Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: longshadow
Consider the word *evolve*. The definition of the word itself forces one to run the question "evolve from what?" back, how far back does one go? At what point does one stop and why? What/who has determined evolution's starting point? Man? Then it's whatever he wants it to be isn't it, and he will defend to death won't he. I can see that *in theory* the Theory of Evolution doesn't *have to* depend on any Theory of Origion but how does one *know* it doesn't?

What is are the specific reasons the theory of evolution cannot include origin of life? Why must the two theories be separated??

Touch me with your Noodly Appendage please..... :-)

93 posted on 08/29/2005 6:09:50 PM PDT by dynoman (Objectivity is the essence of intelligence. - Marylin vos Savant)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies ]


To: dynoman; PatrickHenry
The definition of the word itself forces one to run the question "evolve from what?" back, how far back does one go?

Back to the first biological entity capable of passing on heritable traits to its subsequent generation, variation of those traits, and upon which natural selection can act, as I have previously explained to you.

At what point does one stop and why?

Asked and answered.

What/who has determined evolution's starting point? Man?

All scientific theories have a scope that is limited to the phenomona which are subject to the processes or mechanisms described by the theory. Evolution is about heritable traits being passed on to subsequent generations, those traits having variations across the population, and the population being subject to natural selection. Therefore, it's starting point is the earliest biological population that is capable of being characterized by that process. By definition, the first living organism arose from some other process (whether it be some form of abiogenesis, or seedlings planted by space aliens or deities.) Therefore it can't be described by the same processes that describe Evolution, as it is a different phenomona. This is identical to why the theory of the origin of water is fundamentally distinct from the theory of water dynamics, i.e., Hydrology. As I said in my last post: "Different processes, different phenomona, different theories." Which word didn't you understand?

Then it's whatever he wants it to be isn't it, and he will defend to death won't he.

No, as I have just painstakingly explained for you yet again. ("Different processes, different phenomona, different theories." Which word didn't you understand?)

I can see that *in theory* the Theory of Evolution doesn't *have to* depend on any Theory of Origion [sic] but how does one *know* it doesn't?

By paying attention to the argument I put forward three times now, instead of ignoring the content of my posts and responding with non-sequitors such as "Yes, but Evolution is unique and complex, therefore it must address Origin of Life itself!". Your conclusion does not logically follow from that premise.

What is are the specific reasons the theory of evolution cannot include origin of life? Why must the two theories be separated?

Asked and answered. ("Different processes, different phenomona, different theories." Which word didn't you understand?)

Touch me with your Noodly Appendage please..... :-)

I accept your cordial acknowledgement that you don't have a counter argument to what I've been trying to tell you for the last several posts. If you don't understand after this post, there isn't any point in my continuing this one sided dialogue. Go in peace; may all your noodles be al dente.

95 posted on 08/29/2005 8:04:37 PM PDT by longshadow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson