prove me wrong on evolution

[fantome profane]

is that the best you can do? owh well since you are not Murdocsvan i guess it doesnt matter.

Let me give it a try.

The problem with the numbers argument is that the odds only become significant if the result is a predicted or intended result. It is like that old card trick where the magician pulls your card from a (supposedly) randomly shuffled deck of cards. You choose a card, say the queen of hearts. Now if the magician pulls out the queen of hearts and asks “is this your card?”, you applaud his skill. But think about it. What are the odds of him pulling out the queen of hearts? Obviously they are 1 in 52, not staggering odds to be sure, but low enough that you know that this is a trick. But what if he pulled the eight of clubs instead? This would mean he did the trick wrong and there would be nothing to applaud. But again what are the odds of pulling out the eight of clubs? Again they are 1 in 52, exactly the same as pulling out the queen of hearts. But the queen of hearts is the significant result because it was the intended result; the eight of clubs (or any other card) is not an intended result so the odds are not significant.

Now think about the universe. The odds of the universe being as it is are quite literally astronomical. But just like with the cards that is only significant if you are assuming that the universe was intended to be this way. The odds are only significant if someone or something intended this particular outcome. So in order for the odds to be significant you must assume the very thing you are attempting to prove.




p.s. just looking at his profile it seems that murdocsvan has not visited this board in over four months.

 

[worshiper]

It is like that old card trick where the magician pulls your card from a (supposedly) randomly shuffled deck of cards. You choose a card, say the queen of hearts. Now if the magician pulls out the queen of hearts and asks “is this your card?”, you applaud his skill. But think about it.

its funny how you bring that card trick as your example. that is exactly what i believe. someone or something (in your example its the magician) must've pulled the right DNA sequence card.

Let me give it a try.

p.s. just looking at his profile it seems that murdocsvan has not visited this board in over four months.

it doesnt matter to me actually what the Evos and the Creos think. i think we are better of doing something more useful than debating thing we dont know of. i respect the views of everyone in this thread. i was just trying to hear what Murdocsvan got to say. just curious of what his reply will be


anyways have a good one!!

 

[fantome profane]

its funny how you bring that card trick as your example. that is exactly what i believe. someone or something (in your example its the magician) must've pulled the right DNA sequence card.

Right, you got it exactly. The odds of DNA sequence are significant to you because you believe it is the “right card”. But if you didn’t already believe that then the odds themselves would have no meaning.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

<yawn>

Roughly speaking, the term 'odds' refers to a ratio of possibilities.

The sun rose this morning in Chicago at 6:27 DST. To marvel at this noting that the 'odds' against a Chicago sunrise during the 6 AM hour are 23:1 would be ludicrous.​

</yawn>

 

[worshiper]

Right, you got it exactly. The odds of DNA sequence are significant to you because you believe it is the “right card”. But if you didn’t already believe that then the odds themselves would have no meaning.

now i am lost.... are you pro Creo or Pro Evo?
the right card that i meant was actually the right DNA sequence to create a living being.

"Magician" and "Card"
"God" and "DNA Sequence"

magician pulls the intended card resulting the right card to be shown
God pulls (create or direct whatever he does) the intended DNA sequence resulting the creation of a living being.

if you rely on probability alone, this will be near to impossible. not only that, how long does it take for an evolution to take place? one hour? one day? one year? one millenium? one million years? if it takes longer to evolve, then the odds of getting the right DNA sequence by chance will become impossible.

yet if you have a magician (divine intervention) then it would make a good explanation.

 

[painted wolf]

Life requires very little in the way of DNA.
"pulling the right card" becomes less of a problem when you consider all the "non living" things (ie viruses) that have DNA kicking around.

The largest known virus is comperable to the smallest known bacterium in terms of DNA complexity.

wa:do

 

[Smoke]

if you rely on probability alone, this will be near to impossible. not only that, how long does it take for an evolution to take place? one hour? one day? one year? one millenium? one million years? if it takes longer to evolve, then the odds of getting the right DNA sequence by chance will become impossible.

What is "an evolution," and how would one know when it has taken place? What do you think "the right" DNA sequence is?

 

[worshiper]

What is "an evolution,"

[SIZE=-1]
In the life sciences, evolution is a change in the traits of living organisms over generations, including the emergence of new species. Since the development of modern genetics in the 1940s, evolution has been defined more specifically as a change in the frequency of alleles in a population from one generation to the next.In other fields evolution is used more generally to refer to any process of change over time. [/SIZE]

and how would one know when it has taken place?

i ask the same thing. but according to the definition above it takes generations. who knows how long that will take. but for hundreds of thousands of years, we humans havent evolve into another life form.

What do you think "the right" DNA sequence is?

i'm not sure you are getting what i'm talking about. i was assuming that as a result of a correct DNA sequence, a new life form is created. mix that DNA up, you'll get a sequence that cannot support life. mix it up again, if you get another "right" sequence that can support another form of life, that life form created. i was just metaphorically speaking for the sake of the Magician and the Card metaphor.

 

[fantome profane]

now i am lost.... are you pro Creo or Pro Evo?

Sorry, it seemed like you understood.

First let me say that my personal beliefs should be irrelevant to the argument. But for the sake of clarity I will tell you that I believe the evidence strongly supports the theory of evolution. I will also tell you that I am an atheist, but I am not trying to argue against the idea of “God”, I am only trying to argue for evolution. And in this specific case I am only responding to the argument about odds that you presented.

So …

"Magician" and "Card"
"God" and "DNA Sequence"

magician pulls the intended card resulting the right card to be shown
God pulls (create or direct whatever he does) the intended DNA sequence resulting the creation of a living being.

No, or at least that is not how I was using the analogy. What I was trying to indicate is this.

“the card pulled” = the DNA sequence we ended up with.
“right” = “intended”
(Actually my original intent was to make it an analogy to the “universe we ended up with”, but lets just talk about one thing at a time here.)

If the magician pulls the right card that is reason to applaud. It the “DNA sequence we ended up with” is the ”intended” one, that is reason to believe in divine intervention.

I take it that it is your position that “the DNA sequence we ended up with” is the “right” DNA sequence. But I want you to understand that I am not making that assumption. If the “DNA sequence we ended up with” is not “intended” then there is no reason to assume divine intervention. Just pulling a card from a deck is not a trick, even though the odds of pulling that card are only 1 in 52. It is only a trick if it is the intended card. The probability of “the DNA sequence we ended up with” is not evidence of divine intervention, regardless of what those odds are. It is only evidence of divine intervention if you assume that it was the intended result.

if you rely on probability alone, this will be near to impossible. not only that, how long does it take for an evolution to take place? one hour? one day? one year? one millenium? one million years? if it takes longer to evolve, then the odds of getting the right DNA sequence by chance will become impossible.

yet if you have a magician (divine intervention) then it would make a good explanation.

Any number of DNA sequences could result in living organisms, so I see no reason to assume that the DNA sequence we ended up with is the “right” DNA sequence. For that matter it could be possible for life to exist without any DNA sequences. And even more to the point, although you might find this thought disturbing, I don’t see any reason to assume that life is the intended result. Don’t get me wrong, I love life and I am glad to be alive. It is a strange and wonderful experience. But I personally see no reason to assume that anyone intended me to have this strange and wonderful experience.

The point I am labouring to get across is that it is only if you make that assumption that the odds become significant. If you don’t believe that this result is the intended result then there is no indication of “divine intervention”. If you are talking to someone who has made the same assumption of intent that you have made, then your argument is unnecessary. If you are talking someone who has not made the same assumption of intent that you have then your argument of odds is meaningless.

 

[rojse]

Why do you think that "your" DNA sequence is the one that God wants? What makes you perfect in this regard, and the other six odd billion people imperfect?

In regards to your statement about people not evolving, it is quite a contentious issue in regards to whether this process still occurs or not. I believe we are still doing so, as is every other animal.

Evolution does not occur in discrete stages, so we do not straight away become another life form. Life evolves slowly, over thousands of years. You don't have one generation completely constisting of "have nots" and the next generation completely consisting of "haves". The process occurs gradually - in the next generation, there will will be some "haves", and there will be some "have nots". The "haves" will have an advantage over the "have nots" so they will be able to breed more, and over time, will either form a separate species, or take over the old species.

In terms of human evolution, I would say that you are quite wrong in saying that people have not evolved in recent history. For example, we are now lactose tolerant, some groups of people have developed skin pigmentation changes, and Europe has an increased resistance to the bubonic plague. The last example even occured within the last one thousand years. Every year, we gain the cold virus, and we become immune to that, so a slightly different virus comes along, and we become immune to that, too. That's evolution at work, too.

 

[worshiper]

Sorry, it seemed like you understood.

First let me say that my personal beliefs should be irrelevant to the argument. But for the sake of clarity I will tell you that I believe the evidence strongly supports the theory of evolution. I will also tell you that I am an atheist, but I am not trying to argue against the idea of “God”, I am only trying to argue for evolution. And in this specific case I am only responding to the argument about odds that you presented.

So …



No, or at least that is not how I was using the analogy. What I was trying to indicate is this.

“the card pulled” = the DNA sequence we ended up with.
“right” = “intended”
(Actually my original intent was to make it an analogy to the “universe we ended up with”, but lets just talk about one thing at a time here.)

If the magician pulls the right card that is reason to applaud. It the “DNA sequence we ended up with” is the ”intended” one, that is reason to believe in divine intervention.

I take it that it is your position that “the DNA sequence we ended up with” is the “right” DNA sequence. But I want you to understand that I am not making that assumption. If the “DNA sequence we ended up with” is not “intended” then there is no reason to assume divine intervention. Just pulling a card from a deck is not a trick, even though the odds of pulling that card are only 1 in 52. It is only a trick if it is the intended card. The probability of “the DNA sequence we ended up with” is not evidence of divine intervention, regardless of what those odds are. It is only evidence of divine intervention if you assume that it was the intended result.



Any number of DNA sequences could result in living organisms, so I see no reason to assume that the DNA sequence we ended up with is the “right” DNA sequence. For that matter it could be possible for life to exist without any DNA sequences. And even more to the point, although you might find this thought disturbing, I don’t see any reason to assume that life is the intended result. Don’t get me wrong, I love life and I am glad to be alive. It is a strange and wonderful experience. But I personally see no reason to assume that anyone intended me to have this strange and wonderful experience.

The point I am labouring to get across is that it is only if you make that assumption that the odds become significant. If you don’t believe that this result is the intended result then there is no indication of “divine intervention”. If you are talking to someone who has made the same assumption of intent that you have made, then your argument is unnecessary. If you are talking someone who has not made the same assumption of intent that you have then your argument of odds is meaningless.

thanx for clarifying that. now i understand that we used the same analogy in a different perspective.

"I believe the evidence strongly supports the theory of evolution."

i do too. but to some extent.

Quran:
[21:30] Do the unbelievers not realize that the heaven and the earth used to be one solid mass that we exploded into existence? And from water we made all living things. Would they believe?

i believe this is the one the scientists called the big bang and the evolutionists claim that life begins in water or something like that

[24:45] And GOD created every living creature from water. Some of them walk on their bellies, some walk on two legs, and some walk on four. GOD creates whatever He wills. GOD is Omnipotent.

to medieval men, these verse are simply verse. they cannot comprehend. they can only imagine. but to us 21st centurions we know coz we have science to support this.

that is how i came to my conclusion that evolution did happened but to some extend. and certainly not without divine intervention. and may i add, God's science is much much much much more advance than our science. there are things in life which seems utterly impossible to our level of comprehension. some would call it strange phenomenon, some call it mysterious, some would call it miracle.

i call it a higher level of science that we are yet to understand.

 

[worshiper]

Why do you think that "your" DNA sequence is the one that God wants? What makes you perfect in this regard, and the other six odd billion people imperfect?

i think you miss my point my friend. i never said anything about my DNA sequence is perfect compared to other people. and certainly i'm no better than other people as well :no:

In regards to your statement about people not evolving, it is quite a contentious issue in regards to whether this process still occurs or not. I believe we are still doing so, as is every other animal.

Evolution does not occur in discrete stages, so we do not straight away become another life form. Life evolves slowly, over thousands of years.

which supports my probability argument.

In terms of human evolution, I would say that you are quite wrong in saying that people have not evolved in recent history. For example, we are now lactose tolerant, some groups of people have developed skin pigmentation changes, and Europe has an increased resistance to the bubonic plague. The last example even occured within the last one thousand years. Every year, we gain the cold virus, and we become immune to that, so a slightly different virus comes along, and we become immune to that, too. That's evolution at work, too.

but we are still human.

yes i hear ya my brotha!! i never claim that evolution never happened. to some extent yes it did happened. your quote above is one of the extent i was talking about. thank you

p/s: if you read my 1st post in this thread, then i think you'll have a clearer picture of my views. i'm not siding any groups here. i am Pro Evo and Pro Creo

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

What do you think "the right" DNA sequence is?

:clap Excellent! :clap

 

[worshiper]

]What do you think "the right" DNA sequence is?

:clap Excellent! :clap

once again you are not getting my point. i'm not saying i know the right DNA sequence. never did. the right DNA sequence that i was talking about is the ones that resulting of a new life form being created. who knows what that sequence are. i certainly dont know.

my education havent reached to that level yet coz my teacher died halfway

 

[Smoke]

[SIZE=-1]
In the life sciences, evolution is a change in the traits [/SIZE]

Yeah, I know what evolution is. But when you said "an evolution," I was wondering whether you thought there was a particular moment when speciation could be said to have occurred.

 

[worshiper]

Yeah, I know what evolution is. But when you said "an evolution," I was wondering whether you thought there was a particular moment when speciation could be said to have occurred.

i see your point.

[SIZE=-1]1) evolution is a change in the traits of living organisms over generations

2) including the emergence of new species <-- i was refering to this[/SIZE] not the previous

 

[Booko]

*** MOD POST ***

Several posts have been deleted from this thread.

Please refrain from personal sniping.

In addition, please review the following rule:

3) Advertising, spamming and trolling are not allowed and will not be tolerated. We will delete all spam posts (advertising directly or indirectly), or any post with just a link and no explanation. This includes using the forum email and Private Message system to spam other members. You may be banned for spamming. Refrain also from posting meaningless threads, or making one word or nonsense posts. Multiple or repeated posting in order to increase your post count is also not allowed.

Thanks in advance for your cooperation.

 

[worshiper]

advice noted. will try to improve in the future.

thnx Booko

 

[painted wolf]

but we are still human

one major recent change in the Human population is the ability to drink and digest milk late into adulthood. This is one of many mutations that makes us different from our early human ancestors.

One reason we don't change much over time is we love to travel. We do a wonderful job keeping our genetic pool quite mixed. One of the biggest factors to speciation is genetic isolation. We don't have that.

wa:do

 

[camanintx]

[SIZE=+1]Darwin's famous statement that "life began as a `simple' cell" is laughable.[/SIZE]

As recently as 50 years ago, Wells, Huxley, and Wells wrote in their classic textbook that "nothing can be seen inside the nucleus but clear fluid." We know now that the cell, is an extremely complex unit, with billions of nucleotides in the gene material inside the nucleus, and millions of biochemical reactions. The probability laws tell us that the probability of the haphazard creation of the exacting sequences of nucleotides into DNA is Zero, many times over. We are not talking about 84 nucleotides; we are talking about billions of nucleotides that must be arranged in a specific sequence.
​

​

Why do you think the concept of life evolving from a single cell over millions of years is impossible when you yourself grew from a single cell to an adult human in only 20 years? It sounds like you think of life as an increadibly delicate state when experience shows it is really quite resilient.