Evolution is Fact

[Pyrotex]

...turn your attention to evolving. the only way to prove that is to compair two subjects one that evolved and one that did not

Okay.

 

I'll bite.

 

[sarcasm] I evolved. You didn't. [/sarcasm]

 

:cup: Sorry 'bout that, but you left yourself wide open, and I just can't pass up a straight line. :)

 

Pyro

[freeztar]

i think it purdy much a fact that life is the chemical reaction between carbon and oxygen. now as soon as the reaction between oxygen and carbon is started it burns violently untill all the carbon and oxygen are combined.

 

If you think this is fact, please give us a reference for this "fact".

 

As far as Earth-based lifeforms, there are none that I know of that consist of only carbon and oxygen. Even viruses are much more chemically complex.

[Moontanman]

i think it purdy much a fact that life is the chemical reaction between carbon and oxygen. now as soon as the reaction between oxygen and carbon is started it burns violently untill all the carbon and oxygen are combined.

 

so billions of years ago when the life reaction was started it would have went BOOM and that would have been the end of life.

 

Is that a fact? Have you ever tried to start charcoal with a match? I have and it never goes boom unless i use something else to help the fire along. On top of that there was no free oxygen at the start and even if there was when was the last time you saw a person suddenly go boom from breathing? Life uses oxygen for energy now, life at it's most basic doesn't need to have oxygen to respire. Oxygen just happens to be the best way life has

evolved so far to gain energy from food. Catalysts and enzymes are needed by life to use any energy source. No modern life form uses a chemical energy source without them to either slow down to speed up the process.

[Overdog]

Okay.

 

I'll bite.

 

I evolved. You didn't.

Pyro

 

That was cold. Funny, but cold.

[HydrogenBond]

The reaction of oxygen and hydrogen makes water. When the universe was still a blob of sub-atomic particles, and there was no hydrogen or oxygen, water was still what was going to form when hydrogen and oxygen atoms finally appeared. We could go to the center of the sun and track plasma oxygen and hydrogen and it eventually and predictably becomes water. That design is inherent in the universe. It will not form CO2 or something random. Based on the laws of nature, this is how the design is always going to happen. We can wish it is different. Intelligent design, in terms of science, knows that the laws of nature will form water no matter how many steps backwards we want to start.

 

Like I was saying before, life has milestones like DNA, RNA. Like water, as the O,C,H,N, P, gathers the design for life, based on natural laws, is going to result in DNA, RNA, in those proper places where life is able to form. It is a predictable as water. The cell is another parameter milestone built into the natural laws of nature. Between these milestones there may be dice, but the milestones are probability=1.0.

 

Evolution may concede milestones up to cells, although the exact order of mini-milestones is subject to debate, since we have not made life in the lab. Once they can make life from scratch in the lab, even with 100 labs doing the technique, they will also line up with the same design.

 

The question is how far do these milestones go? There are no dominant life forms that reason, using only a single cell. We know multicellular is also a necessary milestone. Do design milestones stop at basic multicellular or do these go much further up the evolutionary ladder? Another is nervous tissue and then a brain. Maybe lungs for higher O2 uptake, maybe warm blooded, etc. There is still the random of survival and selective advantage between milestones. Going from DNA to a cell had a lot of prototypes. Once the cell formed we reached a solid milestone. It is still tweaked but there is no evidence of another basic unit of life analogous to a cell. This is the natural design already set by natural law, at the same time as water.

[Thunderbird]

okay, so i've been farmin purty heavly the past few days but always thinking.

i began to wonder what is the purpose of the evolution theory. it can't be used in any way, nor does it help anything. when is the last time you heard it said, thanks to the evolution theory engineers where able to increase fuel mileage?

 

"to everything there is a season, a time for every purpose under heaven"

so what is the purpose of the evolution theory?

 

I for one do believe very much in the evolutionary process’s, I not only have a knowledge of basic Darwinian models , but further I have a keen interest of how these models can be applicable to cover cross disciplinary fields of study, such as cosmology, geology,physiology, systems science, certain theoretical models of physics, and the rise of the civilized world, and even the study of the role religion, art, epistemology mythology, and even the technology’s directional aims should be, for a successful future. The one thing science can do better than any thing is..... predict, studing evolutionary process's can give you clues to do to survive, or should. Studying evolution in this way gives us clues to how we can self evolve as a society and individually. One tenet of which is the exchange of diverse information, I believe this can be referred to as communication. When a group becomes redundant in information , ether in genetic traits or in the case of a community of ideas, inbreeding will result, the children of which become unable to cope with the diverse social environment or scientific dynamics of the present.

[goku]

If you think this is fact, please give us a reference for this "fact".

 

you really don't know? or are you just yanking my chain?

 

you eat carbon and breathe oxygen

[goku]

On top of that there was no free oxygen at the start

 

and you know this because that's what they told you?

because it is a scientific fact? you know, one of those things that isn't concrete :shrug:

[goku]

As a farmer you should know better. Corn and wheat are fine examples of the usefulness of evolution. Over the last few thousand years they've changed drastically in oder to be useful to (and because of) people. The Breeding of domesticated species of plants shows the usefulness of natural selection. Many geneticists are employed in the field.

 

it's called selective breeding, has nothing to do with evolution, who told you that?

 

This is not wrong. Thanks to evolution theory corn production increases and more ethanol is produced lowering the cost of biofuel.

 

selective breeding, ethanol was a dumb idea there's not enough corn

 

Hopefully the reason you're here is so you don't have to take it on faith. Science works for anybody. If you learn the science then you can work it out yourself and you don't need to wonder if science (or any other institution) is lying to you. It is certainly one of the better things about science I'm fond of - you don't have to take it on faith.

 

-modest

 

any time some one says scientists "believe" and you believe it also, you're taking it on faith

[C1ay]

i think it purdy much a fact that life is the chemical reaction between carbon and oxygen. now as soon as the reaction between oxygen and carbon is started it burns violently untill all the carbon and oxygen are combined.

If you think this is fact, please give us a reference for this "fact".

you really don't know? or are you just yanking my chain?

 

you eat carbon and breathe oxygen

 

And you're claiming that we burn violently as a result of eating carbon and breathing oxygen? Again, reference please.

[modest]

it's called selective breeding, has nothing to do with evolution, who told you that?

 

Before I respond fully I'd like to make sure I understand your position. You are saying a species can evolve by selective breeding but not natural selection? Is this fair?

 

any time some one says scientists "believe" and you believe it also, you're taking it on faith

 

You miss my point. Science has a method you can use to question facts and theories yourself. No faith needed.

[C1ay]

it's called selective breeding, has nothing to do with evolution, who told you that?

 

Selective breeding is actually a test of evolution and supports the theory well. Perhaps you'll find this article informative....

[freeztar]

you really don't know? or are you just yanking my chain?

 

you eat carbon and breathe oxygen

 

I asked for a source for your supposed "fact". I'm not yanking your chain. I honestly do not believe that you can find one.

[Moontanman]

and you know this because that's what they told you?

because it is a scientific fact? you know, one of those things that isn't concrete :shrug:

 

There is a tremendous amount of evidence to support the idea of no oxygen at the beginning none to support there was oxygen. On top of that there are a vast number of life forms that do not use free oxygen and are poisoned by it.

[Pyrotex]

The fact that the early Earth began with NO oxygen does not require faith, or any complicated evidence.

 

Oxygen is very reactive--it combines with a large variety of elements and molecules, releasing heat in the process. Oxygen is almost as reactive as chlorine!

 

There are no common chemical reactions which release oxygen. Hydrogen peroxide does release oxygen, but H2O2 is not produced by any common chemical reactions in nature. (Except by a fish and a beetle, but how THEY produce H2O2 is anything but common).

 

The only chemical reactions that release enough oxygen to account for all the oxygen in our atmosphere are BIOLOGICAL ones. If there were no Life on Earth, all the oxygen would disappear in a matter of a few decades.

 

Oxygen is produced by Life as a waste product. Plants, algae, some bacteria. The bacteria that produce oxygen generally find it toxic at concentrations much lower than it occurs in our atmosphere (21%).

 

Therefore, before there was Life on Earth, we are very safe in concluding that there could have been no oxygen.

[Thunderbird]

In the geological record of the earth there are the “red beds” layers of iron that dropped out of suspension as iron oxide when oxygen levels became high enough. This tipping point of earths biosphere that turned the seas a blood red color also coincides in time and in correlation with the appearance , or birth of complex life. I like to refer this event as the mother earth’s menstruation period, signaling sexual maturity.:shrug:

[Moontanman]

In the geological record of the earth there are the “red beds” layers of iron that dropped out of suspension as iron oxide when oxygen levels became high enough. This tipping point of earths biosphere that turned the seas a blood red color also coincides in time and in correlation with the appearance , or birth of complex life. I like to refer this event as the mother earth’s menstruation period, signaling sexual maturity.:shrug:

 

I've had a lot of metaphores cross my mind about the Earth but some how that one just never turned up. It is discriptive.....:doh: