Notice: Forums will be shutdown by June 2019

To focus on better serving our members, we've decided to shut down the POF forums.

While regular posting is now disabled, you can continue to view all threads until the end of June 2019. Event Hosts can still create and promote events while we work on a new and improved event creation service for you.

Thank you!

Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  >      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 Verzen
Joined: 12/9/2007
Msg: 686
Evolution.Page 28 of 64    (24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64)
More like 'common' sense...
 stargazer1000
Joined: 1/16/2008
Msg: 687
Evolution.
Posted: 3/15/2010 3:58:45 PM

Tell us what the theory of evolution means to you..


It isn't a question of personal interpretation. The theory of evolution is simply that. The theory of evolution. It is the best explanation for the observed phenomenon.
 RocketMan_Len
Joined: 7/5/2006
Msg: 688
A scientific understanding
Posted: 3/15/2010 6:18:06 PM
^^^^^

Very poetic. You may want to try making sense next time, though...
 susan_cd
Joined: 5/16/2007
Msg: 689
A scientific understanding
Posted: 3/15/2010 8:05:13 PM

You may want to try making sense next time, though


But if you try to ( or do) make sense you may be asked to explain exactly what you mean &/or provide evidence for what and why you believe something... and others ( who aren't as sensitive or attuned to reality as you) may not take your belief as evidence for your convictions.

It's so much easier to simply state what you believe & call those that question or dismiss your beliefs hardliners, realists, obsessed with the facts/evidence etc etc.
 Island home
Joined: 7/5/2009
Msg: 690
A scientific understanding
Posted: 3/16/2010 9:14:44 PM

Epicetus

LIFE started/germinated high up in the clouds of sulphuric acid/ hydrogen peroxide and ammonia... and not on the ground

An interesting concept, flying primordial soup, I don't say this as ridicule


(look back on my earlier DNA post and that will tell you exactly why "Darwinian style evolution" is impossible from a more fundamental viewpoint)

Which MSG number was that
OK I'll admit I'm lazy
 desertrhino
Joined: 11/30/2007
Msg: 691
view profile
History
A scientific understanding
Posted: 3/17/2010 9:53:23 PM
Epicetus,

It's clear you are not trained in genetics or molecular biology. Some of us are.


you are beyond crazy to even try and say "I understand"


Perhaps it would be crazy for YOU to say that. I won't say I understand completely, but I can surely see a possible path to arrive at the current state of affairs. It didn't START with DNA. It also didn't start in an ammonia cloud as a fungus. You can believe and imagine what you will, but don't call it science or knowledge. It's just uneducated fantasy.
 Island home
Joined: 7/5/2009
Msg: 692
Evolution.
Posted: 3/18/2010 4:41:04 PM
zero tolerance to this type of behaviour


Lack of tolerance whether mechanical or via human interaction
Will always cause friction

When its between two surfaces neither surface is the individual cause

I suspect the same is some what true here
 Verzen
Joined: 12/9/2007
Msg: 693
Evolution.
Posted: 3/18/2010 4:55:56 PM
Epicetus
Where did life come from then? How did we come into existence?
 Verzen
Joined: 12/9/2007
Msg: 694
Evolution.
Posted: 3/18/2010 6:19:42 PM

How did the Universe, its laws and attributes come into existence ?

No. I don't first have to ask that just like you don't have to find out where gravity originated from in order to know gravity exists.


to ask unanswerable questions is philosophy...... I don't ask such questions

How life came to be and how the diversity of life came to be is NOT philosophy.


but I do know the Big Bang theory is a load

Oh, I didn't realize you know more about astro physics than hawking does. You will be famous!
 Verzen
Joined: 12/9/2007
Msg: 695
Evolution.
Posted: 3/18/2010 7:31:11 PM
1- Without understanding the laws which govern it, you cannot understand the mechanics at work.

Such a load of BS. If this were true, Einstein would of never discovered gravity and Einstein would of never come up with relativity.


He's not saying he discovered the answer...

When you say you KNOW something, that means you "discovered" the answer. Or at least what isn't the answer.
 Island home
Joined: 7/5/2009
Msg: 697
Evolution.
Posted: 3/20/2010 11:57:09 PM


there are over 12 differening theories of the origin of life. Which does one choose if science is so "empirical"?
It certainly isn't infallible!

Well that got me googling and the first video I looked at
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6QYDdgP9eg
amongst other things said

The origin of life , Abiogenesis, has nothing to do with the theory of evolution

Which makes sense to me
Although I wouldn't claim to totally understand that videos explanation of the origin I can see that the evolution theory is not dependent on having the exact cause of origin known for it to be valid.
Though I dare say that knowing the exact cause of origin would help explain evolution more clearly.
No need for me to google any more because I am sure I probably wouldn't understand the explanation anyway
 Verzen
Joined: 12/9/2007
Msg: 698
Evolution.
Posted: 3/21/2010 12:58:59 AM
Island. Evolution only explains the 'diversity of life' that's it.
 FrogO_Oeyes
Joined: 8/21/2005
Msg: 699
view profile
History
Evolution.
Posted: 3/21/2010 3:52:04 AM

there is MEANING,,,Direction, and purpose... without even getting religious

Those assumptions ARE religious [and unscientific].


Darwinian evolution does not allow anything other than

It ALLOWS much, but does not consider "meaning", "purpose", or anything else for which there neither is, nor can be, any evidence.


LIFE concept (super-organism) answers all questions, tells us what we should be doing, where we are going... and even why we exist... in scientific terms

Those questions cannot be answered by science.


and that mechanism is detoxification... food/environment pre preparation by lower life forms.

Anthropomorphizing. Post hoc fallacy. This is not science, it's fallacy and pseudoscience. Be sure to frame it in technical sounding terminology so as to fool the naive.
 Island home
Joined: 7/5/2009
Msg: 700
Evolution.
Posted: 3/21/2010 4:00:08 AM
{b}{/b}<div class="quote">Darwinian evolution does not allow anything other than, if you exist you are superior
and the more you rise above the heap, the more suitably adapted you are

The obvious questions then are
How many evolution theories are there?
When is your evolution theory going to be published?
Are you working on it alone or is there collaboration?

Edit And should your version be taught in schools?
 stargazer1000
Joined: 1/16/2008
Msg: 701
Evolution.
Posted: 3/21/2010 5:30:30 AM

there is MEANING,,,Direction, and purpose... without even getting religious


That is at the very heart of religion.


LIFE concept (super-organism) answers all questions, tells us what we should be doing, where we are going... and even why we exist... in scientific terms


Even creationists try to use "scientific terms" to explain the interference of a deity in natural processes. However, the use of "scientific terms" doesn't bolster what is, essentially, a religious assertion.
 stargazer1000
Joined: 1/16/2008
Msg: 702
Evolution.
Posted: 3/22/2010 9:07:03 AM
Right now, I'm reading Richard Dawkins book The Greatest Show on Earth: The evidence for evolution. I just finished a tremendous (and tremendously detailed) chapter called Before Our very Eyes about an experiment done with e. coli bacteria by Dr. Richard Lenski. The results were staggering and showed evolution occurring, as the title states, before the researcher's eyes.

For anyone not clear on evolution, I'd highly recommend it.
 FrogO_Oeyes
Joined: 8/21/2005
Msg: 703
view profile
History
Evolution.
Posted: 3/23/2010 4:10:56 AM
Fallacy and fantasy.


oh, there is heaps of scientific evidence...just you are not aware

Doubtful.

delve into biochemistry, neurology, genetics and microbiology.... just to get some background

Done. Many times over. Shell game won't work.


Abiogenesis theory requires that the first life forms consisted of free-living autotrophs (i.e. organisms that are able to manufacture their own food) since the complex life forms needed to sustain heterotrophs (organisms that cannot manufacture their own food) did not exist until later.

The first life therefore must be much more complex than M. genitalium even though it is estimated to manufacture about 600 different proteins. A typical eukaryote cell consists of an estimated 40,000 different protein molecules.

Nothing like cherry picking to support a position which is otherwise untenable. Autotrophs obtain their resources from the "raw" environment rather than by breaking down the materials produced by others. The phrase "manufacture their own food" is deliberately misleading.

The most basic pre-life form was likely nothing more than a phospholipid bilayer in chemically rich environment. Such membranes form and bud all on their own, and in such an environment would encase a soup of chemicals. Among countless such "cells", it is suspected that some enveloped compounds suitable for chain-reaction. The membrane continues to grow and envelop new resources, continuing the reaction, and then dividing it as it buds apart. Already, some degree of "evolution" is happening, even though "life" arguably does not yet exist. So long as a new cell continues the reaction chain [or a version thereof], the chain continues. Light, heat, and chemical reactions at this point ALREADY drive some reactions uphill, to form new energy-storing chemicals. In a cell, those break down, driving other reactions uphill. Outside energy then re-forms them. Now it's self-sustaining. Ribonucleotides are already present in the environment [their building blocks exist even in space], and likely to be included in the cells. All we need is ribonucleotides which catalyze synthesis of some of the other basics of the chain-reactions. Now we have life with a very basic genetic code. It's extremely simple life. After this, any increase in complexity of the ribonucleotides simply leads the cell to death or to increased specialty in a single niche.

None of this requires anything to kick-start it beyond a chemical soup and self-assembling lipid bilayers. There is good reason to expect both were common at that point.


The first life therefore must be much more complex than M. genitalium

Non sequitur. That's a fallacy, by the way. You have in no way shown that there is ANY reason for first life to have been more complex. I have shown the opposite.


ALL BY ACCIDENT ??????? NOT!!!!!!!!!!

That argument is still a fallacy - several actually. I don't think we've mentioned "appeal to personal incredulity" yet, so add that to the list.


Now that is quite a trick for bugs... some use sunlight, some use radioactivity..or volcanic vents... for energy.. but they all need a suitable substrate to metabolise... so that must also be available.. the plot just get murkier and murkier the higher up one goes

Either you don't understand basic organic chemistry, or you deliberately wish to mislead others about it.

Chemical reactions proceed "downhill". Addition of appropriate energy reverses that. This can be seen as energy storage, or as "building". In either case, it requires nothing more than energy from a downhill chemical reaction, or influx of energy from elsewhere in the form of heat, light, or other EM radiation. With a chemical soup, a membrane, and abundant energy, life has its basic requirements.


I am not going through the whole science... but basically I know Darwinian evolution theory... it is defunct..naive and very primitive

Same claim creationists make, and just as weak. First problem is the old fallacy of attaching "Darwinian" to the moniker in hope of making it sound two centuries out of date. The second is that evolutionary theory is continually supported, and never refuted. The latter renders your last claim, above, meaningless and utterly without support. That's without even acknowledging that you didn't actually TRY to support the statement in the first place.


and really (unless you can theorise some other mechanism)...it all points to "all that lives is ONE super-organism"

See also "Occam's razor" and "epic fail". Consider looking into "pseudoscience" as well, since the actual science you've provided as support is...lacking. P.S. - more parsimonious mechanisms are already established, yours is, well...not parsimonious OR established. You're left in the "extraodinary claims" department still.


nothing is even slightly "evolved" in a different direction... what we see is just genetic card shuffling..but with a purpose, showing a distinct direction towards flowering (earthlings offer/innately develop, the mechanisms (as flowers do) to spread the seeds of LIFE)

Wow. This is a remarkable, and unusual, example of not understanding evolution, life, or even science! Science cannot ascribe purpose. Life needs NO purpose - it need only survive! Only the life which actually lives and reproduces, passes on the blueprints for its functioning. Really, really, REALLY basic factor here.


Not only the toxicity of the environment needs to be considered but also food and energy sources,

Nope. Life is chemistry. The environment in which it forms will by definition NOT be toxic, and will also by definition contain the resources it needs. Only the life which has the ability to cope with new environments will survive in those environments.


and the impossible situation of an organism writing its own genetic blueprint..... like a building drafting its own plans..... in exquisite detail

Two more fallacies - a strawman followed by a false analogy. To the first [QED], there was never a need for a self-written code. To the second, chemical reactions take place all on their own. Blueprints and buildings are mechanically created, both by [chemically driven] intermediaries.
 rockondon
Joined: 2/21/2007
Msg: 704
view profile
History
Evolution.
Posted: 3/23/2010 12:08:02 PM

complex ?.. and we are still at the slime stage... ALL BY ACCIDENT ??????? NOT!!!!!!!!!!
Saying that we are not created by accident is just as intelligent as saying that we are not created by grapes or not created by tennis shoes. Nobody is saying that we were created by accident (or grapes, or shoes) so when you announce the obvious you are refuting nobody.
Contrary to fundie claims about life forming by accident, biochemistry exists, and it naturally leads to complex products - such as a simple strand of 5 or 6 nucleotides which would have been enough to replicate itself (ie, life).

I am not going through the whole science... but basically I know Darwinian evolution theory... it is defunct..naive and very primitive
This is about as compelling as me saying that I'm not going to go through the whole theology...but basically I know Christianity...it is a belief system that states that cats created the universe out of goat cheese.
Evolution was overwhelmingly proven a century ago and new evidence rolls in every day making it stronger and stronger. Disproving it at this point would be no less shocking than proving that the earth is cube-shaped or disproving our existence in the universe.
 Verzen
Joined: 12/9/2007
Msg: 705
Evolution.
Posted: 3/23/2010 1:07:31 PM

then tell me how this pre-life form wrote its own CODE , so that the code could reproduce the organism

*sigh* Organisms write their own code similar to how gravity writes the equations of physics in order to operate in the physical environment.

Stop using the irreducibly complex argument.
 Verzen
Joined: 12/9/2007
Msg: 706
Evolution.
Posted: 3/23/2010 2:29:57 PM
"LOL, you wish"
No. I don't wish. The entire genetic code is made up of four chemicals much like laws can be made up of equations.

"There is much to explain.... and evolution just don't cut it... not even slightly"
So do you claim that organisms do not mutate? Because that's what you just stated...

"More unfortunately evolution does not help in anything at all"
Except for vaccines and cures but I mean.. Those are kind of useless though, aren't they? The world is over populated as it is.

"life still has no meaning"
And? Does gravity need sentience to exist? Does it need meaning to exist? No.

"D'oh I forgot its all accidental"
Ignorant comment from an ignorant man. Quit with the strawman.
 desertrhino
Joined: 11/30/2007
Msg: 707
view profile
History
Evolution.
Posted: 3/23/2010 4:48:05 PM

Then you must realise, there has to be a certain number of these first organisms to be even able to survive....


Yep. One. And, as we're here, clearly it did survive. I just think it's hilarious you claim to be a scientist. Clearly your training is not in genetics, evolutionary, or cellular biology.


Let me get this correct

pre-organisms/first organisms..... happen accidentally.... here, there and other places.. and they each learn to read and write so that they can describe themselves... magnitudes better than our science can do today, with all our equipment.... in a *code* that is alien to them... but more, they ALL learn and understand the SAME code, no matter where they are..... and this code is written so well that it is expandable and can encompass all organisms then and NOW...... wow what clever organisms


The same effect is observed if all extant organisms are descended from the first successfully-encoded genetic blueprint.

Just saying, is all.
 Verzen
Joined: 12/9/2007
Msg: 708
Evolution.
Posted: 3/23/2010 5:48:41 PM
Your ignorance is showing again Epicetus. Single celled organisms reproduce at a phenomenal speed. Reproduction starts with 'asexual' reproduction.
 susan_cd
Joined: 5/16/2007
Msg: 709
Evolution.
Posted: 3/23/2010 6:33:18 PM

To assume than men and women evolved from other species would imply so many questions whereas the answers are mere ridiculous .


Yeah, so much easier to believe a great sky spirit created everything. Then we can stop wasting time actually thinking & learning where we came from & can instead use our time energy & resources to try & destroy the godless heathens or the heretics that worship the wrong sky god
 desertrhino
Joined: 11/30/2007
Msg: 710
view profile
History
Evolution.
Posted: 3/23/2010 7:52:09 PM

ONE organism alone in a hostile world........ I don't like your meds... you have no credibility

Even in this benign world, groomed by LIFE.... one organism alone will die...

Think it through again... and learn some science..... you are not an individual... you are a cog in a machine just swimming around doing things you are not even aware of


Yep. One. Even now, one spore of Anthrax can cause a lethal disease in someone with a compromised immune system. Refute with some sort of facts this time, would you? That would be refreshing.

And... Whether you think I have credibility or not, you should look up some of the work of Thomas Cech, for whom I was a TA back in 1991. From there, I went on to a graduate degree from an Ivy-League school in molecular genetics. Trust me, I can smell the particular brand of ignorance that fuels your BS from several miles away.

Honestly, you've passed the point of being worthwhile to respond to, and that quite a few posts ago.

When you're ready to actually discuss, rather than pontificate based on anti-intellectual fantasy, let us know, will you?
 Verzen
Joined: 12/9/2007
Msg: 711
Evolution.
Posted: 3/23/2010 10:12:10 PM
Krebby, aren't you Catholic?


organized religion will continue to retard progress for eons to come, or at least attempt to do so.
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  >