Evolution vs. Creation

There are 20 comments on the Best of New Orleans story from Jan 6, 2011, titled Evolution vs. Creation. In it, Best of New Orleans reports that:

High school senior Zack Kopplin is leading the fight to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Best of New Orleans.

“Why does my ignorance”

Level 5

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#71634 Jan 22, 2013
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>A species is a division of individuals grouped by virtue of their common capabilities to be fruitful and multiply within a given work area or ecosystem niche.
So you have loosely covered the reproduction species concept and the niche species concept.

The niche one doesn't work when examined, because niches aren't real. They're created by species who favor exploiting parts of the environment over all others. Selection then favors those individuals who are better at exploiting that one part of the environment and runaway natural selection produces a specialist species. This especially happens when like species are living in the same geographic area - they specialize in order to not compete with each other (a more accurate way of saying this is that natural selection favors individuals who are specialists if there are other specialists around).

But the niche didn't exist before the species as a separatable thing from the overall environment. The species produced that by creating a resource and then monopolizing it.

So niche is really a shorthand for saying "the specific part of the environment exploited by a species."

The reproductive species concept doesn't work too well, either, b/c lots of species can interbreed and produce fertile offspring. Ruffed grouse and sprouse grouse, white tail deer and mule deer, and on and on. In the laboratory, lots of species can produce offspring that otherwise wouldn't b/c of mating practices or social behavior - hamadryas baboons and olive baboons, for example, various birds, lizards, salamanders, etc.

So a species not necessarily bounded by reproduction; gene flow can happen between closely related species. Moreover, all free living species have parasites and pathogens that sometimes inject their DNA into the species' gene pool.

How can we call a species a bounded unit if it's DNA can change through transposons and mutagens?

Well, we cannot. Species are best defined through a DNA centered framework. Species are loosely bounded gene pools that can be invaded by outside DNA, through gene flow and pathogens, and mutation.

When you understand this rather difficult concept, then the fossil record becomes clear. Species are loosely bounded gene pools traveling through time, changing over time - they are dynamic and not static, they are loosely bounded and not perfect.

“Why does my ignorance”

Level 5

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#71635 Jan 22, 2013
neutral observer wrote:
<quoted text>
To suggest that there is evolution within the human species is not pc. One must cling to the notion that we are all pretty much equal in our abilities. To do otherwise would be to engage in eugenics much like the nazis did.
With billions of humans evolution has hit a dead end. We evolve through non evolutionary means. It is our technology which evolves... not our genes.
Small isolated communities evolve in order to survive. Humanity survives by using the grey matter we were all born with. Not much different than the grey matter our ancestors were born with when they first left Africa. We are post evolutionary. Unless a comet or something were to wipe about 99.9% of us out anyway.
I am not concerned with it being PC.

The human species is currently undergoing rapid evolution, strongest in our immune systems and second strongest in our central nervous system.

Here is just one study. There are lots now.

"The gene ASPM (abnormal spindle-like microcephaly associated) is a specific
regulator of brain size, and its evolution in the lineage leading to Homo sapiens was driven by strong positive selection. Here, we show that one genetic variant of ASPM in humans arose merely about 5800 years ago and has since swept to high frequency under strong positive selection. These findings, especially the remarkably young age of the positively selected variant, suggest that the human brain is still undergoing rapid adaptive evolution."

http://www.eebweb.arizona.edu/faculty/nachman...

Another:

"Nonsynonymous differences between human and chimpanzee orthologs showed uneven distribution between the two &#946; sheets of the Sia-recognition domain, suggesting biased mutation accumulation. These data indicate that CD33rSiglec genes are undergoing rapid evolution via multiple genetic mechanisms, possibly due to an evolutionary “arms race” between hosts and pathogens involving Sia recognition."

http://www.pnas.org/content/101/36/13251.full

Immune system:

"Siglecs (sialic acid-binding Ig-like lectins) are mainly expressed in the immune system. Sn (sialoadhesin)(siglec-1), CD22 (siglec-2) and siglec-15 are well conserved, whereas the CD33-related siglecs are undergoing rapid evolution, as reflected in large differences in repertoires among the different mammals studied so far. In the present paper, we review recent findings on the signalling properties of the CD33-related siglecs and discuss the emergence of both inhibitory and activating forms of this family. We also discuss how Sn may function as a positive regulator of adaptive immune responses and its emerging role as an induced macrophage pattern-recognition molecule for sialylated pathogens, especially enveloped viruses."

http://test.biochemsoctrans.org/bst/036/1467/...

etc., etc.

Humans are undergoing rapid evolution, despite that it may not be pc to do so.

“Why does my ignorance”

Level 5

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#71636 Jan 22, 2013
Thomas Robertson wrote:
Those poor Biblical Creationists have gotten caught in a double bind.
The more kinds they recognize, the more work they impose on Noah and his seven trusty crewman.
The fewer kinds they recognize, the more evolving--excuse me, adapting--they impose on the animals, and in just 4500 years.
Did Noah take only two dogs? That's 35 species in 14 genera.
Did Noah take only two bats? That's 850 species.
Did Noah take only two worms? That's 28,000 species in 18 phyla, which is over half the phyla in the Animal Kingdom.
How about beetles? That's half a million species.
Duane Gish claimed that the concept of kinds can be understood by "any high school student with average intelligence." However, he cannot remember his own system. On page 35 of the 1978 edition of Evolution: The Fossils Say No! hhe assigns a slot each to gibbons, chimpanzees, and gorillas, but 0on page 47, he designates all apes as a "major kind."
hahaha, well said!

“Why does my ignorance”

Level 5

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#71637 Jan 22, 2013
Tinka wrote:
Like the chicken and the egg which came first planet or walking creature...
To walk on you would have had to had something to be walking on...
Why use your legs in mid air having had to develop legs for a reason don't you think? Limbs
Bone scale hair...wonder which came first...Fiber in threads or minerals...
Fiber helps you move along har har...:)
Fins came first, then legs.

Creatures came first, then eggs.

“Why does my ignorance”

Level 5

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#71638 Jan 22, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
"most insects breath through a trachael system that starts on the surface of the body as openings called spriracles"
And your point?
You are clearly stating that insects breath through their surface (skin) of their body's. they clearly do not have " nostrils with the breath of life (Genesis 6:17, 7:14-15, 22). "
So why is it that you claim that I need to brush up on my entomology?
Noah was commanded to take into the ark all the animals on land in whose nostrils was the breath of life (Genesis 6:17, 7:14-15, 22). There is no reason to believe that all the varieties of insects were on the ark because they breathe through their skin and do not have nostrils. They could have survived on floating matter or by burrowing in the mud. Some of the insects may have been on the ark in the fur of the animals or in nooks and crannies of the ark. The Bible does not teach that they had to be on board.
Now I will point out to you what you need to brush up on. These fish you talk about, here let me quote you "Genetic and molecular evaluation of these fish species reveal that they all developed from a single ancestor species"
And that my boy is the definition of a "Kind" macro evolution is one kind changing to another kind. No macroevolution happened here just microevolution.
daaaahahahahahahahah!

You are soooo funny when you justify your crazy myths.

“Why does my ignorance”

Level 5

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#71639 Jan 22, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
No sorry I have to burst your bubble.
Macro evolution is one "Kind of animal or plant completely changing to another Kind" there is no proof of this ever happening.
Education faaaaaaiiiiiillllluuuuurrreeee e.

“Why does my ignorance”

Level 5

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#71640 Jan 22, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh I'm quite aware that microevolution does happen.
No need to keep pushing that issue.
Turning on or off genes that God has created is not a miracle.
Education failure.

Microevolution is not "turning on or off ... genes."

(God's genes - what a joke! Thanks, that was funny.)

Microevolution is a change in gene frequencies in a gene pool, over time. That happens through gene flow, mutation, genetic drift, random assorted mating, and so on. Changes are additive over time, hence gene pools increasingly diverge as time passes, producing what we humans categorize as macroevolution. However, there really is no difference between the two - macroevolution is simply microevolution + time. It's a pretty simple concept. Only someone with religious blinders on can't understand it.

I have a question for you that you've never answered. Your education in biological science is amazingly poor. Unbelievably poor. Yet you have no problems pronouncing untrue nonsense as if you have some kind of special knowledge. And you never back up your nonsense with real scientific articles, of course because science doesn't support your delusions.

Why do you believe your ignorance can stand for knowledge?

“You want a piece of this?!??”

Level 1

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#71642 Jan 22, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Education faaaaaaiiiiiillllluuuuurrreeee e.
YOU FAIL

“Why does my ignorance”

Level 5

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#71643 Jan 22, 2013
Cybele wrote:
Can anyone guess where I came from? lol
Your father's testicles, and your mother's ovaries.

“Why does my ignorance”

Level 5

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#71644 Jan 22, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
Created kinds are organisms that are defined by creation biology as sharing a common ancestry. The phrase refers to the Genesis account of the creation week during which God created many kind
bwaaahahahahahaha, I nearly spit out my coffee, that's soooooo funny!

How do you produce hypotheses from your "paradigm" there, Langoliers? How do you test anything? How do you produce new knowledge or technology from your useless belief system?

hahahahahahaha

“Why does my ignorance”

Level 5

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#71645 Jan 22, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
Tommy that's so funny! What a card you are.
'cause you can't answer him. No way a ship could fit 2 of every species on the planet on it. Unless they were frozen as sperm and ova.

The Flood never happened. If it did, we would be able to trace every species back to 2 individuals at exactly the time of the Flood.

Since almost all species on the planet show great genetic diversity - stretching back hundreds of thousands of years in most cases - objectively proves the Biblical Flood did not happen.

There are also all kinds of geology and physics reasons it objectively didn't happen as well.

But, seeing as how you know nothing of science, and are a science denier, you're just going to stupidly dismiss this, too.

You have convinced me that creationism is damaging to the human mind. You were a child once and now you are delusional - that's child abuse. Your parents are at fault for teaching you this nonsense.

“Why does my ignorance”

Level 5

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#71646 Jan 22, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
What makes me special is something I don't understand.
The chances of you happening is 1 in 2 trillion.

Well done!

And that chance is based on who your mother and father are/were. So...you, as a body and mind can never happen again. Unless your parents have 2 trillion more babies.
FREE SERVANT

Bellevue, WA

#71647 Jan 22, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
So you have loosely covered the reproduction species concept and the niche species concept.
The niche one doesn't work when examined, because niches aren't real. They're created by species who favor exploiting parts of the environment over all others. Selection then favors those individuals who are better at exploiting that one part of the environment and runaway natural selection produces a specialist species. This especially happens when like species are living in the same geographic area - they specialize in order to not compete with each other (a more accurate way of saying this is that natural selection favors individuals who are specialists if there are other specialists around).
But the niche didn't exist before the species as a separatable thing from the overall environment. The species produced that by creating a resource and then monopolizing it.
So niche is really a shorthand for saying "the specific part of the environment exploited by a species."
The reproductive species concept doesn't work too well, either, b/c lots of species can interbreed and produce fertile offspring. Ruffed grouse and sprouse grouse, white tail deer and mule deer, and on and on. In the laboratory, lots of species can produce offspring that otherwise wouldn't b/c of mating practices or social behavior - hamadryas baboons and olive baboons, for example, various birds, lizards, salamanders, etc.
So a species not necessarily bounded by reproduction; gene flow can happen between closely related species. Moreover, all free living species have parasites and pathogens that sometimes inject their DNA into the species' gene pool.
How can we call a species a bounded unit if it's DNA can change through transposons and mutagens?
Well, we cannot. Species are best defined through a DNA centered framework. Species are loosely bounded gene pools that can be invaded by outside DNA, through gene flow and pathogens, and mutation.
When you understand this rather difficult concept, then the fossil record becomes clear. Species are loosely bounded gene pools traveling through time, changing over time - they are dynamic and not static, they are loosely bounded and not perfect.
A niche is a work place in the chain of life....

“You want a piece of this?!??”

Level 1

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#71648 Jan 22, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
'cause you can't answer him. No way a ship could fit 2 of every species on the planet on it. Unless they were frozen as sperm and ova.
The Flood never happened. If it did, we would be able to trace every species back to 2 individuals at exactly the time of the Flood.
Since almost all species on the planet show great genetic diversity - stretching back hundreds of thousands of years in most cases - objectively proves the Biblical Flood did not happen.
There are also all kinds of geology and physics reasons it objectively didn't happen as well.
But, seeing as how you know nothing of science, and are a science denier, you're just going to stupidly dismiss this, too.
You have convinced me that creationism is damaging to the human mind. You were a child once and now you are delusional - that's child abuse. Your parents are at fault for teaching you this nonsense.
The Biblical flood DID happen i saw it, all the animals were on the TITANIC.

Like a MF'in BOSS

“Why does my ignorance”

Level 5

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#71649 Jan 22, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
Cybele:
"The definition of micro and macro-evolution from that link is incorrect or misused. lol"
That link was Berkeley's evolution teams web page.
Yes. And for some strange reason you are claiming that the entire science department at Berkeley is wrong about evolution. And not just that science department, but every single science department at every single top university in the entire world.

In fact, I cannot imagine that a university could be "creationist," and certainly not a biological science department. The closest any biologists come is the ID movement - and there's less than a handful of them who are a disgrace to their departments. Michael Behe, for example - his own department has a paragraph declaring his silly ideas about ID non-scientific. And he hasn't produced a real research based scientific article in quite a few years.

See? You are delusional.

You proclaim that others cannot argue with Berkeley and then you take a stance that no biological department at any university takes - in fact, you proclaim that they are all wrong, despite all their evidence, and that your religion's silly idea, based on an ancient mythological text, is somehow correct.

Totally delusional.

“Why does my ignorance”

Level 5

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#71650 Jan 22, 2013
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>A niche is a work place in the chain of life....
I really didn't think you'd get it. No worries. Someone did.

“Why does my ignorance”

Level 5

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#71651 Jan 22, 2013
Combat-Wombat-88 wrote:
<quoted text>
YOU FAIL
at being an uneducated creationist, yes. Yes I do!

“There is no such thing”

Level 3

Since: May 08

as a reasonable person

#71652 Jan 22, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Fins came first, then legs.
Creatures came first, then eggs.
That is just disgusting... I never understood how people could get into bestiality.

“You want a piece of this?!??”

Level 1

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#71653 Jan 22, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
at being an uneducated creationist, yes. Yes I do!
NO you fail at life

The world was obviously created 200 years ago by pirate space aliens. Duh!
FREE SERVANT

Bellevue, WA

#71654 Jan 22, 2013
WORK or the Whole Organizational Range of KInds theory is an orgainzational theory which is an explanation of how ecological systems work in relation to SCP concept.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Weird Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 6 min wichita-rick 161,851
2015: "Make a Story/ 6 Words Only: 8 min Grace Nerissa 203
Last 3 Letters into 3 new words. (Dec '08) 11 min Trouser Cough 56,690
WHAT???? A NEW word game? FOUR WORDS (Sep '08) 14 min Trouser Cough 41,536
Make A Sentance out of a 5 letter word. (Nov '09) 18 min Trouser Cough 31,847
News Man given 15 years for having sex with a cow he... 33 min wichita-rick 13
Recovery Software to Recover Lost Android Photos 40 min shuiguobaobei 1
Do you have a Topix crush? (Jun '11) 1 hr Princess Hey 8,270
Things that make life eaiser... 2 hr wichita-rick 283
More from around the web