occurs to me. Believers like a drowning man will look for anything floating.

Now I'm being told a child will look like its parents rather than a random stranger only if that appearance results from selection pressure.

In a very real sense every individual results from a sort of highly localized bottleneck.

 

[cladking]

Thing is, "must have" is the same species as its parents "must" and "have" strung together. And "mustta" is the same species. It's spelled different, but not a different species. A change has been made, but not enough to make it incomprehensible. But then you have "masa," assuming a world where masa arises. Someone new to that world may wonder what the heck is "masa?" If it fails to portray the English language (at least ostensibly) but is utilized in a new language in the same way, you have a genuine new species of that word.

It's rocket science.

My intent was not to obscure my meaning but to highlight the thinking of believers. I've found that anytime I get to a "must have" in my own thinking that what follows tends to be a leap of faith.

I apologize.

"Mustta" means there is only one possibility and in reality there are always an infinite number of possibilities.

 

[cladking]

I predict you as an individual wouldn't succeed in 7th grade science class

In my prime I took an 11th grade biology test and got a C+ on it. I doubt I could ever duplicate the feat.

What made it remarkable is that even though I didn't even know my alpha, beta, gammas back in those days the test was in Greek. I'm good at tests and pattern recognition. It mightta been an easy test but I had no means to tell.

 

[F1fan]

In my prime I took an 11th grade biology test and got a C+ on it. I doubt I could ever duplicate the feat.

Well we can guess what you got wrong. You still get it wrong even though you have valid knowledge available for free on the internet. There is no excuses for ignorance these days.

It's one thing to be ignorant of science, but another to have false beliefs about it, especially those false beliefs that are spread by Christians.

What made it remarkable is that even though I didn't even know my alpha, beta, gammas back in those days the test was in Greek. I'm good at tests and pattern recognition. It mightta been an easy test but I had no means to tell.

This doesn't explain why you avoid reading up on subjects like evolution, and then make false statemenst about evolution in debate where your errors are pointed out. Why aren't you embarrassed? You seem proud to be wrong.