Evolution is........

[Bicoastal]

Poll question: Evolution is........

"An Evolution poll on on DU?! No way!"

Sorry, but after today's visit to the American Natural History museum in NYC, I'm damned curious to find out if this "controversial issue" is still on anyone's mind around here.

[Bobbieo]

1. We evolved from the sea!!!!!

[GreenPartyVoter]

26. Maybe even from Mars microbes that crash landed in the sea.

[Uncle Joe]

31. Yes, I believe we are the product of stardust,

comets crashing to a barren earth bringing the building blocks of life, if you think about it, the planets such as earth resemble an egg and comets resemble a sperm cell. Under this scenario, our universe would be the equivalent of a uterus.

[GreenPartyVoter]

40. I like your metaphor.

[Kutjara]

2. There's controversy and there's controversy.

Evolution is "controversial" in the sense that some of the specific details of how it works are still being figured out. Whether the mechanism is one of punctuated equilbrium or continuous change and how exactly genetic mutation manifests itself in specific instances are all open to debate, discussion and theorization. Quite correctly, genuine controversy is at the root of this rapidly developing field.

Evolution is, however, not "controversial" in the sense that fundies define the word. Put simply, there is no better theory for describing the manifestations of life on this planet, and the theory is backed up by a large amount of physical evidence. Creationism and "intelligent design" are not alternative explanations because they explain nothing. Indeed, they assume what they purport to explain.

Calling evolution vs. creationism a controversy is to degrate the word into incoherence. You might as well say that quantum physics vs. Harry Potter is a controversy.

[XemaSab]

7. What do you have against Harry Potter????

:grr:

Or better yet, what do you have against quantum physics?

:grr: :grr:

[Kutjara]

9. Oh dear, I have defiled the sacred earth of Potterdom.

I am heartfully sorry. ;)

Actually, no slur against the esteemed Master Potter was intended. That said, I would be reluctant to read The Halfblood Prince in preparation for my physics final.

[XemaSab]

12. How about reading it in lieu of your physics final?

:shrug: :P

[Kutjara]

18. I did far too much of that during my college days,...

...which goes a long way towards explaining my exam results.

[Lautremont]

3. MY GRANDFATHER WAS NOT AN APE!

Look, I can prove it. Here's a photo of us together:

Man, I wish I still owned that hat. I looked pretty good in it.

[Quantess]

11. The chimp is BJ, and the actor is "The Bear", do I have that correct?

[Lautremont]

19. More or less.

[w13rd0]

4. I think that we, as a species...

...have to realize a new form of evolution now, moving from our evolution as a species to our evolution as an organism, or a collective. If we are to evolve to the next stage, in a thousand or a million years, we need to find ways to operate in a fashion that...enhances our potential and expands our boundaries. Too many eggs on this basket.

[bananas]

10. We are evolving to the next stage

that's how it works.

[krispos42]

17. Why would we evolve any more?

Aside from the occasional Darwin award, what is driving our bodies to evolve?

We fight diseases with drugs and surgery.

We fix eyesight with lenses and lasers.

We fix missing limbs with prostetics.

We immunize now against diseases that in the past have laid waste to humanity.

We have tools to protect us against dangerous predators.

We have tools to protect us against changes in the environment.

We have tools and techniques to maintain our food supplies year-round.

I suppose we could argue about economic Darwinism, but that changes too fast, I believe to give evolution time to work.

I can envision our society evolving and our technology evolving. But us, as a species?

[Strelnikov_]

21. Definitely something I have pondered

And we protect many many fledging Darwin award winners from themselves through proactive enforcement and regulation.

In other words, modern society protects those who are not the sharpest knives in the drawer. In other words, the Freepers.


My biggest concern is the effect of modern medicine on our immunity. As someone who takes 'Collapse of Complex Societies' seriously, will we someday 'engineer' the species to a point where if the modern medical system is destroyed, through societal collapse, will we be pushed to the brink as a species?

[Swamp Rat]

38. "Crack that whip..."

:D

[Oak2004]

27. Oh we are evolving, and our technology is intimately connected to the evolution

I recall (sorry no links) that about a year or so ago a researcher showed that there has been a measurable increase in cranial size between contemporary humans and humans alive just 600 years ago.
It would make sense that there would be a feedback loop here -- the more technology we create, the more we adapt to being technological creatures (including bigger brains).

After all the human hand adapted to be better able to manipulate objects as we developed better and better stone tools Many decidedly non-human apes make and use stone tools -- the big difference came when we began to walk upright and could *carry* our tools with us. We had reason to invest more time and care in making tools, and our brains and hands evolved to take advantage of the new opportunities.

Animals don't evolve just in response to negative forces: they evolve in response to positive opportunities, too.

[Conan_The_Barbarian]

29. What is the mechanism for this adaption?

According to you evolution occurs simply as the need for certain adaptations arises.

Natural Selection is agreed by all those that believe in evolution to be the mechanism through which the process takes place. What you are describing sounds to be more like a neural adaptation which is the result of the changing conditions in which our race lives, however there would be no reason for this adaptation to have occured at a genetic and hereditary level. Meaning those same ancestors you're describing had the exact same capacity for the same neural adaptation that we have supposedly developed. What is the mechanism for your positive feedback loop hypothesis? Are you proposing there could possibly be some kind of unidentified polymer/macromolecule which slightly tweaks chromosome configuration during meosis to better suit the next generation of the species based off of the tasks that the parent perfomed? Species evolve and adapt to changing conditions because of genetic mutation and variation. Offspring born with a trait which gives them an advantage over those which do not possess such a trait are more likely to procreate and pass on that trait and possibly give birth to offspring with that same trait but emphasized to higher degree.

Evolution gave homonids the ability to learn. When the obivously when one homonid realized that smacking the bones of an animal carcass with a rock got at the bone marrow those around him realized the advantage of doing so, so the behavior itself proliferated. So genetic adaptation lead to a brain capable of learning, which resulted in the behavior adaptation of using simple tools. So now those homonids born with more sensitive, and delicate hands, along with more upright backs had the evolutionary advantage because of this discovery and thus had more offspring. A species doesn't evolve unless those without the advantages die out. There is no reason for a trait to proliferate throughout a population if everyone in that population is living comfortably and producing fertile offspring.

Also, everyone also seems to forget, correlation does not mean causality. Remeber I can put the number of pirates on the X-axis, and average global temperature on the Y and I'll get some kind of correlation between the two variables. Could it possibly be that has humans became more technologically advanced they began to have higher living standards, and ate more regularly and nutritionally that their bodies were able to develop under more and more ideal conditions?

[Oak2004]

35. The same one as always:

more intelligent humans do better and so mate more easily and have more surviving children, just as more agile hands make better tools which bring home more meat/plow more fields, leading to more mates and more surviving children.

If you doubt this look at the relative marriage prospects of a male janitor versus a male accountant ("male" because we're still a sexist society and there's evidence that women do select on the basis of who is the better provider). The accountant in fact has a much better chance of finding a wife, and the janitor is in danger of never marrying (again there's recent research on this, but I don't bookmark everything and my bookmarks are a mess scattered across five computers in any case). The janitor, of course, might still have children, but in 21st century America the prospects for single-parent kids are bad and getting worse.

[Conan_The_Barbarian]

42. follow up

Here is an interesting link let's crunch some numbers:
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/national/20050515_CLASS_GRAPHIC/index_04.html

Okay so we've got an accountant. to be a legitimate accountant, you need a masters so bam, 97 perctile education
Average income is 65,000 per year as an accountant, not too shabby.
accumulated wealth, how about 100,000-500,000
an job is accounting so that just works itself out.
So we have somone who is clearly established himself in the top 5th of society. Finding a mate won't be difficult.

What about the other 4/5's of the population?
Life expectancy in general for the population is 70 something currently I believe and infant mortality is quite low. Part of our population isn't dieing off because their brain sizes are smaller. Hypothetically lets say the accountant happens to have a child who for some reason is significantly less intelligent than he is and doesn't make it through college. Is he going to die off because of it? Yes the accountant has the mating advantage but there is no reason why his genes will significantly proliferate. Most people have kids, no matter what income bracket.

So are you claiming that this minority population within another globally racial minority has resulted in a larger average brain size? Sounds to me just like a bit of isolated genetic variation. Get back to me in 250,000 years or so.

" recall (sorry no links) that about a year or so ago a researcher showed that there has been a measurable increase in cranial size between contemporary humans and humans alive just 600 years ago."

Also, just a quick question. Are you speaking about the world in general, or just the industrialized world? Are you implying that White North Americans are inherently more intelligent from birth than their 3rd world counterparts? How and why would cranial size also increase in the 3rd world?

[greyl]

49. Our culture isn't all of humanity. - it doesn't represent what being human means.

Unfortunately, it's doing a pretty bang up job of encouraging humanity's extinction.

[The2ndWheel]

23. Evolve to the next stage?

What does that even mean? Realize a new form of evolution? What? Evolution is not progress. Evolution is not linear. We don't get to control it, but we try, and that's why we'll take life down with us.

[damntexdem]

5. Well, 'sensible and self-evident' was the best alternative given.

But in fact, evolution is sensible and well-supported by evidence. Self-evident just doesn't cut it in science -- supported by the evidence is essential.

[BlooInBloo]

6. Indeed, it's non-self-evident in the extreme. That's the whole fucking point....

... of having mountains upon mountains of evidence.

Sigh. Woulda been SO much better if the alternative given was "A damn good game, and the only one in town".

[Hosnon]

8. Sensible and, upon reviewing the evidence, nearly self-evident.

That's how I'd phrase it.

[BlooInBloo]

14. lol! Um, "self-evident" doesn't mean what you think it means. But that's funny-ass shit tho!! LOLOL!

[Hosnon]

16. Good catch. I'll update my usage. nt

[Bucky]

13. Have you ever noticed how a banana fits perfectly in your hand? That proves Genesis is true!

I saw a Kirk Cameron video on this.

[BlooInBloo]

15. i LOVE that!!! it RULES!! ROFLMAO!!!

That's one instance where no commentary can truly suffice.

http://www.wayofthemaster.com/

By GOD i love religion. No one else could make that shit up. Well, except that they did.

:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:

[bleedingheart]

37. I just went to that site and all I had to hear was....

"this is about bypassing the intellect"....bwahahahaha

[Hunter_1253]

20. I love that banana video

I love that banana fits in your hand argument. It gets me every time.

When you suggest that maybe your hand evolved around gripping the banana, the fundie goes nuts.

[Bucky]

25. That's because they *know* what you mean by "gripping the banana"

:spank: <== they also know what I mean by "spanking the smily"

[bleedingheart]

36. I just read this part of this thread and I am having trouble breathing

...some of yinz DUers are so funny.....

I have to go get some water...

[BlooInBloo]

45. mmmm - I miss Pittsburgh....

[greyl]

50. Yet, how many of us peel it the "wrong" way? ;)

According to the relevant experts in the field, a banana should be opened from the tip, not from the stem.
1. No bruising
2. Easier
2. Nice little stem handle to keep hands clean

[Annces]

22. an incomplete theory with physical evidence

that seems to satisfy many scientifically oriented individuals. However artists, poets, mystics are not satisfied with a piece of the puzzle presented as the whole puzzle.

[Bill McBlueState]

30. which individuals are satisifed?

Certainly not biologists; they'd be out of a job if they were satisfied with the current understanding of evolution.

[Annces]

33. I have had professors who were quite satisfied with the

theory of evolution, in that they thought it explained everything about life on earth and how it has changed and developed. They were still interested in delving deeper, but they thought the theory was there in its entirety.

[Arugula Latte]

34. It's the framework for all of the natural sciences.

Saying it's a theory is like saying it's a theory that the world is round.

We have observed evolution in our lifetimes -- organisms adapt and change -- in other words EVOLVE. That's a FACT.

[Annces]

41. Many scientists would say the theory of evolution

covers all questions about how animals have evolved. And I disagree with this. I think there is scientific evidence behind Darwin's theories, however they do not cover all the whys and wherefores. They are mechanistic. They do not take into consideration a creator, who is behind the creation, and that the creator has certain plans, of which we are not capable of comprehending.

The earth is round is not a theory. There is no dispute about that. We can all agree about the definition of a circle and the earth fits that definition. However evolutionists like to explain things like instincts, or behaviors, or colorations schemes, all as the result of mating factors and success at reproduction, and I think that does not cover it, not nearly. It explains a portion of it, as I said originally.

[Bill McBlueState]

43. is there evidence for a creator?

How would one test the hypothesis that there is a creator? If such a test were to show that a creator exists, and if that result were verifiable and repeatable, than scientists would incorporate a creator into the theory of the origin of species.

So far, that hasn't happened, which is an important null result. With all the polls showing how overwhelming numbers of the world's people believe in a creator, you might expect someone to have found empirical evidence of one.

[Annces]

47. evidence of a creator

that is subjective. Science is limited in what it can explain.

You are here on the earth, as a result of a direct link to millions of creatures that came before you. What is the evidence that you care about how you came to be here and your inner relationship to those who came before you?

[BlooInBloo]

46. ROFLMAO!!!!

[porphyrian]

24. Here's where I come down with it, and a link to a test about it.

While the "test" isn't really all that scientific, the data used in it is, from what I can tell.

[mvd]

28. Not a controversy in my mind

Evolution has occurred. Even if God had a plan, God obviously let nature and evolution play itself out. And creationism is a total joke.

[TZ]

32. Evolution and DNA

So I work in the sciences and we have lots of journals lying around. I recently saw an article in Nature which makes a good point. To the people who believe that there is no "proof" of evolution you should point out that they should then not believe in any DNA results used in courts because fundamentally that is really the same thing because at its most basic level evolution is really the change in genetic traits over time and that the testing based on the genetic differences/similarities in genes is all based on this underlying principle. But thats probably too complex an idea for the fundies to comphrehend...like the fact that there are complex mathematical equations which illustrate evolution....

[frogmarch]

39. People who don't believe in organic evolution

are in the same category as flat-earthers, imo.

[noonwitch]

44. Evolution is scientific truth and Genesis is spiritual truth

My personal view is that Genesis is symbolically describing man's jump from animal to human.

[Orsino]

48. Evolution is fact...

...unless one considers seriously that a billion-year fossil record might have been forged by Lucifer.

Evolution happened. Period. Serious inquiry should be directed at understanding the processes by which it occurred.

[OxQQme]

51. Both are true

But we didn't evolve from the animal kingdom or from the "chaos soup".
I'm somewhat of a self-learned amateur with an interest in the humanity that left records of their
world circa Mesopotamia,the oldest 'known' recorded Civilization.
Cities not camps.
Intelligence exhibited beyond any previous.
Right there in the heart of what's now known as Iraq.
The remains of those who lived in those times tell quite a story taken in their entirety.
Several hundred thousand of those pieces dug up and categorized and moved to private collections
and museums and libraries and studied by 'scholars' over centuries, tell and show, in the form of pictographs, that the knowledge of geometry, written language and record keeping, spacial thinking, musical instruments, written and performed music, the wheel, the kiln, high-rise buildings, streets, marketplaces, granaries, schools, wharves, metallurgy, medicine, surgery, textile making, agriculture, irrigation, ships and navigation, international trade, weights and measures, kingship, laws, justice, domestic animals and zoos, warfare, artisanship, prostitution, and above all: the knowledge and study of the 'heavens' was all brought here from those who we are genetically
related to, 'The Lofty Ones'. Those who from Heaven to Earth had come.
The sophistication in celestial knowledge-attributed by the Sumerians to the astronauts who had
come from 'Marduk'. The stars were identified, grouped together into constellations, given names, and located in the heavens. All the constellations we now recognize are listed in Sumerian astronomical
tablets in their correct order and by names which we have been using to this very day.
The twelve astronomical 'houses' (Virgo, Gemini, Libra, etc)names are still the same.
Knowledge of the earths Axis precession, which takes a few lifetimes to shift one degree, was known and recorded.
Measuring the earth and delineating it into latitudes and longitudes.


Just a few links if you're interested:
Cartography:
http://www.rain.org/gis/catal-hyuk-map.html

Record keeping:
http://www.brown.edu/Facilities/University_Library/libs/hay/focus/cuneiform/

Geometry:
http://it.stlawu.edu/~dmelvill/mesomath/tablets/YBC7289.html

Misc:
http://www.halexandria.org/dward367.htm

We ARE Stardust.
Genetically manipulated.
We have 'eaten' from The Tree of Knowledge but not The Tree of Life.
Yet.


flame suit on, shields up