Why the Theory of Evolution is not only the right answer, why it is a critical answer

[LTCArmyRet]

I don't know how I missed your first post there, but I will address both.

First of all, evolution is not, does not explain the origin of life. However life originated, it evolves.

Secondly, I don't need to explain it for it to be true:

Finally, there are no guarantees in life. You didn't know this? Huh.

separating origin from evolution? how convenient


evolution is about adapting to your surroundings, if it was fact, we wouldn't have more extinct species than living

Why is this a problem for you? The theory of evolution was never meant to explain the origin of life. it was meant to explain the diversity of life. There are separate theories for the origin of life. One popular theory is the abiogenesis theory. Another is the panspermia theory.

The reasons why there are more extinct species than living include:

1) The fact that the Earth is a VERY dangerous place to live;

2) the fact that evolution would not occur if #1 were not true.

3) Evolution weeds out the less fit. If you, as a species, have evolved in a stable environment and have survived in that environment as a species for thousands of years, then a sudden, drastic change in that environment occurs (i.e., a five mile wide asteroid strikes the Yucatan Peninsula), the chances of your survival are greatly diminished.

Finally, you seem to think that evolution is about positive change only. The existence of genetic diseases demonstrates clearly that that notion is not true.

I applaud you on your google search capability.

 

[GISMYS]

EVOLUTION IS PURE BUNK "science" MICRO YES AS ANIMALS CAN BE BREED FOR SIZE OR COLOR AND SUCH BUT NO HONEY BEE WILL EVER BECOME A COW JUST AS POND SCUM WILL NEVER EVOLVE INTO THE MOST COMPLEX THING IN THE KNOWN UNIVERSE=THER HUMAN BRAIN AND BODY!!!! TRY TO THINK!

 

[rightwinger]

EVOLUTION IS PURE BUNK "science" MICRO YES AS ANIMALS CAN BE BREED FOR SIZE OR COLOR AND SUCH BUT NO HONEY BEE WILL EVER BECOME A COW JUST AS POND SCUM WILL NEVER EVOLVE INTO THE MOST COMPLEX THING IN THE KNOWN UNIVERSE=THER HUMAN BRAIN AND BODY!!!! TRY TO THINK!

CAPLOCK is not your friend

God is bunk science

Evolution is a fact

 

[GISMYS]

Silly non thinker!!! If evolution were true then a bee could become a cow and pond scum could evolve into man but if you think you would know the human brain and body are far to complex to be just an accident of time and chance!!! Try to think!

 

[rightwinger]

Silly non thinker!!! If evolution were true then a bee could become a cow and pond scum could evolve into man but if you think you would know the human brain and body are far to complex to be just an accident of time and chance!!! Try to think!

If evolution were not a fact you would find human bones mixed with those of dinosaurs. You would not find rock strata with only implement forms of life in it with more complex life found in higher strata

Guess what? There were millions of years in which man did not exist

 

[GISMYS]

Any crazy,stupid idea is ok but not creation by god!!! The newest idea,now that science found that life could not just evolve,is that life came to earth from outerspace on comets,rocks,they don't even try to say where or how life started in outerspace or other worlds!!! Lol!

 

[rightwinger]

Any crazy,stupid idea is ok but not creation by god!!! The newest idea,now that science found that life could not just evolve,is that life came to earth from outerspace on comets,rocks,they don't even try to say where or how life started in outerspace or other worlds!!! Lol!

There are mountains of scientific evidence supporting the fact that evolution occurs. Fossil evidence, biological and DNA

There is no scientific evidence supporting a theory of God

 

[abu afak]

Any crazy,stupid idea is ok but not creation by god!!! The newest idea,now that science found that life could not just evolve, is that life came to earth from outerspace on comets,rocks,they don't even try to say where or how life started in outerspace or other worlds!!! Lol!

But saying 'God' came from Outer space/Nowhere and magic-wanded up humans IS credible Looney Tune?
I've seen your Lunatical CAPS-LOCK Ravings on other message boards. What a Nut Bag!
`

 

[GISMYS]

Lol!!! You dream!!!! Pond scum evolving to mankind???? Pure bunk for the sin loving god haters! And you??

 

[orogenicman]

separating origin from evolution? how convenient


evolution is about adapting to your surroundings, if it was fact, we wouldn't have more extinct species than living

Why is this a problem for you? The theory of evolution was never meant to explain the origin of life. it was meant to explain the diversity of life. There are separate theories for the origin of life. One popular theory is the abiogenesis theory. Another is the panspermia theory.

The reasons why there are more extinct species than living include:

1) The fact that the Earth is a VERY dangerous place to live;

2) the fact that evolution would not occur if #1 were not true.

3) Evolution weeds out the less fit. If you, as a species, have evolved in a stable environment and have survived in that environment as a species for thousands of years, then a sudden, drastic change in that environment occurs (i.e., a five mile wide asteroid strikes the Yucatan Peninsula), the chances of your survival are greatly diminished.

Finally, you seem to think that evolution is about positive change only. The existence of genetic diseases demonstrates clearly that that notion is not true.

I applaud you on your google search capability.

What google search? Left you speechless, have I?

 

[orogenicman]

EVOLUTION IS PURE BUNK "science" MICRO YES AS ANIMALS CAN BE BREED FOR SIZE OR COLOR AND SUCH BUT NO HONEY BEE WILL EVER BECOME A COW JUST AS POND SCUM WILL NEVER EVOLVE INTO THE MOST COMPLEX THING IN THE KNOWN UNIVERSE=THER HUMAN BRAIN AND BODY!!!! TRY TO THINK!

And that's a GOOD thing, because if that were possible, that would disprove evolution. But since evolution doesn't make such silly claims, perhaps you should do more than try to think. Perhaps you should learn what evolution is before you comment on it.

 

[S.J.]

Primates have been around for 75 million years, so if Homo Sapiens has a short shelf-life, it will likely be self imposed.

Primates have been around for that long but not any particular primate species, such as ourselves. Correct me if I am wrong.

But the mold has been around that long (five fingers, fingernails, fingerprints, binocular vision, upright posture, etc)..

Thanks you orogenicman for your excellent posts on this thread.

De nada.

Would you two homo sapiens like to be alone?

 

[orogenicman]

Primates have been around for that long but not any particular primate species, such as ourselves. Correct me if I am wrong.

But the mold has been around that long (five fingers, fingernails, fingerprints, binocular vision, upright posture, etc)..

Thanks you orogenicman for your excellent posts on this thread.

De nada.

Would you two homo sapiens like to be alone?

Are you offering to leave the thread?

 

[S.J.]

But the mold has been around that long (five fingers, fingernails, fingerprints, binocular vision, upright posture, etc)..



De nada.

Would you two homo sapiens like to be alone?

Are you offering to leave the thread?

No, I'm offering to give you a chance to make your case for evolution, which you have not. Since you claim to be so "educated" on the subject, you should be able to answer the critical questions that your theory is based on. You can start with explaining where the first creature in the chain came from. Then you can explain how it became another species. Then explain why those "evolving" creatures are still around if they "evolved" into something else. So, instead of attacking everyone who questions your assertions, how about PROVING your assertions?

 

[orogenicman]

Would you two homo sapiens like to be alone?

Are you offering to leave the thread?

No, I'm offering to give you a chance to make your case for evolution, which you have not. Since you claim to be so "educated" on the subject, you should be able to answer the critical questions that your theory is based on. You can start with explaining where the first creature in the chain came from. Then you can explain how it became another species. Then explain why those "evolving" creatures are still around if they "evolved" into something else. So, instead of attacking everyone who questions your assertions, how about PROVING your assertions?

First of all, do explain how you managed to interpret my response to your post as an attack. Secondly, your response to my post, if anything was a snide comment on the fact that someone complimented me. Now, I can only conclude that the fact that I was complimented somehow left you feeling slighted, which can only mean that since you weren't even involved in the discussion, that your ego is much larger than it deserves to be. Perhaps you could put a lid on those kinds of comments in the future.

Secondly, we are unsure of where the "first" creature came from for the simple fact that the strata where they would be preserved has itself apparently not been preserved. The Earth is a very old and dynamic planet. Erosion and plate tectonics have likely destroyed the very oldest life-bearing sediments. That said, to suggest that there was a "first" creature is to misunderstand not only evolution, but genetics and even organic chemistry. Evolution of species occurs in populations not in individuals. So the more correct question is 'where did the first population come from". And the plain and simply truth is that to date we don't know, and may never know.

But not knowing where the first life came from had no bearing on the fact that life evolves, so I am unclear on why you believe the question to be germane.

As to how the first life came to be another species, the answer is simple - evolution. I know you were expecting me to suggest some magical sky daddy was involved in the mix. Sorry about that.

As to why evolving species are still around if "they evolved into something else", really? All species evolve. If all evolving species went extinct every time they evolved then there would be no life on this planet, because the life that they evolved into would itself go extinct. It is a meaningless question.

And further questions?

 

[Big Black Dog]

I am a child of God and I strongly believe that He made me in His image. I'm pretty sure that my wife evolved from monkeys though...

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Cures for disease. For instance:

Giant leaps of evolution make cancer cells deadly - health - 23 January 2014 - New Scientist

Tumour cells take big genetic jumps called macromutations to become invasive "hopeful monsters". Treatment to block that evolution could be the next step

More at the link.

You really have no idea what you are talking about, do you?

 

[S.J.]

First of all, do explain how you managed to interpret my response to your post as an attack.

I didn't. Read it again. I said you attack everyone who questions your assertions.

But not knowing where the first life came from had no bearing on the fact that life evolves, so I am unclear on why you believe the question to be germane.

Sorry, but it IS germane. You're claiming that the first life form became another, then another, and so on, but you can't explain how it started. The entire theory is based on life not being created, but evolving, so you should be able to explain how it started. And you should be able to recreate it in a lab.

As to how the first life came to be another species, the answer is simple - evolution. I know you were expecting me to suggest some magical sky daddy was involved in the mix. Sorry about that.

That's your answer, "evolution"? In other words, you don't know.

As to why evolving species are still around if "they evolved into something else", really? All species evolve. If all evolving species went extinct every time they evolved then there would be no life on this planet, because the life that they evolved into would itself go extinct. It is a meaningless question.

Oh, so a monkey somewhere along the line popped out a human and viola, a new species is born? I know, I know, "evolution". So why can't you explain HOW "evolution" changes one species into another? I know that species evolve WITHIN their own species to a small extent to adapt to different environments, but you have yet to provide any evidence whatsoever that they evolve into different species.

 

[orogenicman]

First of all, do explain how you managed to interpret my response to your post as an attack.

I didn't. Read it again. I said you attack everyone who questions your assertions.

If that is what you take from this thread, then perhaps you are wasting your time. In which case, why are you here?

But not knowing where the first life came from had no bearing on the fact that life evolves, so I am unclear on why you believe the question to be germane.

Sorry, but it IS germane.

No it is not. Keep reading.

You're claiming that the first life form became another, then another, and so on, but you can't explain how it started.

Notice how your claim uses the singular, not the plural. What part of "populations evolve" do you not understand? How it started is irrelevant to the FACT that life evolves. If you want to discover how life started, you need another theory because evolution, by definition, is only about the origin of species, not the origin of life.

The entire theory is based on life not being created, but evolving, so you should be able to explain how it started. And you should be able to recreate it in a lab.

No, the entire theory describes the diversity of life, not how it started or where or when it originated.

As to how the first life came to be another species, the answer is simple - evolution. I know you were expecting me to suggest some magical sky daddy was involved in the mix. Sorry about that.

That's your answer, "evolution"? In other words, you don't know.

Yes that is my answer. No it is not a non-answer. It is THE answer. And I do know. Keep reading.

As to why evolving species are still around if "they evolved into something else", really? All species evolve. If all evolving species went extinct every time they evolved then there would be no life on this planet, because the life that they evolved into would itself go extinct. It is a meaningless question.

Oh, so a monkey somewhere along the line popped out a human and viola, a new species is born? I know, I know, "evolution". So why can't you explain HOW "evolution" changes one species into another? I know that species evolve WITHIN their own species to a small extent to adapt to different environments, but you have yet to provide any evidence whatsoever that they evolve into different species.

Obviously, you don't know evolution. Because if you did, you would not have repeated this misrepresentation of evolutionary theory. Again, what part of "populations evolve, not individuals" do you not understand?

I can explain how species evolve. You didn't ask it before so I didn't tell you. Species evolve via natural selection.

Look at artificial selection of domestic animals by humans. The mechanism for changing those animals is there naturally, or we would not be able to breed these animals for our own purposes. That mechanism is their genomes. We select animals based on what we desire of them (i.e., gentle nature, speed, taste, etc.), and then breed only those specimens that have the desired characteristics. After repeated breeding, we end up with breeds that only have those characteristics. They breed true. And we've done this only after a relative few generations of selective breeding. Nature does this via natural selection (i.e., the gradual process by which biological traits become either more or less common in a population as a function of the effect of inherited traits on the differential reproductive success of organisms interacting with their environment) as well, but over a much longer period of time.

 

[S.J.]

First of all, do explain how you managed to interpret my response to your post as an attack.

I didn't. Read it again. I said you attack everyone who questions your assertions.

If that is what you take from this thread, then perhaps you are wasting your time. In which case, why are you here?




No it is not. Keep reading.



Notice how your claim uses the singular, not the plural. What part of "populations evolve" do you not understand? How it started is irrelevant to the FACT that life evolves. If you want to discover how life started, you need another theory because evolution, by definition, is only about the origin of species, not the origin of life.



No, the entire theory describes the diversity of life, not how it started or where or when it originated.





Yes that is my answer. No it is not a non-answer. It is THE answer. And I do know. Keep reading.

As to why evolving species are still around if "they evolved into something else", really? All species evolve. If all evolving species went extinct every time they evolved then there would be no life on this planet, because the life that they evolved into would itself go extinct. It is a meaningless question.

Oh, so a monkey somewhere along the line popped out a human and viola, a new species is born? I know, I know, "evolution". So why can't you explain HOW "evolution" changes one species into another? I know that species evolve WITHIN their own species to a small extent to adapt to different environments, but you have yet to provide any evidence whatsoever that they evolve into different species.

Obviously, you don't know evolution. Because if you did, you would not have repeated this misrepresentation of evolutionary theory. Again, what part of "populations evolve, not individuals" do you not understand?

I can explain how species evolve. You didn't ask it before so I didn't tell you. Species evolve via natural selection.

Look at artificial selection of domestic animals by humans. The mechanism for changing those animals is there naturally, or we would not be able to breed these animals for our own purposes. That mechanism is their genomes. We select animals based on what we desire of them (i.e., gentle nature, speed, taste, etc.), and then breed only those specimens that have the desired characteristics. After repeated breeding, we end up with breeds that only have those characteristics. They breed true. And we've done this only after a relative few generations of selective breeding. Nature does this via natural selection (i.e., the gradual process by which biological traits become either more or less common in a population as a function of the effect of inherited traits on the differential reproductive success of organisms interacting with their environment) as well, but over a much longer period of time.

Well, I kept reading and I still didn't see any answers that you keep claiming you have. All I've seen is you telling me I don't understand evolution. Apparently you don't understand it either because you don't seem to be able to answer any of the questions I just asked. For example, I'm still waiting for you to show us how species evolve into other species. And this time, how about something other than "You just don't understand evolution"?