evolution just a word?

Discussion in 'General Science & Technology' started by vhawk, May 26, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. vhawk Registered Member

    Messages:
    101
    it seems to me that evolution is just a word and change would do just as well

    Please note, I am not taking sides in the great evolution/something design debate, the latter are seen as bonkers to me

    Any reasonable person would infer from the available evidence that it is the nature of life to change in response to changed circumstances. If people want to call that evolution. That's fine by me

    One thing I have noticed about nature, is that it always responds to the law, of necessity, and everything on earth and elsewhere.if it is there, it is there because it performs some necessary function. I do not suggest some overall, controlling mind or design. I'm agnostic about that.


    So to sum up, please may we just say change instead of evolution, or does evolution contained some sort of subtext to and if so, what is it?

    I'm really not trying to start a raging debate about God versus evolution, it seems to me that that that is futile, and can go nowhere. And frankly I don't care. Why can't I just say change when I say, or would say evolution?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    No. Evolution explains how things change. Before evolution, people thought that when an individual changes, for instance when a giraffe stretches it's neck to eat a leaf, that this change is passed on, but it doesn't happen that way.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. vhawk Registered Member

    Messages:
    101
    I take it you mean they change by genetic differences or adoptions being passed on
    am I right in thinking that there no examples of marginal change/evolution?

    eg, no monkey has ever juststrolled out of the forest asking for help with 9 down in the times crossword- or may be one just has- just a humorous example
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    What do you need by marginal?
     
  8. vhawk Registered Member

    Messages:
    101
    in the process of changing/ evolving
     
  9. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    I'm not sure I understand you. Are there examples of slight or minimal evolution? Of course.
     
  10. vhawk Registered Member

    Messages:
    101
    there you go then mate, marginal means at the margins, as in the marginal tax cost of earning more money
    so marginal evolution would be a monkey little by little getting a mansize brain and little by little doing manlike things which may or may not be reflected in his genes
     
  11. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    Evolution usually works that way.
     
  12. vhawk Registered Member

    Messages:
    101
    so, is there an example of that in real life just now- any animal or creature, marginally evolving/changing?
     
  13. Bishadi Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,745
    as well, knowledge evolves

    changed by environment, conditions; a progression

    the current 'laws of physics' can't define that "progression" at the molecular scale

    that is why 'evolution' in a pure 'law of nature' does not meet with the existing math of the sciences (they think everything is a reduction)

    words are the creation of mankind like fractals within existence; they evolve with knowledge

    eg..... moses didn't know the word and the irony is Darwin never used it in his book either.
     
  14. vhawk Registered Member

    Messages:
    101
    progress is another weasely word in itself. now it really is interesting that Darwin never used evolution, who coined the word?
    i'm most interested in the subconscious baggage that comes with the word; i have even heard it said" evolution wants"
     
  15. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    Yes, there are numerous cases of gradual and mild evolution, that much is usually not thought of as controversial. One case is the evolution of the human ability to digest lactose. In most mammals, they lose the ability after weaning. The preservation of this ability into adulthood corresponds to places where dairy animals were a major food source.
     
  16. vhawk Registered Member

    Messages:
    101
    and interestingly only Europeans or those of European origin can digest lactose, but but lactose digestion hardly seems to an example of marginal evolution, but what do I know?- you're the expert
     
  17. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    You flatter me, I'm no expert, it's just an interest of mine. It seems pretty minor to me. There are other cultures besides Europeans that can digest lactose, such as the Bushmen, and there are other examples.

    Even more minor would be the differences between races, which is an example of evolution; the adaptability of viruses including AIDS....

    There are studies of birds on certain islands where the average beak length changes depending on the local climate! In drier years, certain kinds of food are more common, and birds that have a beak length that can take advantage of it have a better survival rate. This changes every few years when the climate gets wetter.
     
  18. vhawk Registered Member

    Messages:
    101
    none of your learned examples come close to demonstrating monkeys ever being nearly men, but that was not my main question in fairness. are the birds clear and unequivocal evidence of marginal evolution?
    a recent television program in England , posits that the original black humans in Europe died out from an inability to receive or whatever the word is, vitamin D through sunlight on their skin- hence fair /light skinned Europeans, but you can guess forever and a day. I have difficulties with idea that all humans are descended from a very small band of wandering Africans, although the DNA stuff strongly suggests it. I guess people do not wish to believe what they do not, for whatever reason, like
     
  19. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    I don't understand your focus on "marginal" evolution, whatever that is. Evolution in general acts by slow simple steps, even the evolution from a primate-like ancestor to a human. We have found fossils of apes that walk upright, and later fossils that walk upright with fewer and fewer ape features, and larger and larger brains. The picture seems clear to me. I doubt that there were ever black humans in Europe, we didn't migrate that quickly.
     
  20. tamkinrules how troublesome... Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    25
    sigh...evolution is pretty random and happens little by little. When reproduction occurs, things can change from the original product, like when you make a proposal for a project and the finished product can be different from what you wrote in the proposal. Some changes might be bad, like a deformed wing (I'm using the bird example), and others might be good. Darwin was observing birds and saw that there were the same birds, but both had different beaks. One had a small one and the other had a big one. The one with the bigger beak could eat more because it could break stuff like nuts open. Whereas the little beaked could only manage to eat berries and maybe small nuts (can't remember ^_^"). Point is, the better traits are passed on to the next generation (like the bigger beak) and soon, that species would all be big beaked. Survival of the fittest as they say.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  21. vhawk Registered Member

    Messages:
    101
    I focus on marginal evolution as it seems to me that would be unequivocal proof of the theory of evolution, ever since I was a child I have found it a difficult theory to accept although I admit it is highly plausible
    be cause i am a criminal lawyer i like proof beyond reasonable doubtor maybe i just have a skeptical nature
     
  22. John99 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    22,046
    one thing i think needs to be said is that i dont believe selection happens in nature. can we be inadvertently putting a human construct on nature?
     
  23. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    Why would the most minor recognizable aspects of evolution be considered "unequivocal proof"? That seems like a strange approach. Perhaps you would enjoy this example:

    Evolution Unravels Itself in Front of Researcher's Eyes
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page