Evolution in a nutshell

page: 1
6
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 11:38 AM
link   
Evolution happens all around us every second of the day...and right before our eyes.
Look at the evolution of the computer and the constant never ending evolution of operating systems and software so that computers and computer users can advance their way of doing things in this forever changing world.

Look at how far cars have evolved the last hundred years...from the horse and buggy to the horseless carriage and now to cars that practically drive themselves... and soon will drive themselves.

Computers and cars have evolved on their own specifically to make people's lives easier...yeah, same reasoning as Darwinism.

Humans have evolved cars, computers, those flying machines started by the Wright brothers, microwave ovens, hybrid plants, skyscrapers and toilet paper using the human brain.

There is "always" some form of intelligence behind evolution, whether it is pond scum, animals, insects, human brains or machines, somebody/something intelligent has its finger in the mix and designs the outcome. The idea of everything happening by "chance" is absurd.

My opinion is that Darwin and Religion are way off the mark when it comes to what is going on in this "intelligently" run universe.




posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 12:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by sleeper
Computers and cars have evolved on their own specifically to make people's lives easier...yeah, same reasoning as Darwinism.

That can't be right as the reasoning behind Darwinism is not that it makes things easier for anyone.
Nor do computers and cars develop on their own.



Humans have evolved cars, computers, those flying machines started by the Wright brothers, microwave ovens, hybrid plants, skyscrapers and toilet paper using the human brain.

That is correct.



There is "always" some form of intelligence behind evolution, whether it is pond scum, animals, insects, human brains or machines, somebody/something intelligent has its finger in the mix and designs the outcome.

That is just a statement.
If you throw Darwinism into the well, it would be interesting to hear you point out why it doesn't work, instead of claiming the involvement of something intelligent.



The idea of everything happening by "chance" is absurd.

Actually, it's less "by chance" than Darwin could have imagined. There are examples on earth that show how some things are more likely to evolve into something specific than others.
Also, how is natural selection "chance"?



My opinion is that Darwin and Religion are way off the mark when it comes to what is going on in this "intelligently" run universe.

Could you please back up your "opinion" rather than stating that Darwinism is "absurd".
Also, it is interesting that you dismiss religion as well, which is quite difficult to dismiss as it's a claim that can't really be proven unless God suddenly decides so. And.. what is this intelligent design that you are talking about, but that most definitely is not God?

But I'd rather you explaining why darwinism "doesn't work", even though it seemingly does.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 02:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by sleeper
There is "always" some form of intelligence behind evolution,


Can you please list every case of evolutionthat has ever occured, the intelligence behind it, and the evidence for that link.

Thanks.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 03:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nevertheless

That can't be right as the reasoning behind Darwinism is not that it makes things easier for anyone.
Nor do computers and cars develop on their own.


It makes things easier for the creature that was upgraded that's the whole reasoning behind Darwinism.

Computers and cars don't "happen" they are made created by "intelligent design" humans, if you will.





There is "always" some form of intelligence behind evolution, whether it is pond scum, animals, insects, human brains or machines, somebody/something intelligent has its finger in the mix and designs the outcome.

That is just a statement.
If you throw Darwinism into the well, it would be interesting to hear you point out why it doesn't work, instead of claiming the involvement of something intelligent.


That is just a statement, as is saying that Darwinism is the reason for things happening out of the blue. Pixy dust makes more sense and is more believable in my book.



The idea of everything happening by "chance" is absurd.

Actually, it's less "by chance" than Darwin could have imagined. There are examples on earth that show how some things are more likely to evolve into something specific than others.
Also, how is natural selection "chance"?


I have yet to see anything that has evolved, I have seen similar animals with different body parts or variations. Which means they are intrinsically different, a cousin or like a sibling. There is no proof that anything changed except for those that want there to be proof, which is the quandary. We humans tend to see what we wish to see, or believe. There are literally millions of variations of creatures on this planet. Some lived millions of years ago and some similar ones exist today. It don't mean that they are the same creature or plant.



My opinion is that Darwin and Religion are way off the mark when it comes to what is going on in this "intelligently" run universe.

Could you please back up your "opinion" rather than stating that Darwinism is "absurd".
Also, it is interesting that you dismiss religion as well, which is quite difficult to dismiss as it's a claim that can't really be proven unless God suddenly decides so. And.. what is this intelligent design that you are talking about, but that most definitely is not God?

But I'd rather you explaining why darwinism "doesn't work", even though it seemingly does.


We could say that apes saw how their human cousins turned out and decided not to evolved further or stopped evolving and remained apes, now that I might believe.

The universe is huge and has been going on forever, figuratively speaking, there are endless possibilities amongst those billions of stars and planets, certainly humans are nowhere near the top of the food chain concerning intelligence. It's my opinion that everything was created by higher beings. Which is more believable an idea for me than believing things created themselves by mere chance or natural selection, which to me is the same thing.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 03:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by sleeper
There is "always" some form of intelligence behind evolution,


Can you please list every case of evolutionthat has ever occured, the intelligence behind it, and the evidence for that link.

Thanks.


That was a figure of speech, I don't believe in evolution, I believe everything was created for a reason, not by chance, natural selection or by one god.



posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 05:19 PM
link   
Some interesting theories here, thanks.


I think I can show evolution in a nutshell.........




posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 02:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by sleeper

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by sleeper
There is "always" some form of intelligence behind evolution,


Can you please list every case of evolutionthat has ever occured, the intelligence behind it, and the evidence for that link.

Thanks.


That was a figure of speech,


Doesn't look lik it to me - looks like a claim of fact.


I don't believe in evolution, I believe everything was created for a reason, not by chance, natural selection or by one god.


Well that is as weird as heck - usually anti-evolutionists do believe it is all god's fault.

However Lenski's experiment proves that your lack of belief in natural selection as an evolutionary process is wrong, and your confusion is irrelevant.



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 07:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by sleeper
I don't believe in evolution, I believe everything was created for a reason, not by chance, natural selection or by one god.


Well that is as weird as heck - usually anti-evolutionists do believe it is all god's fault.


You can't past the buck to a figment of the imagination.



However Lenski's experiment proves that your lack of belief in natural selection as an evolutionary process is wrong, and your confusion is irrelevant.


There is no lack of confusion in the evolution game and business. Scientists have to do lots of experiments no matter the relevancy or accuracy of such experiments to earn a paycheck.

Evolution remains a scientific theory and a theory is not a fact it's only an idea, a guess, a theory.



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 08:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by RiverRunsFree
Some interesting theories here, thanks.


I think I can show evolution in a nutshell.........



Good picture, could be part of the deja vu we humans experience every now and then. Who knows how many times human civilizations have come and gone over the billions of years that this planet has been here.



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 12:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by sleeper

Originally posted by Nevertheless

That can't be right as the reasoning behind Darwinism is not that it makes things easier for anyone.
Nor do computers and cars develop on their own.


It makes things easier for the creature that was upgraded that's the whole reasoning behind Darwinism.

No it doesn't. In many cases it leads to instant death of individuals with "upgrades".
In other cases, it leads to the death of complete speices thanks to the wrong "choice".

Again, that is natural selection.



Computers and cars don't "happen" they are made created by "intelligent design" humans, if you will.

That's what I said. In contrary to life.



That is just a statement.
If you throw Darwinism into the well, it would be interesting to hear you point out why it doesn't work, instead of claiming the involvement of something intelligent.




That is just a statement, as is saying that Darwinism is the reason for things happening out of the blue. Pixy dust makes more sense and is more believable in my book.


No, it is not just a statement. Science shows so. That is what differs the theory of evolution to your statement.
So again, please explain how science is wrong in this. That's what science is for, there are no random statements.



I have yet to see anything that has evolved

The process is painfully slow, so it's difficult to see in action.
However, you are in a bit of luck:
Easily digested evolution in action



, I have seen similar animals with different body parts or variations. Which means they are intrinsically different, a cousin or like a sibling.

Does your cousins and siblings have different body parts or variations?
Also, I don't really understand what exactly are you expecting to see?
Also, think about the ridiculous things we have managed to do with wolves in only ~10.000 years, because we've actually been able to control the process. A gray wolf turned into dogs of all colors, shapes and sizes that look nothing like wolves.



There is no proof that anything changed except for those that want there to be proof

It seems like you haven't even looked. But at least I gave you simple examples that you can see with your own eyes. I don't feel like going into archaeology, zoology, or DNA with you.



We humans tend to see what we wish to see, or believe.

We are all different.
You seem to believe what you wish to believe, so much is true.



There are literally millions of variations of creatures on this planet. Some lived millions of years ago and some similar ones exist today. It don't mean that they are the same creature or plant.

No one does?



We could say that apes saw how their human cousins turned out and decided not to evolved further or stopped evolving and remained apes, now that I might believe.

First of all, we didn't evolve from apes.
Second, neither we or apes have stopped evolving.
Third, we cannot consciously evolve to any direction unless we agree on a breeding program.
Incidentally though, there is a little bit of truth that mammals (and others) have something of a breeding program "built-in", as it's a successful thing.



The universe is huge and has been going on forever, figuratively speaking, there are endless possibilities amongst those billions of stars and planets, certainly humans are nowhere near the top of the food chain concerning intelligence.

This is of course pure speculation, but yes, there could certainly be more "intelligent" beings out there.
I don't know however what humans or human intelligence has to do with this topic?



It's my opinion that everything was created by higher beings. Which is more believable an idea for me than believing things created themselves by mere chance or natural selection, which to me is the same thing.

And those intelligent beings were created by even higher beings? Turtles all the way?
I'm also curious about you telling how we human liked to make life easier for us by developing or "evolving" cars, computers and other gear to make life easier for us. Why did some higher beings create something inferior like us?
But this is still only a random statement which will be interesting only after you have explained what is wrong with darwinism.



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 02:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by sleeper
[Evolution remains a scientific theory and a theory is not a fact it's only an idea, a guess, a theory.




A Scientific Theory is a technical term which differs from common English useage, which you have given above.

In Science a "theory" is NOT "an idea, a guess" - it is the 2nd highest level of Scientific knowledge if you like, "exceeded" only by a "law".


The formal scientific definition of theory is quite different from the everyday meaning of the word. It refers to a comprehensive explanation of some aspect of nature that is supported by a vast body of evidence. Many scientific theories are so well established that no new evidence is likely to alter them substantially. For example, no new evidence will demonstrate that the Earth does not orbit around the sun (heliocentric theory), or that living things are not made of cells (cell theory), that matter is not composed of atoms, or that the surface of the Earth is not divided into solid plates that have moved over geological timescales (the theory of plate tectonics)...One of the most useful properties of scientific theories is that they can be used to make predictions about natural events or phenomena that have not yet been observed.
- United States Natinal Academy of Science

"It's jsut a theory" is a demonstration of willful ignorance, because the definition of a scientific theory as above is well known and ther is no excuse for thinking otherwise.
edit on 24-1-2013 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nevertheless

No it doesn't. In many cases it leads to instant death of individuals with "upgrades".
In other cases, it leads to the death of complete speices thanks to the wrong "choice".

Again, that is natural selection.


Rather than a wrong choice, what might have happened was that the animal became obsolete and it died off, or more likely killed off...removed from service similar to removing a dangerous fish from a fish tank to spare the other fish...by the intelligent or not so much, owner of the fish tank, that mistakenly put a dangerous fish in his/her fish tank.



No, it is not just a statement. Science shows so. That is what differs the theory of evolution to your statement.
So again, please explain how science is wrong in this. That's what science is for, there are no random statements.


Science searches for clues to fit a certain model and avoids at all costs "random" contradictions...sometimes by sweeping them under the rug...when encountered.



I have yet to see anything that has evolved

The process is painfully slow, so it's difficult to see in action.
However, you are in a bit of luck:
Easily digested evolution in action

The url didn't work.



I have seen similar animals with different body parts or variations. Which means they are intrinsically different, a cousin or like a sibling.



Does your cousins and siblings have different body parts or variations?
Also, I don't really understand what exactly are you expecting to see?
Also, think about the ridiculous things we have managed to do with wolves in only ~10.000 years, because we've actually been able to control the process. A gray wolf turned into dogs of all colors, shapes and sizes that look nothing like wolves.


Have you seen my cousins? ('
') Anyway, intelligent humans have tampered with wolves and turned them into a bunch of weird dogs...That's my point, someone or thing intervened in the process, as is true with all natural selection happenings, in my opinion.



First of all, we didn't evolve from apes.
Second, neither we or apes have stopped evolving.
Third, we cannot consciously evolve to any direction unless we agree on a breeding program.
Incidentally though, there is a little bit of truth that mammals (and others) have something of a breeding program "built-in", as it's a successful thing.


I agree that we didn't evolve from apes...I don't believe we evolved and are still evolving. Have you seen the elections lately?



This is of course pure speculation, but yes, there could certainly be more "intelligent" beings out there.
I don't know however what humans or human intelligence has to do with this topic?


Pure speculation true, as is everything.



But this is still only a random statement which will be interesting only after you have explained what is wrong with darwinism.


Everything is wrong with Darwinism, even Darwin remained unconvinced and he became so confused that he ended up choosing religion over science on his death bed.



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 05:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by sleeper
[Evolution remains a scientific theory and a theory is not a fact it's only an idea, a guess, a theory.




A Scientific Theory is a technical term which differs from common English useage, which you have given above.

In Science a "theory" is NOT "an idea, a guess" - it is the 2nd highest level of Scientific knowledge if you like, "exceeded" only by a "law".


The formal scientific definition of theory is quite different from the everyday meaning of the word. It refers to a comprehensive explanation of some aspect of nature that is supported by a vast body of evidence. Many scientific theories are so well established that no new evidence is likely to alter them substantially. For example, no new evidence will demonstrate that the Earth does not orbit around the sun (heliocentric theory), or that living things are not made of cells (cell theory), that matter is not composed of atoms, or that the surface of the Earth is not divided into solid plates that have moved over geological timescales (the theory of plate tectonics)...One of the most useful properties of scientific theories is that they can be used to make predictions about natural events or phenomena that have not yet been observed.
- United States Natinal Academy of Science

"It's jsut a theory" is a demonstration of willful ignorance, because the definition of a scientific theory as above is well known and ther is no excuse for thinking otherwise.
edit on 24-1-2013 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)


The fact that the earth moves around the sun is no longer a theory it is an observable fact, Darwinism remains a scientific theory because most of its tenets remain unproven and speculative at best.



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 05:33 PM
link   
Nicely ignoring that you were just plain wrong about what a scientific theory is!!

Evolution is a sceintific fact - drug resistant strains of various diseases are a fact, not "just a theory".

And natural selection as a mechanism for evolution is also a fact - as demonstrated by Lenski's experiment.

you choosing to ignore them does not stop them from being facts.



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 09:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
Nicely ignoring that you were just plain wrong about what a scientific theory is!!

Evolution is a sceintific fact - drug resistant strains of various diseases are a fact, not "just a theory".

And natural selection as a mechanism for evolution is also a fact - as demonstrated by Lenski's experiment.

you choosing to ignore them does not stop them from being facts.


Scientist can fight drug resistant strains with new types of drugs specifically designed for those new strains. One intelligent maneuver, the scientists, against another intelligent maneuver, those creating the resistant strains. It's like a game of chess, the humans against the unknown but very real intelligent entities affecting and counter acting perceived changes in viruses with new stains of viruses. Mutating viruses mutate by intelligent forces/designs. Just because the scientists can't see who is doing it means nothing. Dogs and cats don't know where their food comes from, food simply appears before them and they eat the food...food provided by humans... the magic behind the food delivery. No you can't have what I'm smoking.



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 09:24 PM
link   
reply to post by sleeper
 


so you are saying drug resistant strains have actually been delibverately created? got any evidence for that?

Being able to use other drugs or techniques to fight drug resistant strains is not relevant to the FACT that the drug resistant strains EVOLVED in the first place, hence evolution exists
edit on 24-1-2013 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 08:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by sleeper
 


so you are saying drug resistant strains have actually been delibverately created? got any evidence for that?


I have as much evidence as you have about natural selection.



Being able to use other drugs or techniques to fight drug resistant strains is not relevant to the FACT that the drug resistant strains EVOLVED in the first place, hence evolution exists
edit on 24-1-2013 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)


There is no such thing as chance, coincidence, or evolution. Everything happens for a reason or it doesn't happen at all.

We send children to school to challenge them, giving them a little information at a time and when they learn it we give them a little more to chew on. Learning is an ongoing never ending process. Drug resistant strains is the same principle, a learning curve for human scientists to chew on and figure out. And they get paid the big bucks for chewing. What a deal.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 01:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by sleeper
Rather than a wrong choice, what might have happened was that the animal became obsolete and it died off, or more likely killed off...removed from service similar to removing a dangerous fish from a fish tank to spare the other fish...by the intelligent or not so much, owner of the fish tank, that mistakenly put a dangerous fish in his/her fish tank.

Aha, so "in the beginning" there were "all" species, and now we only have those who haven't died out? We lived together with the dinosaurs and so forth?
Also, when did all this life get "planted" on the planet? At what stage of the formation of Earth?




No, it is not just a statement. Science shows so. That is what differs the theory of evolution to your statement.
So again, please explain how science is wrong in this. That's what science is for, there are no random statements.

Science searches for clues to fit a certain model and avoids at all costs "random" contradictions...sometimes by sweeping them under the rug...when encountered.

Again, it looks like you don't seem to be too involved with the scientific method.
Science has no reason whatsoever to try to fit in their finding's in some madman's model. Darwin's theory lives on for that reason.




The process is painfully slow, so it's difficult to see in action.
However, you are in a bit of luck:
Easily digested evolution in action

The url didn't work.

You could have searched for it yourself.
Last example: Bacteria resistant to antibiotics.



Have you seen my cousins? ('
') Anyway, intelligent humans have tampered with wolves and turned them into a bunch of weird dogs...That's my point, someone or thing intervened in the process, as is true with all natural selection happenings, in my opinion.

So, you DO believe that species can evolve? Not a fixed set?



I agree that we didn't evolve from apes...I don't believe we evolved and are still evolving. Have you seen the elections lately?

What you believe is quite irrelevant.
Yes, I've seen some of it, what do they have to do with anything? People gotten dumber? I'm not ready to agree, but let's pretend that that is the case. We have just witnessed evolution. Again you agree that we evolve.



Pure speculation true, as is everything.

Science is not.



Everything is wrong with Darwinism, even Darwin remained unconvinced and he became so confused that he ended up choosing religion over science on his death bed.

It is completely true that Darwin remained unconvinced, and that for a reason.
Like Einstein, he did not have the means to prove or even show that all of his claims actually were true. Science eventually did.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 02:17 PM
link   
reply to post by sleeper
 





There is no such thing as chance, coincidence, or evolution. Everything happens for a reason or it doesn't happen at all.


The above statement is one of the most ignorant statements I have ever heard come from anyone EVER.
Such an absolute claim is an obvious sign of ignorance. Please stop.


Edit: Evolution is more of natural selection not just a "Chance". Before you make a thread like this, go actually educate yourself on the subject matter instead of advertising your ignorance.
edit on 1/25/1313 by GR1ill3d because: (no reason given)
edit on 1/25/1313 by GR1ill3d because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 02:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nevertheless

It is completely true that Darwin remained unconvinced, and that for a reason.
Like Einstein, he did not have the means to prove or even show that all of his claims actually were true. Science eventually did.


Science hasn't proven anything concerning evolution. Everything concerning evolution is unproven, speculative, and romanticized conjecture.





new topics
top topics
 
6
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join