Page 11 of 16 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 157

Thread: Scientists Cite Fastest Case of Human Evolution

  1. #101
    Sage
    Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:20 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,170

    Re: Scientists Cite Fastest Case of Human Evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    A calculation is only as good as it's starting assumptions and data being input into it.
    If you have a problem with the specific starting assumptions or data being used, please share. Try not to dismiss something out out hand simply because of a person's degree. Some of the most interesting work in science is cross-disciplinary.

  2. #102
    Sage
    Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:20 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,170

    Re: Scientists Cite Fastest Case of Human Evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Tammerlain View Post
    However when calculating complex probabilities that involve evolution understanding evolution should be a requirement,
    Yes, to the extent necessary. But I hope you'll agree that critiques of such work should be aimed at their understanding of evolution, not their math degree.

  3. #103
    Educator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Last Seen
    01-17-15 @ 02:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    629

    Re: Scientists Cite Fastest Case of Human Evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    There are scientists to disagree with that assumption, at least in part.
    There may be some scientists, but I really think they're wrong. And also, if you just think about, you can make some sense out of it too.

    Here's the Miller-Urey experiment. Basically what it says is that if you put the starting elements and molecules found in the early earth together in a closed container and then zap it with electricity, you will get basic organic and life compounds such as amino acids and formaldehyde.

    Experiment

    The experiment used water (H2O), methane (CH4), ammonia (NH3), and hydrogen (H2). The chemicals were all sealed inside a sterile array of glass tubes and flasks connected in a loop, with one flask half-full of liquid water and another flask containing a pair of electrodes. The liquid water was heated to induce evaporation, sparks were fired between the electrodes to simulate lightning through the atmosphere and water vapor, and then the atmosphere was cooled again so that the water could condense and trickle back into the first flask in a continuous cycle.

    At the end of one week of continuous operation, Miller and Urey observed that as much as 10–15% of the carbon within the system was now in the form of organic compounds. Two percent of the carbon had formed amino acids that are used to make proteins in living cells, with glycine as the most abundant. Sugars, lipids, and some of the building blocks for nucleic acids were also formed.

    In an interview, Stanley Miller stated: "Just turning on the spark in a basic pre-biotic experiment will yield 11 out of 20 amino acids."[10]

    As observed in all subsequent experiments, both left-handed (L) and right-handed (D) optical isomers were created in a racemic mixture.
    So it shows that if you start out with simple elements, you're bound to get more complex compounds from things reacting with each other. Also see Abiogenesis.

    Barrow and Tipler [30] review the consensus among such biologists that the evolutionary path from primitive Cambrian chordates, e.g. Pikaia, to Homo sapiens was a highly improbable event. For example, the large brains of humans have marked adaptive disadvantages, requiring as they do an expensive metabolism, a long gestation period, and a childhood lasting more than 25% of the average total life span. Other improbable features of humans include:

    Being the only extant bipedal land (non-avian) vertebrate. Combined with an unusual eye–hand coordination, this permits dextrous manipulations of the physical environment with the hands;
    A vocal apparatus far more expressive than that of any other mammal, enabling speech. Speech makes it possible for humans to interact cooperatively, to share knowledge, and to acquire a culture;
    The capability of formulating abstractions to a degree permitting the invention of mathematics, and the discovery of science and technology.


    Barrow, John D.; Tipler, Frank J. (19 May 1988). The Anthropic Cosmological Principle. foreword by John A. Wheeler. Oxford: Oxford University Press. LC 87-28148. ISBN 9780192821478. The anthropic cosmological principle - Google Books. Retrieved 31 December 2009. Section 3.2
    These notions I think are incorrect. Having a larger brain is evolutionarily advantageous. You can make tools and succeed in the environment better, just look at how humans have done so far to see the success we have achieved. It may have it's drawbacks to have a larger brain, but it only makes sense how having a larger brain would be evolutionarily better. From what I've heard, early humans were hunting more and eating more proteins and lipids to support their brain development.

    There's nothing improbable about the other features as well. All these features are all evolutionarily advantageous, so its only natural that humans would evolve in that manner. These features are also what set humans apart from other species and why our evolution was so significant during our development.

  4. #104
    Sage
    mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    DC Metro
    Last Seen
    11-13-16 @ 12:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    22,499

    Re: Scientists Cite Fastest Case of Human Evolution

    I have a few questions that maybe someone more educated on biology and evolution than myself can answer.

    Why are we so less genetically diverse as a species than is the species we are most closely similar too?

    Why are we so separate mentally and physically from all other species on earth? Species that share much greater physical and mental similarities to each other than we do to our closest relative.

    Why are we so much more adaptable to our environment than any other species?

  5. #105
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:02 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,316
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Scientists Cite Fastest Case of Human Evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Taylor View Post
    If you have a problem with the specific starting assumptions or data being used, please share. Try not to dismiss something out out hand simply because of a person's degree. Some of the most interesting work in science is cross-disciplinary.
    This would be true if their degree and study had anything to do with the topic at hand. They do not. Further, the problem with what their concept has also been discussed in this very thread.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  6. #106
    Educator
    Anarcho-fascist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    T E X A S !
    Last Seen
    09-26-14 @ 11:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,069
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Scientists Cite Fastest Case of Human Evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by mac View Post
    I have a few questions that maybe someone more educated on biology and evolution than myself can answer.
    I'm no expert, but I'd like to think I keep up OK with major developments that area.

    Quote Originally Posted by mac View Post
    Why are we so less genetically diverse as a species than is the species we are most closely similar too?
    The idea that the super-volcano "Toba" caused a near extinction has been getting a bit of popular press lately. There have been some studies that suggest that the total human population might have been at a very low level relatively recently.

    Quote Originally Posted by mac View Post
    Why are we so separate mentally and physically from all other species on earth? Species that share much greater physical and mental similarities to each other than we do to our closest relative.
    All our closer relatives are extinct. Some species share a lot in common, but slugs, leopards, and giant redwoods are more separate compared to each other, than we are compared to chimps.

    Quote Originally Posted by mac View Post
    Why are we so much more adaptable to our environment than any other species?
    Well, we are smarter than any other thing on the Earth (that's what I like to think at least). Water bears can survive freezing, boiling and the vacuum of space, although technically I don't know if you'd really call that "adaptable" or just "tough".

  7. #107
    Sage
    Erod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    North Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:34 AM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    13,067

    Re: Scientists Cite Fastest Case of Human Evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by mikhail View Post
    Einstein didnt believe in a personal god of any discription and used the term god basically as a tool can we please put this myth to bed.You need to read a decent book about evolution.I would reccomend anything by stephen jay gould something like the Panda's thumb is more of an easy read for someone who isnt to interested in just a strauight educational book.
    So I suppose the many scientists who believe in God are just loonies in your mind?

    Here's a historical sampling:

    Famous Scientists Who Believed in God
    Belief in God
    Is belief in the existence of God irrational? These days, many famous scientists are also strong proponents of atheism. However, in the past, and even today, many scientists believe that God exists and is responsible for what we see in nature. This is a small sampling of scientists who contributed to the development of modern science while believing in God. Although many people believe in a "God of the gaps", these scientists, and still others alive today, believe because of the evidence.

    Rich Deem
    1.Nicholas Copernicus (1473-1543)
    Copernicus was the Polish astronomer who put forward the first mathematically based system of planets going around the sun. He attended various European universities, and became a Canon in the Catholic church in 1497. His new system was actually first presented in the Vatican gardens in 1533 before Pope Clement VII who approved, and urged Copernicus to publish it around this time. Copernicus was never under any threat of religious persecution - and was urged to publish both by Catholic Bishop Guise, Cardinal Schonberg, and the Protestant Professor George Rheticus. Copernicus referred sometimes to God in his works, and did not see his system as in conflict with the Bible.
    2.Sir Francis Bacon (1561-1627)
    Bacon was a philosopher who is known for establishing the scientific method of inquiry based on experimentation and inductive reasoning. In De Interpretatione Naturae Prooemium, Bacon established his goals as being the discovery of truth, service to his country, and service to the church. Although his work was based upon experimentation and reasoning, he rejected atheism as being the result of insufficient depth of philosophy, stating, "It is true, that a little philosophy inclineth man’s mind to atheism, but depth in philosophy bringeth men's minds about to religion; for while the mind of man looketh upon second causes scattered, it may sometimes rest in them, and go no further; but when it beholdeth the chain of them confederate, and linked together, it must needs fly to Providence and Deity." (Of Atheism)
    3.Johannes Kepler (1571-1630)
    Kepler was a brilliant mathematician and astronomer. He did early work on light, and established the laws of planetary motion about the sun. He also came close to reaching the Newtonian concept of universal gravity - well before Newton was born! His introduction of the idea of force in astronomy changed it radically in a modern direction. Kepler was an extremely sincere and pious Lutheran, whose works on astronomy contain writings about how space and the heavenly bodies represent the Trinity. Kepler suffered no persecution for his open avowal of the sun-centered system, and, indeed, was allowed as a Protestant to stay in Catholic Graz as a Professor (1595-1600) when other Protestants had been expelled!
    4.Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
    Galileo is often remembered for his conflict with the Roman Catholic Church. His controversial work on the solar system was published in 1633. It had no proofs of a sun-centered system (Galileo's telescope discoveries did not indicate a moving earth) and his one "proof" based upon the tides was invalid. It ignored the correct elliptical orbits of planets published twenty five years earlier by Kepler. Since his work finished by putting the Pope's favorite argument in the mouth of the simpleton in the dialogue, the Pope (an old friend of Galileo's) was very offended. After the "trial" and being forbidden to teach the sun-centered system, Galileo did his most useful theoretical work, which was on dynamics. Galileo expressly said that the Bible cannot err, and saw his system as an alternate interpretation of the biblical texts.
    5.Rene Descartes (1596-1650)
    Descartes was a French mathematician, scientist and philosopher who has been called the father of modern philosophy. His school studies made him dissatisfied with previous philosophy: He had a deep religious faith as a Roman Catholic, which he retained to his dying day, along with a resolute, passionate desire to discover the truth. At the age of 24 he had a dream, and felt the vocational call to seek to bring knowledge together in one system of thought. His system began by asking what could be known if all else were doubted - suggesting the famous "I think therefore I am". Actually, it is often forgotten that the next step for Descartes was to establish the near certainty of the existence of God - for only if God both exists and would not want us to be deceived by our experiences - can we trust our senses and logical thought processes. God is, therefore, central to his whole philosophy. What he really wanted to see was that his philosophy be adopted as standard Roman Catholic teaching. Rene Descartes and Francis Bacon (1561-1626) are generally regarded as the key figures in the development of scientific methodology. Both had systems in which God was important, and both seem more devout than the average for their era.
    6.Isaac Newton (1642-1727)
    In optics, mechanics, and mathematics, Newton was a figure of undisputed genius and innovation. In all his science (including chemistry) he saw mathematics and numbers as central. What is less well known is that he was devoutly religious and saw numbers as involved in understanding God's plan for history from the Bible. He did a considerable work on biblical numerology, and, though aspects of his beliefs were not orthodox, he thought theology was very important. In his system of physics, God is essential to the nature and absoluteness of space. In Principia he stated, "The most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion on an intelligent and powerful Being."
    7.Robert Boyle (1791-1867)
    One of the founders and key early members of the Royal Society, Boyle gave his name to "Boyle's Law" for gases, and also wrote an important work on chemistry. Encyclopedia Britannica says of him: "By his will he endowed a series of Boyle lectures, or sermons, which still continue, 'for proving the Christian religion against notorious infidels...' As a devout Protestant, Boyle took a special interest in promoting the Christian religion abroad, giving money to translate and publish the New Testament into Irish and Turkish. In 1690 he developed his theological views in The Christian Virtuoso, which he wrote to show that the study of nature was a central religious duty." Boyle wrote against atheists in his day (the notion that atheism is a modern invention is a myth), and was clearly much more devoutly Christian than the average in his era.
    8.Michael Faraday (1791-1867)
    Michael Faraday was the son of a blacksmith who became one of the greatest scientists of the 19th century. His work on electricity and magnetism not only revolutionized physics, but led to much of our lifestyles today, which depends on them (including computers and telephone lines and, so, web sites). Faraday was a devoutly Christian member of the Sandemanians, which significantly influenced him and strongly affected the way in which he approached and interpreted nature. Originating from Presbyterians, the Sandemanians rejected the idea of state churches, and tried to go back to a New Testament type of Christianity.
    9.Gregor Mendel (1822-1884)
    Mendel was the first to lay the mathematical foundations of genetics, in what came to be called "Mendelianism". He began his research in 1856 (three years before Darwin published his Origin of Species) in the garden of the Monastery in which he was a monk. Mendel was elected Abbot of his Monastery in 1868. His work remained comparatively unknown until the turn of the century, when a new generation of botanists began finding similar results and "rediscovered" him (though their ideas were not identical to his). An interesting point is that the 1860's was notable for formation of the X-Club, which was dedicated to lessening religious influences and propagating an image of "conflict" between science and religion. One sympathizer was Darwin's cousin Francis Galton, whose scientific interest was in genetics (a proponent of eugenics - selective breeding among humans to "improve" the stock). He was writing how the "priestly mind" was not conducive to science while, at around the same time, an Austrian monk was making the breakthrough in genetics. The rediscovery of the work of Mendel came too late to affect Galton's contribution.
    10.William Thomson Kelvin (1824-1907)
    Kelvin was foremost among the small group of British scientists who helped to lay the foundations of modern physics. His work covered many areas of physics, and he was said to have more letters after his name than anyone else in the Commonwealth, since he received numerous honorary degrees from European Universities, which recognized the value of his work. He was a very committed Christian, who was certainly more religious than the average for his era. Interestingly, his fellow physicists George Gabriel Stokes (1819-1903) and James Clerk Maxwell (1831-1879) were also men of deep Christian commitment, in an era when many were nominal, apathetic, or anti-Christian. The Encyclopedia Britannica says "Maxwell is regarded by most modern physicists as the scientist of the 19th century who had the greatest influence on 20th century physics; he is ranked with Sir Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein for the fundamental nature of his contributions." Lord Kelvin was an Old Earth creationist, who estimated the Earth's age to be somewhere between 20 million and 100 million years, with an upper limit at 500 million years based on cooling rates (a low estimate due to his lack of knowledge about radiogenic heating).
    11.Max Planck (1858-1947)
    Planck made many contributions to physics, but is best known for quantum theory, which revolutionized our understanding of the atomic and sub-atomic worlds. In his 1937 lecture "Religion and Naturwissenschaft," Planck expressed the view that God is everywhere present, and held that "the holiness of the unintelligible Godhead is conveyed by the holiness of symbols." Atheists, he thought, attach too much importance to what are merely symbols. Planck was a churchwarden from 1920 until his death, and believed in an almighty, all-knowing, beneficent God (though not necessarily a personal one). Both science and religion wage a "tireless battle against skepticism and dogmatism, against unbelief and superstition" with the goal "toward God!"
    12.Albert Einstein (1879-1955)
    Einstein is probably the best known and most highly revered scientist of the twentieth century, and is associated with major revolutions in our thinking about time, gravity, and the conversion of matter to energy (E=mc2). Although never coming to belief in a personal God, he recognized the impossibility of a non-created universe. The Encyclopedia Britannica says of him: "Firmly denying atheism, Einstein expressed a belief in "Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the harmony of what exists." This actually motivated his interest in science, as he once remarked to a young physicist: "I want to know how God created this world, I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thoughts, the rest are details." Einstein's famous epithet on the "uncertainty principle" was "God does not play dice" - and to him this was a real statement about a God in whom he believed. A famous saying of his was "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."
    Famous Scientists Who Believed in God
    Last edited by Erod; 07-06-10 at 12:45 PM.

  8. #108
    Advisor LimeLight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    01-15-12 @ 02:19 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    343

    Re: Scientists Cite Fastest Case of Human Evolution

    Since the beginning of time religion and science have been linked. Religion brings unanswered questions. Science attempts to answer them. But in the end they both some to a common conclusion.

  9. #109
    ThunderCougarFalconBird
    roughdraft274's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Louisiana
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    11,061

    Re: Scientists Cite Fastest Case of Human Evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Erod View Post
    So I suppose the many scientists who believe in God are just loonies in your mind?

    Here's a historical sampling:



    Famous Scientists Who Believed in God
    You'll notice how long ago most of these scientists lived, mostly before and idea of evolution. God made sense because they had no other way to explain the complexity of life without invoking a deity. We no longer have that need.

  10. #110
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    03-31-11 @ 07:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    2,331

    Re: Scientists Cite Fastest Case of Human Evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Erod View Post
    Well, I can't speak for all Creationists, but here's my opinion.

    I don't discount that humans, and all species, have an amazing ability to adapt. I don't discount that over time, humans have changed in different ways as part of a "survival of the fittest" weening out process. I readily accept those conclusions.

    What I don't accept - and I say this for effect, not saying you believe this - is that a paramecium turned into a fish thing, which turned into a salamander, which turned into a squirrel, which turned into a monkey, which turned into a human. I realize that is an oversimplification of the theory of evolution, but that aspect of it remains the most implausible and unproven aspect of the whole thing.

    Evolution, or the changing and adaptation of the earth's species, is not in my mind at odds with Creationism. It is in itself, a "miracle" as you would prescribe the religious views on these things.

    Whatever the process is not necessarily for us to understand, and it is certainly in the control of a higher power in my mind. Science and religion do not have to conflict with each other, which most Christians acknowledge.

    Churches are not filled with just mindless idiots, as non-believers would like to think. Albert Einstein believed in God, and many of the congregation each Sunday are educated, successful people who have given this a great deal of thought. Don't let the over-the-top televangelists paint the stereotype for you.
    Erod is not that people like Einstein and myself don't believe in a God. We do. What we don't believe in is organized religion like christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddha, etc. Those religions are as fake as Jenna Jameson's breasts.:p However, you have to understand that we don't still understand the process of how a single celled organism turned into a complex being like a monkey, man, etc. Everything that exists is because of the evolution of those single celled organisms.

    I believe in evolution and the sciences more then in a book written by a starving lunatic.

Page 11 of 16 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •