Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Topic: Evolution???? Posted: 13-Oct-2005 at 08:58 |
Im asking for a brief answer; can you build a building without ground floor? you cannot. how can you build a theory without explaining the origin of first living organism? Give me a logical answer.chemas-microsoft-comfficeffice" />>>
> >
|
|
Jhangora
Chieftain
Joined: 02-Oct-2005
Location: Korea, South
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1070
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Oct-2005 at 09:04 |
Ahmet if u want ur building to be a strong one n durable be sure to have a strong foundation before builiding the ground floor.
|
Jai Badri Vishal
|
|
Maju
King
Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Oct-2005 at 10:33 |
This should belong to Intelectual Discussion. But anyhow my answer is:
we still don't know for sure what causes gravity but we know how it
works. Does that mean that gravity doesn't exist? If you think so, I
tell you: throw yourself from a tower and I will prove you how
wrong you are.
|
NO GOD, NO MASTER!
|
|
Constantine XI
Suspended
Suspended
Joined: 01-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5711
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Oct-2005 at 03:21 |
LOL @ Maju.
Well evolution is a theory, and
science has many such theories. Just remember that theories are
supported by empirical evidence, the basis of scientific discovery
being that the theory with the greatest empirical evidence should be
regarded as the most trustworthy. To my knowledge there is no other
school of thought which explains the things evolution does and is
supported by as much empirical evidence. But hey, you don't wanna buy
it, there will always be an alternative to evolution if that doesn't
satisfy you.
|
|
azimuth
Caliph
SlaYer'S SlaYer
Joined: 12-Dec-2004
Location: Neutral Zone
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2979
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Oct-2005 at 03:25 |
moved to Intelectual Discussion forum.
|
|
|
Tobodai
Tsar
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Location: Antarctica
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4310
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Oct-2005 at 03:36 |
Originally posted by ahmetcelik
Im asking for a brief answer; can you build a building without ground floor? you cannot. how can you build a theory without explaining the origin of first living organism? Give me a logical answer.chemas-microsoft-comfficeffice" />>>
> >
|
You cant build a religion without people to invent it first!
|
"the people are nothing but a great beast...
I have learned to hold popular opinion of no value."
-Alexander Hamilton
|
|
Maju
King
Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Oct-2005 at 05:37 |
Anyhow, the theory of evolution does have some plausible explanations
on how the first living criature came to existence; what hasn't been
able so far is to reproduce the proccess in laboratory (only the main
biological constituents have been artificially re-created by such
methods so far). But that doesn't mean that the theory is wrong: it
means that we are so far unable to reproduce it with our current
technology and knowledege.
We can't reproduce the Big Bang either or the formation of Earth but
that doesn't mean that the most respectable theories dealing with those
issues are wrong: it just means that our means are limited.
|
NO GOD, NO MASTER!
|
|
gcle2003
King
Suspended
Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Oct-2005 at 06:11 |
Originally posted by Constantine XI
LOL @ Maju.
Well evolution is a theory,
|
No it's not. It's an observed fact. Darwinian natural selection, Lamarckian/Lysenkoist inheritance of acquired characteristics, and intelligent design are all theories of evolution, in that they attempt to explain the fact of evolution.
The Darwinian and Lamarckian theories are scientific, in that they can be tested empirically. Intelligent design, while it is a theory, is not a scientific theory, in that it cannot be tested empirically. It's proper place therefore is in the category of religion, or at least metaphysics. It has no place in a science class whatsoever.
and science has many such theories. Just remember that theories are supported by empirical evidence, the basis of scientific discovery being that the theory with the greatest empirical evidence should be regarded as the most trustworthy. To my knowledge there is no other school of thought which explains the things evolution does and is supported by as much empirical evidence. But hey, you don't wanna buy it, there will always be an alternative to evolution if that doesn't satisfy you.
|
As I obvious from the above I think you are confusing evolution with Darwinism (or possibly Lamarckism or some other theory). It's a shorthand way of referring to something which has lots of attendant dangers.
'Evolution' is not like the theory of Relativity. Evolution is like the fact that the speed of light is observed to be constant in vacuum.
|
|
Cywr
King
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6003
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Oct-2005 at 06:20 |
The theory of evolution has nothing to do with how life started. Thaes the logical answer, but some people just don't get it.
Lets put it another way, how can you know the speed of light if you are noo sure how the universe began?
Doesn't seem so smart now does it?
|
Arrrgh!!"
|
|
azimuth
Caliph
SlaYer'S SlaYer
Joined: 12-Dec-2004
Location: Neutral Zone
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2979
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Oct-2005 at 07:34 |
well it is a Theory. i think, how can anybody prove something happened like a billion years ago to be a solid fact??!! thats imposible, so its a theory and more discoveries MAY prove it wrong or prove it more correct than other theoris.
its not that easy to determine how things evolved in millions of years just like that.
about humans being Apes and the rest of the theory its not fully proven yet and there is something called a missing link between what they found and humans.
its also said that humans and those stright walking monkeis did exist at the same time and lived at the same period !
even if this theories about earth creation were proven more to be correct and more logical than other theories i personally dont think that these happened by themselvs just like that. there must be a question of Why? and there there will be an answer like God wanted to creat universe like that !
Edited by azimuth
|
|
|
Perseas
General
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 14-Jan-2005
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 781
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Oct-2005 at 08:15 |
I agree with Cywr. Evolution is not a theory of the origin of life. It has nothing to do with 'creation' or origin of life. It just describes what happened after life got started. Generally the concept of evolution points to the beginning of the process of evolution, but not to A Beginning.
|
A mathematician is a person who thinks that if there are supposed to be three people in a room, but five come out, then two more must enter the room in order for it to be empty.
|
|
Maju
King
Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Oct-2005 at 08:36 |
Originally posted by azimuth
about humans being Apes and the rest of the theory
its not fully proven yet and there is something called a missing link
between what they found and humans. |
There's no actual missing link anymore. Lucy and the other
Australopithecus are the "missing link". Of course we don't have
fossils of every single evolutionary step but we have enough steps to
see the overall picture of hominid and human evolution.
Additionally by mere genetic study, the closer living relative to
chimpanzees and bonobos (Pan gender) are not gorillas or other apes but
us (Homo gender). We are so close that some scientists defend that we
should be in the smame biological gender, though, of course cultural
prejudices and maybe other reasons play against such a reclasification.
its also said that humans and those stright walking monkeis did exist at the same time and lived at the same period ! |
If for straight walking monkeys (quite an unscientifical description: great apes are not monkeys:
they don't have tail!) you mean the Australopithecus gender, they
actually did share the African plains with our ancestors Homo habilis
and Homo erectus. But neither of them are yet members of our species
(Homo sapiens) nor they had a cultural developement that could compare
to ours. Only with the most evolved and big-headed spcies Homo
neanderthalensis and Homo sapiens true reather sophisticated
technologies evolve. These two species date from c. 200,000 years back
and there were no Australopitheci anymore, probably H. erectus had
outcompeted them long before.
|
NO GOD, NO MASTER!
|
|
Maju
King
Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Oct-2005 at 08:52 |
Originally posted by Aeolus
I agree with Cywr. Evolution is not a theory of the
origin of life. It has nothing to do with 'creation' or origin of
life. It just describes what happened after life got started. Generally
the concept of evolution points to the beginning of the process of
evolution, but not to A Beginning.
|
I wouldn't fully agree with this. Ultimately Biology and its
evolutionary paradigm do aim to clear up how exactly life was formed
initially. True that we don't have the exact answer and we might never
know for sure, true that the diferents theories on the origins of life
are not strictly part of the theory of evolution but it's clearly
related.
Science aims to explain everything acording to material evidence and
logic. If there was a God behind the process, science would confront
that fact via material evidence and logic too, the fact that no
evidence has been given to prove that God exists, while not denying its
existence and possible influence, keeps it out of the field of science
proper: relegated to the less prestigious fields of philosophy and
theology... and to the personal intimate convictions of each one.
|
NO GOD, NO MASTER!
|
|
Perseas
General
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 14-Jan-2005
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 781
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Oct-2005 at 16:10 |
Originally posted by Maju
Originally posted by Aeolus
I agree with Cywr. Evolution is not a theory of the origin of life. It has nothing to do with 'creation' or origin of life. It just describes what happened after life got started. Generally the concept of evolution points to the beginning of the process of evolution, but not to A Beginning.
|
I wouldn't fully agree with this. Ultimately Biology and its evolutionary paradigm do aim to clear up how exactly life was formed initially. True that we don't have the exact answer and we might never know for sure, true that the diferents theories on the origins of life are not strictly part of the theory of evolution but it's clearly related.
Science aims to explain everything acording to material evidence and logic. If there was a God behind the process, science would confront that fact via material evidence and logic too, the fact that no evidence has been given to prove that God exists, while not denying its existence and possible influence, keeps it out of the field of science proper: relegated to the less prestigious fields of philosophy and theology... and to the personal intimate convictions of each one.
|
Yes but the evolutionary theory is a scientific theory about how life has developed meaning there is a premise that life already exists. It does not, as a matter of course, have explanations on the origins of life. The study of naturalistic origin of life is a separate field known as Abiogenesis.
Certainly it is valid to say that biological evolution and the basis of naturalistic clarification of Abiogenesis, called molecular evolution, have some kind of relation between each other but still we mustn't confuse the true nature of evolution.
|
A mathematician is a person who thinks that if there are supposed to be three people in a room, but five come out, then two more must enter the room in order for it to be empty.
|
|
Illuminati
General
Joined: 08-Dec-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 949
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Oct-2005 at 16:39 |
Originally posted by Maju
Originally posted by azimuth
about humans being Apes and the rest of the theory its not fully proven yet and there is something called a missing link between what they found and humans. |
There's no actual missing link anymore. Lucy and the other Australopithecus are the "missing link". Of course we don't have fossils of every single evolutionary step but we have enough steps to see the overall picture of hominid and human evolution.
|
Yup. Godd ole Lucy lol. The real debate about evolution now, is the fate of the Neandrethals. We know they existed in many parts of Europe, but no one is sure if they jsut died off or if they mated with early Homo sapiens and kind of ceased to exist as a species that way.
Also, people need to understnad that modern day apes are not on the same evolutionary path as humans. They are not early forms of ourselve. Millions of eyars ago, apes and humans had a common ancestor. BUT, they soon broke off into two distinctly different evolutionary paths....one leading to Homo Sapiens and one leading to modern day apes. This is where believers in the creationist theory try and make their biggest point...."If we evolved from apes, then why are there still apes?" - but no one ever said that creationists were smart
|
|
Genghis
Caliph
Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2656
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Oct-2005 at 17:12 |
Originally posted by Maju
This should belong to Intelectual Discussion. But anyhow my answer is: we still don't know for sure what causes gravity but we know how it works. Does that mean that gravity doesn't exist? If you think so, I tell you: throw yourself from a tower and I will prove you how wrong you are. |
Actually I learned about what we think does cause gravity, they're particles called "exchange mesons" which transmit forces, the ones for gravity are called gravitons.
|
Member of IAEA
|
|
Maju
King
Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Oct-2005 at 18:08 |
Originally posted by Genghis
Originally posted by Maju
This should belong to Intelectual
Discussion. But anyhow my answer is: we still don't know for sure what
causes gravity but we know how it works. Does that mean that gravity
doesn't exist? If you think so, I tell you: throw yourself from a
tower and I will prove you how wrong you are. |
Actually I learned about what we think does cause gravity, they're
particles called "exchange mesons" which transmit forces, the ones for
gravity are called gravitons. |
Yes, that's the theory, but no one has seen any graviton yet. It has
all the limitations of theoretical science. There are major problems of
proportionality in order to observe gravity and no way about detecting
gravitons in a particle accelarator. Not yet and not for much time to
come.
|
NO GOD, NO MASTER!
|
|
Maju
King
Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Oct-2005 at 18:17 |
Originally posted by Illuminati
We know they existed in many parts of Europe,
but no one is sure if they jsut died off or if they mated with early
Homo sapiens and kind of ceased to exist as a species that way. |
It's already confirmed that Neanderthals didn't got mixed with modern humans (DNA testing, I think).
Neanderthals were either killed or outcompeted by our ancestors, who
apparently were more flexible in thought and adaptability. Not bigger
brains, actually Neanders had slightly bigger heads, just more flexible
for adaptation, possibly more creative. Neanderthals were actually much
stronger and were better adapted to European cold climate but still,
our grandparents just displaced them to the point of extintion.
Sometimes I think that Neanders could resemble the dwarfs of legends, they were smaller but much stronger than us and, without being clearly inferior, they were simply diferent.
They lasted for many milennia, co-existing with us, till they they finally disapeared anyhow. It wasn't any sudden proccess.
|
NO GOD, NO MASTER!
|
|
SearchAndDestroy
Caliph
Joined: 15-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2728
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Oct-2005 at 19:13 |
What makes evolution still a theory is that scientist don't know which order it exactly happened. There were so many Human forms that went to a dead end or continued we are just not sure which path evolution took for us to get here. But the scientist can take the skulls and put them in one row and show the evolution change from the beginning to where we are now showing the brain cavity grow to the dental changing.
Go here and click on documentary http://www.becominghuman.org. After that at the top of the window showing the documentary click on lineages. Then click on number three The Human family Tree, now there are three theories you can look at. If you want to under evolution further watch the little documentary.
So far scientist found out you need two key things for the start of life, water and energy, I would say three as in amino acid, but don't quote me on that. Anyways scientist have been finding new life and life starting in places they thought were prviously in possible. They once thought life can only be started in a perfect enviroment, supposedly like earth. But life has proven scientist wrong as it's found in the most extreme of areas, including radioactive areas. Life is alot tougher then scientist once believed. If I can find a article on this I'll post it, but this is stuff I heard in a documnetary.
|
"A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government." E.Abbey
|
|
Illuminati
General
Joined: 08-Dec-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 949
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Oct-2005 at 20:16 |
Originally posted by Maju
Originally posted by Illuminati
We know they existed in many parts of Europe,
but no one is sure if they jsut died off or if they mated with early
Homo sapiens and kind of ceased to exist as a species that way. |
It's already confirmed that Neanderthals didn't got mixed with modern humans (DNA testing, I think).
Neanderthals were either killed or outcompeted by our ancestors, who
apparently were more flexible in thought and adaptability. Not bigger
brains, actually Neanders had slightly bigger heads, just more flexible
for adaptation, possibly more creative. Neanderthals were actually much
stronger and were better adapted to European cold climate but still,
our grandparents just displaced them to the point of extintion.
Sometimes I think that Neanders could resemble the dwarfs of legends, they were smaller but much stronger than us and, without being clearly inferior, they were simply diferent.
They lasted for many milennia, co-existing with us, till they they finally disapeared anyhow. It wasn't any sudden proccess.
|
They have in no way found enough remains to be sure , even with using
DNA evidence that Neanderthals didn't breed with early Homo sapiens.
This debate is still very much alive in teh scientific community
Heck, They aren't even 100% positive that early
humans migrated out of Africa only. Most believe that all human life
started in Africa and then moved out, but tehy can't disprove other
theories.
Edited by Illuminati
|
|