Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
God, Religion, Wampeters, Foma & Granfalloons
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Jones" data-source="post: 765493" data-attributes="member: 4805"><p>I feel like you're just talking past me on the origin of life thing. Evolution is not the origin of life, and evolutionary theory is not an explanation of the origin of life. Evolution is not "based on things having a common ancestry and evolving to more complex beings". All these misconceptions about evolution are part of the problem and they're so widespread that when someone tells you that they "don't believe in evolution" it's a pretty safe bet that they don't really understand what evolution is. If they tell you that the reason they don't believe in evolution is because it doesn't explain the origin of life it goes from being a safe bet to a certainty. Biological evolution is a change in the genetic characteristics of a population over time. That this happens is a fact. The theory of evolution describes the mechanisms that cause evolution. Saying that evolution is useless if it can't explain the origins of life is like saying that an umbrella is useless if you don't understand meteorology.</p><p>Talking about "adding genetic information" is a red herring regardless of whether or not it's possible because it's not part of evolutionary theory, nor is "a widget evolving into a dog". Sorting animals by "kind" is a creationist construct and is pretty inexact (what "kind" is a lemur for instance? Or a duck billed platypus?) If it works for you that's fine, but it's not the way that biologists look at the animal kingdom.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Jones, post: 765493, member: 4805"] I feel like you're just talking past me on the origin of life thing. Evolution is not the origin of life, and evolutionary theory is not an explanation of the origin of life. Evolution is not "based on things having a common ancestry and evolving to more complex beings". All these misconceptions about evolution are part of the problem and they're so widespread that when someone tells you that they "don't believe in evolution" it's a pretty safe bet that they don't really understand what evolution is. If they tell you that the reason they don't believe in evolution is because it doesn't explain the origin of life it goes from being a safe bet to a certainty. Biological evolution is a change in the genetic characteristics of a population over time. That this happens is a fact. The theory of evolution describes the mechanisms that cause evolution. Saying that evolution is useless if it can't explain the origins of life is like saying that an umbrella is useless if you don't understand meteorology. Talking about "adding genetic information" is a red herring regardless of whether or not it's possible because it's not part of evolutionary theory, nor is "a widget evolving into a dog". Sorting animals by "kind" is a creationist construct and is pretty inexact (what "kind" is a lemur for instance? Or a duck billed platypus?) If it works for you that's fine, but it's not the way that biologists look at the animal kingdom. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
God, Religion, Wampeters, Foma & Granfalloons
Top