Originally posted by KellyJayLet me ask you a question: when a new species appears (something that has been observed) what would satisfy you that it had evolved from some other species? Or do you believe that they simply pop into existence out of nothing?
Fossils? The biggest collection of dots that get connected there is!
As I pointed out with your evidence for evolution, you start with
bacteria you end with bacteria, so the only reason you can say
there is a reason to believe evolution is real is, because you
want it to be. You have not shown evolution, you can show small
changes, which does not mean ...[text shortened]... changes
will build up to major changes over time, accept to those that believe
in that.
Kelly
Originally posted by telerionHow the hell do the goods get to market then? How do they get made? How do they get purchased? Poor analogy for an already logic-poor 'process,' which somehow acts as though it is a force, and every so often leaps to the status of agent.
Kelly, "selection" does not necessarily imply that some agent is selecting. In economics we discuss a phenomena called "adverse selection" in which the distribution of information in a market leads to suboptimal outcomes. In this case there is no agent doing the selecting. Just is the structure of the market leads to a case where some goods (usually low ...[text shortened]... the poor goods are "selected" for. Because the quality is low, the selection is adverse.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHActually its a great analogy- you just have poor comprehension skills. The objections you made are also irrelevant.
How the hell do the goods get to market then? How do they get made? How do they get purchased? Poor analogy for an already logic-poor 'process,' which somehow acts as though it is a force, and every so often leaps to the status of agent.
Originally posted by amannionim not even going to bother reading all that has been said (20 pages already) but here is the conflict: evolution, to put it simply, is the course in which nature evolves on its own, with no control or guidance from any creator or other wise. To agree with this is to say there is no God. That beeing said, I have a spiritual background and I can say that inter species variance evolution makes sence, we see it everyday, we call it survival of the fitest. WHen the point is reached where people claim that new speicies can be made through this process, I tend to disagree.
Why does evolution have to be antagonistic to religion?
There are many scientists, including evolutionary biologists who are religious - and yet a small and very vocal minority seems to believe that to accept evolution means rejecting their religious beliefs, and so reject evolution.
Why is this?
Does it have to be the case?
I can't myself see any confl ...[text shortened]... s, other than when the Bible is read literally which is clearly a ridiculous viewpoint to take.
Originally posted by Conrau KGreat comeback. I'm convinced (or, at least, I think I am: it's just hard for me to decide). Since your uh, comprehension skills, are so superior to mine, would you mind explaining to me how you came to your three conclusions?
Actually its a great analogy- you just have poor comprehension skills. The objections you made are also irrelevant.
Originally posted by e4masterTo agree with evolution is not to disagree with the concept of god at all. Evolution takes no place on the existance of god, natural selection is a mechanism, and evolution the result, that is all. Personally, I see no need for god at all in the universe at large, but if he exists that's fine too, it won't stop evolution being true.
im not even going to bother reading all that has been said (20 pages already) but here is the conflict: evolution, to put it simply, is the course in which nature evolves on its own, with no control or guidance from any creator or other wise. To agree with this is to say there is no God. That beeing said, I have a spiritual background and I can say that i ...[text shortened]... ached where people claim that new speicies can be made through this process, I tend to disagree.
Originally posted by KellyJayso who selects the grains of sand on a beach then? You've never answered that. Perhaps Freaky could illuminate us to which force causes those sand grains to be so well sorted, and how it knows to do it.
No, you have a term with the word 'selection' in it, but no one is
making a selection, you have been justifying the use of that word
'selection' with the word 'competition' when in fact none is taking
place. Like most of the fairy tales evolution has supporting it, it is
simply some dots being connected between the ears of the true
believers of evoluti ...[text shortened]... simply doesn't wash except in
between the ears of those that want it to be true.
Kelly
Both you, Kelly, and Freaky, could well do to go and read a textbook on probability, and then perhaps a book or two on evolutionary biology.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHSeeing as my comprehension skills are so superior, i doubt you would understand what I am saying.
Great comeback. I'm convinced (or, at least, I think I am: it's just hard for me to decide). Since your uh, comprehension skills, are so superior to mine, would you mind explaining to me how you came to your three conclusions?
Originally posted by FreakyKBHIt doesn't matter how the goods get to the market anymore than it matters why a single panda bear eats on one bamboo stalk rather than on an identical bamboo stalk next to it. The kinds of "selection" that scott and I describe arise from pressures and incentives that shape aggregate behavior in a general equilibrium.
How the hell do the goods get to market then? How do they get made? How do they get purchased? Poor analogy for an already logic-poor 'process,' which somehow acts as though it is a force, and every so often leaps to the status of agent.
I'm not trying to be rude, but I think Connie is right. You think you've raised some keen objections by playing semantics, but you clearly know very little about economics (and apparently biology as well). That's fine. You can't be an expert at everything. All you can do is make an attempt to be informed before you open your mouth.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHFreaky, what is it with you and this 'natural selection is a force' thing?
How the hell do the goods get to market then? How do they get made? How do they get purchased? Poor analogy for an already logic-poor 'process,' which somehow acts as though it is a force, and every so often leaps to the status of agent.
Just get over it man.
Natural selection is not, never has been, and never will be a force.
1 edit
Originally posted by Conrau KNatural selection is a reaction to a pressure - it's not a force. It is dependant upon how good the attributes of an organism are in comparison to all the other organisms it competes with. No person or force selects one organism over another, competition for limited resources is ultimately the selector and the least good don't survive.
Yes, but it is explicable by forces. Does that count....does it matter if it is a force anyway?
Originally posted by e4masterIt doesn't even make sense to say 'survival of the fittest' if one
im not even going to bother reading all that has been said (20 pages already) but here is the conflict: evolution, to put it simply, is the course in which nature evolves on its own, with no control or guidance from any creator or other wise. To agree with this is to say there is no God. That beeing said, I have a spiritual background and I can say that i ...[text shortened]... ached where people claim that new speicies can be made through this process, I tend to disagree.
buys into evolution, because it isn't always the strong, the fast,
the healthy that survive in it; it is more survival of the lucky.
Survival of the fittest is more of a physiological line of thought
than anything else, a kin to might makes right.
Kelly
Originally posted by scottishinnz"So well sorted?" You can't be serious. Chance has nothing whatsoever to do with the sand on a beach.
so who selects the grains of sand on a beach then? You've never answered that. Perhaps Freaky could illuminate us to which force causes those sand grains to be so well sorted, and how it knows to do it.
Both you, Kelly, and Freaky, could well do to go and read a textbook on probability, and then perhaps a book or two on evolutionary biology.