[_ Old Earth _] Irreducible Complexity?

[coffeelover]

so the toe says poof in one instant the first cell formed fully and had something to ingest,,or is that part of the the theory of abiogenesis?

It would be abiogenesis, but I don't think abiogenesis says that either.

 

[jasoncran]

so the toe says poof in one instant the first cell formed fully and had something to ingest,,or is that part of the the theory of abiogenesis?

It would be abiogenesis, but I don't think abiogenesis says that either.

yes and no, it says that someway some chemical elements formed the first aminoacids.

 

[jasoncran]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis
alot of we dont know with some experimentation on what is plauisable. mights , coulda and shoulda. donna a know a fir sura.

 

[coffeelover]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis
alot of we dont know with some experimentation on what is plauisable. mights , coulda and shoulda. donna a know a fir sura.

What's wrong with saying we don't know yet?

 

[jasoncran]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis
alot of we dont know with some experimentation on what is plauisable. mights , coulda and shoulda. donna a know a fir sura.

What's wrong with saying we don't know yet?

nothing but its not being taught that way. ever heard of the explanation of panspermia. we can believe twas an alien from mars that did it but not god.

and yes panspermia is being taught in the florida collegiate system.

i learned this recently. and some claim the toe is plauisable.

 

[faithtransforms]

Exactly, that is what I understand to be the difference between "micro" and "macro" evolution. As a creationist, I believe 100% in natural selection, I just reject the idea of trans-speciation.

However, there seems to be ample evidence of such trans-speciation, demonstrated in both the fossil record, the phylogenetic hierarchy and in ring species as in the example previously referred to. If you are happy with the actuality of microevolution, i.e. changes within species, I wonder what biological mechanism you see as preventing macroevolution from occurring, what evidence there is for the existence of this mechanism and how it can be identified?

I need to do some research on "transitional" fossils. I understand there is great debate as to whether there really are true examples in the fossil record of species in transition. As to what mechanism would prevent the possibility of macroevolution I do not know. I would have to research the topic much more thoroughly to give you a thoughtful response.

 

[coffeelover]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis
alot of we dont know with some experimentation on what is plauisable. mights , coulda and shoulda. donna a know a fir sura.

What's wrong with saying we don't know yet?

nothing but its not being taught that way. ever heard of the explanation of panspermia. we can believe twas an alien from mars that did it but not god.

and yes panspermia is being taught in the florida collegiate system.

i learned this recently. and some claim the toe is plauisable.

Panspermia may be being discussed in a collegiate atmosphere. College is supposed to be about discussing theories. Panspermia is mostly sci fi guessing anyhow.

Also, of course toe is plausible. It is the pretty much accepted my all biologists.

 

[jasoncran]

the word plauisable doenst meant its set as done we know that it happening

i dont say that its plausable that we die, rather that we will die.

plauisable as in most likely but some are so set that theres to be no questioning of darwin

and space aliens bringing life to the earth isnt just as "religious" as christ doing it to you?

paging one daniel jackson to explain how man got here and the pyramids being landing platforms.

they used the word plausable for the the theory of abiogenesis. btw hmm

 

[coffeelover]

the word plauisable doenst meant its set as done we know that it happening

i dont say that its plausable that we die, rather that we will die.

plauisable as in most likely but some are so set that theres to be no questioning of darwin

and space aliens bringing life to the earth isnt just as "religious" as christ doing it to you?

paging one daniel jackson to explain how man got here and the pyramids being landing platforms.

they used the word plausable for the the theory of abiogenesis. btw hmm

Aliens bringing life to earth is the storyline to a star trek the next generation episode. It is not seriously being discussed in a classroom. Well perhaps a philosophy class.

Abiogenesis isn't really a theory. It is a word to that describes a field of research with many theories.

I think most biologists think evolution has gone beyond the mere plausible, but they still question Darwin.

 

[jasoncran]

uh no its being discussed in a classroom, thats what panspermia is aliens bringing or seeding the earth with dna.

 

[lordkalvan]

I need to do some research on "transitional" fossils. I understand there is great debate as to whether there really are true examples in the fossil record of species in transition. As to what mechanism would prevent the possibility of macroevolution I do not know. I would have to research the topic much more thoroughly to give you a thoughtful response.

Just a brief comment. You should be aware that 'transitional fossils' are not the same thing as 'species in transition': a fossil (or living organism, for that matter) can show features that demonstrate transitional features (such as Archaeopteryx and Ardi, for example), but this does not mean that these particular species were themselves 'transitioning', i.e. directly ancestral to modern birds and modern hominids.

 

[coffeelover]

uh no its being discussed in a classroom, thats what panspermia is aliens bringing or seeding the earth with dna.

What is being discussed, and how is it being discussed exactly? There is no evidence for it. Might as well propose that snails from alternate dimensions seeded the earth. Its just an exercise in make believe.

 

[jasoncran]

from what my friend tells me that they are teaching that that aliens could have put life on the earth.
he may have misunderstood. or i misread him. when i see him next month, i will find out which florida state college is doing this and what they are actually saying.

 

[Barbarian]

I need to do some research on "transitional" fossils. I understand there is great debate as to whether there really are true examples in the fossil record of species in transition.

Don't see any debate on that in the science. Some creationists deny it. What would you need to see to consider a fossil "transitional?"

As to what mechanism would prevent the possibility of macroevolution I do not know. I would have to research the topic much more thoroughly to give you a thoughtful response.

Moot point. The first directly observed example was early in the last century.

 

[faithtransforms]

I need to do some research on "transitional" fossils. I understand there is great debate as to whether there really are true examples in the fossil record of species in transition. As to what mechanism would prevent the possibility of macroevolution I do not know. I would have to research the topic much more thoroughly to give you a thoughtful response.

Just a brief comment. You should be aware that 'transitional fossils' are not the same thing as 'species in transition': a fossil (or living organism, for that matter) can show features that demonstrate transitional features (such as Archaeopteryx and Ardi, for example), but this does not mean that these particular species were themselves 'transitioning', i.e. directly ancestral to modern birds and modern hominids.

I didn't know that...thanks!! : ) Btw, I like your style. Very reasonable...non-argumentative. Hats off to you!! No offense, but I don't find a lot of evolutionists to be so polite, lol!!

 

[jasoncran]

tony generally is polite.

 

[lordkalvan]

I didn't know that...thanks!! : ) Btw, I like your style. Very reasonable...non-argumentative. Hats off to you!! No offense, but I don't find a lot of evolutionists to be so polite, lol!!

You're welcome and thanks for the compliment. I try to avoid confrontation and always try to return courtesy for courtesy, as in your case. I hope that everyone can learn something from reasoned discussion, even if we don't have any great expectation of changing each other's viewpoints.

 

[faithtransforms]

I didn't know that...thanks!! : ) Btw, I like your style. Very reasonable...non-argumentative. Hats off to you!! No offense, but I don't find a lot of evolutionists to be so polite, lol!!

You're welcome and thanks for the compliment. I try to avoid confrontation and always try to return courtesy for courtesy, as in your case. I hope that everyone can learn something from reasoned discussion, even if we don't have any great expectation of changing each other's viewpoints.

100% agreed!!! : )

 

[Strangelove]

However, there seems to be ample evidence of such trans-speciation, demonstrated in both the fossil record, the phylogenetic hierarchy and in ring species as in the example previously referred to. If you are happy with the actuality of microevolution, i.e. changes within species, I wonder what biological mechanism you see as preventing macroevolution from occurring, what evidence there is for the existence of this mechanism and how it can be identified?

It's not about wondering what biological mechanism prevents macroevolution its about there being absolutely NO evidence to support it.

Is that why you believe Macroevolution Kalvan?

Because theres nothing proving it cant happen?

 

[Strangelove]

As far as I am aware, all examples that have been put forward of 'irreducibly complex' structures have failed to withstand any serious scrutiny at all, the most notorious example being that of the bacterial flagellum.

Lets see your rebuttal to Irreducible Complexity in the bacterial flagellum then.