Thread: What evidence do you need?

Originally Posted by Mario92

This is the truth. I'm actually a bit scared to go into the BD section...

They say your brains turn into goo if you stay in there for more than 10 minutes straight.

Originally Posted by lseadragon

I would like to hear this theory as well, incidentally. If you think it'll be reacted to negatively, put it in BD, and anything you say will automatically look to make a good deal more sense.

Lol I'm not posting it publicly. If I do that, it'll be an all out open war no matter where I post it. xD;

Xei: I'm all for science. But this theory as you say is 'well established explanatory framework'. That means we haven't uncovered everything there is to know about it. And that is why I've drifted off into a different tangent and tried to string them all together with my own theories instead of just accepting that one Theory of Human Evolution as it is.

No, a well established framework is well established. The word 'theory' in scientific usage does not entail 'gaps'. With regards to natural selection, the fundamental idea has remained unchanged since its conception.

There is no theory of human evolution, the theory of evolution applies to every organism.

Originally Posted by Marvo

So what do you think? Of evolution that is. Since you don't have any questions, I assume you've formed a final opinion.

Opinion can mean a lot of things. Explain please?

Originally Posted by Noogah

Opinion can mean a lot of things. Explain please?

Stop evading and answer the damn question for once!!!

In case you really seriously are stuggling to understand what "your final opinion" means then:

OPINION (noun)
1. a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.
2. a personal view, attitude, or appraisal.
3. the formal expression of a professional judgment: to ask for a second medical opinion.
4. Law. the formal statement by a judge or court of the reasoning and the principles of law used in reaching a decision of a case.
5. a judgment or estimate of a person or thing with respect to character, merit, etc.: to forfeit someone's good opinion.
6. a favorable estimate; esteem: I haven't much of an opinion of him.

Originally Posted by evildoctor

In case you really seriously are stuggling to understand what "your final opinion" means then:

Evildoctor, you only further prove my point by posting six different definitions for opinion.

Yes, I truly don't know what he means. What aspect of my opinion does he want.?

He may be asking, what d you think of Evolution? As in, do I like it? Do I believe in it? But I dismissed these possibilities, as I thought it seemed rather obvious what I thought of Evolution.

If that truly is his question however, than you already know my opinion of Evolution. It hasn't wavered since I first came to these forums,

[QUOTE=Noogah;1219371]Evildoctor, you only further prove my point by posting six different definitions for opinion.[QUOTE]

Silly Noogah, even an idiot can see that only some of those 6 are relevant in the context of Marvo's question. A middle school child would know excatly what Marvo is asking. I was going to be quite vindictive in my response - but your quote above is so inane that it shall stand on its own merit, or indeed lack thereof.

Yes, I truly don't know what he means. What aspect of my opinion does he want.?

Hmmm yes. I see your point. To formulate an opinion one must THINK. Yet you of course prefer to be told what to think by your preacher which saves you the effort - or you go to a bible web site that has versus for every occasion which you can cut and paste in absence of a reasoned response.

If that truly is his question however, than you already know my opinion of Evolution. It hasn't wavered since I first came to these forums,

Look back through this thread Noogah. O'nus started it by asking what EVIDENCE people need. You joined and demanded non vague evidence in a vague way. Onus obligingly posted a vast amount of links, references and videos that must have taken some time to prepare. You completley ignored this - instead making some pointless post about a creationist forum that (thankfully) vanished. You were then accused by several of running. MArvo then reminded you you should check Onus's link. You asked what link. Marvo provided a new link and then asked you FOR YOUR FINAL OPINION - to which of course you start asking moronic questions about what "opinion means".

Now - answer Onus - answer MArvo - or bugger off the thread.

I HAD left the thread until I was adressed by Marvo. I told you what my opinion was, now cool off.

Originally Posted by Noogah

Evildoctor, you only further prove my point by posting six different definitions for opinion.

Yes, I truly don't know what he means. What aspect of my opinion does he want.?

He may be asking, what d you think of Evolution? As in, do I like it? Do I believe in it? But I dismissed these possibilities, as I thought it seemed rather obvious what I thought of Evolution.

If that truly is his question however, than you already know my opinion of Evolution. It hasn't wavered since I first came to these forums,

Well there is your answer then, I guess, and my answer aswell. I will no longer debate with you, on the subject of religion and the sciences that seem to contradict religion


e: vvvv I didn't notice, that's funny hehe.

I will no longer debate with you, on the subject of religion and the sciences that seem to contradict religion.

Well, seems like that won't be possible anyways. He left dreamviews or something?

Originally Posted by O'nus

This keeps coming up so I made a thread for it.

What evidence do you need to see to see that evolution is factual?

~

I would need to see some kind of breeding program that resulted in all kinds of dogs, like chihuahuas, Saint bernards, Pit Bulls, German Shepards, all from a common ancestor, like a wolf. I would need to see a breeding program for plants that would result in greater quantities of food for humans like corn, wheat, from normal grass.

If I am going to be convinced of evolution, I would need to know why some things, like many single celled organisms don't evolve at all, or stopped evolving. And things like crocodiles and sharks.

If I am going to be convinced of evolution, I would need to know why some things, like many single celled organisms don't evolve at all, or stopped evolving. And things like crocodiles and sharks.

Hahahaha.

Originally Posted by Dannon Oneironaut

I would need to see some kind of breeding program that resulted in all kinds of dogs, like chihuahuas, Saint bernards, Pit Bulls, German Shepards, all from a common ancestor, like a wolf.

First of all, I can show you the genetic relation of all living things.

Genetic Relations


+ "This tree is from an analysis of small subunit rRNA sequences sampled
from about 3,000 species from throughout the Tree of Life. The species were chosen based
on their availability, but we attempted to include most of the major groups, sampled
very roughly in proportion to the number of known species in each group (although many
groups remain over- or under-represented). The number of species
represented is approximately the square-root of the number of species thought to exist on Earth
(i.e., three thousand out of an estimated nine million species), or about 0.18% of the 1.7 million
species that have been formally described and named. "
+ http://www.zo.utexas.edu/faculty/ant...dfilesToL.html

Dogs Genetic Relation

"We used molecular markers to study genetic relationships in a diverse collection of 85 domestic dog breeds. Differences among breeds accounted for 30% of genetic variation. Microsatellite genotypes were used to correctly assign 99% of individual dogs to breeds. Phylogenetic analysis separated several breeds with ancient origins from the remaining breeds with modern European origins. We identified four genetic clusters, which predominantly contained breeds with similar geographic origin, morphology, or role in human activities. These results provide a genetic classification of dog breeds and will aid studies of the genetics of phenotypic breed differences."
+ http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/conten.../304/5674/1160

"Mitochondrial DNA control region sequences were analyzed from 162 wolves at 27 localities worldwide and from 140 domestic dogs representing 67 breeds. Sequences from both dogs and wolves showed considerable diversity and supported the hypothesis that wolves were the ancestors of dogs."
+ http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/conten...;276/5319/1687

Genetic routes producing miniature breeds that retain the proportion of the original
+ http://www.fredlanting.org/2008/07/p...rd-dog-part-1/

Evolution of Grass

I would need to see a breeding program for plants that would result in greater quantities of food for humans like corn, wheat, from normal grass.

This is misleading. There is no such thing as wild corn as it has been biologically created by man.

"The genetic structure of 35 populations of wild relatives of cultivated wheats, all collected in Syria and Lebanon, was assessed using ten isozymes. The populations consisted of diploid goat grass, Aegilops speltoides, diploid wild wheats, Triticum monococcum spp. aegilopoides and T. urartu, and tetraploid wild wheat, T. turgidum ssp. dicoccoides. The majority of the populations were polymorphic (P=0–70%) having low within-population mean genetic diversity (Hep=0.05–0.10) and relatively high within-species genetic diversity (Hes=0.14–0.31). The linkage between loci did not seem to be one of the causes for the observed polymorphism. All four species showed significant inbreeding at both the population (0.31–0.64) and species (0.77–0.96) levels, and the extent of inbreeding did not correlate with mating systems. Despite their apparent common ecological and evolutionary history, between-population or between-species level genetic identity was low (I=0.43–0.86). Among the diploid species, populations of Ae. speltoides clustered distinctly from those overlapping clusters of T. monococcum ssp. aegilopoides and T. urartu. The tetraploid species T. turgidum ssp. dicoccoides had relatively less genetic diversity (Hes=0.14) and was highly homozygous (F=0.96). The results suggest that these wild progenitors of cultivated wheats have undergone extensive local differentiation and inbreeding. We discuss the implications of our results on the management of wild wheat and goat grass populations."
+ http://www.springerlink.com/content/q9grr1chey9bgvy1/

I will have to look further into this one as I do not often read about the evolution of... grass.

If I am going to be convinced of evolution, I would need to know why some things, like many single celled organisms don't evolve at all, or stopped evolving. And things like crocodiles and sharks.

Nothing has "stopped evolving". What are you talking about? What about crocodiles and sharks..?

~

Originally Posted by O'nus

This keeps coming up so I made a thread for it.

What evidence do you need to see to see that evolution is factual?

~

Now, I've only read the first page... just a warning

Honestly, I believe that through natural selection we have evolved. THis is based off of "survival of the fittest". Evolution is not based off Lemark (which seems like an idiodic hypothosis now a days, lol).

Anyways, I believe that there is a lot of evidence in support of evolution. How else can you explain hominid creatures?

We know more from science than we do from religion. Hell, the bible says that the Earth is 6,000yo, plus minus 1,000yrs. Wow... that's a 33% error whereas science has determined Earth is 4.54bill yo with a 1% error

But I digress. However, science has proven many things that can be repeated many times. How many times has God been proven? Yes, there are miricles, but they have yet to be duplicated the same way. Yes, there are very strange phenomina that happen that science can't explain somehow and so it get's put on religion

However, staying on topic, there's way too much evidence on the subject for someone to be ignorant and stubborn and say it's a load of rubbish. You obviously need to do some reading, or something

Chimpanzees are 98% related to humans. There is also another animal that isn't even a mammal (I can't remember what it was), but it was 95% related to humans by DNA standards... so tell me how that's possible

As I think was said, evolution has been proven in bacteria. Due to bacteria's life span being so short, it evolves very quickly. Read up on the Russian Prison TB virus. Prisoners were treated for TB. However, their treatment was never carried out fully and some some of the virus that hadn't been killed by the treatment was resistant and thus became a new strain of TB. So it multiplies and it infects more prisoners. A new vaccine had to be found and then administered. Treatment was not carried out fully and thus a new strain of TB formed. This happened a few times over the course of a few decades and is now a multi-drug resistant strain of TB that is still rampant in Russian prisons (1 in 10 inmates have this strain of TB)

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&s...ison+tu&aqi=g1

So if evolution doens't exist... then how have they gone from regular, treatable TB, to a MDR TB? I don't think God jsut said, "I'm going to make a MDR strain of TB today."

I believe in God, so don't get me wrong, but science has proven a lot more than God has

Originally Posted by Dannon Oneironaut

I would need to see some kind of breeding program that resulted in all kinds of dogs, like chihuahuas, Saint bernards, Pit Bulls, German Shepards, all from a common ancestor, like a wolf. I would need to see a breeding program for plants that would result in greater quantities of food for humans like corn, wheat, from normal grass.

If I am going to be convinced of evolution, I would need to know why some things, like many single celled organisms don't evolve at all, or stopped evolving. And things like crocodiles and sharks.

You know how long it took for dogs to get to where they are from their common ancestor? Mills of years. Even with our technology today, I don't think you'll see it. And you do know that ANY dog/ wolf you can think of are all the same species? Due to humans, there are different breeds, but they can all mate with each other and produce viable offspring

When the Nat. Amer. harvested corn, corn was only about 2" long. Through selective harvesting, corn has become what we know of today. However, if left on it's own, who know's what it could've turned out to become

Bacteria, as I've said, is always evolving. Humans are evolving. Have you ever seen funature from the 1800s? The beds are only about 5'6". The average person wasn't that tall. Why do you think people though Abe Lincoln was a "giant" at 6'4". Today if you see someone that height I'm sure you'd only think, "That's a tall person." Being 6' myself, 6'4" isn't that much taller than me

Crocs and sharks... don't know what you mean by that, so here're some Wikis

Ancient croc:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deinosuchus

Shark
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megalodon

As you can see, some species have lived for many millions of years before the species dies out (and a new species is discovered which leads to the theory of evolution. One species dies out but a similar one takes it's place)

It takes millions of years to evolve. Generations of scientists would have to work to "watch" a species evolve. Humans have only been of the Genus Homo for 2.5mill yrs. As a whole, we split occured about 5mill yrs ago, so it's thought

The problem I have is because it's so slow at which point is it one or the other?

Take this gradiant as an example of evolution. Red is on the left, yellow on the right. At one point is it a different color?

......v--red.............................................ye llow--v

.........................red---^.............^--yellow

What's the middle though? Red? Yellow? Or should we just call the middle ground orange? But again, at what point is the red ACTUALLY orange? Some people may see it differently. I think that there may be something out there that isn't quite one or the other, so it become classified as something else. Maybe is just for the ease of science. If it looks more like one than the other, then put it with the one

I hope that makes sense

Originally Posted by O'nus

This is misleading. There is no such thing as wild corn as it has been biologically created by man.

Nothing has "stopped evolving". What are you talking about? What about crocodiles and sharks..?

~

You didn't get it. i was being facetious. Corn was evolved by man from grass. Breeding is just sped up evolution where man has chosen the desired traits instead of chance mutations surviving by natural selection. I mean, corn was not genetically engineered, it was bred.


Well, there are simple organisms that have remained unchanged for billions of years, like diatoms, algae, sponges, amoebae, bacterias, yeasts, etc. And other things have evolved and then seemed to stop evolving like great white sharks and crocodiles which both existed before dinosaurs.

I am not arguing against evolution, I thoroughly believe in it. It is just these things are curious to me.
Can you tell me what insects and arachnids, and earthworms and milipedes etc. evolved from? In school they just said that a fish came out of the water and became an amphibian, which became reptiles, which became birds and mammals, but they left out the whole part about bugs. My feeling is that bugs came out of the water before fish did. Maybe it was a shrimp that came out of the water?
Cool information though.

Originally Posted by Dannon Oneironaut

You didn't get it. i was being facetious. Corn was evolved by man from grass. Breeding is just sped up evolution where man has chosen the desired traits instead of chance mutations surviving by natural selection. I mean, corn was not genetically engineered, it was bred.


Well, there are simple organisms that have remained unchanged for billions of years, like diatoms, algae, sponges, amoebae, bacterias, yeasts, etc. And other things have evolved and then seemed to stop evolving like great white sharks and crocodiles which both existed before dinosaurs.

I am not arguing against evolution, I thoroughly believe in it. It is just these things are curious to me.
Can you tell me what insects and arachnids, and earthworms and milipedes etc. evolved from? In school they just said that a fish came out of the water and became an amphibian, which became reptiles, which became birds and mammals, but they left out the whole part about bugs. My feeling is that bugs came out of the water before fish did. Maybe it was a shrimp that came out of the water?
Cool information though.

In answer to your question about why it seems that some organisms "stop" evolving is that technically, it is a possibility. There are a set of 5 conditions that all must be true for a population to be considered static, or not evolving, called the hardy-weinberg principle. Some organisms fit the bill a lot better than others, and so don't appear to be evolving. The occasional new gene may arise, but the population is so vast or so efficient, that the new gene is snuffed out.
Also keep in mind that an organism can retain the same appearance through millions of years, but it will still be "evolving." Modern humans are evolving at the fastest rate in known history, and overall, we really haven't changed all too much in physical appearance over the Millenia.

Well, there are simple organisms that have remained unchanged for billions of years, like diatoms, algae, sponges, amoebae, bacterias, yeasts, etc. And other things have evolved and then seemed to stop evolving like great white sharks and crocodiles which both existed before dinosaurs.

The whole point of evolution by natural selection is that organisms become better adapted to their environments over time. Natural selection therefore only takes place when an organisms environment changes so that it is not optimally adapted. Those organisms you listed are extremely well adapted to their environments already, and their environments do not change; although some members of those species may have moved to other locations where they were not very well adapted, and hence evolved; in other words some yeasts have evolved - but then obviously they aren't yeasts any more.

Can someone show me what cats or dogs are going to evolve into, and when I can expect to see them? Or at least form a theory.

Also: do you think it's possible for a cat or dog to turn into like a human or somethin? Or are least human-like

Originally Posted by Tarsier

Can someone show me what cats or dogs are going to evolve into, and when I can expect to see them? Or at least form a theory.

Also: do you think it's possible for a cat or dog to turn into like a human or somethin? Or are least human-like

I don't think that a cat or a dog can turn human.
I always wondered what if an insect or a cuttlefish evolved into a very high intelligence with opposable thumbs. I also am interested in the theory that psychoactive mushrooms helped evolve humans. If so, what would happen if we fed them to gorillas. I always wished we were more like gorillas than we are to chimps. Gorillas are much more peaceful.

oops. double post

Originally Posted by Dannon Oneironaut

I don't think that a cat or a dog can turn human.

Eugenics. Given the ideal circumstances, we are on the cusp of being able to recombine canine genes into a humanoid.

I always wondered what if an insect or a cuttlefish evolved into a very high intelligence with opposable thumbs.

Given the right circumstances and hundreds of millions of years, anything is possible

I also am interested in the theory that psychoactive mushrooms helped evolve humans. If so, what would happen if we fed them to gorillas. I always wished we were more like gorillas than we are to chimps. Gorillas are much more peaceful.

Erm...what? Psilocybin does not alter the genetic structure of humans. It's effects may lead to spur-of-the-moment intercourse between two certain people, but is by no means a driving force of evolution.Also, I'm almost dead-certain that we're most closely related to chimps...

.

Also can I please see evidence of Dragon fossils?

Erm...what? Psilocybin does not alter the genetic structure of humans. It's effects may lead to spur-of-the-moment intercourse between two certain people, but is by no means a driving force of evolution.Also, I'm almost dead-certain that we're most closely related to chimps...

Well, they say that LSD changes your DNA. Also the theory for mushrooms is that it made people better adapted to hunting and hiding in the grassy plains of Africa. It made their eyesight better.