Question Evolution! 15 questions evolutionists cannot adequately answer
- Thread starter Mango Elephant
- Start date
- Status
Kozmos
Jew Detective
Didn't sex came up because mixing DNA is a good deal to stay ahead of parasites and viruses?
Eat_Up_Martha
Prince
Now it's the exact opposite!
Abegweit
Anarchist trader
Sex exists to allow mixing of new traits from two different lines. Let's say we have two organisms of the same species which have had two different beneficial mutations. with sex, it is possible for a child organism to blend the two lines thereby benefiting from both mutations. Without sex this can't happen.
Thus it does help stay ahead of parasites and viruses but it is far more powerful than just that.
Kozmos
Jew Detective
I remember reading one article that said it was probably the main reason since the reproduction of other species is much more simpler and effective.
Abegweit
Anarchist trader
Yes, but I'd phrase it a bit differently.
Because it allows mixing of different lines, sex speeds up the process of evolution by several orders of magnitude.
Because it allows mixing of different lines, sex speeds up the process of evolution by several orders of magnitude.
GoodGame
Red, White, & Blue, baby!
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2004
- Messages
- 13,725
Hmm.... so if evolution can't answer that question, intelligent design can?
How does intelligent design answer the questions? It says "intelligent design".
The A is A logic is irrefutable if A isn't even demonstrated to exist. How do you test that argument?
Restate the OP by replacing all statements of "intelligent design" with "evolution" and vice versa, and what do you prove? Vice versa again, and did you actually prove something?
/thread.
Side question: How did you learn about "intelligent design"? What was your data?
How does intelligent design answer the questions? It says "intelligent design".
The A is A logic is irrefutable if A isn't even demonstrated to exist. How do you test that argument?
Restate the OP by replacing all statements of "intelligent design" with "evolution" and vice versa, and what do you prove? Vice versa again, and did you actually prove something?
/thread.
Side question: How did you learn about "intelligent design"? What was your data?
Hey, I resemble that remark!
Actually that list is of unsolved problems in science hence the trollface. Science will get around to working them out, but whether they will wind up as DNA or luminiferous aether is unknown
mangxema
I
Nick Carpathia
Unleash the HAARP
It's because fundementalist christians are intellectually bankrupt tribalists who are incapable of conceiving that their particular brand of irrationality is no more special than any other group in the world.
The difference is that this group has billions of dollars worth of political power and access to strategic nuclear weapons.
The difference is that this group has billions of dollars worth of political power and access to strategic nuclear weapons.
Abegweit
Anarchist trader
throwing a bunch of sperm and eggs in the water and hoping for the best IS SEX and it is certain that the inventors of sex did exactly that. What you are talking about is a second-order phenomenon - choosing your mate.
I submit that the first innovation was far more important than the second.
mangxema
I
True. I interpreted the question to be referring to what we'd informally call sex, but strictly speaking, yeah you're right. Without the spraying approach first, the rest would never have become an issue.
Moderator Action: Spam deleted.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
How did life originate? How did life with hundreds of proteins originate just by chemistry without intelligent design?
It evolved
Why is natural selection taught as evolution as if it explains the origin of the diversity of life?
Because it does
Living things look like they were designed, so how do evolutionists know that they were not designed? Why should science be restricted to naturalistic causes rather than logical causes?
It isn't restriced - just find some proof and your theory will win
Why are the (expected) countless millions of transitional fossils missing?
Every single fossil ever found is a transitional fossil
How did blind chemistry create mind/intelligence, meaning, altruism and morality?
This is not in the province of evolution
Why is evolutionary just-so story-telling tolerated?
It isn't - scientists have to collect evidence and then put the best theories together based on that evidence.
Where are the scientific breakthroughs due to evolution? Why do schools and universities teach evolution so dogmatically, stealing time from experimental biology that so benefits humankind?
Because evolution is the basis of molecular biology, genetics, biology etc
Why is evolution, a theory about history, taught as if it is the same as this operational science?
Because it's not a historical theory, it's a science
Why is a fundamentally religious idea, a dogmatic belief system that fails to explain the evidence, taught in science classes? If you cant teach religion in science classes, why is evolution taught?
Because it's not a religious idea, no more than astronomy or gravity are religious ideas. It is science.
It evolved
Why is natural selection taught as evolution as if it explains the origin of the diversity of life?
Because it does
Living things look like they were designed, so how do evolutionists know that they were not designed? Why should science be restricted to naturalistic causes rather than logical causes?
It isn't restriced - just find some proof and your theory will win
Why are the (expected) countless millions of transitional fossils missing?
Every single fossil ever found is a transitional fossil
How did blind chemistry create mind/intelligence, meaning, altruism and morality?
This is not in the province of evolution
Why is evolutionary just-so story-telling tolerated?
It isn't - scientists have to collect evidence and then put the best theories together based on that evidence.
Where are the scientific breakthroughs due to evolution? Why do schools and universities teach evolution so dogmatically, stealing time from experimental biology that so benefits humankind?
Because evolution is the basis of molecular biology, genetics, biology etc
Why is evolution, a theory about history, taught as if it is the same as this operational science?
Because it's not a historical theory, it's a science
Why is a fundamentally religious idea, a dogmatic belief system that fails to explain the evidence, taught in science classes? If you cant teach religion in science classes, why is evolution taught?
Because it's not a religious idea, no more than astronomy or gravity are religious ideas. It is science.
Berzerker
Deity
I have no problem with evolution and creation, the latter is about how life began on this piece of rock and evolution explains what happened to life over the course of 4 billion years.
Father Sky mated with Mother Earth - the seed of life was implanted here via collision and/or mixing of "waters".
Marduk slays the watery dragon Tiamat with his "winds", part of her is spread out to mark the battle (Heaven) and the rest becomes Earth and life begins.
God's wind approaches (?) the dark face of the watery deep and there is light
Sky Father sent a diving animal below the waters to bring back mud, Sky Father spread the mud out to form the land.
And I still dont see a conflict between the science and some of the creation myths I've come across.
Father Sky mated with Mother Earth - the seed of life was implanted here via collision and/or mixing of "waters".
Marduk slays the watery dragon Tiamat with his "winds", part of her is spread out to mark the battle (Heaven) and the rest becomes Earth and life begins.
God's wind approaches (?) the dark face of the watery deep and there is light
Sky Father sent a diving animal below the waters to bring back mud, Sky Father spread the mud out to form the land.
And I still dont see a conflict between the science and some of the creation myths I've come across.
Verbose
Deity
I always liked the Egyptian version (well, one of them, in the Memphite theology). The creator god Atum lay in the still unformed primordial sludge. He felt lonely, so he had a bit of a . And from this act came the impetus for the ordered world to be created. In the fullness of time, this ordered universe will collapse back into the original unformed state, and Atum will sink back into it as well. It's got a bit of a ring of realistic human psychology...
Trev
Prince
A cell to survive and replicate needs all of
DNA information for cell processes, parts, replication
RNA to decode DNA so that the information can be used
ATP synthase to provide energy for cell processes included decoding of DNA
Error correction to fix the million of errors that occur in DNA daily in every cell
Cells walls and structure that preserve and maintain the DNA,RNA,ATP, error correction
There is no evidence for replicating life that does not require all these things either as a part of themselves or through the use of an hijacked host (viruses). There is no evidence or possibility that all these 5 things could have happened simultaneously. But there appears from observation that none of these things can continue to exist without the other things. This is glossed over by evolutionists, but it is a massive stumbling block to belief in evolution if logical reasoning is used.
DNA is very error prone which is why an error correction process is a vital part of every cell. The damage to DNA by the fixation of free radicals would render DNA useless in a very short period of time without error correction. RNA is much more error prone than DNA, so even less viable as an option for information storage.
There is no even remotely plausible option for the commencement of life apart from belief in a creator who designed and created it.
DNA information for cell processes, parts, replication
RNA to decode DNA so that the information can be used
ATP synthase to provide energy for cell processes included decoding of DNA
Error correction to fix the million of errors that occur in DNA daily in every cell
Cells walls and structure that preserve and maintain the DNA,RNA,ATP, error correction
There is no evidence for replicating life that does not require all these things either as a part of themselves or through the use of an hijacked host (viruses). There is no evidence or possibility that all these 5 things could have happened simultaneously. But there appears from observation that none of these things can continue to exist without the other things. This is glossed over by evolutionists, but it is a massive stumbling block to belief in evolution if logical reasoning is used.
DNA is very error prone which is why an error correction process is a vital part of every cell. The damage to DNA by the fixation of free radicals would render DNA useless in a very short period of time without error correction. RNA is much more error prone than DNA, so even less viable as an option for information storage.
There is no even remotely plausible option for the commencement of life apart from belief in a creator who designed and created it.
brennan
Argumentative Brit
How did life originate? How did life with hundreds of proteins originate just by chemistry without intelligent design?
See information about the Miller Urey experiment, an attempt to recreate the conditions in which we think the 'primordial soup' produced the first amino acids and eventually the first life. Recent re-evaluations of the Miller Urey experiment, with more sensitive testing equipment have recently revealed that this was even more successful than previously realised, with many more amino acids being detected. RNA has now been synthesised from its components in similar exeriments.
How did the DNA code originate? The code is a sophisticated language system with letters and words where the meaning of the words is unrelated to the chemical properties of the lettersjust as the information on this page is not a product of the chemical properties of the ink (or pixels on a screen). What other coding system has existed without intelligent design?
This is just garbage, creationist proponents seem to have a very poor grasp of the concept of information. If DNA were in fact an intelligently designed code, it would not have so much junk in it for starters: huge proportions of the base pairs in the DNA of all organisms is excess to requirmements, which is demonstrative of the less than perfect evolutionary process.
How could such errors (mutations) create 3 billion letters of DNA information to change a microbe into a microbiologist? How can scrambling existing DNA information create a new biochemical pathway or nano-machines?
Again, this is nonsense. DNA information does not get 'scrambled' or 'lost' or any of the other things creationists claim and such assertions simply display their poor understanding of the facts. Changes in DNA between generations are slight and tend to make very gradual changes to species over time. Evolutionarily poor changes are weeded out by natural selection ofc.
Why is natural selection taught as evolution as if it explains the origin of the diversity of life?
Because it does.
How did new biochemical pathways, which involve multiple enzymes working together in sequence, originate?
Do I detect an irreducible complexity argument? Thus far no creationist has been able to produce an example of this in which it cannot be shown that the component parts could have alternative functions.
Living things look like they were designed, so how do evolutionists know that they were not designed? Why should science be restricted to naturalistic causes rather than logical causes?
Living things do not look like they were designed. In fact many of them contain flaws that are explained better by evolutionary processes than by the suggestion that they were designed, e.g the structure of the eye in vertebrates.
How did multi-cellular life originate?
Via parasitation and symbiotic relationships between single celled organisms. It took a very long time for this to happen, historically I would guess that there have been more generations of single celled organisms than there have been of multi cellular organisms.
How did sex originate?
Again, this took a long time to appear, but has really taken off as it is a great way to produce new generations. We know btw that genetic information can move between species in the real world, it is not a stretch to imagine that a mechanism to encourage this could 'evolve'.
Why are the (expected) countless millions of transitional fossils missing?
As someone already stated, fossilisation is a very rare process, we do not expect to find countless millions of fossils, and the term 'transitional fossil' is very misleading, evolution is a constant process, so every fossil can be considered 'transitional'.
How do living fossils remain unchanged over supposed hundreds of millions of years?
Species evolve if forced to by their environment. If the environment of a successful species changes little over millions of years, there is less pressure of natural selection to encourage changes.
How did blind chemistry create mind/intelligence, meaning, altruism and morality?
2 questions here: it is easy to show that the mind is based on chemistry, just have a few drinks. Physical changes or damage to the brain lead to marked changes in behaviour.
Altruism and morality are behavioral aspects of organisms that are subject to evolutionary pressures and vary between species. Humans across the planet have very similar morals, regardless of their religous beliefs, probably ecause we ar a comparatively young species with quite homogenous societies; almost every human believers that children should be protected. Male lions on the other hand will kill and devour young cubs that are not their own progeny when they take over a pride. Spiders notoriously devour their mates. These are evolved behaviours that increase the survivability of species.
Why is evolutionary just-so story-telling tolerated?
Because it is an extremely robust theory with vast explanatory and predictive power.
Where are the scientific breakthroughs due to evolution? Why do schools and universities teach evolution so dogmatically, stealing time from experimental biology that so benefits humankind?
Experimental biology is based upon our understanding of genetics and evolution.
Why is evolution, a theory about history, taught as if it is the same as this operational science?
Because it is, in fact, operational science.
Why is a fundamentally religious idea, a dogmatic belief system that fails to explain the evidence, taught in science classes? If you cant teach religion in science classes, why is evolution taught?
Because it is not dogmatic, it is thorougly researced and questioned; it does explain the evidence, is extremely useful and therefore bears none of the characteristics you ascribe to it. All of which belong to Religion itself, the basis for the idea of Intelligent Design.
See information about the Miller Urey experiment, an attempt to recreate the conditions in which we think the 'primordial soup' produced the first amino acids and eventually the first life. Recent re-evaluations of the Miller Urey experiment, with more sensitive testing equipment have recently revealed that this was even more successful than previously realised, with many more amino acids being detected. RNA has now been synthesised from its components in similar exeriments.
How did the DNA code originate? The code is a sophisticated language system with letters and words where the meaning of the words is unrelated to the chemical properties of the lettersjust as the information on this page is not a product of the chemical properties of the ink (or pixels on a screen). What other coding system has existed without intelligent design?
This is just garbage, creationist proponents seem to have a very poor grasp of the concept of information. If DNA were in fact an intelligently designed code, it would not have so much junk in it for starters: huge proportions of the base pairs in the DNA of all organisms is excess to requirmements, which is demonstrative of the less than perfect evolutionary process.
How could such errors (mutations) create 3 billion letters of DNA information to change a microbe into a microbiologist? How can scrambling existing DNA information create a new biochemical pathway or nano-machines?
Again, this is nonsense. DNA information does not get 'scrambled' or 'lost' or any of the other things creationists claim and such assertions simply display their poor understanding of the facts. Changes in DNA between generations are slight and tend to make very gradual changes to species over time. Evolutionarily poor changes are weeded out by natural selection ofc.
Why is natural selection taught as evolution as if it explains the origin of the diversity of life?
Because it does.
How did new biochemical pathways, which involve multiple enzymes working together in sequence, originate?
Do I detect an irreducible complexity argument? Thus far no creationist has been able to produce an example of this in which it cannot be shown that the component parts could have alternative functions.
Living things look like they were designed, so how do evolutionists know that they were not designed? Why should science be restricted to naturalistic causes rather than logical causes?
Living things do not look like they were designed. In fact many of them contain flaws that are explained better by evolutionary processes than by the suggestion that they were designed, e.g the structure of the eye in vertebrates.
How did multi-cellular life originate?
Via parasitation and symbiotic relationships between single celled organisms. It took a very long time for this to happen, historically I would guess that there have been more generations of single celled organisms than there have been of multi cellular organisms.
How did sex originate?
Again, this took a long time to appear, but has really taken off as it is a great way to produce new generations. We know btw that genetic information can move between species in the real world, it is not a stretch to imagine that a mechanism to encourage this could 'evolve'.
Why are the (expected) countless millions of transitional fossils missing?
As someone already stated, fossilisation is a very rare process, we do not expect to find countless millions of fossils, and the term 'transitional fossil' is very misleading, evolution is a constant process, so every fossil can be considered 'transitional'.
How do living fossils remain unchanged over supposed hundreds of millions of years?
Species evolve if forced to by their environment. If the environment of a successful species changes little over millions of years, there is less pressure of natural selection to encourage changes.
How did blind chemistry create mind/intelligence, meaning, altruism and morality?
2 questions here: it is easy to show that the mind is based on chemistry, just have a few drinks. Physical changes or damage to the brain lead to marked changes in behaviour.
Altruism and morality are behavioral aspects of organisms that are subject to evolutionary pressures and vary between species. Humans across the planet have very similar morals, regardless of their religous beliefs, probably ecause we ar a comparatively young species with quite homogenous societies; almost every human believers that children should be protected. Male lions on the other hand will kill and devour young cubs that are not their own progeny when they take over a pride. Spiders notoriously devour their mates. These are evolved behaviours that increase the survivability of species.
Why is evolutionary just-so story-telling tolerated?
Because it is an extremely robust theory with vast explanatory and predictive power.
Where are the scientific breakthroughs due to evolution? Why do schools and universities teach evolution so dogmatically, stealing time from experimental biology that so benefits humankind?
Experimental biology is based upon our understanding of genetics and evolution.
Why is evolution, a theory about history, taught as if it is the same as this operational science?
Because it is, in fact, operational science.
Why is a fundamentally religious idea, a dogmatic belief system that fails to explain the evidence, taught in science classes? If you cant teach religion in science classes, why is evolution taught?
Because it is not dogmatic, it is thorougly researced and questioned; it does explain the evidence, is extremely useful and therefore bears none of the characteristics you ascribe to it. All of which belong to Religion itself, the basis for the idea of Intelligent Design.
Trev
Prince
Amino acids which are created in those sorts of experiments are also quickly destroyed in those conditions. They can never combine together to form any of the complicated chains of amino acids/proteins that are necessary for life and replication in that reactive environment, so the results of those experiments have no relevance to the origin of life.
- Status
Similar threads
