15 Jan 15
Originally posted by C HessBeneficial for local environment, but if changes take millions of years to
Natural selection refers to exactly that, yes. Call it bad choice of words, if you will. Darwin called it natural selection because he noticed how certain traits in a population of breeded animals can be selected for so that they spread throughout the population, and he realised that essentially the same thing happens in nature, with one difference: no one is ...[text shortened]... ividual traits are selected for by what is beneficial for reproduction in the local environment.
occur what local environment is around that long? The mutations are not
again specifically designed they are supposed to be quite random. Now
small changes within an already established life form could adapt a little
easier and those changes of natural selection would be easy to see how they
would occur. Rabbits that live in the far north that are white would stick
around while those that do not blend in would be spotted very easy. This
is a far cry from a million year change to get something useful to maybe
occur.
Reminds me of the Titanic, it could not turn fast enough to avoid the ice it
was to slow. Millions of years to adapt to a cold climate would be very long
time to get it right!
- Joined
- 31 Aug 06
- Moves
- 40565
15 Jan 15
Originally posted by KellyJayAre you saying it's not useful to not be easily spotted by predators?
Beneficial for local environment, but if changes take millions of years to
occur what local environment is around that long? The mutations are not
again specifically designed they are supposed to be quite random. Now
small changes within an already established life form could adapt a little
easier and those changes of natural selection would be easy to ...[text shortened]... to slow. Millions of years to adapt to a cold climate would be very long
time to get it right!
- Joined
- 31 Aug 06
- Moves
- 40565
15 Jan 15
Originally posted by KellyJayMass extinctions are not unheard of, but I think I'm beginning to see the problem here. What you need to understand is that there's a lot, I mean a lot, of accumulated genetic material over millions of years, so that when the environment begins to change one way or the other, the odds are good that some of that material proves useful for adaptation, such as alleles that produce a different color of fur. Once you have two populations where before there was only one, and if conditions stay such that they don't interbreed, you can only have them move further and further apart with each mutation.
Reminds me of the Titanic, it could not turn fast enough to avoid the ice it
was to slow. Millions of years to adapt to a cold climate would be very long
time to get it right!
15 Jan 15
Originally posted by C HessNo, not problem, problems!
Mass extinctions are not unheard of, but I think I'm beginning to see the problem here. What you need to understand is that there's a lot, I mean a lot, of accumulated genetic material over millions of years, so that when the environment begins to change one way or the other, the odds are good that some of that material proves useful for adaptation, such as a ...[text shortened]... they don't interbreed, you can only have them move further and further apart with each mutation.
The changes that make a mutation useful are only going to be useful if they
are done when they are needed. I have a issue, and the answer is a million
years away, I'm toast!
You still have to have a new random mutation work with another older one
to get something brand new that functions properly.
All the while not get wiped out by outside forces that do not care if you live
or die!
All the while you need enough to eat!
A host of over issues are there too!
- Joined
- 31 Aug 06
- Moves
- 40565
15 Jan 15
Originally posted by KellyJay
How did you get that out of what I said?
Rabbits that live in the far north that are white would stick around while those that do not blend in would be spotted very easy. This is a far cry from a million year change to get something useful to maybe occur.
15 Jan 15
1 edit
Originally posted by KellyJayYou are under estimating the tenacity of life. There isn't only one solution to every problem. There are many many solutions. A given species typically has a wide range of genetic information. When changes occur in the environment, some individuals do better than others. The genetic content of the species as a whole then changes over time.
No, not problem, problems!
The changes that make a mutation useful are only going to be useful if they
are done when they are needed. I have a issue, and the answer is a million
years away, I'm toast!
It is wrong to assume that a particular problem comes along and a single solution is required and it must immediately occur at the time it is required.
For example, suppose a new flu appears amongst humans. Some people will already be resistant to it. But they won't all have the exact same mutation. There may be 100,000 possible ways to get resistance to it, of which perhaps 100 variants currently exist in the population. Those that have the necessary variants will be more likely to survive. But even those that don't have the mutations may survive for other reasons, eg they may not encounter the disease, they may be at an age where the disease is normally less severe, they may receive good medial attention etc.
Similarly with changing climate, most species have a fairly large range and in some cases, they will simply die off in the range that is now unsuitable, in some cases there will be individuals able to survive the new conditions, in some cases the whole species goes extinct. A whole range of solutions exist, not just one single one.
If we look at dogs for example, we see that they have adapted very rapidly to different conditions and different requirements around the world. There are dogs that hunt well, dogs that make good fighters, dogs that do well in cold climates, dogs that make good pets, dogs that survive well in the wild, etc. In many cases there are multiple breeds that have solved any given problem in a different way. There is more than one breed of sheep dog, more than one breed of cold climate dog. etc. This is all observable here and now. It does not require faith.
15 Jan 15
Originally posted by twhiteheadYou do realize that man has been selectively breeding dogs for several thousand years to bring out these traits because God originally designed them with the ability to produce varieties, right?
You are under estimating the tenacity of life. There isn't only one solution to every problem. There are many many solutions. A given species typically has a wide range of genetic information. When changes occur in the environment, some individuals do better than others. The genetic content of the species as a whole then changes over time.
It is wrong to ...[text shortened]... breed of cold climate dog. etc. This is all observable here and now. It does not require faith.
15 Jan 15
Originally posted by KellyJayTake a look at this famous example using a mousetrap that illustrates how evolution works. It shows each part of the mousetrap could've been used to catch a mouse, and getting more and complex over time. You can skip the lengthy introduction and just scroll down to the illustrations:
Beneficial for local environment, but if changes take millions of years to
occur what local environment is around that long? The mutations are not
again specifically designed they are supposed to be quite random. Now
small changes within an already established life form could adapt a little
easier and those changes of natural selection would be easy to ...[text shortened]... to slow. Millions of years to adapt to a cold climate would be very long
time to get it right!
http://udel.edu/~mcdonald/mousetrap.html
15 Jan 15
1 edit
Originally posted by vivifyWhat evolutionists seem to ignore is that even the so-called evolution of a mouse trap or an outboard motor did not happen without intelligent design input and those mechanical things are not near as complicated and complex as biological systems.
Take a look at this famous example using a mousetrap that illustrates how evolution works. It shows each part of the mousetrap could've been used to catch a mouse, and getting more and complex over time. You can skip the lengthy introduction and just scroll down to the illustrations:
http://udel.edu/~mcdonald/mousetrap.html
Behe was not trying to say that no other design could be made to make a mousetrap or and outboard motor, but that with the design of that particular flagellar motor that a missing part would cause it to cease to work for its intended purpose. Therefore, it was irreducibly complex.
Of course the evolutionists did not want to hear that so they started inventing strawman arguments such as the one in your reference.
15 Jan 15
Originally posted by RJHindsThose varieties can all be identified in the DNA. Each variety of dog has specific mutations in their DNA. It is simply not possible for all those variations to have existed in the origional dogs (assuming a few pairs as per your Bible story). Most of the relevant mutations must have happened within the thousands of years that man has been breeding dogs or, you Bible story is wrong and man has in fact been breeding dogs for much longer than that and there has been a much larger population of dogs than the few breeding pairs on Noahs ark as per your Bible story.
You do realize that man has been selectively breeding dogs for several thousand years to bring out these traits because God originally designed them with the ability to produce varieties, right?
15 Jan 15
Originally posted by C HessSo the white rabbits that would blend into the snow would not be seen and
Rabbits that live in the far north that are white would stick around while those that do not blend in would be spotted very easy. This is a far cry from a million year change to get something useful to maybe occur.
they would stick around while the others would stand out and get caught.
Exactly how does that go along with what you said?
That is natural selection in the real world verse the stuff you are pushing!
15 Jan 15
Originally posted by C HessPlease, when the changes occur if they don't add to helping a life form
Nope.
they add nothing, and if that nothing takes a million years to be useful than
all it has done is nothing! A million years will go by without help! Your
usefulness is as helpful as your theory!
15 Jan 15
Originally posted by twhiteheadWhere did you get this information?
Those varieties can all be identified in the DNA. Each variety of dog has specific mutations in their DNA. It is simply not possible for all those variations to have existed in the origional dogs (assuming a few pairs as per your Bible story). Most of the relevant mutations must have happened within the thousands of years that man has been breeding dogs o ...[text shortened]... much larger population of dogs than the few breeding pairs on Noahs ark as per your Bible story.