Evolution 101

As the title says this is a thread about evolution. In my first post I would like to start out by introducing what evolution is, how it works, and the evidence to support evolution. I would use pictures & videos, information from articles, and what not I can find useful. Before I share the information I'll make sure everything is correct. I'll also like to address misconceptions many believe about evolution.

Introduction:

Evolution is the process of change in all forms of life over generations, and evolutionary biology is the study of how evolution occurs.

How Evolution Works

Life evolves by means of mutations (changes in an organism's hereditary information), genetic drift (random change in the genetic variation of a population from generation to generation), and natural selection (the non-random and gradual process of natural variation by which observable traits (such as eye color) become more or less common in a population).

Natural selection:

To understand the origin of whales, it's necessary to have a basic understanding of how natural selection works: It is the process by which organisms change over time as a result of changes in heritable physical or behavioral traits. Changes that allow an organism to better adapt to its environment will help it survive and have more offspring. Natural selection can change a species in small ways, causing a population to change color or size over the course of several generations. This is called "microevolution." But natural selection is also capable of much more. Given enough time and enough accumulated changes, natural selection can create entirely new species. It can turn dinosaurs into birds, apes into humans and amphibious mammals into whales.

Mutations:

The physical and behavioral changes that make natural selection possible happen at the level of DNA and genes. Such changes are called "mutations." Mutations can be caused by chemical or radiation damage or errors in DNA replication. Mutations can even be deliberately induced in order to adapt to a rapidly changing environment. Most times, mutations are either harmful or neutral but in rare instances, a mutation might prove beneficial to the organism. If so, it will become more prevalent in the next generation and spread throughout the population. In this way, natural selection guides the evolutionary process, preserving and adding up the beneficial mutations and rejecting the bad ones.

Evidence
Fossils of Earliest Old World Monkeys Unearthed
Dinosaur Feathers Discovered in Canadian Amber
List of transitional fossils
Lizards Show Evolution In Action
Super-sized fleas adapted to feed off dinosaurs
Human Evolution Fossil Evidence In 3D
Quick evolution leads to quiet crickets
Artificial selection in the lab
A Fin is a Limb is a Wing
Tw o fish families evolved electric powers by tweaking the same gene

Human Evolution
What does it mean to be human?


Misconceptions
Barkeley Misconceptions
Another Link
Even Another Link
Top 10 Myths About Evolution

Misconception: “Evolution is a theory about the origin of life.”
Response: Evolutionary theory deals mainly with how life changed after its origin. Science does try to investigate how life started (e.g., whether or not it happened near a deep-sea vent, which organic molecules came first, etc.), but these considerations are not the central focus of evolutionary theory. Regardless of how life started, afterwards it branched and diversified, and most studies of evolution are focused on those processes.

Sources
Source 1
Source 2
Source 3
Source 4
Source 5
Source 6
Additional Sources
potholer54
Potholer54debunks

Sorry for the long thread. I wanted to include everything I can find and quickly read or watch. Hopefully you find the information useful. Also correct me if I make any mistakes or you have a question ask me.

Questions:

1. Entropy?
2. 2nd Law of Thermodynamics?
3.Missing intermediary fossil record?

reply to post by micmerci


That was a fast reply! Hopefully you had time to read all the information I posted. However, I doubt it. To answer your question I did include links that show pictures and information about transitional fossils and there are others that discuss criticism about missing gaps. Just browse to see what you can find. But on your other two questions I'll go over them. What you're trying to point out is that creationist believe the second law of thermodynamics points to the most complex life forms couldn't come from simpler life forms. But this couldn't be more wrong. Here are two wonderful sources that address this issue.
"Evolution violates the 2nd law of thermodynamics."

This shows more a misconception about thermodynamics than about evolution. The second law of thermodynamics says, "No process is possible in which the sole result is the transfer of energy from a cooler to a hotter body." [Atkins, 1984, The Second Law, pg. 25] Now you may be scratching your head wondering what this has to do with evolution. The confusion arises when the 2nd law is phrased in another equivalent way, "The entropy of a closed system cannot decrease." Entropy is an indication of unusable energy and often (but not always!) corresponds to intuitive notions of disorder or randomness. Creationists thus misinterpret the 2nd law to say that things invariably progress from order to disorder. However, they neglect the fact that life is not a closed system. The sun provides more than enough energy to drive things. If a mature tomato plant can have more usable energy than the seed it grew from, why should anyone expect that the next generation of tomatoes can't have more usable energy still? Creationists sometimes try to get around this by claiming that the information carried by living things lets them create order. However, not only is life irrelevant to the 2nd law, but order from disorder is common in nonliving systems, too. Snowflakes, sand dunes, tornadoes, stalactites, graded river beds, and lightning are just a few examples of order coming from disorder in nature; none require an intelligent program to achieve that order. In any nontrivial system with lots of energy flowing through it, you are almost certain to find order arising somewhere in the system. If order from disorder is supposed to violate the 2nd law of thermodynamics, why is it ubiquitous in nature? The thermodynamics argument against evolution displays a misconception about evolution as well as about thermodynamics, since a clear understanding of how evolution works should reveal major flaws in the argument. Evolution says that organisms reproduce with only small changes between generations (after their own kind, so to speak). For example, animals might have appendages which are longer or shorter, thicker or flatter, lighter or darker than their parents. Occasionally, a change might be on the order of having four or six fingers instead of five. Once the differences appear, the theory of evolution calls for differential reproductive success. For example, maybe the animals with longer appendages survive to have more offspring than short-appendaged ones. All of these processes can be observed today. They obviously don't violate any physical laws.

Source 1
Source 2

As a creationist i will not attempt to comprehend the information you have provided.

Instead i will ask why there are still monkeys and pretend i won the debate.

So how does "Life evolve" from nothing

reply to post by TsukiLunar


Because we share the same common ancestor and both species have survived to multiply Earth.
But you can believe in theistic evolution. Accept evolution while believing in what form of creation you believe in.

Originally posted by borntowatch
So how does "Life evolve" from nothing

The only "philosophy" that says "Everything came from nothing" is religion.

reply to post by borntowatch


Life doesn't evolve from nothing. Evolution is the process of how life changes and adapts to its environment. You're thinking about abiogenesis.

Abiogenesis or biopoiesis is the natural process by which life arises from inorganic matter.

wiki link
Another link

It's funny how over the years mutations and adaptations have become the two main points for "proving" evolution.

And come on. If a Christian used a Christian equivalent of Bill Nye the Science Guy, they would get laughed out of the forum!

Originally posted by Phoenix267
reply to post by borntowatch

 

Life doesn't evolve from nothing. Evolution is the process of how life changes and adapts to its environment. You're thinking about abiogenesis.

Abiogenesis or biopoiesis is the natural process by which life arises from inorganic matter.

wiki link
Another link

You know, every time this discussion pops up the distinction between abiogenesis and evolution has to be reexplained. Either these people have never seen evolution being discussed or they are willfully ignorant of the information they have already been provided.

Originally posted by jeramie
It's funny how over the years mutations and adaptations have become the two main points for "proving" evolution.

And come on. If a Christian used a Christian equivalent of Bill Nye the Science Guy, they would get laughed out of the forum!

Not sure what your point is?

reply to post by jeramie


I really like Bill Nye and his were the only video I could find that would be great to use on YouTube. To answer your question a animal evolves to survive in its environment by adapting and sometimes mutations can influence how an animal can either successfully or unsuccessfully adapt to its environment.

I sourced this in my first post.

The physical and behavioral changes that make natural selection possible happen at the level of DNA and genes. Such changes are called "mutations." Mutations can be caused by chemical or radiation damage or errors in DNA replication. Mutations can even be deliberately induced in order to adapt to a rapidly changing environment. Most times, mutations are either harmful or neutral but in rare instances, a mutation might prove beneficial to the organism. If so, it will become more prevalent in the next generation and spread throughout the population. In this way, natural selection guides the evolutionary process, preserving and adding up the beneficial mutations and rejecting the bad ones.

Fantastic thread, and you're following it up with great replies. S & F.

There's one problem though. This thread is based on scientific evidence, research, observation and logic. None of which is recognised by the people that need this the most.

reply to post by SpearMint


Thanks! I'm trying to do my best and being respectful at the same time. Thanks again.

What your reply is demonstrating is adaptations and mutations which are microevolution at best. This does not account for species changes across generations. Dogs are still dogs.

Abiogenesis fits into the debate because it sets a precedent, not because creationists do not understand scientific terms.

OP, I do appreciate your civility throughout this thread. If others could follow your example, maybe the debate would not degrade to pettiness.

Can you give an example of a genetic mutation or an evolutionary process which can be seen to increase the information in the genome?

Also, can you explain the complexity of bacterial flagellum and the theory of irreducible complexity?

Originally posted by micmerci
What your reply is demonstrating is adaptations and mutations which are microevolution at best. This does not account for species changes across generations. Dogs are still dogs.

Abiogenesis fits into the debate because it sets a precedent, not because creationists do not understand scientific terms.

OP, I do appreciate your civility throughout this thread. If others could follow your example, maybe the debate would not degrade to pettiness.

But the different species of dogs that you see today haven't been around for very long at all. Large changes can take millions and millions of years, this distinction between "micro" and "macro" is really non-existent, both are evolution, the latter is the result of the former over an extended period of time.

Dogs are actually a good example of evolution. Selective breeding has resulted in very fast, forced evolution in a short period of time. The changes are obvious and indisputable, the longer this goes on for the larger the changes become and if it were to continue on a larger time scale it would result in animals that you would not think were related.

reply to post by micmerci

Dogs are still dogs.

Where did they come from? god popped them to existence or wolves that got domesticated became dogs.

Hello Siberian Husky!

How was the first cell formed?
How did this cell transform to you?
Thanks