Fact is, this theory is under attack (Evolution Revolution Alert)

Baltimoresun.com ^ | 5 Feb 2005 | Arthur Hirsch

[gobucks]

ELKTON - Charles Darwin and his intellectual descendants have taken a lashing here lately.

With the Cecil County Board of Education about to vote on a new high school biology textbook, some school board members are asking whether students should be taught that the theory of evolution, a fundamental tenet of modern science, falls short of explaining how life on Earth took shape.

*snip*

The politically conservative county of about 90,000 people bordering Pennsylvania and Delaware is joining communities around the country that are publicly stirring this stew of science, education and faith.

*snip*

At the Board of Education's regular monthly meeting Feb. 14, the five voting board members are scheduled to decide whether to accept the new edition of the book and might discuss Herold's call for new anti-evolution materials in addition to the book.

*snip*

The consensus in mainstream science, represented in such organizations as the National Academy of Sciences, the American Institute of Biological Sciences, the Smithsonian Institution and the American Museum of Natural History, was, in effect, captured in 31 pages of text and illustrations published in November in National Geographic magazine. In big red letters, the magazine cover asks: "WAS DARWIN WRONG?" In bigger letters inside, the answer is: "NO. The evidence for Evolution is overwhelming."

*snip*

Joel Cracraft, immediate past president of the American Institute of Biological Sciences, compared the scientific agreement on evolutionary theory to "the Earth revolving around the sun."

*snip*

Then there's the matter of teaching the meaning and method of good science.

"The issue is science," Roberts said. "What is science, and, if there's a conflicting view, does it meet the rigor of science we're seeking?"

[gobucks]

Truer words were never posted.

Not any more...

Proverbs 1:22

"You simpletons!" she cries. "How long will you go on being simpleminded? How long will you mockers relish your mocking? How long will you fools fight the facts? 23Come here and listen to me! I'll pour out the spirit of wisdom upon you and make you wise.

[Fester Chugabrew]

Checked out the first link briefly. These appear to be bones, not fossils. How do we know these were found as a whole as opposed to fabricated? How are we supposed to know whether these particular bones lend credence to the notion that whales once had hips or legs? What benefit would there be in terms of survival for natural selection to eliminate the same? Why did natural selection deprive humans of the obvious benefit of gills?

Please be advised that whatever you propose in the way of an answer will not be received as an article of fact, but as an article of faith.

[Rudder]

I want to see a definite prediction that bears fruit, i.e., starting with simple organisms, without purposeful prior selection, a demonstration of enviromental conditions forcing a change in species.

Typicaly human investigators don't live long enough to observe speciation in animals. However, the rapid evolution response of bacteria to the stressor of antibiotics is a well-documented phenomenon that has been known for many years.

[Dimensio]

No. The mechanics of gravity are well known. And I'm not about to get into some stupid 'gotcha' comparison of Newtonian physics and Relativity.

I'm not trying to pull you into that game. I'm merely pointing out that even when the mechanics of a process are known, it is not always possible to preduct the ultimate outcome of an event that will utilize that process.

And I'm not talking in the sense of " we see a progression of evidence in the fossil record, therefore, we predict a progression of evidence in the fossil record " crap. That is a tautology.

You're right. The progression of evidence in the fossil record was made after it was predicted, thus that would count as a successful prediction of the theory, not a tautology.

As for the trap of explaining mechanics, lets just say that the laws governing the motion of planets around the sun can predict within a rather good degree of accuracy where those planets will be 10 years from now.

A giant asteroid hitting one of the planets and knocking it out of orbit would falsify the prediction, but this would not falsify what we know about the laws of motion.

[bvw]

Found behind the potter's shed, eh?

[Right Wing Professor]

Yeah sure, you obviously have never had a single class in thermo.

Anyone who repeatedly uses the phrase 'thermodynamic mechanism' surely never has.

[Doctor Stochastic]

Nor are the wood boring beetles, nor shipworms, nor barnicles, nor opossums.

[Fester Chugabrew]

Perhaps because you slept through your science classes.

As I recall, my science classes did not make a big deal out of evolution. Hardly even mentioned it. With respect to Jr. High biology my grades were excellent.

[FastCoyote]

Check #337, a fossil whale with legs and arms. Oooops, guess that's impossible.

My point with the modern humpback skeleton is that it even has floating pelvic bones, and there are descriptions from whalers with even greater vestigial structures depending on the species, etc. Believe what you want. I'm going with the story visible in the bones.

[Right Wing Professor]

How do we know these were found as a whole as opposed to fabricated?

How do we know you're not a space alien?

[Right Wing Professor]

With respect to Jr. High biology my grades were excellent.

No doubt. Social promotion, I dare say.

[Tench_Coxe]

"Typicaly human investigators don't live long enough to observe speciation in animals. However, the rapid evolution response of bacteria to the stressor of antibiotics is a well-documented phenomenon that has been known for many years."

True. But propose an experiment. Take a bacteria with flagella, then create environmental conditions in which those flagella are not conducive to functioning well in that environment ( or, conversely, take a simple cell organism without flagella, and produce an environment in which they are necessary to function ), and slowly change the environment to produce the necessary changes ( intermediate forms ) for the characteristics to evolve.
Successful, this establishes a certain baseline case to formulate prediction, and have it verified by discovery. I haven't seen this yet.

[Fester Chugabrew]

Okay. I see what you mean in #337. I just can't infer by necessity that the presence of such bones is to be interpreted as a vestigial aspect of evolutionary history. At the same time I must accord a great deal of respect to the aptitude with which these ancient components have been assembled and documented.

[Tench_Coxe]

"A giant asteroid hitting one of the planets and knocking it out of orbit would falsify the prediction, but this would not falsify what we know about the laws of motion."

OK. Let's accept this argument.
Now, knowing a trajectory of the asteroid, and it's mass, one can go back and determine the results.
Can you say the same for providing environmental conditions and predicting an end result?

[balrog666]

You said 'scientists'. I've not noticed elsewhere you lack literacy. That's a second lie, Mr. Christian.

Is he, or is he not, an incarnation of the much reviled ALS?

[Fester Chugabrew]

Social promotion, I dare say.

Ha! Wish I had that kind of clout.

[FastCoyote]

"Anyone who repeatedly uses the phrase 'thermodynamic mechanism' surely never has"

That's right, all those engineering credits were a waste. And my hobby of pulsejet combustion gives me no opportunity to use thermodynamic theory. And work debunking envirowackos for the American Nuclear Energy Council gave me no opportunity to debunk similar thermodynamic falacies. And my in-house combustion code I wrote for an airplane simulator is completely wrong after countless hours of checking.

Yup, I'm stupid as a brick, do doubt about it. And did you have a factual disagreement with something I said, or were you just bloviating?

[PatrickHenry]

Been away about 6 hours. Just got back from a friend's wedding party. All outstanding posts to me are gonna just fade into cyber oblivion.

[Right Wing Professor]

. Government Scientist is an oxymoron, and especially in the Life Sciences, government scientists are typically an inferior lot. So we have this inferior lot leading around the best brains in the business. It's not awful, but our progress could have been much greater if they would get out of the way.

Disagree. Drug companies do a lot of biological research. I know good scientists both there and in NIH labs. They both have to deal with bureaucratic nonsense, in different ways.

[Rudder]

Sex is a selective pressure, and it enables intervention. Thus, human beings selectively bred animals to elmininate unwanted traits and to maximize preferred traits. The examples are abundant.