Evolutionary Theory predicts almost nothing?

[FarWanderer]

I would not turn to evolutionary theory because it predicts almost nothing.

Rarely have I encountered a statement that strikes me as ridiculous as this. What in biology does evolutionary theory NOT predict?

[rikuoamero]

I would not turn to evolutionary theory because it predicts almost nothing.

Rarely have I encountered a statement that strikes me as ridiculous as this. What in biology does evolutionary theory NOT predict?

The strength of a theory in science is its ability to predict future data. That is, it is able to predict what we will be able to find in the future.
Evolutionary theory predicts that we will find fossils in the ground ordered by how old they are. It predicts we will not find fossils of wildly differing ages mixed together e.g. we will not and never will find a fossil corresponding to a modern rabbit mixed in with a 200 million year old dinosaur fossil.

[Neatras]

It predicts that the distribution of endogenous retroviruses will match the nested hierarchy we expect from the tree of life. In fact, if we take the model tree of life and apply the relationship between species who have matching endogenous retroviruses, we'll have an identical overlay.

This is two converging lines that both explain and predict future data about the real world.

Creationists can fumble their way through any ad hoc explanation for ERV's they like. "Oh, god designed it that way," but try and ask them to use creationism to model how we should expect to see ERV's in future data, and they'll shrug and say, "Well, I can't predict how god would design it, but just because the theory of evolution explains and predicts what we eventually see in future data doesn't mean it's true! Something else could explain it!"

Still waiting on the follow-up.

Is evolutionary theory better at explaining the biblical god's design choices than his stalwart representatives, the creationists?

[Elijah John]

I would not turn to evolutionary theory because it predicts almost nothing.

Rarely have I encountered a statement that strikes me as ridiculous as this. What in biology does evolutionary theory NOT predict?

What does evolutionary theory predict? Can it predict the exact phenotpye of a given species? What, for example will chimps or people will look like exactly in a million or a billion years?

I ask this as someone who beleives in Evolution, but do not see that it aswers everything to do with biology, and the future development of species.

The theory accounts for many things that have already happened, but predicts?

I think the only thing evolution can "predict" is that a given speices will probably change in the near or distant future. Generalties, not specific predictions.

[FarWanderer]

I would not turn to evolutionary theory because it predicts almost nothing.

Rarely have I encountered a statement that strikes me as ridiculous as this. What in biology does evolutionary theory NOT predict?

What does evolutionary theory predict? Can it predict the exact phenotpye of a given species? What, for example will chimps or people will look like exactly in a million or a billion years?

I ask this as someone who beleives in Evolution, but do not see that it aswers everything to do with biology, and the future development of species.

The theory accounts for many things that have already happened, but predicts?

I think the only thing evolution can "predict" is that a given speices will probably change in the near or distant future. Generalties, not specific predictions.

There is actually only a very narrow range of morphologies that are suitable to any particular environment. Species are not going to develop maladaptively.

The only things that evolution does not predict are random mutation (because it’s random) and the environment of the organisms in question.

[Divine Insight]

Can it predict the exact phenotpye of a given species? What, for example will chimps or people will look like exactly in a million or a billion years?

Evolution theory actually predicts, and explains, why the future of evolution cannot be foretold in great detail. There are two simple reasons. One is that mutations are caused by random processes. And the other one is that evolution cannot predict that a give species will decide to destroy itself via pollution and the destruction of its own ecosystem, etc.

So evolution theory actually predict that evolution itself does not have a specific plan moving forward.

But evolution theory does predict that some babies will be born defective, etc. And that not all people will have precisely the same abilities.

Compare this with religions that claim that all men are created equal and will be judged for their choices.

Free will is often given as the apology for religious claims. But I have free will, yet I have no desire to do bad things. So free will itself does not explain why some people have a desire to do bad things.

Free will does not equate to desire. And clearly all humans do not desire the same things. So the religious excuse that free will is the explanation for "sin" is absolute nonsense.

Evolution theory shows precisely why different people think differently and not everyone has the same desires.

If there were a God who actually created some people to have evil desires, then it wouldn't be those people's fault that they have evil desires.

So evolution wins hands-down as a predictive theory over religious superstitious claims, that clearly cannot be true.

It cannot be true that free will causes people to choose to do evil things. If that were true than all humans would chose to do evil things. But they don't. So much for religious superstitions. Religion proves itself false by the predictions it makes that don't pan out.

[Elijah John]

I would not turn to evolutionary theory because it predicts almost nothing.

Rarely have I encountered a statement that strikes me as ridiculous as this. What in biology does evolutionary theory NOT predict?

What does evolutionary theory predict? Can it predict the exact phenotpye of a given species? What, for example will chimps or people will look like exactly in a million or a billion years?

I ask this as someone who beleives in Evolution, but do not see that it aswers everything to do with biology, and the future development of species.

The theory accounts for many things that have already happened, but predicts?

I think the only thing evolution can "predict" is that a given speices will probably change in the near or distant future. Generalties, not specific predictions.

There is actually only a very narrow range of morphologies that are suitable to any particular environment. Species are not going to develop maladaptively.

The only things that evolution does not predict are random mutation (because it’s random) and the environment of the organisms in question.

Yes, the "maladaptive" developments do not last.

But I disagree, that "there is only a very narrow range of morphologies that are suitable to any particular enviroment."

Both the ant and the antelope are suited to their same enviroment, yet they could not be more different.

[FarWanderer]

Both the ant and the antelope are suited to their same enviroment, yet they could not be more different.

More different to each other compared to what? Anything else in the environment. In other words they define the range of suitable morphologies. There are far more hypothetical non-suitable morphologies than suitable ones, however, which is why I called the range of suitable morphologies “narrow�.

[shnarkle]

I would not turn to evolutionary theory because it predicts almost nothing.

Rarely have I encountered a statement that strikes me as ridiculous as this. What in biology does evolutionary theory NOT predict?

If we take something like Newton's theories, his equations, formulas, etc. allow us to calculate where a planet should be located in the night sky. We are then able to look up into the sky and lo and behold, there's the planet right where it should be. The theory of evolution has nothing to compare to this. if we ask the evolutionist how many morphological changes are required for a land based species to adapt to living in the ocean, there is no equation, algorhythm or calculation we can rely on to give us anything like a meaningful answer. In a nutshell, the closest we can come to an answer is "variation varies".

Hack fortune tellers come up with more compelling vagueries.

[shnarkle]

I would not turn to evolutionary theory because it predicts almost nothing.

Rarely have I encountered a statement that strikes me as ridiculous as this. What in biology does evolutionary theory NOT predict?

What does evolutionary theory predict? Can it predict the exact phenotpye of a given species? What, for example will chimps or people will look like exactly in a million or a billion years?

I ask this as someone who beleives in Evolution, but do not see that it aswers everything to do with biology, and the future development of species.

The theory accounts for many things that have already happened, but predicts?

I think the only thing evolution can "predict" is that a given speices will probably change in the near or distant future. Generalties, not specific predictions.

There is actually only a very narrow range of morphologies that are suitable to any particular environment. Species are not going to develop maladaptively.

The only things that evolution does not predict are random mutation (because it’s random) and the environment of the organisms in question.

Yes, the "maladaptive" developments do not last.

But I disagree, that "there is only a very narrow range of morphologies that are suitable to any particular enviroment."

Both the ant and the antelope are suited to their same enviroment, yet they could not be more different.

"Evolution as an explanation does not explain anything. As for the
idea of natural selection and "survival of the fittest', if it means
only that things fitted for survival do in fact survive, well, that
does not really give you much actual information. Nobody needs to be
told that in a flood fish live and cattle die. The question is: How
soon do cattle turn into fish? Our logic consists mostly of missing
links."

"Their myth is called the Missing Link. They know nothing of their own
argument except that it breaks down somewhere."

C.K. Chesterton