View Poll Results: Does evolution happen

Voters
91. You may not vote on this poll
  • Evolution happens, and it is random

    65 71.43%
  • Evolution happens and is guided by a higher power

    10 10.99%
  • There is not enough information to know for sure

    7 7.69%
  • No, evolutuon does not happen

    5 5.49%
  • I don't know

    4 4.40%
Page 15 of 32 FirstFirst ... 5131415161725 ... LastLast
Results 141 to 150 of 311

Thread: Evolution

  1. #141
    Sage
    RiverDad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    04-20-14 @ 02:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    5,039

    Re: Evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    If there are clear pressures influencing outcomes that are not random, then the process in which evolution is directed is not random.
    Evolution is NOT directed. There is no one directing it and the processes do not arise in response to direction. A mutation arises randomly. Whether the mutation is beneficial, neutral or harmful is often times dependent on the environment. For instance, if an individual develops a specific mutation near the EPAS1 gene then they'll be better able to regulate the hemoglobin in their blood while in low oxygen environments. If the mutation arises in a person living in a low altitude area, then the environment will not select for the mutation, however if the person lives in a high altitude area then the mutation will be selected. The environment in which the mutation arises is a random process. It is not directed.

    You really should refrain from allowing intuition to guide your thinking on technical issues.

  2. #142
    Sage
    Bodhisattva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    New Zealand
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:05 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    63,882

    Re: Evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    This is a bad poll.

    Evolution happens and it is guided by the influences of the natural world. That much is certain. Evolution is no more random any more so than why the wind blows in certain directions.
    But you understood the point. Really, nothing is random, just chaos that appears random.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    I have pooped in public, even in public neighborhoods.
    Quote Originally Posted by Absentglare View Post
    You can successfully wipe your ass with toilet paper, that doesn't mean that you should.

  3. #143
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by ecofarm View Post
    That's not circular? I get your point but, still, that doesn't look right. The only "theory of gravity" I've ever seen linked was some hokey website.
    No, it's not circullar because gravity is different than gravitation. The theory of gravity relates to the theoretical graviton.

  4. #144
    Uncanny
    Paschendale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    New York City
    Last Seen
    03-31-16 @ 04:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    12,510

    Re: Evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by sookster View Post
    You see, these are laws, not theories. They all started as theories, but experiment after experiment after experiment showed that these "theories" hold true. Therefore, they can be conducted as scientific laws.
    Actually, we just don't use the word "law" anymore. Einstein's theories, Hawking's theories, all of quantum mechanics, Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle... all of these are theories. Since the formalization of the scientific method, we just don't use the word "law" anymore. Theory does not mean guess. It means "experiment after experiment after experiment showed that these theories' hold true". That process does not promote theory to law, but rather hypothesis to theory. But this is a matter of semantics. E=MC squared is just as much a law as Newton's laws. They're just called different things. No scientific principle published in the last century has been called a law.

    I believe the definition of the word coincidence is an illusion. And life sure needed a whole lot of coincidences in order for it to be here.
    And you can assign a probability to those coincidences. And then you run that same probability on a huge number of planets throughout the universe and this one happened to roll all 6's. It's not really coincidence. It only looks that way if you limit your sample size to just Earth. It's really just probability.
    Liberté. Égalité. Fraternité.

  5. #145
    Educator Dogger807's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    979

    Re: Evolution

    Stating evolution didn't happen is like saying the earth is flat. It takes a very big disconnect from reality or religion to insist that the evidence doesn't point toward evolution. One can even argue that a religion, by definition, is a very big disconnect from reality.
    Ignorance is the refuge of faith
    It's become very apparent that there is nothing respectable about faith
    "If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people"

  6. #146
    Professor
    sookster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    In my own world.
    Last Seen
    06-27-17 @ 10:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,838

    Re: Evolution

    Actually, we just don't use the word "law" anymore. Einstein's theories, Hawking's theories, all of quantum mechanics, Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle... all of these are theories. Since the formalization of the scientific method, we just don't use the word "law" anymore. Theory does not mean guess. It means "experiment after experiment after experiment showed that these theories' hold true". That process does not promote theory to law, but rather hypothesis to theory. But this is a matter of semantics. E=MC squared is just as much a law as Newton's laws. They're just called different things. No scientific principle published in the last century has been called a law.
    I did not say just because a theory isn't a law means it is not true. And what you say is not really true...

    In order to make a theory a law, you have to construct experiments that give you direct evidence that the theory holds true. How would you suppose scientists with current technology prove that time is relative?

  7. #147
    Uncanny
    Paschendale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    New York City
    Last Seen
    03-31-16 @ 04:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    12,510

    Re: Evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by sookster View Post
    I did not say just because a theory isn't a law means it is not true. And what you say is not really true...

    In order to make a theory a law, you have to construct experiments that give you direct evidence that the theory holds true. How would you suppose scientists with current technology prove that time is relative?
    No, you do that to show that a hypothesis is a theory. NO theory becomes law anymore. The word is just not used. To make it simpler, just put "theory" where you think "law" should go, and "hypothesis" where you think "theory" should go. That's the technical terms that scientists use.

    Relative time is not a law. It was determined within the last century or so, after people stopped using the word law. Now it is a theory. Theory does not mean it is untested. An idea only becomes a theory after many many experiments with consistent results.

    What I say really IS true. That's the terminology.

    How did they prove that times is relative? Go read Einstein's experiments, and some of Hawking's. They can explain it far better than I.
    Liberté. Égalité. Fraternité.

  8. #148
    Sage
    Dezaad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Last Seen
    06-28-15 @ 10:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    5,058
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by ecofarm View Post
    We've found evidence of life on various things that were out there, and we've plenty of evidence of water elsewhere. Of course, that RNA on Earth came from somewhere else rests on the presumption that life outside Earth exists or existed (you expect me to prove that?). My "theory" is nothing more than common sense...

    1. Life outside Earth.
    2. Life on Earth.
    3. Can't demonstrate how it happened.
    4. Coulda happened elsewhere and got here on an asteroid or something. Hell, maybe someone like us launched RNA all over the place. These possibilities cannot be entirely discounted by an undemonstratable theory.

    I have an MSc. I'll give my real name, and have - at this forum, but the forum doesn't like that. I'm almost done with my PhD (writing dissertation during field research). Attacking credentials as fake is weak, but reminds me of how little it takes to be unbelievably awesome in the internet world. And I'm an atheist, have been since I was ~13 and I'm 40. I actually know what the definition is, perhaps that confuses you. My visitor messeges has some basic info about me, if you're interested (hard to believe, I know, but it is all true!).
    Why mention your credentials in this context unless you wish for them to be part of the debate?

    Terrestrial Abiogenesis is still a very viable hypothesis. Now you are dismissing it because your still unsupported hypothesis is "common sense"? Is that how you approach your academic work as well?

    I see where you are hinting that you might have a smidgen of evidence. But even if you turn out to have that much, once you back it up, it won't meet the level of support required for acceptance. Obviously.
    You can never be safe from a government that can keep you completely safe from each other and the world. You must choose.

  9. #149
    Only Losers H8 Capitalism
    Spartacus FPV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    In your echo chamber
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    12,891

    Re: Evolution

    Evolution is the non-random survival of randomly varying replicators. There needs to be an option "Evolution Occurred and it is not random"
    Last edited by Spartacus FPV; 08-21-11 at 12:51 PM.
    Haymarket's "support" of the 2nd Amendment, a right he believes we never had.
    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    no. You cannot lose rights you do not have in the first place. There is no such thing as the right to have any weapon of your choice regardless of any other consideration. It simply does not exist.

  10. #150
    Only Losers H8 Capitalism
    Spartacus FPV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    In your echo chamber
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    12,891

    Re: Evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by sookster View Post
    I did not say just because a theory isn't a law means it is not true. And what you say is not really true...

    In order to make a theory a law, you have to construct experiments that give you direct evidence that the theory holds true. How would you suppose scientists with current technology prove that time is relative?
    No amount of evidence and verification can make a theory into a law in scientific terms, you simply do not know what the words mean.

    Theory in scientific terms means HUGELY SUPPORTED FACT in laymens terms.
    Haymarket's "support" of the 2nd Amendment, a right he believes we never had.
    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    no. You cannot lose rights you do not have in the first place. There is no such thing as the right to have any weapon of your choice regardless of any other consideration. It simply does not exist.

Page 15 of 32 FirstFirst ... 5131415161725 ... 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
  •