Is evolution as crooked as Hillary?

[Kemosloby]

Well, we do not usuall kneel and bow to anybody. This is what you guys like to do. Or feel compelled to do. For some inscrutable reason.

But since Darwin is himself the product of evolution, I am not sure what you mean.

Do you maybe believe that humans have been created in the form and shape of an ape by a God so that humans are in His image?

Ciao

- viole

Sorry I can be sarcastic. Meaning Darwin created Evolution theory, which you said produced me. but of course we would all be here without evolution theory. So what does it actually produce for society?

It says God created Adam as a pattern of the One to come, Christ. So Adam was created in the image of God before God took on the image of man.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

Could it be possible that Evolution theory is just a monstrous lie based on cross breeding? The only observable facts to the regular Joe is we have seen cross breeding and know that animals can change. For the rest we would need to look at the server in Hillarys' basement.

Seriously they make such a big deal out of Evolution theory, but what good does it do? If you were building a building, and miscalculate the strength of steel, the building might fall down. But if you're wrong about Evolution theory, name one thing which would result from it.

I'm trying not to get dragged into politics here- so I'll stay entirely neutral on that. (Let the best man win )



if they're wrong about Evolution...? how about when

Large shovel fulls of it, once considered key elements - can be entirely thrown out without having much practical effect on anything, Piltdown man, gradualism, birds from dinosaurs, etc

Sorry I can be sarcastic. Meaning Darwin created Evolution theory, which you said produced me. but of course we would all be here without evolution theory. So what does it actually produce for society?

It says God created Adam as a pattern of the One to come, Christ. So Adam was created in the image of God before God took on the image of man.

It was intended to produce atheism, and has to a certain degree, though there is obviously overlap, belief in Darwinism is about 19% according to Gallup, but that's quite a bit higher than belief in atheism.

 

[metis]

And why would infants be dying? No tractors, hard times. Not enough cotton, no blankets, means a cold baby catching pneumonia.

And if you think that this is probably why most babies died, then I can more fully understand why you don't accept the basic ToE.

 

[jonathan180iq]

Anyone dying at 35 probably died from a broken back.

...No.

There's a reason that you never got Polio. There's also a reason why you can find hundreds of child graves in your local community from around the turn of the century, deaths caused by completely curable diseases today.

http://www.businessinsider.com/leading-causes-of-death-from-1900-2010-2012-6
When's the last time someone you know died of Tuberculosis, Pneumonia, or Influenza?

You can thank evolutionary understanding for that, as it has been applied to almost every single field of science since it's discovery.

*And for the record, this conversation has nothing at all to do with Darwin. He was wrong about a lot of things. He was right about much, as well. The fact that you've equated Evolutionary Biology to Darwin tells me a lot about your level of education in the area that you're attempting to debunk. You should move on.

 

[Quintessence]

As I said, the aim of sciences is to describe and understand the world around us. As such, the sciences never rest - they are always pushing into new frontiers to further our understanding. Describing and classifying biological organisms was an early endeavor of biological sciences. As we started making these observations, more questions arose. Why does this organism have features similar to this other organism? How are these organisms related to each other? How did these organisms come to be? Biological evolution is a scientific theory that helps answer these types of questions. It's part of studying the plants and animals as much as studying anatomy, physiology, taxonomy, metabolism, genetics, etc. Any good undergraduate program in biological sciences requires students to study biological evolution for this reason. It is a central theory to the discipline.

So.... no response to this, @Kemosloby ? Is there something I need to clarify?

 

[Kemosloby]

And if you think that this is probably why most babies died, then I can more fully understand why you don't accept the basic ToE.

ToE is survival of the fittest still? Maybe evolution was just weeding out the weak. What's evolution got to do with medicine?

 

[Valjean]

Large shovel fulls of it, once considered key elements - can be entirely thrown out without having much practical effect on anything, Piltdown man, gradualism, birds from dinosaurs, etc

Piltdown man was clearly a hoax, and would have been discovered immediately, today. Gradualism? Birds from dinosaurs? Who's dismissing these?

It was intended to produce atheism, and has to a certain degree, though there is obviously overlap, belief in Darwinism is about 19% according to Gallup, but that's quite a bit higher than belief in atheism.

ROFL.

Hard to believe as it may be, scientists don't have a religious agenda. They rarely even think about religion, as it doesn't apply to their studies in any way.
The ToE was proposed as an explanation of observed facts. There was no other agenda.

Science isn't supposed to have a "practical effect." It's strictly explanatory.
Maybe you're thinking of technology.

And what the heck is "Darwinism?"

 

[Kemosloby]

So.... no response to this, @Kemosloby ? Is there something I need to clarify?

No I get it. You don't get a pug from a wolf all at once. It takes a long process, you've got to evolve the pug out of the wolf.

 

[jonathan180iq]

Well physics produces something useful such as understanding the strength of steel. Chemistry produces something such as understanding the process of making steel. But what does Evolution theory produce? So if Evolution theory was gone what would we not be able to do?

You avoided quote a few questions in my post #8. Why is that?

To answer yours, all of modern science would be changed if you were to completely remove what we now know about the Evolutionary process. Literally everything that exists can be attributed to it, if not directly, then as a subset of the field. Chemistry, for example, is enhanced by understand the roles that environments play on inorganic and organic material alike. This, as well as the fact that the genetic link between viroids, viruses, bacteria, and diseases are the very foundation of how modern medicine prevents future outbreaks and widespread illness... The study of Cosmology would also be forever affected by hypothetically removing the last 200 years worth of biological understanding, as it is a field that encompasses nearly every major branch of Science within it. Paleontology would revert back to a time where some of the major names in the field could only speculate about the nature of certain fossilized remains, lacking any knowledge about the interconnected nature of organisms on the planet. The ancients dug up bones and assumed they were gorgons, or cyclopses, or the bodies of the Titans. Do you prefer those speculations to be the basis of our modern scientific knowledge?

Ancestral research would have no solid foundation, as the DNA analyses that we do for long-term heritage could not exist. You'd know who your grandmother was, sure. But you'd not fully understand where she came from, or what haplo group constitutes your makeup. You'd never know why you got to where you were, outside of a couple generations of loose notes and word-of-mouth stories.

Evolution is everywhere. It is in every science. The concepts and theories that it has produced have enhanced every single field that it has touched, except for the rare exceptions where it has been rejected by stubborn theologies and antiquated mindsets.

You don't have to click on any of the link that have been provided to you in this thread, but you should. I've read everyone of them. Nothing in here is spam, or a virus, or anything of the sort. People are trying to educate you on a topic that you obviously need help understanding. You'd be foolish to ignore all of this.

 

[metis]

ToE is survival of the fittest still? Maybe evolution was just weeding out the weak. What's evolution got to do with medicine?

Here:

Evolutionary medicine or Darwinian medicine is the application of modernevolutionary theory to understanding health and disease. ... The evolutionary approach has driven important advances in our understanding of cancer, autoimmune disease, and anatomy... -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_medicine

 

[jonathan180iq]

ToE is survival of the fittest still? Maybe evolution was just weeding out the weak. What's evolution got to do with medicine?

Whether they help us or harm us, bacteria are living things. They evolve and adapt to their environments just like anything else.

Some pathogens are going to be naturally resistant to certain types of antibiotics. So, for example, if we aren't careful, we can, through a process called Artificial Selection, accidentally produce a super resistant strain of bacteria that can cause some serious medical problems...

That's all part of evolutionary understanding. Offspring inherit the traits of their parents. The environment decides which traits are more likely to survive and be passed on to future generations. What you're arguing against is something very simple and observable, even in your own life.

 

[Valjean]

ToE is survival of the fittest still? Maybe evolution was just weeding out the weak. What's evolution got to do with medicine?

Do you understand what's meant by "survival of the fittest?
"

 

[Kemosloby]

Here:

Evolutionary medicine or Darwinian medicine is the application of modernevolutionary theory to understanding health and disease. ... The evolutionary approach has driven important advances in our understanding of cancer, autoimmune disease, and anatomy... -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_medicine

Hollow words but it's on Wikipedia so it must be truth. You notice how they just make these non specific generalizations, fitting in the word evolution wherever possible? Dogma attached to science...

 

[Kemosloby]

Whether they help us or harm us, bacteria are living things. They evolve and adapt to their environments just like anything else.

Some pathogens are going to be naturally resistant to certain types of antibiotics. So, for example, if we aren't careful, we can, through a process called Artificial Selection, accidentally produce a super resistant strain of bacteria that can cause some serious medical problems...

That's all part of evolutionary understanding. Offspring inherit the traits of their parents. The environment decides which traits are more likely to survive and be passed on to future generations. What you're arguing against is something very simple and observable, even in your own life.

Crossbreeding...not evolution. I don't deny that stuff but don't call it Evolution since that would attach it to the Evolution that says man evolved from an ape, which evolved from a fish, which evolved from an slug, and on and on. Which I think is stretching the observation of crossbreeding into a Hillary sized lie.

 

[Kemosloby]

Do you understand what's meant by "survival of the fittest?
"

The one that grows strongest gets to pass on his genes.

 

[sayak83]

You avoided quote a few questions in my post #8. Why is that?

To answer yours, all of modern science would be changed if you were to completely remove what we now know about the Evolutionary process. Literally everything that exists can be attributed to it, if not directly, then as a subset of the field. Chemistry, for example, is enhanced by understand the roles that environments play on inorganic and organic material alike. This, as well as the fact that the genetic link between viroids, viruses, bacteria, and diseases are the very foundation of how modern medicine prevents future outbreaks and widespread illness... The study of Cosmology would also be forever affected by hypothetically removing the last 200 years worth of biological understanding, as it is a field that encompasses nearly every major branch of Science within it. Paleontology would revert back to a time where some of the major names in the field could only speculate about the nature of certain fossilized remains, lacking any knowledge about the interconnected nature of organisms on the planet. The ancients dug up bones and assumed they were gorgons, or cyclopses, or the bodies of the Titans. Do you prefer those speculations to be the basis of our modern scientific knowledge?

Ancestral research would have no solid foundation, as the DNA analyses that we do for long-term heritage could not exist. You'd know who your grandmother was, sure. But you'd not fully understand where she came from, or what haplo group constitutes your makeup. You'd never know why you got to where you were, outside of a couple generations of loose notes and word-of-mouth stories.

Evolution is everywhere. It is in every science. The concepts and theories that it has produced have enhanced every single field that it has touched, except for the rare exceptions where it has been rejected by stubborn theologies and antiquated mindsets.

You don't have to click on any of the link that have been provided to you in this thread, but you should. I've read everyone of them. Nothing in here is spam, or a virus, or anything of the sort. People are trying to educate you on a topic that you obviously need help understanding. You'd be foolish to ignore all of this.

Not to mention evolutionary and genetic algorithms that is crucial to so many fields of engineering today
https://books.google.com/books?id=g...evolutionary+algorithms&source=gbs_navlinks_s

While Classical and Quantum Physics has the highest number of applications in engineering overall, I am hard-pressed to find another example of one simple theory branching out into so many disparate applications and fields of science and engineering as the theory of evolution by mutation and selection has.

 

[Kemosloby]

Not to mention evolutionary and genetic algorithms that is crucial to so many fields of engineering today
https://books.google.com/books?id=g...evolutionary+algorithms&source=gbs_navlinks_s

While Classical and Quantum Physics has the highest number of applications in engineering overall, I am hard-pressed to find another example of one simple theory branching out into so many disparate applications and fields of science and engineering as the theory of evolution by mutation and selection has.

You've got that word on everything. Got any evolutionary ice cream?

 

[metis]

Hollow words but it's on Wikipedia so it must be truth. You notice how they just make these non specific generalizations, fitting in the word evolution wherever possible? Dogma attached to science...

It is completely disingenuous to virtually poo-poo someone else's source without citing your own source in response.

I'm a retired anthropologist who was brought up in a fundamentalist Protestant church that dissed the ToE, as you are doing, During my undergrad years I started out in biology but eventually moved into anthropology, which I did my graduate degree in and later taught the subject for some 30 years.

IOW, I did the homework, realized that I had been fed garbage and was willing to admit I was wrong and made the logical and necessary changes. What you are posting is nothing short of pure ignorance on the subject, and it's become rather obvious that no amount of evidence is likely to get you to actually do some homework on the subject.

Oh, btw, if you actually looked at the Wikipedia article, you might have noticed that it contains links to scientific sites and studies, but I doubt very much that looking such things up actually interests you.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

Piltdown man was clearly a hoax, and would have been discovered immediately, today.

I agree it was clearly a hoax.. to most people... but not so clear to evolutionists- who believed it was the basis of human evolution for 40 years!

Computer sims and mass media make such inventions far more easily disseminated today, but that's beside the point, which is that evolution can mean lots of self conflicting things. When a theory is free from the restraints of direct empirical evidence, there is a lot of freedom for movement

Gradualism? Birds from dinosaurs? Who's dismissing these?

plenty of evolutionists, 'punctuated equilibriumists' & dissent on dinos-to-birds has been growing for some time- not all that controversial an observation..

scientists don't have a religious agenda. They rarely even think about religion, as it doesn't apply to their studies in any way.
The ToE was proposed as an explanation of observed facts. There was no other agenda.
"

Of course not! I can't think of a single example of a prominent evolutionist with an atheist agenda...

ROFL.

 

[Kemosloby]

It is completely disingenuous to virtually poo-poo someone else's source without citing your own source in response.

I'm a retired anthropologist who was brought up in a fundamentalist Protestant church that dissed the ToE, as you are doing, During my undergrad years I started out in biology but eventually moved into anthropology, which I did my graduate degree in and later taught the subject for some 30 years.

IOW, I did the homework, realized that I had been fed garbage and was willing to admit I was wrong and made the logical and necessary changes. What you are posting is nothing short of pure ignorance on the subject, and it's become rather obvious that no amount of evidence is likely to get you to actually do some homework on the subject.

Oh, btw, if you actually looked at the Wikipedia article, you might have noticed that it contains links to scientific sites and studies, but I doubt very much that looking such things up actually interests you.

Yeah, there seems to be a commision in the scientific community for how many times you can use the word evolution in your studies.