Ohio's Critical Analysis of Evolution

Critical Evaluation of Evolution ^ | March 2004 | Ohio State Board of Education

[Junior]

I don't understand this hesitance in evolutionists to say that more complex is better.

Because "better" is a subjective term.

[js1138]

Evolution isn't about better, or even about more complex. Evolution happens all the time in the world without significant increases in complexity.

But increases in complexity are possible, and when they result in reproductively fit organisms, they stick.

[biblewonk]

Because "better" is a subjective term.

Yup that seems to be the problem.

[biblewonk]

OK, so I want to see an example of an increase in complexity at a DNA level that is more survivable, which may also be a subjective term, that has happened "all around us".

[longshadow]

troll-free placemarker (regretably, no trolls died in the process of making this placemarker)

[js1138]

http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/creation/polyploidy.html

[js1138]

http://faculty.washington.edu/comai/polyploidy.htm

[jennyp]

Data sculpture is not scholarship

"Data sculpture". I love it!

[js1138]

http://www.emc.maricopa.edu/faculty/farabee/BIOBK/BioBookEVOLII.html

[biblewonk]

In your own words give me an example.....

[js1138]

http://www.biologie.uni-hamburg.de/b-online/e37/37d.htm

[Fester Chugabrew]

BTW, what is it with you and questions? Are you trying to lead people into tripping up so that you can cry, "Aha! You're wrong so I'm right!" That would only work if we actually knew your position (other than being contrarian, that is).

Well, questions ARE part of scientific method, right? I would like to think my questions are not aimed at shooting someone down in order to make myself look smart, but I DO have an ego and it IS invested here, so you are right in being suspicious of my motives.

If you wish to query me with questions to see where I stand on these things or how I would give an answer, that's fine. It may help you understand why I believe the way I do about this stuff.

But as for my overall aim in this dialog, I would hope at least to convince the reader that the proposition of intelligent design being an integral part of our universe is not at all preposterous or irrational; that scientific method can operate just fine without rendering a final judgment on the presence or absence of a higher being; that education may free leave the same as an open question without going into details about relgious dogma.

[PatrickHenry]

In your own words, 10 words or less, explain the universe. If you refuse, or if you fail to satisfy me, I win.

[Fester Chugabrew]

free

[js1138]

What is your standard for complexity? I would say there are numerous possible standards, but chromosome count is easy to visualize.

I think you could argue that variations in existing genes is not what we ordinarily think of as an increase in complexity. It is possible, however to get large variations in form and appearance with trivial variations in genes. For example there is an insect that can vary its leg count with a single mutation. There are rats whose ability to smell can be increased by a thousandfold with a single mutation.

Bu increases in chrosome count offers a platform for building more complexity by successive variation. Like adding more disk space to your computer, it is initially blank, but offers room for expansion.

The articles I linked to offer some simple, observable examples of variation in chrosome count.

[js1138]

God did it.
Don't ask how it works.

[Elsie]

A momentary lapse on my part.

Perhaps another lapse has occurred...

 

---

 

I posted this article because it demonstrates my contention that those who are upset about evolution are, in fact, opposed to all of science, and all of the methods and assumptions of science.
This seems to me to be a mighty inclusive statement.  I'm upset , but I do not consider myself to be as you've described here.

 

---

 

On a rather more narrow point, there was for many years, an objection to allowing women to have anesthesia during childbirth, specifically because the Bible declared that women should suffer in childbirth.

No, it does NOT say this:

Genesis 3:16

 To the woman he said, "I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing; with pain you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you."

It says they WILL.

[jennyp]

I think I love you.

<sigh> You are so easily smitten! =:-D

[Elsie]

Which is not something evolutionists say.

OH?

Please describe this 'middle' ground between GOD and Chance.

[Elsie]

it is the quest to understand the underlying mechanisms that lead to life-as-we-know-it ....

but boys.... if this leads to 'god', will you automatically dismiss it?