Why the theory of evolution is so important

[savagewind]

Careful this is 'arguing from ignorance' and smells of duck, bob and weave of the science behind abiogenesis. The present body of evidence concerning the origins of life have at present only one viable explanation, and that is abiogenesis. Of course there are many unknowns, but that is true of many disciplines in the frontiers of science.

What other alternative explanation than abiogenesis for the origins of life is there based on the evidence?

Huh? LOL I posted so that @Wild Fox would be fixed!

Evolution can't happen without life. Correct?

 

[Subduction Zone]

"Life coming about" is abiogenesis. How life types developed is evolution.

Why not tell @Wild Fox to get it right?

The study of how life itself came about is about abiogenesis and that has not been explained sufficiently yet.

Life had to happen before evolution ever did.

@Wild Fox may be guilty of using sloppy language. In context it does not look like he was thinking of abiogenesis when he wrote that. And though abiogenesis still has not been fully explained there is scientific evidence for the concept. There is none that I know of for creationism. I don't know about you, but when it comes to two ideas, one of them supported by evidence and the other not supported, I tend to accept the one that is supported by evidence.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Huh? LOL I posted so that @Wild Fox would be fixed!

Evolution can't happen without life. Correct?

Yes, but the source of life does not really matter.

 

[savagewind]

Life is living is alive. It is about power.

Evolution is about that power in action.

Life can do without evolution but evolution needs the life.

 

[savagewind]

@Wild Fox may be guilty of using sloppy language. In context it does not look like he was thinking of abiogenesis when he wrote that. And though abiogenesis still has not been fully explained there is scientific evidence for the concept. There is none that I know of for creationism. I don't know about you, but when it comes to two ideas, one of them supported by evidence and the other not supported, I tend to accept the one that is supported by evidence.

OK thank you. Sloppy is right.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Between the two of us talking whether we are apes or not is nothing really
compared with the scientists who are dissenting against Darwinism

https://www.discovery.org/m/2019/02/A-Scientific-Dissent-from-Darwinism-List-020419.pdf

https://www.discovery.org/multimedia/tag/dissent-from-darwin/

Project Steve - Wikipedia

Ever heared of "project steve"? It's a list of scientists that didn't "dissent from darwin" and who consider evolution theory to being solid science.

The difference with creationist propaganda lists like the one you linked, is:
- the "project steve" list is far far bigger
- the "project steve" list contains a lot more actual biologists
- only scientists named "steve" or a variation thereof were allowed to sign it.


ow and, off course: argumentum ad populum.

 

[savagewind]

The origin of life is unknown and I trust that it will always and forever be unknown.

But, on the other hand, the word life has come to mean "the existence of an individual human being or animal"@ so @Wild Fox was correct (but sloppy). OK?

 

[savagewind]

Yes, but the source of life does not really matter.

Yes because it isn't matter.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yes because it isn't matter.

You would need to find some evidence for that.

 

[savagewind]

You would need to find some evidence for that.

LOL I know! But, it isn't going to happen. For anyone, imo.

 

[metis]

There is an assumption made in most schools, universities and even in the production of documentaries on nature, that all scientists are unanimous in their belief that life as we know it on earth, evolved over time from rudimentary non-life into viruses and cells that then, over eons of time, developed into the lifeforms we know today.

Which is considered to be a "hypothesis" in the ToE as we do not know with any certainty how life first occurred here on Earth. Even with the acceptance by many of the concept of "divine creation", evolution clearly has occurred and still is occurring as all material forms, including life forms, appear to be constantly changing.

Many people make the mistake of believing that the ToE is counter to the concept of divine creation, but the reality is that we simply do not know with any certainty whatsoever how life, or even our own universe, actually started.

 

[sealchan]

Why is the theory of evolution so important?

The earth being the center of the universe may have been the first major conflict between religion and the developing science but the theory of evolution now remains the center for conflict. So why is this theory so important to discuss?

I am proposing three reasons

1. Unlike any other explanations for the how life came about evolution is the only one discovered rather than created in the past. Developed over time through careful observation despite what one would desire to believe. The theory crosses all nationalities and religions. As the evidence increased it developed increasing more depth rather than contradiction. It is our one explanation not depended on faith but one what is measured and observed.

2. As important, the theory of evolution shows just how we are related to all life in this world. Different than many creations stories that separate humans from all other life, evolution shows we come from shared ancestry and shared genetics most of which are well preserved through all life forms. All life has differences which make them unique yet evolution we share too much with other life forms to see ourselves as separate.

3. Most important of all the theories Evolution and Ecology intertwine and show just how much we are intimately interconnected. No organism lives alone but all are interdependent and developed the intimate relationships in time shaped by the environmental opportunities and selective pressures. Humans and animals cannot exist without plants cannot, flowers without pollinators fail to reproduce, bacteria are essential for digestion for so many animals, and trees communicate and support each other through fungi. Evolution theory with Ecology theory in combination are the only explanation for this relationship and to ignore this interdependence is to face the fate of so many creatures before us – extinction.

I think that evolution is an example of the historical development of complex, adaptive systems and shows what happens as local historical events determine outcomes in a dynamic context. This sort of thing happens as well on the human social level with the development of our languages, our cultures, our economy, etc...

I believe it will be shown that our Universe from "day zero" has been evolving in this way and that the aspects of our Universe described by certain constants (and argued by many to be signs of a carefully crafted Universe capable of producing "God's children") are simply a subjective outcome of a systemic process which has, for us, settled into the shape it has due to historical influences currently outside the scope of our observational capabilities.

 

[MJFlores]

I seriously question how this list was generated, and even whether some referenced actually signed it (?)

Many of the PhDs(?) on this list are not remotely qualified in the sciences related to abiogenesis and evolution such as PhDs in Kinesiology, architecture, computer science, philosophy, and engineering. They can of course express opinions based on their religious agenda.

One thing is true of the list is 99% of those on the list have a fundamentalist Christian agenda against the science of evolution. I detected a very few maybe exceptions.

Some have very questionable education qualifications based on the list for example:

Eugene Buff - Innovation Guru. Technology Scouting. Commercialization Assistance. Coaching. Mentoring. General Business • Sales/Bus Dev. His website does not describe him as having a PhD.
Eugene Buff

Stanley Salthe does not oppose evolution as described. In Stanley N. Salthe – The Evolution Institute he questions how evolution can be described as a conscious process, but other than that does not question evolution.

You Are a Fish—Science Proves It

Do you believe we really came from the ocean?
Do you believe that humans were once fish?
That is theory of evolution

Human clues to our fish ancestry

Do you believe that humans after being fish became reptiles?
Meet the Ancient Reptile that Gave Rise to Mammals

And after becoming a reptile that became an ape?
Introduction to Human Evolution

But before humans were fishes who turned into reptiles then turned into primates
Humans came from LUCA which is a lower life form than bacteria?

That is evolution or may I call it transformation.

 

[MJFlores]

Well, I am a mathematician and their calculation is bunk. Pure and simple.

The biggest problem is that they assume the protein forms all at once with no interaction between the amino acids in the protein. This is the whole basis of multiplying the probabilities of the individual amino acids. Also, it assumes that only one protein can do the job of this one and ignores that, typically, there are multiple ways to do the same job, let alone related jobs.

This calculation is so bad there isn't even a good way to fix it.

Typically, when you find a creationist multiplying a lot of small numbers together, they are ignoring the fact that things interact and that they don't form all at once by random chance.

So you have a separate calculation to arrive at a more sensible probability?

 

[Subduction Zone]

You Are a Fish—Science Proves It

Do you believe we really came from the ocean?
Do you believe that humans were once fish?
That is theory of evolution

Human clues to our fish ancestry

Do you believe that humans after being fish became reptiles?
Meet the Ancient Reptile that Gave Rise to Mammals

And after becoming a reptile that became an ape?
Introduction to Human Evolution

But before humans were fishes who turned into reptiles then turned into primates
Humans came from LUCA which is a lower life form than bacteria?
View attachment 27919


That is evolution or may I call it transformation.

Humans were never fish in the sense that you seem to mean it, but our ancestors were.

 

[MJFlores]

Project Steve - Wikipedia

Ever heared of "project steve"? It's a list of scientists that didn't "dissent from darwin" and who consider evolution theory to being solid science.

The difference with creationist propaganda lists like the one you linked, is:
- the "project steve" list is far far bigger
- the "project steve" list contains a lot more actual biologists
- only scientists named "steve" or a variation thereof were allowed to sign it.


ow and, off course: argumentum ad populum.

What are these scientists dissenting about the Theory of Evolution?

They say that non-life could not make living things.
It would take a living thing to make another living thing.

 

[Subduction Zone]

So you have a separate calculation to arrive at a more sensible probability?

One does not need to calculate the odds of something to prove that someone else's odds are wrong.

 

[Subduction Zone]

What are these scientists dissenting about the Theory of Evolution?

They say that non-life could not make living things.
It would take a living thing to make another living thing.

Most of them are dentists and computer engineers. They may be "scientists" but their opinion is all but worthless.

 

[shunyadragon]

You Are a Fish—Science Proves It

Do you believe we really came from the ocean?
Do you believe that humans were once fish?
That is theory of evolution


Human clues to our fish ancestry

Do you believe that humans after being fish became reptiles?
Meet the Ancient Reptile that Gave Rise to Mammals

And after becoming a reptile that became an ape?
Introduction to Human Evolution

But before humans were fishes who turned into reptiles then turned into primates
Humans came from LUCA which is a lower life form than bacteria?View attachment 27919

Your convoluted terminology needs to be corrected. First science does not prove anything. It falsifies theories and hypothesis. The science of evolution has been falsified beyond any reasonable doubt.

Do you believe we really evolved from the life in the ocean?
Do you believe that humans evolved from fish?
That is theory of evolution


Human clues to our fish ancestry

Do you believe that humans after evolved from fish we evolved from reptiles?
Meet the Ancient Reptile that Gave Rise to Mammals

And after evolving from ancient reptiles that evolved from primates related to the ape?
Introduction to Human Evolution

Yes, and the objective verifiable evidence supports the science of evolution beyond any reasonable doubt, and life and the universe billions of years in the making.

That is evolution or may I call it transformation.

No transformation is not the correct scientific term.

 

[shunyadragon]

↑
So you have a separate calculation to arrive at a more sensible probability?

Creationists use probability the way ENRON did bookkeeping.