Origin of Species - unstable footings in Evolution - Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest

Go Back   Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > General 4x4 Stuff > Politics, Government, or Religion Chat
GL4x4 Live! GL4x4 Casino

Politics, Government, or Religion Chat Bring your flamesuit!

greatlakes4x4.com is the premier Great Lakes 4x4 Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
Search
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old November 7th, 2007, 11:38 PM   #1
amc78cj7
Senior Member
 
amc78cj7's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-07-05
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,354
iTrader: (9)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default Origin of Species - unstable footings in Evolution

Charles Darwin's "Origin of Species" has been used as the foundation of the theory that humans "evolved" from other species. However, did Darwin ever imply that his observations indicated such a phenomenom?

What Darwin’s theory says

Darwin did two things
(1) convinced us that evolution actually occurs
(2)provided an mechanism by how it occurs. Latter the more controversial.
Darwins theory proceeds from three easy observations.
- All species have variations within them. Individuals are not identical.
- Some of the variation is inherited (we look like our parents); some of it
random.
- Organisms produce more offspring than survive. Survivors

All these observation applied only WITHIN a single species.

In fact, Darwin himself, a wise scientist; conceeded that:

"When we descend to details, we can prove that no species has changed [we cannot prove that a single species has changed]; nor can we prove that the supposed changes are beneficial, which is the groundwork of the theory." —*Charles Darwin, in "Francis Darwin (ed.), The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin Vol. 2 (1887), P. 210.


Furthermore, leading evolutionary biologists acknowledge similar gaps in the theory of transmutation evolution:

""Evolution requires intermediate forms between species, and paleontology [the study of fossils] does not provide them." —*David Kitts, "Paleontology and Evolutionary Theory" in Evolution, September 1974, p. 467.

So how much faith is required to believe in the evolution of species from a common ancestor. How objectively to current scientist approach these topics? Or do they just spread propaganda?

Discuss.
__________________
I'm not quoting idiots who promote unsafe recovery strap techniques anymore. :miff:
amc78cj7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old November 7th, 2007, 11:47 PM   #2
lbfin88
American Infidel
 
lbfin88's Avatar
 
Join Date: 01-24-06
Location: Lapeer
Posts: 1,090
iTrader: (0)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Send a message via AIM to lbfin88
Default

The fossil record does not support Darwin's theory. There are NO transistional fossils. A horse has always been a horse, although differing in size and shape it is still classified as a horse
lbfin88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 8th, 2007, 06:06 AM   #3
Yetti
Buy a Fiat! Save the UAW!
 
Yetti's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: 20 minutes south of Hell...
Posts: 14,388
iTrader: (10)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Default

at some point there had to be a catlyst for change. wether it was a climate or surface change like an earth quake moving a body of water that was the sole source of life for a people or critter. the things people don't figure in is disease and mutations of . they can lead to all sorts of off shoots as does climate. if you do a search on skin tones you will see that climate has everything to do with where the darkest skin tones came from in antiquity. the deepest deserts had the blackest skin to repell sun & UV rays and the frozen north had brilliant white to reflect sun and keep people from being burnt by the sun relecting off snow. sometimes the simplest things denote change and are over looked by all.
__________________
Yetti
Yetti is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 8th, 2007, 08:03 AM   #4
amc78cj7
Senior Member
 
amc78cj7's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-07-05
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,354
iTrader: (9)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yetti View Post
at some point there had to be a catlyst for change. wether it was a climate or surface change like an earth quake moving a body of water that was the sole source of life for a people or critter. the things people don't figure in is disease and mutations of . they can lead to all sorts of off shoots as does climate. if you do a search on skin tones you will see that climate has everything to do with where the darkest skin tones came from in antiquity. the deepest deserts had the blackest skin to repell sun & UV rays and the frozen north had brilliant white to reflect sun and keep people from being burnt by the sun relecting off snow. sometimes the simplest things denote change and are over looked by all.
Your example of skin color is an example of a change WITHIN a species, not something that causes one species to split into two distinctly different species that cannot inter-breeed.

Please try again.
__________________
I'm not quoting idiots who promote unsafe recovery strap techniques anymore. :miff:
amc78cj7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 8th, 2007, 08:12 AM   #5
mikesova
My 4x4 is a Subaru.
 
mikesova's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Gladwin, MI
Posts: 7,881
iTrader: (1)
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Send a message via AIM to mikesova
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by amc78cj7 View Post
Your example of skin color is an example of a change WITHIN a species, not something that causes one species to split into two distinctly different species that cannot inter-breeed.

Please try again.
oh snap!
mikesova is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 8th, 2007, 08:20 AM   #6
Mjolman
1984 Jeep CJ-7
 
Mjolman's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-13-07
Location: Muskegon, MI
Posts: 574
iTrader: (0)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

YouTube Video
ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.
Mjolman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 8th, 2007, 08:31 AM   #7
amc78cj7
Senior Member
 
amc78cj7's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-07-05
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,354
iTrader: (9)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mjolman View Post
YouTube Video
ERROR: If you can see this, then YouTube is down or you don't have Flash installed.
That's a nice model of evolution, but there is no scientific support "yet" that it occurs. Can you provide evidence that two distinct species arose from a single species? If there are fossil records of the original specie and the current specie there must be a record of the transition specie, no? And considering the amplitude of species today, all developing eyes, brains, kidneys, lungs, hearts, legs, etc. from a single simple single-celled organism there must be ample fossil records of all the transition species so we can see exactly where the branch-points occurred.

Scientist once had a model that the world was flat based on their observations. It wasn't until they had more information that they were able to determine that the model indeed is spherical.
__________________
I'm not quoting idiots who promote unsafe recovery strap techniques anymore. :miff:

Last edited by amc78cj7; November 8th, 2007 at 09:18 AM.
amc78cj7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 8th, 2007, 06:37 PM   #8
Yetti
Buy a Fiat! Save the UAW!
 
Yetti's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: 20 minutes south of Hell...
Posts: 14,388
iTrader: (10)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Default

Platapus!

it explains everything. it shows that anything is possible. even genitc misfits.
__________________
Yetti
Yetti is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 8th, 2007, 06:53 PM   #9
amc78cj7
Senior Member
 
amc78cj7's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-07-05
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,354
iTrader: (9)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yetti View Post
Platapus!

it explains everything. it shows that anything is possible. even genitc misfits.
Yes, Platapus is an excellent example of "survival of the fittist". Where it's common ancester is, nobody knows. Maybe it's the missing link between man and ape.

BTW, did you all know that from a genome standpoint the human's closest relative is a pig?
__________________
I'm not quoting idiots who promote unsafe recovery strap techniques anymore. :miff:
amc78cj7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 8th, 2007, 07:58 PM   #10
brewmenn
Grumpy old man.
 
brewmenn's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Inkster, MI
Posts: 10,586
iTrader: (9)
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by amc78cj7 View Post

BTW, did you all know that from a genome standpoint the human's closest relative is a pig?
that explains everything.
brewmenn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 8th, 2007, 08:11 PM   #11
Yetti
Buy a Fiat! Save the UAW!
 
Yetti's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: 20 minutes south of Hell...
Posts: 14,388
iTrader: (10)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by brewmenn View Post
that explains everything.
...don't know about everything, but it certainly explains alot.

I know the Mythbuster guys use Pigs as test dummys for human injury models. if I remember right the impact sled over at GM had a fridge next to it for pigs and cadavers that were used for tests.
I'm sure glad DCX is to cheap to try that stuff.
__________________
Yetti
Yetti is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 9th, 2007, 11:38 PM   #12
brewmenn
Grumpy old man.
 
brewmenn's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Inkster, MI
Posts: 10,586
iTrader: (9)
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lbfin88 View Post
The fossil record does not support Darwin's theory. There are NO transistional fossils. A horse has always been a horse, although differing in size and shape it is still classified as a horse
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hors...vol.html#part1

There are holes in the theory, but most of it is supported by the fossil record.

If you understood the theory you'd know that all species are "transistional species". Every species is evolving. Platypus are one example of a species that diverged to the point that it doesn't fit the typical classifications. Whales are another. The vestigial legs of whales seem to indicate that they evolved from land animals. Our own bodies contain vestigial tail bones.

If you were to devide all humans into 2 groups and move one group to another planet, the genetic and biological makeup of each group would slowly diverge, with traits that enhanced each groups likelyhood of survival becoming more common, traits that hindered survival becoming less common, and those thathad no effect on survival lingering but maybe not dissapearing. Eventually the 2 populations would diverge to the extent that at some point, maybe in thousands of years, maybe millions, they would be so genetically different that they would no longer be able to reproduce togeather and would be considered different species.

Part of the problem people have with understanding this is the classifications we use. It's human nature to want to classify and organize everything, so we make up names like horse, or dog, or mammal. To say that something was "still classified as a horse" just says that everything that looked like a horse we called a horse. It says nothing about what it really is or what it evolved from.
brewmenn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 10th, 2007, 12:03 AM   #13
amc78cj7
Senior Member
 
amc78cj7's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-07-05
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,354
iTrader: (9)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by brewmenn View Post
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hors...vol.html#part1

There are holes in the theory, but most of it is supported by the fossil record.

If you understood the theory you'd know that all species are "transistional species". Every species is evolving. Platypus are one example of a species that diverged to the point that it doesn't fit the typical classifications. Whales are another. The vestigial legs of whales seem to indicate that they evolved from land animals. Our own bodies contain vestigial tail bones.

If you were to devide all humans into 2 groups and move one group to another planet, the genetic and biological makeup of each group would slowly diverge, with traits that enhanced each groups likelyhood of survival becoming more common, traits that hindered survival becoming less common, and those thathad no effect on survival lingering but maybe not dissapearing. Eventually the 2 populations would diverge to the extent that at some point, maybe in thousands of years, maybe millions, they would be so genetically different that they would no longer be able to reproduce togeather and would be considered different species.

Part of the problem people have with understanding this is the classifications we use. It's human nature to want to classify and organize everything, so we make up names like horse, or dog, or mammal. To say that something was "still classified as a horse" just says that everything that looked like a horse we called a horse. It says nothing about what it really is or what it evolved from.
Could the same evidence be viewed by another set of eyes as supporting a theory that animal species were created using a similar template, and not that the diverged from a single species. Or likewise, could the same evidence be used to support a theory that all species were once very unique but because they have been subjected to similar environmental impacts on the planet earth they are CONVERGING to be similar? Maybe in that model the whale could be explained by the fact that it has been buffered from environmental impacts by it's location deep in the seas; therefore it has not had the natural forces applied to converge to an optimal phenotype?

Since it is not a testable hypothesis, the best you can do is look at the data and develop models that fit the evidence. However, multiple theories fit the data........

I'm just shocked that without a testable hypothesis so many scientists (supposed to be objective) cannot conceive multiple models. Does no one "think outside the box" anymore? Are they all just part of a herd that follow one teaching without asking "what if"?
__________________
I'm not quoting idiots who promote unsafe recovery strap techniques anymore. :miff:

Last edited by amc78cj7; November 10th, 2007 at 12:07 AM.
amc78cj7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 10th, 2007, 02:14 AM   #14
brewmenn
Grumpy old man.
 
brewmenn's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Inkster, MI
Posts: 10,586
iTrader: (9)
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by amc78cj7 View Post
Could the same evidence be viewed by another set of eyes as supporting a theory that animal species were created using a similar template, and not that the diverged from a single species. Or likewise, could the same evidence be used to support a theory that all species were once very unique but because they have been subjected to similar environmental impacts on the planet earth they are CONVERGING to be similar? Maybe in that model the whale could be explained by the fact that it has been buffered from environmental impacts by it's location deep in the seas; therefore it has not had the natural forces applied to converge to an optimal phenotype?

Since it is not a testable hypothesis, the best you can do is look at the data and develop models that fit the evidence. However, multiple theories fit the data........

I'm just shocked that without a testable hypothesis so many scientists (supposed to be objective) cannot conceive multiple models. Does no one "think outside the box" anymore? Are they all just part of a herd that follow one teaching without asking "what if"?
to all your questions... yes.

and I also agree that "hypothesis" is a more actuate word than "theory" for all of these ideas about how life as we know it began.
brewmenn is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > General 4x4 Stuff > Politics, Government, or Religion Chat

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:47 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd. Runs best on HiVelocity Hosting.
Page generated in 0.27236 seconds with 63 queries