Evolution

[keithprosser3]

Given the nature of reproduction and of natural selection isn't evolution inescapable?
How can evolution not happen?

[Danmark]

[Replying to post 1371 by Danmark]

Danmark stated, in part, "The failure to accept the overwhelming evidence of evolution is another example of cognitive dissonance"

kenblogton replied "The failure to reject evolution in the face of underwhelming evidence, as my posting indicated, is another example of rationalization or desperation or delusion or?

I note you have omitted a key phrase in your misquote and have failed to answer any of the substantive points I made:

In fact Festinger used religious belief as an example of cognitive dissonance in When Prophesy Fails. [introduction by Aaronson]
http://cogsciblog.wordpress.com/2011/05 ... festinger/

The failure to accept the overwhelming evidence of evolution is another example of cognitive dissonance since, for some, accepting the fact and theory of evolution conflicts with a literal approach to the Bible which is a false interpretation they are unwilling to let go of.

[emphasis applied]
"For some" is a key part of the sentence, since it avoids issuing a blanket statement. In other words, I did not state that 'everyone' who denies the fact of evolution does so because of cognitive dissonance.

You have failed to address a specific challenge to actually join issue on the facts we are debating. I wrote:
"http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/
This site lists 5 examples of intermediate and transitional forms.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc ... ermediates
Feel free to choose the one you consider the weakest example of macro evolution and critique it."
Do you have a specific argument, supported by scientific evidence, that effectively disputes any of the 5 examples given?

[Jashwell]

[Replying to post 1369 by kenblogton]

1. Spontaneous generation is not a requirement for evolution.
Argument from ignorance & once again just wrong.

As I asked in a post yesterday, "Why should we expect to observe abiogenesis in a number of small lab environments in less than 100 years given that it only had to occur once across the entire planet in up to 500 million years? "


2. "There is no solid evidence that I was speeding, just a series of photos showing my car's displacement that have falsely been treated as part of a continuous picture"
"There's no solid evidence that I walked into the house. Sure, there are a series of muddy footprints leading up to me wearing muddy boots, but not one continuous transition"

And as I asked earlier, "I) Given that less than 1% of species are fossilized, why would modern evolutionary biology require evidence of an entire evolutionary lineage?
II)Why is a fossil of every generation required rather than occasional stages? "

Reply to 1. Of course spontaneous generation is a requirement for evolution. How else to explain the origin of life on planet earth? As I've previously shown, at http://darwin200.christs.cam.ac.uk/page ... page_id=f8, it states "Secretly, Darwin did have his own ideas about how life kicked off; he thought that life probably began spontaneously from the chemical soup that existed as the earth began to calm down a bit following its violent birth. He wrote to his friend Joseph Hooker expressing this idea:

�But if (and Oh! What a big if!) we could conceive in some warm little pond, with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, lights, heat, electricity etc., present that a protein compound was chemically formed ready to undergo still more complex changes�

Darwin had actually hit the nail on the head, the origin of life is a problem for chemistry and biochemists.

In 1953 two people created Darwin�s warm little pond. Stanley Miller and Harold Urey, working at the University of Chicago mixed water, methane, ammonia and hydrogen in a glass bulb and added heat and sparks of electricity; they were trying to recreate the atmosphere that existed during earth's early days to test whether organic molecules such as amino acids, which are the building blocks of proteins, could have spontaneously formed. They ran the experiment for a week and amazingly, when they analysed their concoction, found over 10 different types of amino acids. When Miller�s old tubes were reanalysed in 2008 with new equipment, they discovered they had actually created over 20!"

(as I said last time you gave it, how does that quote do anything but support my position)

evolution
noun
1.
the process by which different kinds of living organism are believed to have developed from earlier forms [of life] during the history of the earth.

abiogenesis
noun
the original [emergence] of life or living organisms from inorganic or inanimate substances.

Evolution does not entail abiogenesis.
Evolution in no way seeks to explain the origin of life.
You want an example of how to explain the origin of life?
Some people seem to think goddidit is an explanation.
Some of those people believe in evolution.

There's no conflict between believing in god creating life and in evolution occurring.

And still, no successful abiogenesis. It doesn't take 500 million years to achieve. On early earth, life generation was due to chance. In the lab, it is deliberate recreation of the early earth life generation conditions. Replicability is a cornerstone of Science. No abiogenesis, no spontaneous generation of life.

I don't see how you aren't getting this.
It is eminently plausible that abiogenesis may be highly unlikely. There is no logical contradiction there whatsoever.
Recreating the early conditions of life has no influence on that whatsoever.
That's like saying that if we "replicate the conditions of a (1 in 10 million or something chance) lottery" with ten tickets, we'll get the correct number sequence immediately.


You still have yet to respond to the very clearly true accusation of special pleading. You demand standards of evidence much higher for naturalistic abiogenesis than for divine abiogenesis.
(which also isn't true, one doesn't need to recreate tectonic movement to know scientifically that mountains are created by plate collisions)

This is what your argument is similar to:
"If God created life we should expect to see God creating life all the time"

Reply to 2. Please don't change the subject or try to obscure it.

Argument ad absurdum, phrase with same implication.
Your arguments are as ad hoc as the examples I gave.

There is no solid evidence. As I've previously noted by Johnson, P.E. 1991. Darwin on Trial. Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity, "According to Steven Stanley, the Bighorn Basin in Wyoming contains a continuous local record of fossil deposits for about five million years.� Because this record is so complete, palaeontologists assumed that certain populations of the basin could be linked to illustrate continuous evolution. On the contrary��the fossil record does not convincingly document a single transition from one species to the next.� (51)"

This quote is from a 25 year old book, and from a book that from the outset set to oust evolution.

Here's a nice quote about the book
"Eugenie Scott wrote that the book "teaches little that is accurate about either the nature of science, or the topic of evolution. It is recommended neither by scientists nor educators."[2] Scott pointed out in a second review that "the criticisms of evolution [Johnson] offers are immediately recognizable as originating with the "scientific" creationists"."

"Evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould's review of the book stated that it contained "no weighing of evidence, no careful reading of literature on all sides, no full citation of sources (the book does not even contain a bibliography) and occasional use of scientific literature only to score rhetorical points". Gould also pointed out that the use of legal criteria, in which a "shadow of a doubt" can suffice to destroy a theory, was inappropriate in science, since "science is not a discipline that claims to establish certainty".[4]"

Steven Stanley thinks that a basin doesn't convincingly document a transition? (yes, he is indeed the only source, and is introduced as just some guy)

Well just some guy Benjamin Burger has written a paper called "Evolution’s Tempo and Mode during the Eocene Epoch: comparison of two long contemporaneous records of the fossil mammal Hyopsodus in the American West." (if you really want the reference) in which he cites bighorn basin for evidence of evolution following particular patterns.
(He also has over 15 citations to scholarly articles, but that's not important)

Given 5 million years of continuous fossil data

There's actually plenty of ad hoc but logically consistent reasons why virtually no evolution might occur over 5 million years, e.g. a stable environment with thriving populations.

But once again, less than 1% of species believed to have existed have been fossilised.
Among these species will be fossils of the same species.

evidence of evolution would be expected. No supporting data, no confirmation of evolution. It takes great faith to believe in a scientific theory for which there is no solid evidence. And remember, Steven Stanley is a respected scientific researcher, as noted at http://www.soest.hawaii.edu/GG/people/g ... ley_s.html.
kenblogton

Are you sure this is the same Steven Stanley?
Research themes: "Earth's surface: water, sediments, and life" (Geology not biology, inc. regarding life)

...
Actually, so I saw his wikipedia page.

Steven M. Stanley (born November 2, 1941) is an American paleontologist and evolutionary biologist at the University of Hawaii at Manoa. He is best known for his empirical research documenting the evolutionary process of punctuated equilibrium in the fossil record.

Oh my.

[Zzyzx]

.

As I see it, your parade your ignorance proudly.

Moderator Warning


Your statement is clearly uncivil and personal -- in flagrant violation of Forum Rules. Kindly refrain from such practices.

Please review our Rules.

______________

Moderator warnings count as a strike against users. Additional violations in the future may warrant a final warning. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[Star]

[Replying to post 1371 by Danmark]

Danmark stated, in part, "The failure to accept the overwhelming evidence of evolution is another example of cognitive dissonance"

kenblogton replied "The failure to reject evolution in the face of underwhelming evidence, as my posting indicated, is another example of rationalization or desperation or delusion or?
kenblogton

By the way, explain a "complete species" vs. an "intermediate species." And how are feathered reptiles and our hominid ancestors not whatever you think they ought to be?

[kenblogton]

1.

[Replying to post 1371 by Danmark]

Danmark stated, in part, "The failure to accept the overwhelming evidence of evolution is another example of cognitive dissonance"

kenblogton replied "The failure to reject evolution in the face of underwhelming evidence, as my posting indicated, is another example of rationalization or desperation or delusion or?

I note you have omitted a key phrase in your misquote and have failed to answer any of the substantive points I made:

In fact Festinger used religious belief as an example of cognitive dissonance in When Prophesy Fails. [introduction by Aaronson]
http://cogsciblog.wordpress.com/2011/05 ... festinger/

2. The failure to accept the overwhelming evidence of evolution is another example of cognitive dissonance since, for some, accepting the fact and theory of evolution conflicts with a literal approach to the Bible which is a false interpretation they are unwilling to let go of.

[emphasis applied]
"For some" is a key part of the sentence, since it avoids issuing a blanket statement. In other words, I did not state that 'everyone' who denies the fact of evolution does so because of cognitive dissonance.

You have failed to address a specific challenge to actually join issue on the facts we are debating. I wrote:
"http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/
This site lists 5 examples of intermediate and transitional forms.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc ... ermediates
Feel free to choose the one you consider the weakest example of macro evolution and critique it."
Do you have a specific argument, supported by scientific evidence, that effectively disputes any of the 5 examples given?

Reply to 1. Have you read the website you reference? You state "In fact Festinger used religious belief as an example of cognitive dissonance" when in fact the website references examples of end of the world prophecies and how, when the failure of the prophesied end occurs, that failure is rationalized. As I previously stated, on your part, this "is another example of rationalization or desperation or delusion or?" Or perhaps it is an example of great anger toward God?

Reply to 2. You miss the point. The argument against evolution doe not require a literal interpretation of the Bible, it only requires an assessment of the available evidence.
Regarding the website you reference. It states "However, a phylogenetic tree does make significant predictions about the morphology of intermediates which no longer exist or which have yet to be discovered. Each predicted common ancestor has a set of explicitly specified morphological characteristics, based on each of the most common derived characters of its descendants and based upon the transitions that must have occurred to transform one taxa into another (Cunningham et al. 1998; Futuyma 1998, pp. 107-108)." However, the website data does nowhere show the complete transitional evolutionary tree for any species. It merely lists transitional species that are morphologically relatable, like dinosaurs & birds.
However and for instance, the dinosaur to bird transition is disputed at http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 183335.htm
The available data for evolution are inconclusive - can you accept that?
kenblogton

[kenblogton]

[Replying to post 1371 by Danmark]

Danmark stated, in part, "The failure to accept the overwhelming evidence of evolution is another example of cognitive dissonance"

kenblogton replied "The failure to reject evolution in the face of underwhelming evidence, as my posting indicated, is another example of rationalization or desperation or delusion or?
kenblogton

By the way, explain a "complete species" vs. an "intermediate species." And how are feathered reptiles and our hominid ancestors not whatever you think they ought to be?

I don't recall using the term "complete species" Viable species is a good term for those which endure longer term.
Intermediate species are those which are transitional between a more primitive ancestor and a more advanced descendent. To solidly establish evolution, at least one example of unbroken intermediates between an ancestor and its viable descendent must be established.
Regarding dino to bird evolution, look at http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 183335.htm.
kenblogton

[kenblogton]

[Replying to post 1376 by Zzyzx]

I stated the comment as my opinion, not fact, which I assumed was acceptable. Apparently not.
Apologies
kenblogton

[kenblogton]

[Replying to post 1375 by Jashwell]

I have nothing additional to add to my previous comments, which I believe adequately address your points. To restate what I've already said would be redundant.
kenblogton

[dianaiad]

[Replying to post 1376 by Zzyzx]

I stated the comment as my opinion, not fact, which I assumed was acceptable. Apparently not.
Apologies
kenblogton

Moderator Warning


Do not challenge, appeal or comment on a moderator action on the public board. Take any comments or appeals to the moderator via PM.


Please review our Rules.

______________

Moderator warnings count as a strike against users. Additional violations in the future may warrant a final warning. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[dianaiad]

Reply to 1. Have you read the website you reference? You state "In fact Festinger used religious belief as an example of cognitive dissonance" when in fact the website references examples of end of the world prophecies and how, when the failure of the prophesied end occurs, that failure is rationalized. As I previously stated, on your part, this "is another example of rationalization or desperation or delusion or?" Or perhaps it is an example of great anger toward God?

Moderator Warning


Address the comments made, not the person making them. Speculating upon a writer's motive for an opinion is not acceptable, nor does it advance your position.

Please review our Rules.

______________

Moderator warnings count as a strike against users. Additional violations in the future may warrant a final warning. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.