Poll: Do you support evolution?

[SinisterDeath]

It can also be fun to pass larger objects like a mug or something. Your brain consistently has trouble with it. Jus a moment of broken expectation. I must have been really bored when I first found it in elementary school but I remember sharing it with my classmates around 3rd grade. To be an adult and to regularly find most people to not know such a simple trick is kind of odd.

Pass an object?
I'm assuming your talking about slight of hand, and making it look like you are throwing something? Tricking your brain into trying to track an object, that's not actually there.. right?

If that's the case, that has a lot to do with our evolution, and how we started to get good at hunting.

After all, our brain can very effectively calculate trajectories with only a few frames of reference. If we could remove that built in ability. Motion tracking would be nearly impossible to keep up with. You simply wouldn't know where to look for an object, because you wouldn't know its trajectory. Since our Eyes have physical limitations, (frames per second, detail, ect) we would very easily lose said object. In the case of slight of hand, we are obviously at a handicap. And someone without, would be able to see what's going on with no problem. But you'd never be able to catch a ball.

 

[Lightknight]

It can also be fun to pass larger objects like a mug or something. Your brain consistently has trouble with it. Jus a moment of broken expectation. I must have been really bored when I first found it in elementary school but I remember sharing it with my classmates around 3rd grade. To be an adult and to regularly find most people to not know such a simple trick is kind of odd.

Pass an object?
I'm assuming your talking about slight of hand, and making it look like you are throwing something? Tricking your brain into trying to track an object, that's not actually there.. right?

If that's the case, that has a lot to do with our evolution, and how we started to get good at hunting.

After all, our brain can very effectively calculate trajectories with only a few frames of reference. If we could remove that built in ability. Motion tracking would be nearly impossible to keep up with. You simply wouldn't know where to look for an object, because you wouldn't know its trajectory. Since our Eyes have physical limitations, (frames per second, detail, ect) we would very easily lose said object. In the case of slight of hand, we are obviously at a handicap. And someone without, would be able to see what's going on with no problem. But you'd never be able to catch a ball.

Well, yes and not. Not throwing something, just moving one hand past another. Because of the positioning of the wrist in the setup I mentioned in that post, you've created a giant blind spot that your hand or coffee mug or whatever must pass through to be visible on the other side. As such, the object appears to temporarily disappear. And yes, the temporary upset brain activity is the result of evolution.

 

[Ponyboy]

If anyone one understands the amazing complexity of even the smallest organisms, how they function at the cellular level and even at the element(s) level, evolution is impossible. Given, if you don't believe that God created everything, at least come up with something almost plausible, like aliens or something put us here or something.

 

[F'Angus]

of course. The evidence points to evolution being correct. When the evidence points to humans coming from the moon I'll probably believe that.

I quite like the Aquatic Ape Hypothesis that humans evolved as we are because we adapted through water but there isn't much in that at the moment.

 

[MiskWisk]

If anyone one understands the amazing complexity of even the smallest organisms, how they function at the cellular level and even at the element(s) level, evolution is impossible. Given, if you don't believe that God created everything, at least come up with something almost plausible, like aliens or something put us here or something.

I have a deep seated suspicion about your account. That is all I'm going to say on that matter.

OT: As people have already stated far more eloquently than I, it is no longer what I think that that matters, it simply is. The only debate should come from whether or not we are missing something about it.

 

[Ponyboy]

A healthy dose of suspicion isn't all bad. Thermodynamics (at least most of it from what I understand of it) is a truly proven science in that you can repeat the experiments every time and always get the same result. I don't know much about Sub-quantum Mechanics, but when you get up to the cellular level that we function in, there are certain Laws that always behave the same. Whether someone drops a hammer off the roof or jumps off, gravity still works the same. (Ya know, it isn't the falling part that hurts, it is the sudden stop that does-) Another truly proven thing is Enthropy, basically what it means is that to make a piece of steel/iron we have to use a lot of energy to crush rocks, heat the bits until enough of the metal will melt and come to a usable form. The usable portion can then be made into a spoon, a car or whatever. Left unprotected the metal will rust(oxidize) and go back to its lower level, as my rusty car will testify. "Things" (any naturally occurring materials)will return to their natural state if left alone, not spontaneously develop.

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

"Things" (any naturally occurring materials)will return to their natural state if left alone, not spontaneously develop.

Funny cus it snows around here and when it does a MILLION of these:

Spontaniously develop from these:

Not to mention the entropy rule is only correct in a closed system. You see if the earth was created with all the total energy inside the system (earth) you would be correct. Unfortunately there is a giant floating ball of fusion in space putting MORE energy into the system and thanks to the atmosphere not a lot is escaping. This means the total amount of energy on earth is increasing, allowing complexity to increase also. Its a system where energy enters but does not exist. Meaning entropy decreases. I suggest googling "Why entropy doesnt disprove evolution". This is a very basic question. Answered by the existance of the sun.

 

[Playful Pony]

I like to think I support the rational option, the one that has facts backing it up! I really like this one:

 

[SecondPrize]

Well, I guess I should support it more. I never had any wisdom teeth (not that they didn't come in, they were never there) so I should have a lot more kids, and pass that on.

 

[Quaxar]

If anyone one understands the amazing complexity of even the smallest organisms, how they function at the cellular level and even at the element(s) level, evolution is impossible.

As a microbiologist I can totally attest to that.
No wait, the other one... I don't think you have an idea what you're talking about. Yeah, that was what I meant.
And suspicion is too lenient of a word, that's a hell of a first post.

If anything, the smaller you get the easier evolution is to witness and explain. That's why dog breeding takes decades to produce new proper subspecies and E.coli can change into something completely new in a few hours.

 

[Yopaz]

Believe it or not, it's basically proven with the exception of being able to show something evolve in real time. Hence why it's a theory ...like gravity, and the earth orbiting the sun, yes, they are theories. For some reason many seem to think a theory means a hypothesis, it's not.

Interesting thing I'd like to add here. A research team at my university is currently observing parapatric speciation (or possibly sympatric speciation based on how you define it) in a species of fish in a pond. The population lives in the same pond, but they lay their eggs in different streams so they are separated while reproducing, thus it's most likely parapatric speciation, but nevertheless they are observing the divergence of one species becoming two.

I know you've been informed of the virus evolution, but I thought you'd be interested in knowing it's being observed in animals too.

Indeed I already replied to another poster about fish but in a different way, 2 of the same species with a difference, one lives in polluted water and survives because they adapted to the waters toxins, and this is a result of our presence so it's not like it could have taken excessively long.

The most easy to observe evolution is the flu, need to constantly make modifications to treatments, no wait that's a conspiracy by the government I'm sure some people suggest. They're out to get our hotdogs ladies and gentleman!

The biggest case against evolution is ignorance in recent discoveries or just information in general "if we came from monkeys, why are there still monkeys!?" or they try and use skewed numbers to justify this planets population to be a miracle. While that may be true there's no confirmed life out there ...yet, even if the odds were .01% for a planet to have life, in our galaxy alone the number of populated planets would be very much in the many...never the less the universe. Hm, I think I got off topic there in the end but, it really shocks me what people force into fields of facts and discovery with bias and prejudgement.

Honestly, ignorance is something I can accept because even after learning about some fragments of evolution I have shifted from believing I understood it (I have never believed it to be false regardless of how I have heard the story) and well it's hard to believe in something you don't understand.

The people you talk about with their monkey example is something that saddens me. It can either be said by someone who doesn't understand evolution or from someone who argues against it and is simply refusing to acknowledge the facts and use a fallacy to ridicule evolution. Ignorance can be fixed with education, but a charismatic speaker who advocates creationism can make statements that confuse the ignorant and make the theory of evolution seem silly.

Now I am quite opposed to saying we evolved from monkeys because it's a little inaccurate, we evolved from a common ancestor which currently is unknown to us. Or simply saying that we share the same ancestor with the modern great apes to cut down on the amount of words used. It's both more accurate and it leaves less room for the silly fallacy, but that's just a personal preference.

Another problem connected to ignorance is that evolution is too often used to explain why animals have this or that adaptation, why they live here, who they evolved from, who shares common ancestry. These things are constantly being shifted around as new information is discovered and we don't really know as much as we'd like to. Now when you mention virus evolution I'd say that's really what makes evolution such an important subject. Viruses and bacteria are evolving quickly due to their short generation length. If we get a bacterial infection and treat it with antibiotics we will most likely kill most of the population. Vaccines will present the antigen to our immune system and be able to act if these are found in our system again. Evolution here could be to make a harmless or useful bacteria virulent or make a harmful bacteria immune to a certain kind of penicillin. A virus can change enough to dodge the immune system and we'll have to initiate a new primary response.

Pesticides are also being rendered useless with time. As pesticides are being used those rare mutations with resistance to pesticides (which are commonly disadvantageous due to trade-offs) become more advantageous and numerous in the population.

Now to boil down my rambling to a more concise point. I like that you bring up viruses because it emphasizes that evolution isn't just an opposition to creationism that tries to explain nature. It's also an important part of our health and agriculture. It gives hypotheses to what might come and why it happens.

Now to go off topic I will say that I have really enjoyed our discussion here.

 

[TomWiley]

The idea of evolution and faith being incompatible in kind of silly.

 

[Cat Cloud]

Of course, how would I get an espeon without it?

 

[DanDeFool]

Probably not. Not really interested in having kids, after all.

Yeah, probably been ninja'd by a dozen or so other smart-asses, but whatever. I had to get it out of my system.

 

[Lazy Kitty]

I see the title has changed.

Well, I don't support evolution.
It happens without my support anyway.

 

[Joccaren]

If anyone one understands the amazing complexity of even the smallest organisms, how they function at the cellular level and even at the element(s) level, evolution is impossible. Given, if you don't believe that God created everything, at least come up with something almost plausible, like aliens or something put us here or something.

Umm... What?
I don't even?

"Something almost plausible, like aliens..." is what really throws me out here, and makes me suspect trolling. If that is what you consider plausible, I don't even...

If you understand the complexity of the smallest organisms and how they function at the cellular and molecular level, you understand that evolution is undeniable. Sure, you can think to yourself "Wow, someone must have designed things to work like this 13.8 billion years ago", but you can't deny that evolution happens. Simple experiments with bacteria, rabbits or any number of rapidly reproducing species will show evolution. You cannot deny that it occurs, unless you are not following the scientific method or common sense, and are denying anything that doesn't support your theories or preconceptions about the world, rather than looking at the world, seeing what happens, and forming theories based off that.

 

[MHR]

I don't believe in the sun. I don't care that scientists think it's just gas blowing up held together by gravity, how can any smart person believe that? If it was just an explosion it would be over fast, not just float there, DOY! Obviously god created a lasting light source because he said "let there be light," how is that so hard to understand? [/sarcasm]

Yes, evolution is real. Go science.

 

[Demongeneral109]

I believe that the things we create can evolve. Art, technology and so on can evolve. But it's a shame how scientists who believe in intelligent design are being taken out of the picture. I couldn't believe that Bill the science guy and Lavar Burton (who I grew up watching reading rainbow with) passed off creationism as meaningless, antiquated fallacy.

I find that modern science is boring. The museum of Natural History is without wonder now because we can somehow explain everything. I don't want to know everything, and I certainly don't want to be able to explain everything. I want to socialize with people who have studied things that I haven't studied, and see where our knowledge connects.

I blame the extreme conservative people. They have no idea who they are representing - they represent themselves and call that God. It's ridiculous. So many people have been turned off by this extreme stance that we now have the opposite extreme - angry atheists who are just as bad.

This jaded desire to explain everything has crept into art and also video game design. Everyone wants things to be explained down to the minute detail, otherwise it's drivel. I'm not into it.

So I vote for Creationism b/c I really don't want to know everything that there is to know. I want to be kept informed, I want to continue learning, but I also want to be blown away when I learn something new. I don't want to be like Darwin who said quote: "A scientific man ought to have no wishes, no affections - a mere heart of stone".

I can not get down with that. It's called lying to yourself. What are we doing when we take our affections out of the equation entirely?

the problem with intelligent design isn't that nobody agrees with it, its that there's no way to prove it one way or another, so even bringing it up in a scientific debate is meaningless. If you believe in God, ID is a good way to let Him coexist with the growth of science. If not, then nothing anyone says will change your mind on it. It has its place, but not in serious scientific discussion, religious on the other hand is a different thing all together.