Facts (rituals, reject, Darwin, Earth, evolution)

[Princecharles]

Hello,
I was just wondering if someone could explain the many parts of evolution to me, such as what is believed if it is accepted by someone who does not believe in a god, and also what is believed when accepted by someone who does believe in one. Also, I have heard many things about evolution being science... and some people think it is faith... could someone explain the reasons it is considered science, if it is provide the facts; and the reasons it is considered faith, and the lack of facts that this idea comes from.
I know there is alot of information on the internet about this, and I don't want to be a burden to you guys, but I thought it would be better if I got an explanation from a group of people that seem to know what infromation is current. Since it is argued alot on this forum I think you guys would probably have the best information, from all sides of the arguments. Also, please provide it in an orderly manner; I tend to get confused.

[michel]

Originally Posted by Princecharles

Hello,
I was just wondering if someone could explain the many parts of evolution to me, such as what is believed if it is accepted by someone who does not believe in a god, and also what is believed when accepted by someone who does believe in one. Also, I have heard many things about evolution being science... and some people think it is faith... could someone explain the reasons it is considered science, if it is provide the facts; and the reasons it is considered faith, and the lack of facts that this idea comes from.
I know there is alot of information on the internet about this, and I don't want to be a burden to you guys, but I thought it would be better if I got an explanation from a group of people that seem to know what infromation is current. Since it is argued alot on this forum I think you guys would probably have the best information, from all sides of the arguments. Also, please provide it in an orderly manner; I tend to get confused.

Welcome Princecharles - it certainly is an honour to have you amongst us!

Welcome to the forum.

I won't say much - it would be easier to point you to sites that explain evolution in a cohrent way.

One thing though, Evolution might be described as
"The objectives of the Society for the Study of Evolution, which was founded in March, 1946, are the promotion of the study of organic evolution and the integration of the various fields of science concerned with evolution. The Society endeavors to accomplish these objectives through the publication of the journal and through meetings and working committees. ."
The site quoting this is http://evol.allenpress.com/evolonlin...est=index-html

Quote "Also, I have heard many things about evolution being science... and some people think it is faith... could someone explain the reasons it is considered science, if it is provide the facts; and the reasons it is considered faith, and the lack of facts that this idea comes from."

Evolution is primarily the domain of the scientist; it is not a faith - why is it a science ? - because it is verifiable, and observable.

The aspect that is considered to be based in faith is Creation, which is the belief that God created the World, as related in the bible, in 6 days; in Genesis - the first chapter of the old testament. The '6 days' is not taken literally by some.

As a Christian, I accept that God played a part in Creation, but that evolution ensued from what he originally created.

Hope that gives you a quick insight; this is not a five minute debate - as you will soon see from some of the threads.

Again, welcome; if you need to know something, there is usually someone here with an answer. Hope you enjoy the forum, and I look forward to seeing your posts.

[Ceridwen018]

I'll be happy to answer your questions to the best of my ability, Princecharles. That said, welcome to the Forums! I noticed that this is your first post. You could also check out the New Member Introduction forums and tell us all a little about yourself!

what is believed if it is accepted by someone who does not believe in a god, and also what is believed when accepted by someone who does believe in one.

If someone believes in God and accepts evolution at the same time, they generally justify the two by saying that God uses evolution as a tool to do things on Earth, much as he uses people for different things, etc. If someone accepts evolution but does not believe in any god, then they simply treat evolution as they would treat any other science. All in all, the theory of evolution and the facts therein do not change between believers and non-believers.

Also, I have heard many things about evolution being science... and some people think it is faith... could someone explain the reasons it is considered science, if it is provide the facts; and the reasons it is considered faith, and the lack of facts that this idea comes from.

Evolution is science, a section of Biology, to be exact. People who believe in creationism like to call it "faith" as a debate tactic, ie, to try and discredit evolution and bring it down to their level, but this is simply not true. Evolution is made up of many smaller theories and facets, all of which have been tested, observed, experimented with, and tested again by scientists all over the world, and for the better part of a hundred years. One thing that evolution is not, is religiously founded, and that is where many people of religion have problems. However, it is my belief that science was never meant to meddle in religion, and religion never meant to meddle in science.

I know there is alot of information on the internet about this, and I don't want to be a burden to you guys, but I thought it would be better if I got an explanation from a group of people that seem to know what infromation is current.

Evolution is a very complex field, especially with the recent mapping of the human genome. Basically, evolution explains how species are able to adapt to changes in their environment, how two different species can share a common ancestor, and other things of that nature. I should note that evolution does not attempt to address the question of the "Origin of Life".

Here is a website about evolution which I have found very helpful in the past.

www.talkorigins.org

[Princecharles]

Michel, thank you for your quick response. You say evolution is "verifiable, and observable". Please tell me how I may verify it. I can verify gravity by dropping a rock, I can verify the earth is round by mathimatical equations, but I have not heard of a method of verifying evolution. People seem to just tell me it exists and move on, just like religion. I don't tend to like that.

[michel]

I can do little better than to point you to Ceridwen's site that she quoted in her post, but in the mean time, I'll have a look around.
you can also look at the following:

http://anthro.palomar.edu/evolve/evolve_3.htm
http://www.evolutionpages.com/
http://www.gate.net/~rwms/EvoEvidence.html

[JerryL]

I was just wondering if someone could explain the many parts of evolution to me

Evolution claims that over time, new species of creatures have arisen from old ones. That's it.

Well, evolution also claims how it happens. Evolution claims that DNA is the building block of life (as we know it), that mutations occur in DNA; that these mutations can change the creature; that positive changes are likely to be passed on to offspring (the creature is more likely to have offspring) and negative changes are less likely (the creature is less likely to have offspring). Throw in a little Mendel (laws of inheritance) and you have all of the criteria.

what is believed if it is accepted by someone who does not believe in a god, and also what is believed when accepted by someone who does believe in one.

No difference. Someone either accepts ro rejects the theory.

Also, I have heard many things about evolution being science... and some people think it is faith... could someone explain the reasons it is considered science, if it is provide the facts; and the reasons it is considered faith, and the lack of facts that this idea comes from.

Try a guide to science vspseudo-science: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoscience , http://www.quackwatch.org/01Quackery...cs/pseudo.html

[JerryL]

Michel, thank you for your quick response. You say evolution is "verifiable, and observable". Please tell me how I may verify it. I can verify gravity by dropping a rock, I can verify the earth is round by mathimatical equations, but I have not heard of a method of verifying evolution.

You can vaerfy it in a number of wasy. You can compare midocondrial DNA between multiple creatures, you can raise rapidly-reproducing creatures and watch speciation. You can check for the basic components (see if DNA is passed on from parent to cihld, see if DNA is related to morpohology (for example, cut the tails off rats, see if the babies have tails... then look at tail-les rats and see if their babies have tails), and you can see if DNA mutates (or just look for aberrant animals in a group and see of those traits are passed on). You could also choose to take a look at the fossil record and search for patterns of change.

Some examples of new species which have arisin within recorded history:

Seedless grapes (pretty self-explanitory)

Salmon (http://www.umass.edu/newsoffice/arc...1900salmon.html)

Goatsbeard ("Three species of wildflowers called goatsbeards were introduced to the United States from Europe shortly after the turn of the century. Within a few decades their populations expanded and began to encounter one another in the American West. Whenever mixed populations occurred, the specied interbred (hybridizing) producing sterile hybrid offspring. Suddenly, in the late forties two new species of goatsbeard appeared near Pullman, Washington. Although the new species were similar in appearance to the hybrids, they produced fertile offspring. The evolutionary process had created a separate species that could reproduce but not mate with the goatsbeard plants from which it had evolved.")

and Mosquitos (having a little trouble trakcing down that one, it was on ABC news's site recently (2-3 months ago) in an article on the effects of global warming. Let me offer some more to make up for it.

Two strains of Drosophila paulistorum developed hybrid sterility of male offspring between 1958 and 1963. Artificial selection induced strong intra-strain mating preferences. (Test for speciation: sterile offspring and lack of interbreeding affinity.) Dobzhansky, Th., and O. Pavlovsky, 1971. "An experimentally created incipient species of Drosophila", Nature 23:289-292

Rapid speciation of the Faeroe Island house mouse, which occurred in less than 250 years after man brought the creature to the island. (Test for speciation in this case is based on morphology. It is unlikely that forced breeding experiments have been performed with the parent stock.) Stanley, S., 1979. Macroevolution: Pattern and Process, San Francisco, W.H. Freeman and Company. p. 41

Formation of five new species of cichlid fishes which formed since they were isolated less than 4000 years ago from the parent stock, Lake Nagubago. (Test for speciation in this case is by morphology and lack of natural interbreeding. These fish have complex mating rituals and different coloration. While it might be possible that different species are inter-fertile, they cannot be convinced to mate.) Mayr, E., 1970. Populations, Species, and Evolution, Massachusetts, Harvard University Press. p. 348

page 22 of the February, 1989 issue of Scientific American. It's called "A Breed Apart." It tells about studies conducted on a fruit fly, Rhagoletis pomonella, that is a parasite of the hawthorn tree and its fruit, which is commonly called the thorn apple. About 150 years ago, some of these flies began infesting apple trees, as well. The flies feed an breed on either apples or thorn apples, but not both. There's enough evidence to convince the scientific investigators that they're witnessing speciation in action. Note that some of the investigators set out to prove that speciation was not happening; the evidence convinced them otherwise.

[Ceridwen018]

Michel, thank you for your quick response. You say evolution is "verifiable, and observable". Please tell me how I may verify it. I can verify gravity by dropping a rock, I can verify the earth is round by mathimatical equations, but I have not heard of a method of verifying evolution. People seem to just tell me it exists and move on, just like religion. I don't tend to like that.

I must say, I like your philosophy!

Gravity is rather simple to test, this is true. Of course, experimenting with whether or not gravity is caused by the dense core of the Earth is a little more involved, and cannot be tested liesurly at home. Such is the case, (some of the time), with evolution. Unlike the Earth's core, everything about evolution can be directly observed in one way or another...just not in the comfort of your lay-z-boy.

When Charles Darwin was busy observing different animals on the Galapagos islands in the 1830's, he noticed something odd about them, most famously the finches. He noticed that there was a different breed of finch on each different island, and still another breed on the nearby mainland of South America. Each different finch, he observed, had different characteristics which suited them specifically for the different environments on the many islands. For example, on one of the islands the breed of finch posessed a rather large beak--larger than those of its neighbors. Consequently, Darwin observed that the main food in the diet of these particular finches was a large nut which was plentiful on that island, but not on any of the others. As Darwin made observations such as these, he began to form his theory of Natural Selection.

The theory of Natural Selection states many things, most notably that only those which are best suited for their environment will survive, whereas those which are not suited will either adapt or die. In this simple case of the finches, Darwin hypothesized that the mainland breed of finch must have spread out to each of the islands, where the then separate poulations were subjected to very different living conditions. In the case of the island with the nuts, only the finches with larger beaks were able to consume the large nuts, while the others either moved away to find sufficient food or died of starvation. Because the finches with the bigger beaks were the only ones left, they bred with each other and thus produced more finches with their "big beak genes", and thus it became the norm for that breed.

Over these last 150 years or so since Darwin published his Origin of Species, much has been added to the theory of natural selection and evolution in general. It can no longer be called "Darwin's theory" because it has changed so much with new discoveries. From Gregor Mendel's work with heredity to the recent mapping of the human genome, today's theory of evolution is much more complex and solidified than it ever was in Darwin's time.

[Princecharles]

I can understand birds choosing where to live based on the food they like, and I can understand fish not wanting to mate with each other because they don't know each other’s mating ritual. I can understand two different types of animals being unable to mate with each other because of DNA differences that occur over a period of time. That's not a big deal to me. Let me ask a different question about this. What is known about the big changes? I hear some conflicting things about getting bacteria from dirt, plants from bacteria, and animals from plants. What transitions are known to have happened?

[Jayhawker Soule]

In my opinion, you're playing a little rhetorical game, where honest debate would be more worthy of respect.