The misinterpretation of evolution

[Delsana]

If I live in a hot climate after living in a cold climate I do not EVOLVE when I become used to it, I have adapted using the equipment I am given, my breathing is moderated slower, my body gives off more heat, my heat index will raise, my skin will become slightly thicker based on sun exposure...

These are adaptations enabled by essentially "cheat codes" which are only unlocked when we come into a situation that requires it.

Now if I grow a third leg I have mutated and if that mutation continues and follows the chain of events that are DNA sets (as the past events can all be logged and thus we can see our future with enough analysis (A LOT OF ANALYSIS)) then that is EVOLUTION, or selective mutation based on environmental damage, corruption, or causes that may follow only my line, which would be considered a mutation, not evolution.

 

[kouriichi]

I believe we were created by something beyond our comprehension.

I could call it "god" just as much as i could call it "fate", "luck", "metaphysical-aliens", or "The flying spaghetti monster".

The chances of our planet being in perfect distance of the sun to have constant liquid water on the surface, have life develop on it from thoughtless chains of atoms, to develop the perfect oxygen atmosphere and then on top of that, for us to NOT be destroyed by one of the countless (literally countless) meteors hurling through space is beyond the realm of "just happening".

And Creationism isnt the belief it happened in a matter of days. Its just that a supernatural being started it. And yes, "evolution" did most of the work after the foundation was laid.

Life gets wiped out pretty commonly on earth, and it's 'perfect oxygen levels' haven't always been here, only after a major extinction. The point is that the earth isn't and wasn't made for our perfect standards. It's literally a coincidence that the conditions were right for life to begin and adapt to the constant hazards. Do you really think that in the universe, with countless galaxies, unthinkable amounts of stars and mind-boggling amounts of planets that there wouldn't be at least one planet with the right requirements for life to evolve from nothing more than a chain of acids?

Lol. I mean for us to exist.
Yes, its all scientifically explainable.
But that doesnt make it anyless random. What are the chances we, HUMANS sit here to day?
The chances of life existing on a planet alone are so astronomical its not even worth knowing.

Its not that it all happened. Its that it all happened perfectly, for us to exist. If the planet were 10 degrees hotter when the protoplasmic creatures were first forming, we might not even exist. The evolution of them could be so radically different we wouldnt even resemble humans.

The "coincidence" of it all happening one after another after another for billions of years is what makes it so..... unbelievable. That everything is happened the way it should for us to be here now.

 

[Delsana]

The chances of our planet being in perfect distance of the sun to have constant liquid water on the surface, have life develop on it from thoughtless chains of atoms, to develop the perfect oxygen atmosphere and then on top of that, for us to NOT be destroyed by one of the countless (literally countless) meteors hurling through space is beyond the realm of "just happening".

If Earth supporting life is proof of some apparently knowledgable force existing and in some way guiding us, then is every other planet that isn't life-sustainable proof that god doesn't exist?

In the bible it says (and I didn't write that statement so either you extrapolated or someone else did) that the universe is a reflection of his beauty and glory.

Essentially an artist doesn't just paint one thing, but not everything in the picture has to be the top focus.

 

[Rafael Dera]

I think that it is fair to say that you seem to need to brush up on some things first before you go crying wolf on other people. Also, it is fair that if one idea is taught in the classroom, then another idea must be taught as well. People need to see all of the choices, and then decide for themselves what they want to believe is true. There is no reasone why Creationism nor evolution can be taught simulataneously.[/quote]

The class in which evolution is taught is known as Science. Creationism is not science, and neither is ID. Therefore evolution and creationism should not be taught simultaneously. Creationism and ID can be taught in the religion class, though.

[/quote]

That comic is pure genius. perfect illustration of how a picture can say more then a thousand words. Thank you for that.

 

[weker]

The one exception of course being a religion class that teaches religion from an outside point of view. It would be rather hard to teach what's in the Bible without going through Genesis.

Thats RE Religious Education, however I think the name as been attack by the PC brigade and been changed to FE Faith and Ethics for both PC reason and for a more accurate name in some cases.

 

[cdstephens]

EVOLUTION is not ADAPTATION

Evolving is the complete change or modification of the DNA strand into some other form, changing critical pieces or adding something entirely different.

ADAPTING is the modification based on current capability of the creature, animal, or humanoid that only activates when it comes close to it.

WE DO NOT EVOLVE when we become immune to a disease, we have ADAPTED.

---

This thread title is literally important when it comes to ADAPTATION and EVOLUTION.

If a species becomes immune to a disease, then yes that means we have evolved because they have genetic differences that make them much less susceptible to the disease.

If we develop antibodies that make us immune to the disease, then yes that is adaptation.

 

[Delsana]

Well the bible says that on a particular day He created man and than woman out of man.

There's really nothing to interpret out of that.

So... creationism.

Alrighty then.

---

Outside of that... when you can find the missing mitochondria eve then we will chat about EVOLUTION, but until then I'm not giving it a thought.

I really don't mean to get into a huge discussion about this (unless you want to take this to a PM), but how is the bible proof? It's basically the same as saying your friend told you: anecdotal evidence that holds no water.

I know you believe it, and that's fine for you and anyone else who does, but can you at least see how others would not?

Also, I am unfamiliar with the whole thing with the missing mitochondria. What is that?

The LINK so to speak is the thing evolution misses the chain that links any animal to the plausible Human DNA chain.

Similarities exist, as they do in every species but there is no link to us and scientists are throwing everything trying to find it (hence why they want to map the entire DNA sequence which would take massive massive datapower) but without it they are just a THEORY.

If I say the dog came from wolf hybridization but I cannot find any static link that shows that it did indeed come from it then I cannot be right.

If I find a chain and say that it links to a ball but the ball has no loose chain that broke then I am wrong.

YOU NEED THE MISSING LINK and without it you are wrong.

Every single "stage" if you want to call it that, (it's really not a stage, just a point in time) is a "missing link" There is no "this turns into this", it's a constant change due to selection pressure.

Incorrect, every scientist has admitted that the missing link is the focus and that one definitely exists... we can track back our DNA and genome through analysis (which we haven't perfected based on processing power) but we can not find how we came from primeapes or anything else on this planet... because the missing link is not there...

But no scientist will agree a missing link doesn't exist... DNA IS THE CHAIN and every chain binds to another that causes a link.

 

[Alexlion]

"That's right, around 50% of the population of the United States does not believe in evolution, and that is sad"

Who put you on such a high horse? You know what? Your saying its sad that people don't believe in what you do, and that is sad. Seriously most people don't give a shit about Human evolution so deal with it. Why do people who strongly believe in Evolution have to be such dick heads? Sorry we can't all be like you.

Here is a hypothetical
Let me put it to you this way i start denying world war 1 or 2 happened, you can prove me wrong and you may well try but i believe your lying and your evidence is falsified how can you make my change my mind, simple answer is you cant.

I do not care if you believe in god or not but evolution happened by gods hand or not, denying it and the evidence though isn't sensible or rational we have to accept the reality of our world around us so we can better our understanding of it and progress science medicine etc. Most people who try to teach you evolution arnt trying to upset you they are trying to teach the truth. Trust me learning the truth about the world does not tarnish its beauty.

 

[Cpu46]

snip

snip

Further nitpick on your nitpick: if it can't be tested or observed, it isn't even a hypothesis. Maybe 'assertion' or 'idea' is closer to the mark. I usually prefer 'thinly veiled religious extremism' to describe ID.

Yea, I know. Someone already pointed that out to me.

 

[MysticToast]

This thread is a perfect example of why I have a hard time believing in evolution- most of you can't even agree on what we're supposed to believe!

I was raised as a Christian and still believe all that stuff but I've seen more and more evidence that points to evolution being something that may have happened. One thing I've never understood is why people don't believe God could have guided evolution; or at least played a part in it.

 

[Delsana]

EVOLUTION is not ADAPTATION

Evolving is the complete change or modification of the DNA strand into some other form, changing critical pieces or adding something entirely different.

ADAPTING is the modification based on current capability of the creature, animal, or humanoid that only activates when it comes close to it.

WE DO NOT EVOLVE when we become immune to a disease, we have ADAPTED.

---

This thread title is literally important when it comes to ADAPTATION and EVOLUTION.

If a species becomes immune to a disease, then yes that means we have evolved because they have genetic differences that make them much less susceptible to the disease.

If we develop antibodies that make us immune to the disease, then yes that is adaptation.

Incorrect, we have no genetic differences, we merely have new information that our body retains in an index or archive or diseases and essentially protects us against.

We get a new instruction manual, we have "learned", "experienced", or "adapted".

We have not evolved, and I don't know any scientist who would agree that your statement would be defined as evolution.

 

[OctopusRidge]

MITOCHONDRIAL LINK TO EVE

You need that or you can't prove evolution and EVERY SINGLE SCIENTIST will admit they don't know what that link is...

To everyone who doesn't know what he's talking about:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitochondrial_Eve

tl;dr: Every woman has DNA in her mitochondria which was passed on from her mother. By comparing the mitochondrial DNA with that of other living women, scientists have reached the conclusion that an African H. sapien woman is the ancestor of every woman currently alive on earth.. Her contemporaries reproduced, mind, but none of their lineages have survived "unbroken".

If any of you are interested in how this was done, this is a very informative Wiki page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genealogical_DNA_test

Look at the mtDNA section.

& Back on topic, please explain exactly the "link" you say is missing. What would you accept as proof? What is the link we're looking for? Fossil evidence? The name and address of the lady? What do you want from us?

 

[NotAwesomeAtAll]

.

 

[cdstephens]

Well the bible says that on a particular day He created man and than woman out of man.

There's really nothing to interpret out of that.

So... creationism.

Alrighty then.

---

Outside of that... when you can find the missing mitochondria eve then we will chat about EVOLUTION, but until then I'm not giving it a thought.

I really don't mean to get into a huge discussion about this (unless you want to take this to a PM), but how is the bible proof? It's basically the same as saying your friend told you: anecdotal evidence that holds no water.

I know you believe it, and that's fine for you and anyone else who does, but can you at least see how others would not?

Also, I am unfamiliar with the whole thing with the missing mitochondria. What is that?

The LINK so to speak is the thing evolution misses the chain that links any animal to the plausible Human DNA chain.

Similarities exist, as they do in every species but there is no link to us and scientists are throwing everything trying to find it (hence why they want to map the entire DNA sequence which would take massive massive datapower) but without it they are just a THEORY.

If I say the dog came from wolf hybridization but I cannot find any static link that shows that it did indeed come from it then I cannot be right.

If I find a chain and say that it links to a ball but the ball has no loose chain that broke then I am wrong.

YOU NEED THE MISSING LINK and without it you are wrong.

Every single "stage" if you want to call it that, (it's really not a stage, just a point in time) is a "missing link" There is no "this turns into this", it's a constant change due to selection pressure.

Incorrect, every scientist has admitted that the missing link is the focus and that one definitely exists... we can track back our DNA and genome through analysis (which we haven't perfected based on processing power) but we can not find how we came from primeapes or anything else on this planet... because the missing link is not there...

Do you have links from respected scientific sources to back up your claims that the "missing link" is the focus, etc.?

 

[Flac00]

"That's right, around 50% of the population of the United States does not believe in evolution, and that is sad"

Who put you on such a high horse? You know what? Your saying its sad that people don't believe in what you do, and that is sad. Seriously most people don't give a shit about Human evolution so deal with it. Why do people who strongly believe in Evolution have to be such dick heads? Sorry we can't all be like you.

I guess you don't know how to quote, but I'll respond anyway. This isn't just about evolution, its a group problem. The same people who don't believe in Evolution also don't believe in global climate change, thats a problem. They also believe many untrue things, like Obama is a radical, socialist, facist, muslim, terrorist, who is the reincarnation of the aniticrist. That is not coincidence. The same reason why there are misconceptions about evolution is why there are misconceptions about every important subject.
And yes, it is sad. That 50% of America does not believe in something that over 80% of most European countries believe in is sad. That China almost has as many people who believe in evolution is sad. The problem is not that they share my beliefs, its that they are ignorant of all of the information out there.

 

[kouriichi]

Let me wrap this whole thing up in burritos. (thats right, im gunna wrap it like a burrito, with burritos.)

Sheep are Stupid.
Sheep are part of a flock. ((Unless theyre black sheep. Then its a Murder of Sheep))
The sheep will listen to whatever the dogs bark loudest. This is learned from an early age, because of the sheep doesnt listen, they get bit.
The dogs like to keep order, and control the flock ((or murder)) of sheep. So they bark loudly.

Now if you didnt get that analogy, let me explain it.

People are stupid.
People are part of religions. ((Unless theyre black sheep. Then its Atheism))
The people will listen to whatever their leaders/parents/priests ideas are. This is learned from an early age, because of the person doesnt listen, they get punished.
The leaders/parents/priests like to keep order, and control the people. So they force their ideas.

Roughly 50% of Americans dont believe in evolution.
Roughly 76% of Americans identify themselves as christian.
Christians are told from an early age, "God made man".
Because they are "brainwashed" (for lack of a better term) to believe what is RIGHT and WRONG, they never read in depth "theories" like Evolution.
Yes, this means many Christians are able to see past their "brainwashing" (again, for lack of a better term), but it also means many are blind, and dont WANT to see past it.

See how it all fits together? Most people who dont believe in evolution, are Christians. Anyone else is well.... an idiot. (Not in the insulting way. I mean "uneducated". And not in a bad way)
Because the large majority of people were told from childhood, "God is always right, never question him, he made the world and everyone on it", they dont believe in evolution.

Im not saying religion is bad. But there is a pretty large correlation between Religion, and the halt of scientific progress.

Please note: I am not saying anyone else has to believe this. This is just my belief. This is MY take on the situation and reason behind evolution being such a misinterpreted subject. If i offended you, sorry. It was not my intention.

So your belief is that Evolution is obviously the "intelligent" side.

Interesting, though I know numerous intelligent Christians that are far more capable than either of us and they wholeheartedly explain, and defend Creationism.

No, evolution isnt so much the "intelligent" side, as it is the "knowledgeable" side.
((I know people who you would call "intelligent", but they cant even change a flat tire))

And personally, i believe in creationism. But the thing is, Evolution is a fact. Why do you think the common cold is such a problem? Because its constantly evolving. Its always changing its form c. We can never cure it, because of its rapid evolution.

Or the experiment of increasing the lifespan of a fly. http://livelonger.hubpages.com/hub/Longevity_and_Genetics

Evolution is one of the few things we can actively PROVE. xD

It is very naive, immature, juvenile, and "unknowledgable", for you to believe you know who "I would call intelligent".

Again I state they are more capable than EITHER OF US (and I have a high capability) and that includes changing tires, but they are smart, intelligent, and wise, far be it for both of us.

The ability to adapt to environments is a written code within us based on outlying factors, EVOLVING is an entirely different concept.

It should be stated though that until you can find the missing mitochondrial eve link for evolution you can't prove ANYTHING, and everyone knows that.

Lol.
This is what i hate about topics like this. One person you meet devolves into insults and semantics.

And we can prove evolution.
Its as simple as looking at the human races, spread out across the planet. We all have different skin color. Why? Because certain skin colors are more favorable in different environments. Humans werent just made all different colors.

Hell, you can see evolution in a hospital. By looking and babies and their parents. A baby wont be an exact copy of 1 of the parents. But a combination of the two, gaining traits from both parents.

What about all the different viruses and diseases. Did they all just EXIST from the beginning of time? How do we keep getting sick if they never evolve to bypass our immune system?

xD the idea that Evolution NEVER happened/happens is a laugh.

 

[Delsana]

MITOCHONDRIAL LINK TO EVE

You need that or you can't prove evolution and EVERY SINGLE SCIENTIST will admit they don't know what that link is...

To everyone who doesn't know what he's talking about:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitochondrial_Eve

tl;dr: Every woman has DNA in her mitochondria which was passed on from her mother. By comparing the mitochondrial DNA with that of other living women, scientists have reached the conclusion that an African H. sapien woman is the ancestor of every woman currently alive on earth.. Her contemporaries reproduced, mind, but none of their lineages have survived "unbroken".

If any of you are interested in how this was done, this is a very informative Wiki page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genealogical_DNA_test

Look at the mtDNA section.

& Back on topic, please explain exactly the "link" you say is missing. What would you accept as proof? What is the link we're looking for? Fossil evidence? The name and address of the lady? What do you want from us?

Ask that to the scientists that are looking for it, but essentially they haven't found the chain in the DNA that links it to any animal outside of a Human.