This is not a question of whether or not evolution is crazy, but how crazy it seems at first glance.
That is, when we discard our experiences and look at claims as if through new eyes, what do we find when we look at evolution? I Believe we can find a great deal of common ground with this question, because when I discard my experience as an animal breeder, when I discard my knowledge, and what I've been taught, I might look at evolution with the same skepticism as someone who has either never been taught anything about it, or someone who has been taught to distrust it.
Personally my mind goes to the keratinised spines on the tongues of cats. Yes, cats have fingernails growing out of their tongues! Gross, right? Well, these particular fingernails have evolved into perfect little brushes for the animal's fur. But I think of that first animal with a horrid growth of keratin on its poor tongue. The poor thing didn't die immediately, and this fits perfectly with what I said about two steps back paying for one forward. This detrimental mutation didn't hurt the animal enough for the hapless thing to die of it, but surely it caused some suffering. And persevering thing that he was, he reproduced despite his disability (probably in a time of plenty that allowed that). But did he have the growths anywhere else? It isn't beyond reason to think of them protruding from the corners of his eyes or caking up more and more on the palms of his hands. Perhaps he had them where his eyelashes were, and it hurt him to even blink. As disturbing as my mental picture is of this scenario, this sad creature isn't even as bad off as this boar, whose tusks grew up and curled until they punctured his brain.
This is a perfect example of a detrimental trait being preserved because it doesn't hurt the animal enough to kill it before it mates. So we don't have to jump right from benefit to benefit. The road to a new beneficial trait might be long, going backwards most of the way, and filled with a lot of stabbed brains and eyelids.
Walking backwards most of the time, uphill both ways, and across caltrops almost the entire trip?
I have to admit, thinking about walking along such a path sounds like, at very least, a very depressing way to get from A to B. I would hope there would be a better way.
How Crazy does Evolution Seem?
Moderator: Moderators
-
OnlinePurple Knight
- Prodigy
- Posts: 3507
- Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 6:00 pm
- Has thanked: 1134 times
- Been thanked: 733 times
- DrNoGods
- Prodigy
- Posts: 2716
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2017 2:18 pm
- Location: Nevada
- Has thanked: 593 times
- Been thanked: 1642 times
Re: How Crazy does Evolution Seem?
Post #1271[Replying to Eloi in post #1267]
There is no answer for "we have had like this for how long" because things are constantly changing. This is evidenced by the fact the huge majority of life forms that ever existed are extinct, and replaced by new forms (via evolution). Come back in a measly 1 million years from now and there will be large changes in the distribution of life forms if we humans (or an asteroid) haven't initiated a reset.
Uh ... I did assume 600 million years between formation of the planet 4.6 billion years ago (which itself likely took tens of millions of years), and the first life forms some 4 billion years ago, so you missed that somehow. I can't make sense of the rest of the above quote. The obvious time period for life to have diversified starting from some 4 billion years ago to now is ... 4 billion years. As for "as they are now", do you mean the present (today) distribution of all living things?I won't make the calculation for you, since I do not believe that ever happened ... but you're probably not taking into account that the planet only became habitable many millions of years after the initial origin of the Universe; no life could have arisen before that ... and from that moment, add up every detail of every little animal and plant ... How long did the earth have to gestate all its productions before making them as they are now? which, by the way, we have had like this for how long?
There is no answer for "we have had like this for how long" because things are constantly changing. This is evidenced by the fact the huge majority of life forms that ever existed are extinct, and replaced by new forms (via evolution). Come back in a measly 1 million years from now and there will be large changes in the distribution of life forms if we humans (or an asteroid) haven't initiated a reset.
In human affairs the sources of success are ever to be found in the fountains of quick resolve and swift stroke; and it seems to be a law, inflexible and inexorable, that he who will not risk cannot win.
John Paul Jones, 1779
The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read.
Mark Twain
John Paul Jones, 1779
The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read.
Mark Twain
-
- Banned
- Posts: 1775
- Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2019 9:31 pm
- Has thanked: 43 times
- Been thanked: 213 times
- Contact:
Re: How Crazy does Evolution Seem?
Post #1272Well, I just read a post before that says something different about the time that this supposed process would really take, and that only in one case or two... imagine all the processes, because separating a single detail to talk about it is one thing, but the world right now is not made of just one detail... Calculate them too.DrNoGods wrote: ↑Fri May 20, 2022 3:59 pm [Replying to Eloi in post #1267]
Uh ... I did assume 600 million years between formation of the planet 4.6 billion years ago (which itself likely took tens of millions of years), and the first life forms some 4 billion years ago, so you missed that somehow. I can't make sense of the rest of the above quote. The obvious time period for life to have diversified starting from some 4 billion years ago to now is ... 4 billion years. As for "as they are now", do you mean the present (today) distribution of all living things?I won't make the calculation for you, since I do not believe that ever happened ... but you're probably not taking into account that the planet only became habitable many millions of years after the initial origin of the Universe; no life could have arisen before that ... and from that moment, add up every detail of every little animal and plant ... How long did the earth have to gestate all its productions before making them as they are now? which, by the way, we have had like this for how long?
There is no answer for "we have had like this for how long" because things are constantly changing. This is evidenced by the fact the huge majority of life forms that ever existed are extinct, and replaced by new forms (via evolution). Come back in a measly 1 million years from now and there will be large changes in the distribution of life forms if we humans (or an asteroid) haven't initiated a reset.
- JoeyKnothead
- Banned
- Posts: 20879
- Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:59 am
- Location: Here
- Has thanked: 4093 times
- Been thanked: 2572 times
Re: How Crazy does Evolution Seem?
Post #1273LomfpocSherlock Holmes wrote: ↑Fri May 20, 2022 3:37 pmIndeed and its for that very reason that I remain unconvinced by the various arguments and extrapolations that purportedly show that the fossil record is evidence for evolution, to me they appear as fairy tales. Still one man's fairy tale is another man's truth I suppose.JoeyKnothead wrote: ↑Fri May 20, 2022 3:30 pmOf course.Sherlock Holmes wrote: ↑Fri May 20, 2022 2:36 pm [Replying to JoeyKnothead in post #1239]
You wrote
That could be because their studies and educational emphasis and so on plays a part in how they interpret things. The fact is this is interpretation of data, some people think it supports evolution and some don't just as some people thing the universe is evidence for God and some don't. Everything is subjective, everything is down to how we choose to interpret stuff.Yet those who study such things, who have advanced degrees in the relevant fields, found the data compelling for evolution.
Some prefer rationality and logic.
Others prefer religious fairy tales.
You don't trust expert conclusions regarding the fossil record, but trust some dead jew hopped up and flew away.
I might be Teddy Roosevelt, but I ain't.
-Punkinhead Martin
-Punkinhead Martin
- Jose Fly
- Guru
- Posts: 1462
- Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2022 5:30 pm
- Location: Out west somewhere
- Has thanked: 337 times
- Been thanked: 906 times
Re: How Crazy does Evolution Seem?
Post #1274Sigh....EarthScienceguy wrote: ↑Fri May 20, 2022 3:57 pm [Replying to Jose Fly in post #1258]
That is not what your article shows.No, that's translocation.
Look at your one article. Chromosome 4 to Chromosome 20. before and after.
https://www.genome.gov/genetics-glossary/Insertion
It takes a section of 4 and moves it to 20.
Translocations are one type of insertion. All translocations are insertions, but not all insertions are translocations.
Again I have to ask...don't you know any of this?
That's a non-response. The fact remains, Aig either lied or are fundamentally ignorant of genetics.Earthscienceguy wrote:Reading comprehension is a wonderful thing.Jose Fly wrote:]Yes, it does. The AiG article you linked to claimed that Lenski's experiment did not document any new mutations. I showed where Lenski specifically did.
Please, for your own sake go learn some basic genetics. And BTW, haven't you and I been over this before over at ToL? Do you remember our discussions of ERV's? Did you forget what they are?In my calculation, I assumed that all said mutations increased the size of the genome. Which they don't according to the article that you cited.
You didn't answer the question. Are you assuming that every single nucleotide requires its own separate mutation?Earthscienceguy wrote:0.4 nucleotides per year is 9 orders of magnitude over the accepted rate. Besides the FACT that there is no evidence that Lenski's experiment increased the size of the genome in the 30 years, it has been running.Jose Fly wrote:Also, are you assuming that every single nucleotide requires its own separate mutation?
Also, is it your position that no genome has ever increased in size?
Being apathetic is great....or not. I don't really care.
Re: How Crazy does Evolution Seem?
Post #1275In the past everything was different surely? that's got to be true if the Big Bang is true. Perhaps creationists unlike philosophical materialists, confront the reality that science cannot explain why or how there is a rationally intelligible universe here at all. As we go further we back we run out of causes eventually.
That's "creationism" so far as I see it anyway, the acceptance that blind unguided materialism can account for the existence of blind unguided materialism.
- Jose Fly
- Guru
- Posts: 1462
- Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2022 5:30 pm
- Location: Out west somewhere
- Has thanked: 337 times
- Been thanked: 906 times
Re: How Crazy does Evolution Seem?
Post #1276So the earth was flat, volcanoes didn't produce ash layers, trees didn't have rings, organisms didn't use DNA, gravity didn't exist, the sun orbited mars.....Sherlock Holmes wrote: ↑Fri May 20, 2022 4:08 pm In the past everything was different surely? that's got to be true if the Big Bang is true.
IOW, God of the Gaps.Perhaps creationists unlike philosophical materialists, confront the reality that science cannot explain why or how there is a rationally intelligible universe here at all. As we go further we back we run out of causes eventually.
Yup, God of the Gaps. That's creationism all right.That's "creationism" so far as I see it anyway, the acceptance that blind unguided materialism can account for the existence of blind unguided materialism.
Being apathetic is great....or not. I don't really care.
Re: How Crazy does Evolution Seem?
Post #1277I have no idea what "Lomfpoc" means but I will tell you that I likely don't trust anyone on the basis of claims of them being an "expert". As someone else pointed out recently in a trial we often see an expert witness called by the defense and a different expert witness called by the prosecution, if they are both experts and therefore both to be trusted then what can one do when they make mutually contradictory statements? These experts can only offer their own personal intepretation.JoeyKnothead wrote: ↑Fri May 20, 2022 4:06 pm Lomfpoc
You don't trust expert conclusions regarding the fossil record, but trust some dead jew hopped up and flew away.
Well what we do in that situation is we ultimately have to interpret what we hear, the experts, the evidence, the arguments and we have to decide for ourselves, we have to interpret all that ourselves.
It's the same with science, evolution, everything really, we cannot extricate ourselves from the reality that we at some point or other, make an interpretation and choose what we think is the best.
- EarthScienceguy
- Guru
- Posts: 2192
- Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2018 2:53 pm
- Has thanked: 33 times
- Been thanked: 43 times
- Contact:
Re: How Crazy does Evolution Seem?
Post #1278[Replying to Jose Fly in post #1274]
Dude, Duplication is what increases the size of the genome. You might want to read your own articles.Translocations are one type of insertion. All translocations are insertions, but not all insertions are translocations.
Again I have to ask...don't you know any of this?
Ok, Mr. insertion increases the size of the genome.That's a non-response. The fact remains, Aig either lied or are fundamentally ignorant of genetics.
Are there any ERV's in Lenski's experiment? Was there any duplication in Lenski's experiment? Duplication usually causes serious problems.Please, for your own sake go learn some basic genetics. And BTW, haven't you and I been over this before over at ToL? Do you remember our discussions of ERV's? Did you forget what they are?
It can if it duplicates. But that causes severe problems with the genome.Also, is it your position that no genome has ever increased in size?
Re: How Crazy does Evolution Seem?
Post #1279What is wrong with inferring God to fill some gap when there's nothing else left to choose?Jose Fly wrote: ↑Fri May 20, 2022 4:14 pmSo the earth was flat, volcanoes didn't produce ash layers, trees didn't have rings, organisms didn't use DNA, gravity didn't exist, the sun orbited mars.....Sherlock Holmes wrote: ↑Fri May 20, 2022 4:08 pm In the past everything was different surely? that's got to be true if the Big Bang is true.
IOW, God of the Gaps.Perhaps creationists unlike philosophical materialists, confront the reality that science cannot explain why or how there is a rationally intelligible universe here at all. As we go further we back we run out of causes eventually.
Yup, God of the Gaps. That's creationism all right.That's "creationism" so far as I see it anyway, the acceptance that blind unguided materialism can account for the existence of blind unguided materialism.
- William
- Savant
- Posts: 14180
- Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
- Location: Te Waipounamu
- Has thanked: 911 times
- Been thanked: 1642 times
- Contact:
Re: How Crazy does Evolution Seem?
Post #1280[Replying to Sherlock Holmes in post #1279]
Evidently what is wrong with that, is that the different religious ideas of GOD which attempt to fill the gap are themselves in need of gap-fill.What is wrong with inferring God to fill some gap when there's nothing else left to choose?