Evidence For And Against Evolution

[YoursTrue]

This is an example of what I was just talking about.

Yes, because the idea of anything, dead or alive, proving evolution as it is said that a dinosaur eventually becoming a bird like a robin is...or bacteria transforming by natural selection to becoming plants, trees, and giraffes is to say the least, remarkable.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Ok, you're right there. So I guess I will have to look up speciation. And since you know much much more than I do, hopefully you and others can help me through it when I have questions. Also how speciation relates to the idea of bacteria eventually evolving to the current latest form, which is, of course, homo sapiens. Yes, speciation and separation of populations is an interesting thought.

New traits arise constantly in a population. And if one had a time machine one would find that technically some populations are not the same "species" that they were a long time ago since modern versions could no longer breed with ancient versions. But what you appear to be asking about is how different species arise and the first step is that the populations must have some sort of separation. Otherwise they will simply keep interbreeding and still be "one species".

In fact the idea of "species" is hard to nail down because evolution is a fact. The most commonly used one is the breeding standard of species. If members of two different populations can produce fertile offspring they are the same species. If they cannot, they aren't:

species | Learn Science at Scitable

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yes, because the idea of anything, dead or alive, proving evolution as it is said that a dinosaur eventually becoming a bird like a robin is...or bacteria transforming by natural selection to becoming plants, trees, and giraffes is to say the least, remarkable.

Especially since that is not what happens.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Unlike you, I understand what Einstein said.

I'm surprised you even need religion.

You clearly think that you are God.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

He already said he doesn't like what he heard about God.

False. He said God, to him, is an impersonal perception of reality, not a personal entity. I.E: Not even remotely anything like the God you're describing.

I would say he heard very bad things if people kept talking about religion and what God will or won't do, as if they know. I also would say that after his entry into the world of various ideas that he gave up (as I did for a while) about trying to figure out about God and so he might have figured God does not exist.

Why have you not yet apologized?

Pride is a sin, y'know.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Ok, you're right there. So I guess I will have to look up speciation. And since you know much much more than I do, hopefully you and others can help me through it when I have questions.

Okay then, let's put all the other stuff aside for a while.

What would you like to ask?

Also how speciation relates to the idea of bacteria eventually evolving to the current latest form, which is, of course, homo sapiens.

Straight away, that's not right. Human did not evolve from "bacteria". Modern bacteria represent a separate evolutionary "branch" that separated from humans as far back ago as the last universal common ancestor. For reference, see this tree of life model:

SOURCE: A new view of the tree of life

If it helps, think of bacteria as your cousins. You both share the same ancestry, but their "branch" of the family is separate from your "branch". You didn't come FROM your cousins.

What humans evolved from, after the LUCA, is early, single-celled eukaryotes. And no, "bacteria" is not another words for "single-celled organism". It is a particular classification of single celled organism that evolved alongside other forms of life into the variety of forms we see today. So to say humans "evolved from bacteria" is like saying that you are "descended from your cousins".

We on the same page so far?

 

[YoursTrue]

What makes you think that? Did I not give you enough information so that you could figure it out for yourself? Just admit that you do not understand. You appear to be trying to learn ask "gotcha" questions. When one is obviously wrong,as you are in this discussion, they are foolish questions that only highlight the fact that the asker has no clue.

If you were a teacher in a class I attended, I'd ask to switch to a kinder teacher. There is no use in being upbraided and constantly insulted. I hope you don't ask how you insult me. I will tell you this: I remember a teacher in college that hated his students for the most part, because he didn't think we were up to his standards. And so he got frustrated and would insult the class as a whole. He was not asked back once evaluations came in.
You just keep insulting by telling me things like you gave me enough information to figure it out for myself. That's not true. I believe at this point you don't want to answer questions, but rather you tell me how uneducated and closed-minded I am. For one thing, and this is not a "gotcha" moment, scientists themselves have problems figuring things out. So when something 'new' is discovered, oftentimes they change their perception or conception of things. I'm not saying this makes scientists wrong on many things. But it is often not easy to understand what they believe and why they believe it in that sense of dating and putting things (such as what is often called evidence) together. I have another point which I will address in another post. About the passage of genes.

 

[YoursTrue]

Then you are reading my profile incorrectly. Slow down and read more carefully.

OK. I will do that.

 

[YoursTrue]

Okay then, let's put all the other stuff aside for a while.

What would you like to ask?


Straight away, that's not right. Human did not evolve from "bacteria". Modern bacteria represent a separate evolutionary "branch" that separated from humans as far back ago as the last universal common ancestor. For reference, see this tree of life model:

SOURCE: A new view of the tree of life

If it helps, think of bacteria as your cousins. You both share the same ancestry, but their "branch" of the family is separate from your "branch". You didn't come FROM your cousins.

What humans evolved from, after the LUCA, is early, single-celled eukaryotes. And no, "bacteria" is not another words for "single-celled organism". It is a particular classification of single celled organism that evolved alongside other forms of life into the variety of forms we see today. So to say humans "evolved from bacteria" is like saying that you are "descended from your cousins".

We on the same page so far?

No, because when I said that it is said that bacteria were the first form of existence (life) on this earth, then didn't they eventually move into other forms, and last but not least, the human form, after who-knows-how-long from the first unicell?

 

[Subduction Zone]

If you were a teacher in a class I attended, I'd ask to switch to a kinder teacher. There is no use in being upbraided and constantly insulted. I hope you don't ask how you insult me. I will tell you this: I remember a teacher in college that hated his students for the most part, because he didn't think we were up to his standards. And so he got frustrated and would insult the class as a whole. He was not asked back once evaluations came in.
You just keep insulting by telling me things like you gave me enough information to figure it out for myself. That's not true. I believe at this point you don't want to answer questions, but rather you tell me how uneducated and closed-minded I am. For one thing, and this is not a "gotcha" moment, scientists themselves have problems figuring things out. So when something 'new' is discovered, oftentimes they change their perception or conception of things. I'm not saying this makes scientists wrong on many things. But it is often not easy to understand what they believe and why they believe it in that sense of dating and putting things (such as what is often called evidence) together. I have another point which I will address in another post. About the passage of genes.

If a student is not there to learn in a class do you think that a teacher should treat him kindly?

In fact when I was polite to you you abused that trust.

Let me repeat that you do not know enough yet to be able to ask gotcha questions. Not do you seem to understand The difference between knowledge and belief.

But, in answer to your last question, yes it a student is genuinely there to learn he should be treated kindly.

 

[YoursTrue]

Then you are reading my profile incorrectly. Slow down and read more carefully.

Sorry. I checked now and it isn't there.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, because when I said that it is said that bacteria were the first form of existence (life) on this earth, then didn't they eventually move into other forms, and last but not least, the human form, after who-knows-how-long from the first unicell?

That is because many people use improper or poorly defined terms. They do do because it is easier than saying " single called organisms".

 

[YoursTrue]

If a student is not there to learn in a class do you think that a teacher should treat him kindly?

In fact when I was polite to you you abused that trust.

Let me repeat that you do not know enough yet to be able to ask gotcha questions. Not do you seem to understand The difference between knowledge and belief.

But, in answer to your last question, yes it a student is genuinely there to learn he should be treated kindly.

It was a class, not one student. But I still thank you, because you exemplify the haughty attitude of some of those who think they know better and are not really willing to explain. So thanks. While I find it amazing, I also find it corroborates what others have said in reference to haughtiness. Anyway, thanks.
But I was thinking about genetics and transmitting genes from parents to child. So let's say in the case of medical expertise (with which my family is quite familiar, one being a well-known researcher and the other having been a pioneering surgeon), when a person goes to the doctor, he is usually asked now in the questionnaire if any of his family had a heart condition, cancer, etc.

 

[YoursTrue]

That is because many people use improper or poorly defined terms. They do do because it is easier than saying " single called organisms".

OK, so single celled organisms. So not to call it a unicell. So then according to you if I understand you correctly, humans evolved wayyy in the future from single celled organisms which started the process of evolution.

 

[YoursTrue]

If a student is not there to learn in a class do you think that a teacher should treat him kindly?

In fact when I was polite to you you abused that trust.

I didn't mean to. In general I do feel that when people don't agree they should still be polite and as kind as possible, explaining their viewpoint. Meantime I apologize because I know I have to work on that. I'll try to do better, but I usually try to figure out what a person is saying and respond as well as I can. I know I have to work on my gut reaction.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

No, because when I said that it is said that bacteria were the first form of existence (life) on this earth, then didn't they eventually move into other forms, and last but not least, the human form, after who-knows-how-long from the first unicell?

As I explained in that previous email, no. Bacteria were not the first form of life.

See "bacteria" is not the same as "single-celled organisms". Bacteria are a KIND of single-celled organism, but the first unicellular organisms were not bacteria. Bacteria evolved FROM those early cells, alongside other branches of life such as eukaryotes, where humans evolved.

Do you have any further questions?

 

[Subduction Zone]

It was a class, not one student. But I still thank you, because you exemplify the haughty attitude of some of those who think they know better and are not really willing to explain. So thanks. While I find it amazing, I also find it corroborates what others have said in reference to haughtiness. Anyway, thanks.
But I was thinking about genetics and transmitting genes from parents to child. So let's say in the case of medical expertise (with which my family is quite familiar, one being a well-known researcher and the other having been a pioneering surgeon), when a person goes to the doctor, he is usually asked now in the questionnaire if any of his family had a heart condition, cancer, etc.

I am more that willing to explain. When you demonstrated that you did not want to learn is when my attitude towards you changed. The attitude that you don't like is your own doing. So please, cut the crap.

 

[Subduction Zone]

OK, so single celled organisms. So not to call it a unicell. So then according to you if I understand you correctly, humans evolved wayyy in the future from single celled organisms which started the process of evolution.

I don't think the term "unicell" ever caught on. The first life on this planet appeared over 3 billion years ago. Right now it looks like 3.8 billion years, but there are some that argue for an even earlier date. I don't know about you, but 3.8 billion years would qualify as "wayyy in the future" to me.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I didn't mean to. In general I do feel that when people don't agree they should still be polite and as kind as possible, explaining their viewpoint. Meantime I apologize because I know I have to work on that. I'll try to do better, but I usually try to figure out what a person is saying and respond as well as I can. I know I have to work on my gut reaction.

Sometimes the student causing trouble must be brought to task. And if you can try so can I.

 

[YoursTrue]

As I explained in that previous email, no. Bacteria were not the first form of life.

See "bacteria" is not the same as "single-celled organisms". Bacteria are a KIND of single-celled organism, but the first unicellular organisms were not bacteria. Bacteria evolved FROM those early cells, alongside other branches of life such as eukaryotes, where humans evolved.

May I ask how you know for sure that the first unicellular organisms had bacteria evolve from them?