Did Evolution Really Happen?

Kung Fu

Superstar
Joined
Mar 24, 2017
Messages
5,087
I quite agree! I did it for three years at Uni. There is definitely a gap between what is presented via the media and the actual substance of their findings!
Evolution is such a wide area of study. It's a very broad topic. Yet both religious folk, atheists, and agnostics speak in such absolute terms all stemming from the colonial and imperial years of the British Empire and Darwin (note: many different groups of people were talking about evolution long before Darwin).
 

Red Sky at Morning

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
13,933
Evolution is such a wide area of study. It's a very broad topic. Yet both religious folk, atheists, and agnostics speak in such absolute terms all stemming from the colonial and imperial years of the British Empire and Darwin (note: many different groups of people were talking about evolution long before Darwin).
For people who don't want to acknowledge a Creator, there has been a long history of alternative narratives!

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_evolutionary_thought
 

mecca

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
7,122
For people who don't want to acknowledge a Creator, there has been a long history of alternative narratives!
But the processes of natural selection are observable and logical. They could have easily been put in place by a Creator, it's a natural process. Evolution is just long term natural selection.
 

Kung Fu

Superstar
Joined
Mar 24, 2017
Messages
5,087
But the processes of natural selection are observable and logical. They could have easily been put in place by a Creator, it's a natural process. Evolution is just long term natural selection.
I do agree that certain forms of evolution are observable but how is "natural selection" observable in the sense that it's random?
 

mecca

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
7,122
I do agree that certain forms of evolution are observable but how is "natural selection" observable in the sense that it's random?
It's observable because we can see examples of it and how it affects certain species over time. One example is moths. The moths used to be light colored and there were only a few dark ones but after the industrial revolution the dark ones made up the majority of the species. That's an example of natural selection where a certain trait helps survival and that trait gets more prominent.
 

Kung Fu

Superstar
Joined
Mar 24, 2017
Messages
5,087
It's observable because we can see examples of it and how it affects certain species over time. One example is moths. The moths used to be light colored and there were only a few dark ones but after the industrial revolution the dark ones made up the majority of the species. That's an example of natural selection where a certain trait helps survival and that trait gets more prominent.
But how is that random? If anything it was the complete opposite of randomness.

Also, when you talk about the changes certain species undertake to fit their environment are you referring to adaptation/micro-evolution?
 

mecca

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
7,122
But how is that random? If anything it was the complete opposite of randomness.
It's not planned, that's why it's random. The moths happened to be in an area affected by pollution and their environment darkened, they also happened to have the gene for darker colors. So it's logical that the darker ones survived in a darker environment because they camouflaged better.
Also, when you talk about the changes certain species undertake to fit their environment are you referring to adaptation/micro-evolution?
Natural selection is the process that allows animals to genetically adapt to changing environments.
 

Kung Fu

Superstar
Joined
Mar 24, 2017
Messages
5,087
It's not planned, that's why it's random. The moths happened to be in an area affected by pollution and their environment darkened, they also happened to have the gene for darker colors. So it's logical that the darker ones survived in a darker environment because they camouflaged better.

Natural selection is the process that allows animals to genetically adapt to changing environments.
And this randomness allows the moth to survive and reproduce disregarding anything else because the only thing that matters is survival and reproduction while rooting out the the "weak" and discarding it, correct?

If natural selection is the process how does adaptation and micro-evolution fit into this then?
 

mecca

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
7,122
And this randomness allows the moth to survive and reproduce
Yes because the dark ones were less visible to birds... therefore less likely to die and more likely to reproduce and pass on their trait.
the only thing that matters is survival and reproduction
No... but in nature it does matter a lot and it's the difference between the existence of a species and the extinction of a species.
rooting out the the "weak" and discarding it
The light colored moths were not weaker... they were just unfortunately more visible to birds in a darker environment and they got eaten.
how does adaptation and micro-evolution fit into this then
The moths adapted to the darker environment because of the process of natural selection. The darker moths could blend in better and survive getting eaten by their predator so they became more prominent. The dark moths are better adapted to the environment. Natural selection, micro-evolution, and adaptation are all basically synonyms.
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2017
Messages
2,024
wait, randomness in regards to evolution refers only to mutations. Natural selection itself is definitely NOT random, that's the whole point. How on earth could it ever be considered random??
 

mecca

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
7,122
wait, randomness in regards to evolution refers only to mutations. Natural selection itself is definitely NOT random, that's the whole point. How on earth could it ever be considered random??
Yeah the mutation that creates a successful trait is random but the fact that the gene survives or helps an animal adapt isn't random, it's based on the environment and how likely it is for an animal with that trait to die or live.
 

Red Sky at Morning

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
13,933
Yeah the mutation that creates a successful trait is random but the fact that the gene survives or helps an animal adapt isn't random, it's based on the environment and how likely it is for an animal with that trait to die or live.
All of this is Biology 101. I believe in natural selection of favoured traits, selective pressures shaping the population the the one that best fits the environment. Where I differ from mainstream evolutionary thinking is that I don't believe these processes give rise to new designs / new data.

Instead of a molecules to man "tree of life" natural selection appears to produce something more like an orchard of life.

I leave a link for anyone with a scientific background to dig a bit further into.

http://creation.mobi/is-the-evolutionary-tree-changing-into-a-creationist-orchard
 

Kung Fu

Superstar
Joined
Mar 24, 2017
Messages
5,087
The light colored moths were not weaker... they were just unfortunately more visible to birds in a darker environment and they got eaten.
Survival of the fittest?

The moths adapted to the darker environment because of the process of natural selection. The darker moths could blend in better and survive getting eaten by their predator so they became more prominent. The dark moths are better adapted to the environment. Natural selection, micro-evolution, and adaptation are all basically synonyms.
Natural selection is the process by which things adapt and change in order to better survive and reproduce in which over a period of time discard that which hinders them and enhance and make better that which allows them to survive and reproduce as often as possible. Would that be correct for me to say according to Darwinian evolution (I say Darwinian because not all evolutionary biologists agree with him and there many different models of evolution counter to Darwin's)?
 

mecca

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
7,122
Natural selection is the process by which things adapt and change in order to better survive and reproduce in which over a period of time discard that which hinders them and enhance and make better that which allows them to survive and reproduce as often as possible. Would that be correct for me to say according to Darwinian evolution
Yeah sure... it's an observable phenomenon.
 

Kung Fu

Superstar
Joined
Mar 24, 2017
Messages
5,087
Yeah sure... it's an observable phenomenon.
I was going to go further in depth but I don't have the time right now. If I have time tomorrow I'll try to get to what I wanted to put out regarding natural selection.

Also, on a side note micro-evolution is observable but speciation/macro-evolution are not observable.
 

mecca

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
7,122
I was going to go further in depth but I don't have the time right now. If I have time tomorrow I'll try to get to what I wanted to put out regarding natural selection.
Alright
Also, on a side note micro-evolution is observable but speciation/macro-evolution are not observable.
That's true but we do have fossils.
 

Kung Fu

Superstar
Joined
Mar 24, 2017
Messages
5,087
That's true but we do have fossils.
Fossils don't actually tell us all that much in terms of speciation/macro evolution. Take for example the Cambrian Explosion (which actually goes against Darwinian Evolution). Evolutionary biologists have come out with different competing theories and conclusion based off of the same sample size of fossils available to us.
 

Cintra

Star
Joined
Jan 11, 2020
Messages
3,224
Wow! Thank you.
I learn something new every day.

Skinks!
 
Top