Evolution is Fact

[Moontanman]

.

 

 

Originally Posted by Univac

The point is that energy forms all matter, and matter doesn’t form all energy.

 

Can you provide a source for this? I've always seen matter/energy as equals.

 

Without energy there are no forms of matter only condensed space as one might call black matter.

 

Quote:

If one’s interpretation of energy is, ether possible or not possible for Human mind (recorded memory) to be still perpetual after the absence of the physical body?

Nobody can prove life after death nor can anybody prove that life evolved unless you were there to experience it.

 

True, but we can make some very accurate conclusions based upon evidence left behind (DNA, fossils) etc.

 

Conclusions are only assumptions not facts, DNA is only a make up of a structure and fossils is only dead energy formed matter.

 

Evolution can be seen within a human lifetime. I see no reason to throw out the *theory* of evolution.

 

Like what a caterpillar.?

 

Quote:

But the Bible was witnessed by mankind making it a fact.

 

That's rather funny! Can you name the person responsible for the bible? How is it "fact"?

 

At the time of Moses a material conductor called the ark was designed by God and built by Moses for the purpose of communication, this was after he personally spoke to God in Zion. (Fact)

 

Moses is credited with writing all the first five books instructed by the word of God through the conduction of ark namely, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy.(Fact)

After this time people were chosen to be conductors called prophets as King David, Solomon, Samuel, Elijah, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Hosea, Joel, Amos, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, Follow by the promised birth of Christ Jesus to indorse the Bible authenticity and the return of the holly spirit to all man kind which Adam and eve lost by unfaithfulness. Then came the twelve apostles the last conductors of God, for the purpose of salvation.(Fact)

 

Ok, if you insist that your bible is a factual document then why is it any more factual than the writings of Budda, or Shintu, or any other religion?

[univac]

Firstly I;m not insisting on anyone belief specially on this subject for those who have faith in the theory of evolution, nor do I define Doctrines of other dominations.

I seek a reasonable understanding and debate on all subjects

[ramanand]

Intelligent design is the assertion that "certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection".

This intelligent cause is surely god,( These assumptions are based on the teleological arguments)which has designed the nature to attain some goal and seems to be directed in a particular direction.

 

But any of these arguments do not support their assertion with a practical example to concrete the idea of intelligent design.

Nature IS "designed". Let's get real clear about that right now. An eyeball has a design. Eyes are very good at seeing. Wings are very good for flying. Spines are very good at supporting and distributing muscular forces. Richard Dawkins said as much in "The Blind Watchmaker".

nature is designed, but what’s the proof, but a proof of nature being evolved is there.

Evolution of the eye - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

 

 

all modern eyes, varied as they are, have their origins in a proto-eye believed to have evolved some 540 million years ago.

Eyes in various animals show adaption to their requirements. For example, birds of prey have much greater visual acuity than humans and some, like diurnal birds of prey, can see ultraviolet light.

All light-sensitive organs rely on photoreceptor systems employing a family of proteins called opsins, which, by structural and sequence homology can be shown to be of common origin.

 

Evolution is hard to understand because it involves an apparent directedness, an apparent intention toward something like a "goal". But the design was NOT pre-ordained or externally intended. OF COURSE Evolution is hard to understand--there is nothing ELSE in our experience that is remotely similar to it. Our feeble attempts to establish metaphors typically go to the extremes of intelligent design or total randomness. LOSE! LOSE!

Evolution is never directed but it is being directed by the various conditions of the living system. It has no goal and no purpose for which it works. And neither it creates the organism with perfect body rather it just make animal to adapt to the conditions of the surrounding environment.

 

Evolution is NOT random. As previously explained, Natural Selection "guides" evolution. Over time, the animal or plant changes to become better suited to its environment. But Natural Selection has no intelligence behind it. It has direction and a "goal" if you will. Like water has the "goal" of going downhill.

if there is intelligent designer than why not dinosaurs were designed in such a way that they do not get extinct. It is basically because they were not able to adapt themselves to the sudden changes in the environment

[InfiniteNow]

And... Here we go again. :(

 

 

This is the BIOLOGY forum.

This is a discussion on evolution.

 

This is not a place for every random idiot who believes in god to state this and suggest that their interpretation of a 2,000 year old book proves evolution wrong.

 

 

Why won't these people just get selected against, already? :hihi:

[C1ay]

At the time of Moses a material conductor called the ark was designed by God and built by Moses for the purpose of communication, this was after he personally spoke to God in Zion. (Fact)

 

Perhaps you need a working example of the rules here to help you understand them. Produce testable evidence of this claim. Undeniable evidence that this alleged ark exists, that it was designed by your alleged God, that your alleged God exists and that he and Moses did in fact have the conversation you allege. Failure to provide undeniable physical evidence of these claims can and will result in sanctions according to the rules here.

[Moontanman]

Firstly I;m not insisting on anyone belief specially on this subject for those who have faith in the theory of evolution, nor do I define Doctrines of other dominations.

I seek a reasonable understanding and debate on all subjects

 

Then why do you say all those totally unsupported things you claim from the bible as fact? There is no support for any of those things to be fact, they are all simply stories, told as fact. Nothing supports them as fact in any way.

[CraigD]

This is not a place for every random idiot who believes in god to state this and suggest that their interpretation of a 2,000 year old book proves evolution wrong.

 

Why won't these people just get selected against, already?

Taking this as a serious question of evolutionary biology, rather than an exasperated jab at evolution deniers, :hihi: my guess of an answer is that “these people” traits don’t disappear because they don’t prevent individuals and their descendents from having many descendents.

 

To the contrary, there’s a little detailed genetic and neuroanatomical, and a lot of informal and anecdotal evidence, that heritable traits predisposing humans for behaviors we can reasonable label credulous or superstitious (or, more politely, “faith-based”) have high positive survival value, while those that predispose for skeptical and strictly rational behaviors have negative survival value. Anecdotally, we observe many extremely academically accomplished, skeptical people suffering from chronic depression, emotional and social dysfunction, and dieing without reproducing, while many of the least so are very emotionally and socially functional and reproductively successful.

 

Because of the high survival value or the commonly accompanying traits, I suspect that “random idiots who believe in god” and reject science will remain in the human population as long as the species survives - the persistence of these traits, paradoxically, predicted by the very science the traits predispose individuals to deny.

 

On an optimistic note, I see ample evidence in history and present day society that superstition and science are not mutually incompatible, but rather capable of coexistence and mutual support, in individual psyches and in society as a whole. The idea that contradiction is inherently bad and in need of eradication is, I think, more profoundly detrimental to humanity and science than any irrational supernatural belief.

[ronthepon]

...or, perhaps because they're humans.

[freeztar]

Because of the high survival value or the commonly accompanying traits, I suspect that “random idiots who believe in god” and reject science will remain in the human population as long as the species survives - the persistence of these traits, paradoxically, predicted by the very science the traits predispose individuals to deny.

 

On an optimistic note, I see ample evidence in history and present day society that superstition and science are not mutually incompatible, but rather capable of coexistence and mutual support, in individual psyches and in society as a whole. The idea that contradiction is inherently bad and in need of eradication is, I think, more profoundly detrimental to humanity and science than any irrational supernatural belief.

 

What a great post Craig!

It is a fascinating, and paradoxical conundrum. Unfortunately, these thoughts remind me of the dystopian movie "Idiocracy" in which the smart and successful people stop breeding and the less-intelligent humans proliferate. :confused:

[Thunderbird]

Got a link? I couldn't find that definition in any reference I looked at.

I took a little semantic license, my bad, The total sum cognitive direction of a species though time as a whole. Human kind, rabbit kind.

[C1ay]

The total sum cognitive direction of a species though time as a whole. Human kind, rabbit kind.

 

Show us your proof that evolution is a cognitive process. There is no inherent intelligence in natural selection. Weak traits die, no intelligence required.

[ughaibu]

my guess of an answer is that “these people” traits don’t disappear because they don’t prevent individuals and their descendents from having many descendents

I'm not so sure. Genital mutilation is a widespread class of ritualised behaviour, generally subsumed by religion. The relative severity, of mutilation, seems to correlate with ecological conditions, suggesting that it succeeded, as a practice, by functioning as a contraceptive, ie harsh conditions that can only support relatively small groups, require the severest mutilations to keep the group's population viably contained. Similarly, one might expect the sexually obsessed religions from arid uncongenial regions, the Abrahamic religions, to function as contraceptives.

[Overdog]

Wow. Some of the posts I see in this thread seem to suggest that whatever selective pressure there may be in nature towards increasing intelligence, it must be very slight indeed.

[freeztar]

Wow. Some of the posts I see in this thread seem to suggest that whatever selective pressure there may be in nature towards increasing intelligence, it must be very slight indeed.

 

Welcome Overdog. :)

 

Care to elaborate?

[Overdog]

The idea that genital mutilation as practiced by some cultures serves as a mechanism for population control does not seem very well supported by the evidence to me...didn't feel I could leave the thread ending on that note.

 

As I see it, all human beings are born ignorant, and perhaps humankind's most profound characteristic, even above intelligence, is a supreme gullibility which allows the rapid development of a belief system (without evidence) which nevertheless confers survival/reproductive advantage...but nature doesn't care what you believe...only that you reporduce.

 

To me the issue is no longer about the evolution of intelligence, but culture, and the never ending struggle against ignorance.

[Thunderbird]

Show us your proof that evolution is a cognitive process. There is no inherent intelligence in natural selection. Weak traits die, no intelligence required.

The advanced progession of communication systems.

 

 

1. Cell to cell communication based upon chemicals relations.

Results in multi-cellular organisms.

2. Species to species sexual communication based upon chemical and visual signals for higher species.

3. Chemical, visual , and auditory communications that relay to potential mates genetic qualities, strong traits.

4. Chemical, visual , auditory, and creative traits signaling to potential mates that the mating partner has not only strengths and energy to survive but has a surpluses of traits to adapt to changes.

5. Complex communication within social groups. exchange of information between group members on food sources, dangers etc.

6.And finally complex language, the biggest leap of cognition on earth that gave man the edge on any other species. Language allowed for an individual to relay complex information in detail that could be passed on as memes surpassing even genetics as a way to pass on information that would allow an individuals and groups to survive to pass on these specific cognitive traits.

[C1ay]

The advanced progession of communication systems.

 

 

1. Cell to cell communication based upon chemicals relations.

Results in multi-cellular organisms.

2. Species to species sexual communication based upon chemical and visual signals for higher species.

3. Chemical, visual , and auditory communications that relay to potential mates genetic qualities, strong traits.

4. Chemical, visual , auditory, and creative traits signaling to potential mates that the mating partner has not only strengths and energy to survive but has a surpluses of traits to adapt to changes.

5. Complex communication within social groups. exchange of information between group members on food sources, dangers etc.

6.And finally complex language, the biggest leap of cognition on earth that gave man the edge on any other species. Language allowed for an individual to relay complex information in detail that could be passed on as memes surpassing even genetics as a way to pass on information that would allow an individuals and groups to survive to pass on these specific cognitive traits.

 

Wow. It is astoundingly incomprehensible that you believe any of that and expect others to believe it too. I believe your understanding of natural selection is so poor that is irreparable. There is no cognitive communication involved in natural selection. Perhaps some of these sources may help with your studies.