It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Stickleback fish extreme evolution

page: 3
<< 1  2   >>

log in


posted on Mar, 7 2016 @ 03:01 AM

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Jonjonj
a reply to: chr0naut

Hello again, thanks for responding in such detail to my rather uninformed queries, some of the things you said have raised even more questions for me.

You state that a belief in god is a leap of faith and I completely understand that, nor is it something that I hold in disregard, every person must choose that which feels right for them.

However, you then also state that a lack of faith also requires such a leap, and I am curious how you come to that assumption given that I personally feel that no such leap is required. I don't believe in god but that doesn't require me to make a leap of faith as I simply don't see any evidence of such a being. I get the idea that the universe is so mind-bogglingly complex as to play into that belief but that isn't evidence of god, in my opinion.

The next point is what I read as a contradiction, but that could simply be me, misunderstanding as I often do.

It is stated that there hasn't been enough time for the required changes by the mechanisms that evolution proposes and yet your next point states that the rapidity and complexity of the changes exclude evolution as the only driving force.

I appreciate your taking the time to address my previous questions and hope that you find interest in answering those I have asked now.

Thank you for your time.

I apologize for the delay in response.

The "leap of faith" bit refers to our incomplete knowledge. The statements that "God does not exist" or that "there is no God" are fairly absolute and assumes that we know this to be a fact (in every possible situation where God may possibly be hidden from our view).

So, in the light of the limitation of our knowledge the most honest response is to admit to opinion. Any "assurance" we have (on either side of the argument) is therefore a leap of faith.

In regard to time scales, the Modern Evolutionary Synthesis describes gradualism in overall change, and this over extended periods of time. Definitely not in terms of a few generations as per the OP article.

In truth, we continually see exceptions where little happens for extended periods, then rapid change occurs in jumps or steps. It is for this reason that Punctuated Equilibrium becomes such a hot topic.

We know that natural processes are chaotic and turbulent and so theories of development (such as the MES) that assume a gradualism or stable environmental conditions cannot hope to adequately describe reality.

This is not to say that the MES is not descriptive of nature, just that it is not the ONLY process happening.

No apology necessary, I am more than grateful that you took the time to respond.

In answer to your fist point I see where you are coming from, and if my position were one of absolute denial of a possibility of a god then I would agree, however, that is not really my point of view. I simply have seen no evidence of god so therefore I see no reason to include it as a possibility. We can certainly agree to disagree on whether that requires a leap of faith though, and your point of view is equally as valid as mine. We may even both be wrong, who knows?

Point two, regarding gradualism: Having read quite a lot lately about evolution in general, and other subjects related I find myself very attracted to the theory of catastrophism. Whereby subtle, long term change is occasionally given a kick through drastic local or not so local change. It is a subject that has rather taken my fancy, so much reading for me to do there.

The nature of such catastrophes are of course open also to debate, and I am sure there have been many, but I like the idea, it seems logical if rather chaotic.

Thank you again for your time, not many would spend theirs in such an endeavour.

Edit: Catastrophism wiki

edit on 7-3-2016 by Jonjonj because: Added catastrophism wiki for whomever may want to read it

posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 08:25 AM
a reply to: dug88

African Cichlids are another good example of visible adaptive evolution.

I may be wrong but I believe that all living things adapt over time to their environment.

It is the survival switch that is activated within us, whenever there are changes in our environment, that affects us on a cellular level.

Again, I could be wrong, but I believe we already have lying within us all the necessary elements for us to have been any known or unknown living organism. The basic pairing of genetic parental material to form a separate organism, comes with a vast number of possibilities, when the survival switch is activated.

posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 08:52 PM
a reply to: GaryN

Do you even science? What is the different between variety and species pray tell?

<< 1  2   >>

log in