The "Theory" of Evolution vs. "Creationism"

[Engimo]

I feel compelled to bring up the difference between micro-evolution and macro-evolution at this point. Even though it distracts from the main point.

All the examples you have given me are of micro-evolution, not macro. Natural selection is not macro-evolution, it is merely a way to develop defenses.

The only difference between "micro-evolution" and "macro-evolution" is time. Ask any biologist, the distinction is a nonexistent one that was made up by creationists to sidestep the facts of bacterial adaptation. Really, it's the same exact mechanism.

 

[nkgupta80]

I feel compelled to bring up the difference between micro-evolution and macro-evolution at this point. Even though it distracts from the main point.

All the examples you have given me are of micro-evolution, not macro. Natural selection is not macro-evolution, it is merely a way to develop defenses.

Actually based on ur definitions of "micro evolution vs. macro evolution" my examples actaully deal with macro-evolution. The structures studied in the research I described are classified and understood through an evolutionary timescale. Certain molecular processes HAD to have evolved over millions of years to have gained such complexity. This time scale helps scientists correlate certain structures in bacteria for example to the structures in humans.

Population genetics deals with macro-evolution.

And as engimo said, give this "micro-evolution" time, and it will become macro-evolution. Milliions of years is a logn time. Think about it. history has existed for barely 4000 years, and look how much huimans have accomplished since then. Imagine 1,000,000 years pass in nature, imagine how much change can occur. Now imagine 3 billion years pass. ITs certainly enough time for micro-evolution to lelad to substantial changes.

 

[steen]

I feel compelled to bring up the difference between micro-evolution and macro-evolution at this point. Even though it distracts from the main point.

Well, you said you brought it up, but I don't see it anywhere. Please specify what macro-evolution actually is, how we would recognize it, and what prevents micro-evolution from turning into macro-evolution.

Lots of creationists make claims about macro-evolution, but none of them seem to be able to provide a meaningful, biological explanation of what it is and what the differences are.

So why don't you become a hero and explain it to us?

Or are you also going to duck out of that as well?

 

[CaliNORML]

The strangest part of this entire evolution is the fact that the principles used by the frontal brain and thus echoed in religion are tied into our physical processes.

The evidence of lie detectors, and new studies on Random acts of kindness, and non violence, show these acts make our physical bodies healthier. Somewhere this abstract world created by the frontal brains growth linked the thoughts and our acts of them into shown affects of our physical state.

Non survial skills: acts of empathy, compassion, and non violence affect us physicaly to humans benifit when preformed .

This complex inter relation forms a merging of the abstract and physical worlds within our beings tied into a single system. What we do with the frontal brain region make us healthier and it is against the survival concepts alone.

KMS

KMS

 

[Thinker]

...What we do with the frontal brain region make us healthier and it is against the survival concepts alone.

Why do you think that something that makes humans healthier doesn't improve
their chances of survival?

It seems obvious that the more healthy members of a population would have a
better chance of breeding successfully than their less healthy fellows.

 

[CaliNORML]

Sorry I mis typed, I meant was these instincts man uses to make make us healthier are against survival alone, they are more.

 

[nkgupta80]

Sorry I mis typed, I meant was these instincts man uses to make make us healthier are against survival alone, they are more.

remember as much much more intelligent beings, survival of the species has begun to rely on the evolution of our technology, more advanced methods of survival. Acts of kindness, non-violence, etc., while may not help the individual alone, do aid the greater human population. If we were all to go on our brute survival instincts alone, we would be surviving at a level of hunter gatherers as we did befor, with a world population around one million. However, reason allows us to form more complex societies and relationships which in turn allow greater productivity and the survival of our species.

 

[CaliNORML]

This seems to stem from this area as well, abstract.

The ability to understand a process as cosmic as gravity without having to see it happen. The theory of relativity. Conceiving that germs exist without a micrscope. We first have to concieve they exist, then produce the means to prove it. We do both.

Because we need the abstract of the concept to believe it to be true. I can not show you the exact processes it takes for my PC to use its memory chips it just does it.

Sort of like religion. I can't tell you exactly why we should use compassion, empahty, music, art, poetry, communication, emotion, inside a metaphorical universe yet these actions help us socialy and physicaly.

Knowlegeable gain is an abstract understanding, and is also linked to our discovery and understanding of the properties based in science. This is that part of this debate that gets involved on "Theories" yes the "Theory" of loads of things are accepted and these build our understanding, though we can't exactly show it physicaly.

Why it seems to be occuring if looked at under this light makes a bit of religion seem to be true, yet tied into a physical science of body systems makes evolution the path to follow. We practice these things because our physical beings require us to do so.

Where can a line be drawn between the principle of religion and actions of humanity which have a positive effect on our species and not be labeled religous teachings?



KMS

 

[CaliNORML]

Doctors have labeled Autistics to Gorillas with their frontal brain functions being about equal .

Abstract concept, social skills, communication, seizures of self abuse, and the grasp of beauty and art are cut off from them. The rate as I reported is 1 out of 166 kids today.

Autistic's brain size is proven larger. Autistic sevants, or those with great ability to music, math, and the like are found. Within them it is as if one single area of the frontal brain was accesed, and all that was contained there was employed.

The rise of 805% in Autism is alone in 10 years makes this step in evolution seem to be faltering. Where this area is physicaly bigger it should be used more, yet children are unable to use it more and more often.

Why this is happening should be a major issue to Americans, where is our future generation going to go if we don't realize it is occuring? And do something about it.

KMS

 

[tecoyah]

Or are you also going to duck out of that as well?

Quack....Quack


If it walks like a duck......and Talks like a Duck......


It has likely gone thru several million years of adaptation, allowing the formation of aquatic ability as its primary food sources changed to a water bound environment......Quack.....

This is actually quite funny....watching someone struggle to "Evolve" his beliefs in the face of superior knowledge. But then....most Oracles in history were dismal failures .

 

[libertarian_knight]

The strangest part of this entire evolution is the fact that the principles used by the frontal brain and thus echoed in religion are tied into our physical processes.

The evidence of lie detectors, and new studies on Random acts of kindness, and non violence, show these acts make our physical bodies healthier. Somewhere this abstract world created by the frontal brains growth linked the thoughts and our acts of them into shown affects of our physical state.

Non survial skills: acts of empathy, compassion, and non violence affect us physicaly to humans benifit when preformed .

This complex inter relation forms a merging of the abstract and physical worlds within our beings tied into a single system. What we do with the frontal brain region make us healthier and it is against the survival concepts alone.

KMS

KMS

Those are only "non-survival skills" IN NON-SOCIAL ANIMALS, or individuals in isolation. Behaviors of individuals in isolation have no real bearing on actions within the social group.

There are different behaviors in social animals, that yes DO benefit the social animals survival, than there are in solitary or even small group animals, or even animals with different social structures.

Lions and deer and dogs will lick other members of their social groups wounds, a process which is "an act of kindness" that serves to clean and heal the injured member, but provides no discernable, immediate benefit to the healer animal.

Bear that in mind in your examination of evolution and beneficial traits: Man is not a Tiger and Tigers are not Men. Examining ALL behaviors as if they were the same is why you reach mistaken conclusions.

 

[libertarian_knight]

Sorry I mis typed, I meant was these instincts man uses to make make us healthier are against survival alone, they are more.

Yeah, but humans are social animals, and social animals have better chances of surviving if the group is better able to survive. There is an added dynamic you miss.

Survival of the group, aids the survival of the social individual.

Being a social animal is a FUNDAMENTAL CHARACTERISTIC of human Beings, and therefor CAN NOT be neglected.

 

[libertarian_knight]

This seems to stem from this area as well, abstract.

The ability to understand a process as cosmic as gravity without having to see it happen. The theory of relativity. Conceiving that germs exist without a micrscope. We first have to concieve they exist, then produce the means to prove it. We do both.

Because we need the abstract of the concept to believe it to be true. I can not show you the exact processes it takes for my PC to use its memory chips it just does it.

Sort of like religion. I can't tell you exactly why we should use compassion, empahty, music, art, poetry, communication, emotion, inside a metaphorical universe yet these actions help us socialy and physicaly.

Knowlegeable gain is an abstract understanding, and is also linked to our discovery and understanding of the properties based in science. This is that part of this debate that gets involved on "Theories" yes the "Theory" of loads of things are accepted and these build our understanding, though we can't exactly show it physicaly.

Why it seems to be occuring if looked at under this light makes a bit of religion seem to be true, yet tied into a physical science of body systems makes evolution the path to follow. We practice these things because our physical beings require us to do so.

Where can a line be drawn between the principle of religion and actions of humanity which have a positive effect on our species and not be labeled religous teachings?



KMS

See, you had the answer, it helps us socially.

Religion is about, more than anything, social structure. So is nation/state. Much of our knowledge and understanding is gained through communication, a social act.

The human brain, powerful as it is, is hugely inefficient and weak. And extremely large amount of sensory data enters our bodies via the sense organs (this is ONLY concerning the things were are actually sensative to, not the large range of things to which we are not (normally or ever) sensative to, like: Infrared as "light," ultraviolent, microwave, extreme small particles, a large range of sounds, and a near limitless host of other sensory data we can not feel. again, I only limit to what we can potentially sense). We filter out a tremendous about of sensory data, consciously and unconsciously, of things we could be sensative to. Because our brains, are as cool as they are, miss entire lifetimes worth of sensory data in moments.

Becuase of this, because people tend to notice things they are familiar with, or things that serve self-interest, indiviual perception is grossly limited and limiting. The brain is subject to errors so great, that a single mind can never be trusted with "knowing the truth."

For this reason, after the advent of language, we developed science, and a systematic and rigirous method of not only adding missed data, but also filtering our individual biases.

Religion does not do this, most religions are command oriented, and disagreeing with the commands can lead to ostracism, punishment or death. Especially those religions with "churches." Religions are about social order and understanding, but they don't add information or filter out prejudicies born of inherent flaws in the human brain. Religions don't leave room for the religion being wrong, and they claim that authority to "always be right" as "granted by God."

There are reasons religions and churchs have insituted crimes against the religion or church: Herasey, blasphemy, idolitry, and the like.

"science" has no "crimes." Becuase it must get it's authority from being right, being corroborated, being unbiased, being reproducable, being tested, retested and challenged constantly. Science is not limited to faith in what one man, as leader of a church or all chruches, says.

Grated, science suffers from systemic human failures, but there are social mechanisms to filter them out or reduce them. However, because people fail, does not mean science fails, because the failures of science are a result of failure in all levels of humanity, and can not be erased. Religion however, as noted, does not allow for wrongness.

All churches are institutions for faith in Man. More particularly, what some Men have said about "God" and mysticism.

Science says "before I trust you, you better show me, and if you show me, I or anyone else is with competant technical knowledge, must be able to reproduce and examine the results, and there must be some predictablity."

 

[CaliNORML]

Those are only "non-survival skills" IN NON-SOCIAL ANIMALS, or individuals in isolation. Behaviors of individuals in isolation have no real bearing on actions within the social group.

There are different behaviors in social animals, that yes DO benefit the social animals survival, than there are in solitary or even small group animals, or even animals with different social structures.

Lions and deer and dogs will lick other members of their social groups wounds, a process which is "an act of kindness" that serves to clean and heal the injured member, but provides no discernable, immediate benefit to the healer animal.

Bear that in mind in your examination of evolution and beneficial traits: Man is not a Tiger and Tigers are not Men. Examining ALL behaviors as if they were the same is why you reach mistaken conclusions.

In certain countries orphans who have not been socialized with start to rock themselves, and have trouble developing language, they in effect turn "Autistic." Elephants have also been known to do this when left alone for long periods of no social interaction as well.

Yet when we have the frontal brain not stimulated it affects the ability to learn all that which makes us human. These children fail to develop imagination, and social skills as well as plagued by learning disabilities.

Way beyond survival and pack mental set only to survive. This action cripples our physical ability to learn.

KMS

 

[libertarian_knight]

In certain countries orphans who have not been socialized with start to rock themselves, and have trouble developing language, they in effect turn "Autistic." Elephants have also been known to do this when left alone for long periods of no social interaction as well.

Yet when we have the frontal brain not stimulated it affects the ability to learn all that which makes us human. These children fail to develop imagination, and social skills as well as plagued by learning disabilities.

Way beyond survival and pack mental set only to survive. This action cripples our physical ability to learn.

KMS

Which is again, point that humans are social animals. Lacking social structure, or simply social interaction, severely inhibits our development and/or our survival. My point, to you, was some of your statements about certain human actions, emotions, thoughts, and physical responses are facets that MUST be looked at under the concept of a social animal, in order to understand their evolutionary benefit. Whereas it appeared you examined them for the view of a solitary survivor, neglecting the supreme importance of humanities social animal status.

 

[CaliNORML]

Science says "before I trust you, you better show me, and if you show me, I or anyone else is with competant technical knowledge, must be able to reproduce and examine the results, and there must be some predictablity."

I see the variation in religion from, "you should act this way to be better for all, and you physically." To "I will physically make you do this, because it is better for you and for us all."

The predictability of religious principles was you live longer, you are happier, and have a richer existance. Some tried the kernel principles and, Boom! They recieved the same affect.

The knowledge of applying it seems to be askew. They preach it but the said results being from a center of power seeking, does not work. These reasons cause the opposite, because their root is not in the true principles of Compassion, Empathy, equality, respect, and not seeking violent means in which to acheive the desired ends. Instead using this warped basis as a justification of those actions that in a physical sense are not toward our desired body processes.

The evolution is metaphorical, and abstract towards non violence and socialization. Tossing away the evidence these acts acheive when practiced correctly and their benificial affect on a human's body, can not be ignored even if twisted by past actions of those spouting it's name.

KMS

 

[CaliNORML]

Maybe this micoro/macro evolution can be looked upon.

The Darwin thought always centered around physical change. Never a chemical one, let alone a chemical brain change. There was no medicine this advanced at the time and no idea of dopamine, seratonin, and chemical processes like diabetes and the known function of these chemicals in our physical systems.

Diet has always shown as a huge factor in evolution, we are what we eat after all and our bodies adjust to the diet.

Today able to control our enviorment, top of the food chain, and with the ability to farm and produce food for many, our "Macro" evolution is done, there are hardly any physical needs we need to adapt to, we adapted the enviroment to suit us.

It seems the chemical, enzyme, and protien micro world that has continued to evolve, leaving very little physical evidence, and no trace, as it is soft tissue at the center of this change. No fossils can exist.

We could extract what we know today, and trace it back to see if there is any clue in this mystery science can give us today about how we got here, and what may be going wrong with the frontal brain.

Wouldn't it a hoot if the evidence in fossils is linked to the spread of a plant, where it went this area of the forehead grew, and as such different development was happening at different times individual areas were creating different shaped human skulls at different times or the same time?

CLICK HERE. links to fossil skulls.
KMS

 

[oracle25]

The only difference between "micro-evolution" and "macro-evolution" is time. Ask any biologist, the distinction is a nonexistent one that was made up by creationists to sidestep the facts of bacterial adaptation. Really, it's the same exact mechanism.

Umm... no, it's not. Micro evolution is simply shifting in DNA. Macro evolution requires new DNA to be created. Think of micro evolution as horizontal change and macro evolution as vertical change. Micro evolution + time will not equal macro evolution. This is a scientific fact which has been demonstrated in numerous experiments.

 

[libertarian_knight]

Umm... no, it's not. Micro evolution is simply shifting in DNA. Macro evolution requires new DNA to be created. Think of micro evolution as horizontal change and macro evolution as vertical change. Micro evolution + time will not equal macro evolution. This is a scientific fact which has been demonstrated in numerous experiments.

huh?

NEVER been hear that described as such

"macro evolution" in nearly everything I have every read (with the exception of your post) was considered speciation, not a supposed reuirement of NEW DNA, but DNA combonations, shifted or otherwise, that resulted eventually in a new species.

 

[Engimo]

Umm... no, it's not. Micro evolution is simply shifting in DNA. Macro evolution requires new DNA to be created. Think of micro evolution as horizontal change and macro evolution as vertical change. Micro evolution + time will not equal macro evolution. This is a scientific fact which has been demonstrated in numerous experiments.

Oh really? This is certainly a revelation to me and the entire scientific community. If you could provide a source for this, I would be massively ingratiated.

 

[tecoyah]

Umm... no, it's not. Micro evolution is simply shifting in DNA. Macro evolution requires new DNA to be created. Think of micro evolution as horizontal change and macro evolution as vertical change. Micro evolution + time will not equal macro evolution. This is a scientific fact which has been demonstrated in numerous experiments.

Well....at the very least you seem to accept that there IS such a thing....first step in gaining much needed knowledge.

 

[CaliNORML]

Micro evolution + time will not equal macro evolution. This is a scientific fact which has been demonstrated in numerous experiments.

My point is I just showed what you described the chemical micro did not affect the larger frame we carried it in, our bodies. The tiniest trace is the skull contained the macro.

The horizontal is the physical, the vertical is the conceptual. A thought movement of understanding another dimension we humans alone see. The micro this evolution left hardly no trace of it, only in the rituals, and abstract capabilites are we able to get the true evolution of intelligence, out of the animal and survival into an abstract place contained in the frontal lobe of our chemicaly evolving brain.

And somewhere along the line it started to affect us within our physical beings, not on the same route as what survival is considered for the best. We rose above survival mode and reached a point horizontal.

Then our understanding of a world beyond the physical slid vertically into another understanding of our physical universe with a different view. A metaphorical understanding and grasp of abstract concept that was in itself evolution. Evolution on a level or protiens, chemicals, and receptors in the frontal brain.

It seems we labeled this process "GOD."

KMS

 

[libertarian_knight]

My point is I just showed what you described the chemical micro did not affect the larger frame we carried it in, our bodies. The tiniest trace is the skull contained the macro.

The horizontal is the physical, the vertical is the conceptual. A thought movement of understanding another dimension we humans alone see. The micro this evolution left hardly no trace of it, only in the rituals, and abstract capabilites are we able to get the true evolution of intelligence, out of the animal and survival into an abstract place contained in the frontal lobe of our chemicaly evolving brain.

And somewhere along the line it started to affect us within our physical beings, not on the same route as what survival is considered for the best. We rose above survival mode and reached a point horizontal.

Then our understanding of a world beyond the physical slid vertically into another understanding of our physical universe with a different view. A metaphorical understanding and grasp of abstract concept that was in itself evolution. Evolution on a level or protiens, chemicals, and receptors in the frontal brain.

KMS

CALI,

With all due respect and no offense. HOLY ***** YOU ARE HIGH.

 

[CaliNORML]

Dude, you want to know some heavy drugs?

Try the "Novel Atypical Antipsychotic" drugs my 16 year old son takes to combat the symptoms of Autism.

HERE

HERE

HERE

Want to know how much this brain area cost Americans?

HERE

I have to give my child some serious frontal brain medication, talk about drugs, these are more like poison.

KMS

 

[Engimo]

Dude, you want to know some heavy drugs?

Try the "Novel Atypical Antipsychotic" drugs my 16 year old son takes to combat the symptoms of Autism.

HERE

HERE

HERE

Want to know how much this brain area cost Americans?

HERE

I have to give my child some serious frontal brain medication, talk about drugs, these are more like poison.

KMS

What does this have to do with Evolution and Creationism?