Posted on 07/14/2007 10:33:34 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Madonna and Bon Jovi are no match for Hawaiian flies when it comes to karaoke hits at the University of Nebraska State Museum in Lincoln. In a popular exhibit activity, visitors attempt to mimic the unique courtship calls of different species of Hawaiian Drosophila, a group of 800 different flies that may have evolved from a single species.
Fly karaoke is part of "Explore Evolution," a permanent exhibit currently at Nebraska and five other museums in the Midwest and Southwest...that explores evolutionary concepts in new ways. Such an activity is a far cry from the traditional way science museums have presented evolution, which usually included charts called phylogenies depicting ancestral relationships or a static set of fossils arranged chronologically. "Explore Evolution'' has those, too—and then some, because museum curators came to realize that they needed better ways to counter growing attacks on their integrity.
...
Under pressure from these kinds of groups, the Kansas State Board of Education in 2005 approved a curriculum that allowed the public schools to include completely unfounded challenges to the theory of evolution.
In an effort to make their case to the public, creationists raised $26 million in private donations to build the 50,000-square-foot Creation Museum in Petersburg, Ky., which opened in late May. The institution presents the biblical history of the universe. Visitors learn that biblically, dinosaurs are best explained as creatures that roamed Earth with humans. In its first month of existence, the museum drew over 49,000 visitors, according to its Web site.
"Explore Evolution," funded by a $2.8 million grant from the National Science Foundation, is one of many recent efforts by science museums to counter such resistance to evolution...
(Excerpt) Read more at sciam.com ...
[[That is, if humans evolved from more primitive lifeforms even ultimatlly from a “chemical soup”.. THEN humans evolved to believed in God..
UNless humans did not evolve at all but were MADE that way..]]
This is exactly the huge debate I spoke about- Dawkins would have us believe that we who believe in God are poor victims of delusions caused by an errant mutation that altered an otherwise useful gene to cause us to think their is a God. He contends that were either too stupid to realize that we’re poor little victims of an errant gene, or too stubborn to ‘rise above’ our poor lower understandings, and brerak free from the ‘retarding’ power of the gene.
Does Dawkins give ANY evidence that such a gene exists? Nope- not an iota- He just spews his vitriolic arrogant hypothesis while looking down his nose at all us lower life forms.
I see.. Do "ideas" come from "the Brain" or from the spirit??..
Is the human "brain" like a telephone merely a concrivance to transmit "ideas" and mechanical information??.. Because a human body does appear to be an organic machine..
Do "ideas" come from the spirit?.. and the brain merely transmits them to the body?..
The wolf does it for selfiush self-centered reason per individual, and they can’t behave in any manner other than self-preservational whereas Humans can truly reason using an absolute universal morality code- in other words- we can selflessly act for the benifit of others, and do so consistently (for hte most part- selfisness is still a problem for some) basing our descision on the welfare of others for THEIR sake only, and not our own. Wolves can indeed give the impression they are acting on behalf of others, and appear to do so selflessly, however, deeper examination shows quite the contrary
Actually, we’re talking about bee-eaters, a type of bird. And the point of this is that the birds are not reasoning; they are engaging in genetically directed behavior that supports the continued existence of their genetic line. This is an example of an adaptation that allows them to gain a competitive edge.
[[I see.. Do “ideas” come from “the Brain” or from the spirit??..]]
More precisely, from the mind- The Spirit, and I’m talking not about our spirit, but the Holy spirit (which I realize is another topic, but interesting for htis discussion non the less) however can influence the mind, but no, our spirits do not influence our minds
[[This is an example of an adaptation that allows them to gain a competitive edge]]
Ah I misunderstood what you were driving at- I thought you were infering that the beeters were reasoning and acting selflessly in order to pass along their better comunity oriented genes (although unknowingly, but driven to act for the benifit of tohers)
Dawkins could just be playing "idea chess".. a game, a gambit.. and any that play with him are trapped into a rigged game.. Dawkins eventally don't know what to believe.. and is hopeing for way to GOD without "FAITH"..
Silly boy.. Knowing good from evil will NOT make you as a GOD..
You will still be a silly human spouting lame semantics..
[[No I won’t see that because I still don’t know what a KIND is. Your link to baramin has nothing at all that says horizontal gene flow is a defining characteristic of a baramin. Where did you get that idea?]]
Oh gosh, I never said that. Has that notion been what’s cuasing hte misunderstanding? Leteral gene transference is the only was NEW information can be ‘implanted’ in dissimiliar KINDS and result in a spcesi possibly beginning a journey toward becoming a new KIND- but Baraminology doesn’t address this because that’s not what Baraminology is about- it’s simply a classification of KINDS based on the linnean classification system which was inplace for many years, and accepted, but did infact have some problems, as do ALL classification systems because of hte difficulties of classifying. Baraminology improves on the Linnean system, and fits quite well with the terminology of KINDS
[[Dawkins could just be playing “idea chess”.. a game, a gambit.. and any that play with him are trapped into a rigged game..]]
It’s not really rigged for those who aren’t dogmatic about the idea that there is no God. Dawkins as I said offers no evidence and his Hypothesis is just that- an A Priori hypothesis that takes as much faith to beleive as does believing in God- only he either doesn’;t realize it, or he is doing as you say, trying to justify his rejection of God.
“Wolves can indeed give the impression they are acting on behalf of others, and appear to do so selflessly, however, deeper examination shows quite the contrary.”
Even if this statement is correct, doesn’t that behavior still work to support the entire group? We aren’t talking about a school of fish where they are all trying to get in the middle, we’re talkiing about intelligent, sophisiticated animals that have evolved behavioral patterns specifically to ensure the continuation of a genetic line. Cooperative activites, well developed social order, and self-interest tempered by group needs are vital to this animal’s existance. Again, how is this different from humans?
Our "soul", our "minds", our "spirits".. our 'brain"..
Where does one begin and other end?...
Answer carefully.. Does or even Can anyone know this absolutely?..
Jesus walking on unfrozen water and inviting some of us to do the same..
Challenges many things.. as true..
A human being is ‘built’ of many levels. When Jesus told Nicademus that ‘unless a man is born of water (birth from the amniotic fluid) and of the Spirit’ he cannot enter into the kingdom of Heaven, Jesus was expressing this ‘levels of reality’ message. The body has cellular level life. If the body reaches a certain complexity, it has a sort of holographic ability to comprehend its environment and eventually conceive of self in that environment, and if the complexity of the organism reaches a ‘pre-set’ level, the being can attain yet another level, that of spirit reality. Jesus made it plain that to have that level for living the being had to be ‘born again’ by God’s Spirit. Do each of these realities have spacetime components associated with them?One would think so since for action to occur there needs be time and for things to manifest physically (Jesus has a resurrected body thingy) there must be space.
Space?... We MAY be swimming in dark energy/matter.. as a metaphorical "fish".. also planets and galaxys(matter).. This universe may be an "ocean" of dark energy/matter.. and what "WE" see as matter/energy could be "light" energy/matter.. (to coin a term).. i.e. SPACE may NOT be empty(vacuum)..
At least thats an interesting "meme" to play with..
I didn't claim it was a universal solution, merely an example of how mutation can make an organism more adapted to its environment. That was precisely your question which I'll recap for definiteness.
Is it really possible for a species to become suited to its environment through a random process of mutation?I think my example addressed every single point.
I hope I didn't give the impression that this is the only way organism can adapt aided by random changes, there are many others like sex and cross over and lateral transfer to name a few.
Also, this begs the question of how the organism knows how to make changes in it’s own genes.
It didn't beg that question at all, you just added it on. In any case, there is no such mechanism known although some folks speculate about ideas like evolved evolvability. And there's some evidence that organisms can become more likely to change when the environment "stresses" them. Who knows, maybe some such thing will become an accepted part of the theory like endosymbiosis has.
the odds against some random mutation serendipitously making bacteria eat nylon, just when they really need to, are so much against it as to make it a practical impossibility.
This is a standard creationist ignorance about probabality and you should rid yourelf of it. It is only reasonable to be impressed by probabilities in a prior sense on the total situation.
then shouldn’t we at least consider the possibility that there is a guiding hand behind all life?
I'd say no. Historically that kind of reasoning has proved very unreliable. Naturalistic reasoning, on the other hand, has. As a conservative, I will stick with the historical lessons.
Gotta go. Bye.
I am still waiting for the first evolutionary “scientist” to be able to create life with a lightning bolt and a bunch of amino acids. It kinda looks like probability of choice 1 equals 0.
[[If you accept that dogs are a KIND (which I think you do), and that the world is +- 6000 years old (which I think you do).]]
The bible isn’t specific about how old the earth is, but there are soem clues about it being between 6000 to 10000 or so years old- I’ll not take a stand on how many thousand years it is, but will point out the clues and leave it to others to decide. And yes, a Dog is a KIND
[[then you accept that evolution happens hundreds of times faster than science says it does.
You can’t have it both ways. If wolves, dogs, foxes and coyotes can all come from a single dog KIND in 6000 years then there is no problem at all with ALL life coming from a common ancestor in 3,500,000,000 years.]]
Well yes there is, The Dog Kind remains a Dog Kind, no matter the amou8nt of microevolution taking place, either naturally or artificially- We know adaption happens very quickly, however Adaption relies on species specific gene dominence which is encoded into genes and can be altered quickly through mutations within the information parameters which allow for alterations within these “biological limits” (there, that is the word for the ‘caps’ I’ve been using) The Domestic Dog went through specialized artificial adaption/gene manipulation in a very directed manner controlled by man and our understanding of character traits, so this really can’t be used as an argument for ‘quick macroevolution’ for both that reason, and the reason that it is microevolution, not macro- which is a biological impossibility.
[[Second, the random nature of mutations is not a road block at all as long as there are a sufficient number of them.]]
The mathematics for KIND TRansforming mutations ( if it were even possible) refute your statement, and is a roadblock- the mathematics scientists at the scientific symposium in chicago higjlighted this issue. Some small species specific microevolutionary changes caused by mutations in species are simple and not very complicated, and work within the parameters of biological limitations-
[[Just to note, you are again ignoring natural selection. Random mutation is the least important part of evolution, it is natural selection that does the shaping. As long as you continue to ignore it, you are arguing against strawman.]]
I’m not ignoring that at all- the fact is that ‘benifical mutations’ take a very long time- too long for enough to accumulate before the negative wipe the species out altogether If we’re arguing macroevolution (you’re discussing two seperate issues at once) I fully realize natural selection is very important- however, the science behind the randomness and accumulation of ‘benificial mutations’ shows that this is VERY important concideration when arguing for macroevolution and suggesting that mutations can lead to major organ/complex system changes in species that move htem to another KIND (and by the way, selective breeding cuases degredation from the original- not improvement- the wolf is still the ultimate predator- the coyote and domestic dogs are degredations)
[[Or maybe there is no eternal damnation in the first place.]]
Quite hte gamble to take the chance that there might not be- don’t you think?
[[No we aren’t, because your traffic cop and caps are figments of your imagination that were arbitrarily created to enforce a “law” that you made up.]]
I made up biological limits? Wow- the cop is illustrative and not a literal seperate figure as I explained in another post to you. Ridicule the annalogy if you like, but hte premise is solid.
[[No I really don’t and neither do you or you would be able to define it. Example...
Species: A species consists of individual organisms that are very similar in appearance, anatomy, physiology, and genetics due to having relatively recent common ancestors.]]
Mmm yes I do, and so do you, and you’re dancing here- Sorry- I don’t dance. KINDS are explained in detail in the link I gave, and the evidence in nature and in biology and also in the fossil records supports KINDS just find
[[No, I don’t know that either, care to give an example of an abominable KIND?]]
I gave you several already in previous posts- Fruit flies with legs where their eyes are as result of allowing simulated millions of years of mutations resulted in what? Yes, another fruitfly- the same KIND- the fruit flies remained fruitflies- We found veryclear evidence that mutations ONLY work on the instructions available to them and can’t create new organs not specific to the species KIND
[[Things that exists can be defined. If you can’t define it either does not exist or you don’t understand what you are talking about]]
What doesn’t exist? I’m stating that there are problems but are so far down the in regards to classifying certain KINDS that they do absolutely nothing to undermine the idea of KINDS at all- the problems involve actual species- and quite frankly, the Phylogenic system also has such problems categorizing certain species
[[I do note that you provided a link. Are you saying that when you say KIND you mean baramin as defined at that link?]]
No Baramin is the classification of KINDS- it’s not KINDS itself. I’m leaving for awhile- will be back later tonight.
They can't be offset in a closed system. The bricks need specific guided information and energy to be ordered into a neat stack. When it occurs without guided energy (i.e. work) total entropy decreases and therfore the the second law is violated.
The second law mandates that the system must go, on average, to higher states of entropy or remain in equilibrium (i.e. max entropy) sans an outside influence.
In an open system, on the other hand, a worker can come in and place the bricks in a neat stack. Information and energy are brought in from the outside. And the second law is not violated. But for a neat stack to occur randomly is impossible.
Those who argue that the second law is not violated usually use the excuse that it's because the earth is an open localized system. But they ignore the importance of information which guides energy. And although the earth is indeed an open system (at least in a local temporal sense) the universe is not.
What country is this, again?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.