Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →

Welcome

Welcome to CEMB forum.
Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email?

Donations

Help keep the Forum going!
Click on Kitty to donate:

Kitty is lost

Recent Posts


New Britain
Yesterday at 03:10 PM

German nationalist party ...
Yesterday at 01:11 PM

Do humans have needed kno...
February 06, 2025, 03:13 PM

Lights on the way
by akay
February 05, 2025, 10:04 PM

Gaza assault
February 05, 2025, 10:04 AM

AMRIKAAA Land of Free .....
February 03, 2025, 09:25 AM

The origins of Judaism
by zeca
February 02, 2025, 04:29 PM

Qur'anic studies today
by zeca
February 01, 2025, 11:48 PM

Random Islamic History Po...
by zeca
February 01, 2025, 07:29 PM

اضواء على الطريق ....... ...
by akay
February 01, 2025, 11:55 AM

News From Syria
by zeca
December 28, 2024, 12:29 AM

Mo Salah
December 26, 2024, 05:30 AM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Evolution

 (Read 12536 times)
  • Previous page 1 23 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Re: Evolution
     Reply #30 - November 25, 2010, 01:20 AM

    In this video, Dawkins talks about the eye:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PhDWCujcFEY


    Her hero is Dawkins? I'm in love. 

    So once again I'm left with the classic Irish man's dilemma, do I eat the potato or do I let it ferment so I can drink it later?
    My political philosophy below
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwGat4i8pJI&feature=g-vrec
    Just kidding, here are some true heros
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBTgvK6LQqA
  • Re: Evolution
     Reply #31 - November 25, 2010, 01:45 AM

    Quote
    However, if we go with the former, as you probably already know, some things are irreducibly complex.


    You have been misinformed.  Irreducible complexity is the Holy Grail  for which creationists have been searching for over 150 years, and they have never found it yet.

    Quote
    Many of these things could not possibly evolve, so how would they make such a large jump? An example is bats. I was told in evolution that bats evolved from small rodents who slowly grew wings. But if this was the case, there would be during the process large time when the legs would be too small to run or walk properly, yet not strong enough to fly.



    Rubbish.   There's no reason why the legs would deteriorate as the wings evolved, not according to Darwinian evolution anyway.   Look at the natural world around you - flying squirrels for example, they have four perfectlly functioning legs, and rudimentary wings allowing them to glide between treetops.

    "Befriend them not, Oh murtads, and give them neither parrot nor bunny."  - happymurtad's advice on trolls.
  • Re: Evolution
     Reply #32 - November 25, 2010, 10:20 AM

    birds have wings & legs too

    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: Evolution
     Reply #33 - November 25, 2010, 10:48 AM

    I didn't bother watching the giraffe vid but I'll bet it was about the recurrent laryngeal nerve. This is well known as being very good evidence of evolution and the giraffe is a great example, although obviously not the only example as all mammals are similar in this respect.

    Anyway, regarding this:You have been reading too much creationist stuff. This is a common distortion of what the original discussion was about.

    What happened was that several decades ago (and I'm old enough to remember when this was going on) Stephen Jay Gould started publicising the idea of "punctuated equilibrium". Of course, as soon as he did this all the creationists starting ranting about how Gould thought Darwin was wrong, which was complete bollocks.

    What Gould suggested was that evolution did not need to always proceed at the same pace. This is obvious when you think about it. If there are no changes in environmental conditions then there will be little incentive for already successful species to adapt in any way. It's usually when conditions change markedly that additional selection pressure gets applied to such species, thus encouraging either extinction or the development of new species.

    All Gould really did was to clarify a minor point that all biologists really knew already but which had not been made clear in so many words, particularly to laypeople. Successful species can remain largely unchanged for very long periods of time. They can also be subject to comparatively rapid speciation if conditions change dramatically after a long period of stability. This is what was meant by "punctuated equilibrium".

    Note that punctuated equilibrium is not a contradiction of standard evolutionary theory. It is simply a small but well-accepted part of standard evolutionary theory.


    yeah i thought that truthseeker was a serious poster until he used the term 'irreducible complexity' in a serious discussion. imo credibility goes straight out of the window when that shit comes up, he's probably one of those michael behe/harun yahya followers or something.
  • Re: Evolution
     Reply #34 - November 25, 2010, 04:24 PM

    An example is bats. I was told in evolution that bats evolved from small rodents who slowly grew wings. But if this was the case, there would be during the process large time when the legs would be too small to run or walk properly, yet not strong enough to fly.

    Hey, good question, and nothing wrong with being skeptical Smiley. I was also skeptical when I first heard of evolution. Since your question is about the evolution of wings, I'll direct you to the following page which describes it, its a very interesting read:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_avian_flight
  • Re: Evolution
     Reply #35 - November 25, 2010, 05:33 PM

    Stork:




    Flamingo:



    Notice the legs and wings in both cases.  grin12

    Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West. bunny
  • Re: Evolution
     Reply #36 - March 18, 2011, 06:47 PM

    Do vets use simlar vaccinations & medicines on bonobos or other apes, as doctors use on us ?

    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: Evolution
     Reply #37 - March 18, 2011, 08:53 PM

    Do vets use simlar vaccinations & medicines on bonobos or other apes, as doctors use on us ?

    Of the tiny 1% window of genetic difference between us and our closest cousins, resistance/susceptibility to different ailments and diseases make up a part. Chimps are more resistant to immunodeficiency viruses like types of aids for example.

    But bear in mind that drugs like Ketamine are used on all kinds of animals, including us.

    Too fucking busy, and vice versa.
  • Re: Evolution
     Reply #38 - March 18, 2011, 09:19 PM

    I really mean in terms of basic medicines like paracetomols & flu jabs.  I think it might show that as well as a macrocopic level God also designed them in a similar fashion on an microscopic level by using the same pathways as us.  Its not a dealbreaker, but another dint in the creationist armour if proved as I suspect to be true.  Although your post doesnt give me much confidence.

    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: Evolution
     Reply #39 - March 18, 2011, 09:46 PM

    Amoxicillin (antibiotic) that was prescribed for my cat is exactly the same as the one used for human children meaning that the cell receptors are the same as well.
  • Re: Evolution
     Reply #40 - March 18, 2011, 10:45 PM

    paracetamol is deadly for cats... I don't know about chimps....

    Just look at the sun and the moon, rotating around the earth perfectly! Out of all the never ending space in the universe, the sun and moon ended up close to earth rotating around it perfectly.!!

  • Re: Evolution
     Reply #41 - March 20, 2011, 07:11 PM

    I really mean in terms of basic medicines like paracetomols & flu jabs.  I think it might show that as well as a macrocopic level God also designed them in a similar fashion on an microscopic level by using the same pathways as us.  Its not a dealbreaker, but another dint in the creationist armour if proved as I suspect to be true.  Although your post doesnt give me much confidence.


    Well, pain killers have different effects even within species.

    Flu jabs, though, are not even consistently effective on humans. The mutation rate of flu means flu jabs have a yearly lifespan at most. Every year they select the most common strains and base a forecast on that, but at best it’s a guess. An educated, expert guess no doubt, and obviously they get it right often enough to make a massive difference and save many lives, particularly amongst elderly people, but it’s a neverending process of change.

    I think I know what you’re asking though. You want similarities as ammo. There are too many examples of how testing on non-human apes have gone horribly wrong though, or for example how testing of human medicine on non-human apes have caused things like birth defects and other reactions. However, you can use the differences rather than the similarities as evidence. You might be better off approaching it from a Positive Selection angle:

    Quote
    Since the divergence of humans and chimpanzees about 5 million years ago, these species have undergone a remarkable evolution with drastic divergence in anatomy and cognitive abilities. At the molecular level, despite the small overall magnitude of DNA sequence divergence, we might expect such evolutionary changes to leave a noticeable signature throughout the genome. We here compare 13,731 annotated genes from humans to their chimpanzee orthologs to identify genes that show evidence of positive selection. Many of the genes that present a signature of positive selection tend to be involved in sensory perception or immune defenses. However, the group of genes that show the strongest evidence for positive selection also includes a surprising number of genes involved in tumor suppression and apoptosis, and of genes involved in spermatogenesis. We hypothesize that positive selection in some of these genes may be driven by genomic conflict due to apoptosis during spermatogenesis. Genes with maximal expression in the brain show little or no evidence for positive selection, while genes with maximal expression in the testis tend to be enriched with positively selected genes. Genes on the X chromosome also tend to show an elevated tendency for positive selection. We also present polymorphism data from 20 Caucasian Americans and 19 African Americans for the 50 annotated genes showing the strongest evidence for positive selection. The polymorphism analysis further supports the presence of positive selection in these genes by showing an excess of high-frequency derived nonsynonymous mutations.

    […]

    Immune-defense-related genes appear at the top of the list. It is not surprising that several of the genes experiencing most positive selection are involved in immune responses to viruses. Considering the speed at which many pathogens, such as viruses, evolve (e.g., [5]), a coevolutionary molecular arms race between pathogens and host cells might explain the presence of strong selection favoring new mutations in these genes. Other forces, including overdominant selection to diversify the spectrum of immune responses, may also cause positive selection in immune- and defense-related genes. Such explanations have previously been used to explain the presence of positive selection in the human major histocompatibility complex [18].

    [...]


    Too fucking busy, and vice versa.
  • Re: Evolution
     Reply #42 - April 04, 2011, 08:00 AM

    This site explains a lot of things about the theory of evolution:

    talkorigins org

    It also has :
    1) a section which refutes the most common arguments brought against the theory
    2) a section about "quote mining", where they show how the creationists are quoting biologists out of context in order to "prove" that there isn't consensus about the theory of evolution among biologists

     When you see a quote that seems to contradict the theory of evolution, with a little effort you will find out that it belongs to one of these categories :
    1) made by a non-biologist
    2) taken out of context to make it sound like it means something else than it was intended
    3) contradicts a certain specific opinion held by biologists, but it doesn't contradict the theory of evolution itself ( for example, biologist Feduccia doesn't believe that birds evolve from theropod dinosaurs; but he believes that birds evolved from another group of reptiles)
    4) made by someone who works for a creationist "institute"; these "institutes" have nothing to do with science ; they are setup by Christians to mislead people

      
  • Re: Evolution
     Reply #43 - April 20, 2011, 11:14 PM

    A cool new discovery !!

    http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/04/australopithecus-fossils-human-evolution/

    MINNEAPOLIS — Fossils described last year as representatives of an ancient species critical to human evolution have reentered the scientific spotlight and set off a new round of debate over the finds’ true identity.

    Researchers described analyses of new and previously recovered remains of a South African species called Australopithecus sediba on April 16 at a meeting of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists. Evidence is accumulating, they reported, that 2-million-year-old A. sediba formed an evolutionary connection between relatively apelike members of Australopithecus and the Homo genus, which includes living people.
    It’s now clear that A. sediba shares more skeletal features with early Homo specimens than any other known Australopithecus species does, said Darryl de Ruiter of Texas A&M University in College Station. “We think A. sediba is a possible candidate ancestor for the genus Homo.”


    De Ruiter suspects that an isolated population of the hominid species Australopithecus africanus gradually evolved into A. sediba, resulting in a species characterized by an unusual mix of skeletal traits, some typical of Australopithecus in general and others of early Homo.

    That scenario, outlined in symposium presentations by De Ruiter and Lee Berger  of the University of the Witwatersrand in Johannesburg, South Africa, remains controversial despite the new fossil discoveries.

    Ian Tattersall of the American Museum of Natural History in New York City endorsed A. sediba as a distinct species, probably closely related to A. africanus. “I wouldn’t classify it as the root of the Homo genus, though,” he commented.

    De Ruiter acknowledged the possibility that two partial A. sediba skeletons previously excavated from a collapsed, underground cave (SN: 5/8/10, p. 14), as well as newly retrieved fossils from the cave, might represent a late-surviving form of Australopithecus africanus unrelated to Homo. Previous A. africanus finds date from about 3 million to 2.4 million years ago in South Africa. Fossils of A. africanus show lots of anatomical disparities from one individual to another, so that species might well encompass fossils attributed to A. sediba, remarked John Hawks of the University of Wisconsin–Madison. Much uncertainty surrounds the identity of fossil members of the human evolutionary family between 3 million and 2 million years ago, he said.

    Possible Homo fossils date to around 2.3 million years ago in East Africa, suggesting that even if A. sediba truly is a new species, it evolved after Homo did.

    New A. sediba fossils from the same South African cave complex, many belonging to the previously discovered partial skeletons, underscore this ancient species’ mosaic anatomy, Berger said. A largely complete female pelvis displays relatively straight, vertically aligned hips and an elongated birth canal, much like early Homo species. Other Australopithecus females possessed a relatively short, wide pelvic opening and flaring hip bones.

    New A. sediba foot bones include a chimplike heel and a humanlike ankle, Berger said. Fossils from the shoulders, rib cage and spine, as well as surprisingly long arm bones, typify Australopithecus.

    Many newly recovered fossils are largely encased in hardened sediment. Computerized scanning produced 3-D images of complete fossils for analysis.

    Digital reconstructions also aided an analysis led by De Ruiter of previously recovered A. sediba skulls and teeth, along with newly unearthed teeth. These remains also contain a blend of Australopithecus and Homo traits, De Ruiter reported.

    Image: The fossilized cranium of Australopithecus sediba. (Brett Eloff/Lee Berger/University of the Witwatersrand/Wikipedia)



    Nothing can be more contrary to religion and the clergy than reason and common sense. - Voltaire
  • Re: Evolution
     Reply #44 - May 31, 2011, 11:00 AM

     Extraordinary thing I've read on a Shia forum :

     "The theory of evolution may have just been a mechanism God had used to make things live in variation. It by no mean contradicts Allah's Islam when one name of Allah is "Al-Bari" the evolver".

     Now it all makes sense, God is not the "designer" of the Christians, he's the "evolver".
     Is there anything in the Quran about the string theory ?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/String_theory
     Maybe one of the names of Allah is "The Tiny String" ?
  • Re: Evolution
     Reply #45 - May 31, 2011, 12:09 PM

    ^^  LOL.   Gotta love their word massaging.  At least they are acknowledging evolution.

    Although, I'm sure 'designer' or 'fashioner' is in there somewhere among the 99 names of Allah.

    "Many people would sooner die than think; In fact, they do so." -- Bertrand Russell

    Baloney Detection Kit
  • Re: Evolution
     Reply #46 - May 31, 2011, 12:23 PM

    Extraordinary thing I've read on a Shia forum :

     "The theory of evolution may have just been a mechanism God had used to make things live in variation. It by no mean contradicts Allah's Islam when one name of Allah is "Al-Bari" the evolver".

     Now it all makes sense, God is not the "designer" of the Christians, he's the "evolver".
     Is there anything in the Quran about the string theory ?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/String_theory
     Maybe one of the names of Allah is "The Tiny String" ?

    Errr Allah may be evolving., But Muslim mind is blocked by Irrational Islamic scriptures., Hence that brain will not evolve unless they look inward and inquire the basis of Islam and the reason for books like Quran & hadith.  This  sand washed  brain  with imaginative mindset   only circles around Islamic books/scriptures/mullahs/houries and  honey rivers,  At the end of 1400 years what we have is stagnated brains   even in well educated families..

    Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything   
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Re: Evolution
     Reply #47 - May 31, 2011, 02:06 PM

    Her hero is Dawkins? I'm in love. 


    Ehm... Darwin. Not Dawkins.

    Grouchy  what is the  good reason for picking up an innocent girl  as Osama  bin Laden?    

  • Re: Evolution
     Reply #48 - May 31, 2011, 03:14 PM


    I read a lot of stuff. I've researched the topic but I don't think I know much. I'm still researching parts of genetic mutation, and macro-evolution.


    I hope you understand that macro-evolution is just  A LOT of micro-evolution. They are not two independent processes.
    micro-evolution + time = macro-evolution

    Also, irreducible complexity is a load of rubbish. It has been debunked a long time ago. If you read Michael Behe's "Darwin's Black Box", you will find that he grossly underestimates the power of natural selection and makes a lot of overwhelming assumptions that ignore every piece of evidence against them that exists. Are you familiar with the Kitzmiller vs Dover trial? Michael Behe was literally laughed out of court.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzmiller_v._Dover_Area_School_District


    Started from the bottom, now I'm here
    Started from the bottom, now my whole extended family's here

    JOIN THE CHAT
  • Re: Evolution
     Reply #49 - June 20, 2011, 08:34 PM

    i think that once you understand the logic of natural selection, you realise that evolution is inevitable and an obvious conclusion drawn from some equally obvious and undeniable observations
  • Re: Evolution
     Reply #50 - July 01, 2011, 08:02 AM

    Can someone explain to me Macro and Micro evolution? Is Micro evolution the small changes that occur over a period of time and then Macro Evolution are the huge noticeable changes after many many years?  parrot parrot

    "God didn't make us in his image, We made him in ours"
  • Re: Evolution
     Reply #51 - July 01, 2011, 08:03 AM

    Can someone explain to me Macro and Micro evolution? Is Micro evolution the small changes that occur over a period of time and then Macro Evolution are the huge noticeable changes after many many years?  parrot parrot


    http://evolution.berkeley.edu/
  • Re: Evolution
     Reply #52 - July 01, 2011, 08:06 AM

    sweet website thanks
     Smiley

    "God didn't make us in his image, We made him in ours"
  • Re: Evolution
     Reply #53 - July 01, 2011, 10:00 AM

    well the question is "What is the difference between Micro evolution and Macro evolution" and   King Koopa  throws a broad link  http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/home.php which says



    Huh! that is "one stop source  for information on evolution"??  King ... it is O.k. link., but that doesn't answer the real question of the difference between Micro evolution and Macro evolution"

    I need answer King mylord..

    Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything   
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Re: Evolution
     Reply #54 - July 01, 2011, 10:44 AM

    well the question is "What is the difference between Micro evolution and Macro evolution" and   King Koopa  throws a broad link  http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/home.php which says

    (Clicky for piccy!)

    Huh! that is "one stop source  for information on evolution"??  King ... it is O.k. link., but that doesn't answer the real question of the difference between Micro evolution and Macro evolution"

    I need answer King mylord..


    Quote
    Biological evolution, simply put, is descent with modification. This definition encompasses small-scale evolution (changes in gene frequency in a population from one generation to the next) and large-scale evolution (the descent of different species from a common ancestor over many generations). Evolution helps us to understand the history of life.


    http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/0_0_0/evo_02
  • Re: Evolution
     Reply #55 - July 01, 2011, 10:57 AM

    http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/0_0_0/evo_02

    Biological evolution, simply put, is descent with modification. This definition encompasses small-scale evolution (changes in gene frequency in a population from one generation to the next) and large-scale evolution (the descent of different species from a common ancestor over many generations). Evolution helps us to understand the history of life.

    ah.. ha! that is an answer., in other words in simpler words..
     
    Micro evolution: It  is the adaptations of species through minor gene mutations for the survival of species to the environmental stressors., that is changes within a species

    Macro evolution: Macro-evolution is the addition of new traits/new species  or a transition to a new species .  The argument for the Macro evolution is that species will change slightly over time and eventually change into something completely different and will over eons of time eventually become a new species.

    Did I get that right dear King K??



    Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything   
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Re: Evolution
     Reply #56 - July 01, 2011, 11:05 AM

    Yes. But I must warn you I wrote my scientific papers with crayons and used lots and lots of those dinosaur stickers! I like the shiny ones the most Smiley

    Jokes aside I would still like to know more about macro evolution, speciation is fascinating but I don't feel I fully get it.
  • Re: Evolution
     Reply #57 - July 01, 2011, 11:52 AM

    Yes. But I must warn you I wrote my scientific papers with crayons and used lots and lots of those dinosaur stickers! I like the shiny ones the most Smiley

     well it is all relative.,  And my background in evolutionary biology is not that different from you., may be,  you may add to crayons,   a bit of reading Darwin and reading some news  clips from scientific magazines. and I don't consider every published paper as scientific knowledge, but luckily science gives freedom to question hence wrong science can not live long unlike scriptures..
    Quote
    Jokes aside I would still like to know more about macro evolution, speciation is fascinating but I don't feel I fully get it.

    yes transition points in biological evolution is worth discussing ., not only you no one gets fully., and there are plenty of open ended questions to answer.

    with bets regards
    yeezevee

    Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything   
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Re: Evolution
     Reply #58 - July 04, 2011, 11:10 PM

    I've had a question about Evolution that hasn't been yet answered. If say a  giraffe like creature were to sprout of the world and fought for survival and lost. Would he cease to exist or would he go about and fight and survive against other creatures like it? Is there something hindering the animal for going and contesting against other species of similarity? 
  • Re: Evolution
     Reply #59 - July 04, 2011, 11:20 PM

    I've had a question about Evolution that hasn't been yet answered. If say a  giraffe like creature were to sprout of the world and fought for survival and lost. Would he cease to exist

    Yes, like you said it fought for survival & lost

    or would he go about and fight and survive against other creatures like it?

    No, once its dead, its dead.  Evolution isnt like a guiding hand (like God) - its just a simple matter of those mutations that survive will reproduce,  those that dont will not.

     
    Is there something hindering the animal for going and contesting against other species of similarity? 

    Yes, the fact that its already dead.  I recommend watching a few youtube videos on evolution, it wont take you long to get your head around it 

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCXzcPNsqGA
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zi8FfMBYCkk
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vss1VKN2rf8
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7w57_P9DZJ4

    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Previous page 1 23 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »