It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: dude1
It would sound better in a music class though.
originally posted by: PhotonEffect
New mechanisms have been discovered and have long been substantiated. So why haven't they been added?
It's getting more complete? When was the last time it was updated?
originally posted by: Barcs
originally posted by: chr0naut
Your assumption that I don't believe in evolution is incorrect.
originally posted by: Barcs
originally posted by: PhotonEffect
New mechanisms have been discovered and have long been substantiated. So why haven't they been added?
Why do you think that new mechanisms are not added? Why do you feel epigenetics is ignored? Where do you get your information from?
It's getting more complete? When was the last time it was updated?
It gets updated whenever new info comes out. For example the recent fossil discoveries of a previously unknown hominid species. I reckon it was updated this year. What makes you think they don't add new discoveries and information to it? You've said this numerous times in the past, but I have yet to see this actually being the case. What is your justification for this view?
originally posted by: peter vlar
originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: dude1
It would sound better in a music class though.
I can see this as the successor to "Book of Mormon" on Broadway... "Creationism, the Musical". I surprised it's not a South Park or Family Guy episode(unless it is and I just missed out on it)!
Why do you think that new mechanisms are not added? Why do you feel epigenetics is ignored? Where do you get your information from?
It gets updated whenever new info comes out.
For example the recent fossil discoveries of a previously unknown hominid species. I reckon it was updated this year. What makes you think they don't add new discoveries and information to it? You've said this numerous times in the past, but I have yet to see this actually being the case. What is your justification for this view?
A search through the Wikipedia article on MES does not return any search results for the word "epigenetic". i.e: the most accessed and up-to-date public definition of MES does not include epigenetics as a mechanism.
originally posted by: PhotonEffect
What makes me think it doesn't get added is quite simple really - the actual theory itself hasn't been adjusted. New fossil discoveries have nothing to do with this discussion since the MES already accounts for this. This was part of the founding principles of the theory.
originally posted by: chr0naut
originally posted by: TzarChasm
a reply to: chr0naut
so what does any of that have to do with creationism?
Little to do with Creationism. It isn't about being 'ismist'.
But myth (cosmic inflation) is clearly being taught as science.
originally posted by: Chrisfishenstein
originally posted by: Prezbo369
a reply to: soulpowertothendegree
You seem to think you now about evolution......can you elaborate on how it requires creationism?...
Oh I don't know.....Maybe because there needs to be a reason for something to exist before it can evolve....That's a good start! We may have evolved, but God created us before we could evolve.....
originally posted by: PhotonEffect
a reply to: TzarChasm
Well the idea is that everything that governs the universe, and I mean everything - laws, constants, particle relationships etc etc. - came to be in the literal split second of inflation. In a sense, I suppose, this signifies the moment of "creation" from a cosmological perspective, although I could have this wrong.. I think chr0naut is only trying to show how uncanny it really is...
Towards A Postmodern Synthesis of Evolutionary Biology
The revision of these fundamental concepts indicates that the Modern Synthesis is no longer a viable framework for evolutionary biology, and a “postmodern synthesis” will have to replace it. Eugene Koonin
You quoted a paper from 2004 written by plant biologists that appears to be a summary of the evolutionary evidence. It wasn't an official theory, nor did it say anything about it not being updated since the 60s.
I still find the claims that it isn't being integrated and that MES hasn't been updated, to be completely unfounded.
Epigenetics isn't an additional mechanism of evolution. It is an expansion of what can happen after these genes have already emerged. So calling it a different mechanism is wrong. It is not different and relies on the same process that everything else in MES relies on. It's an expansion of how genes can be expressed via environmental pressures. It is still very directly linked to genetic mutation and natural selection.
en.wikipedia.org...
Here is the wiki for Modern Synthesis and it has it's own section for Horizontal gene transfer. It's not ignored, it just hasn't been observed in complex organisms, so it may not play the huge role you want it to today, not that it isn't important overall when looking at evolutionary history.