Originally posted by @kazetnagorraAbiogenesis and the nature of good mutations verses bad ones over time.
Which aspect of the theory of evolution hasn't been sufficiently critically evaluated, in your view?
Originally posted by @kellyjayAbiogenesis isn't an aspect of the theory of evolution.
Abiogenesis and the nature of good mutations verses bad ones over time.
"The nature of good mutations verses (sic) bad ones" probably refers to natural selection. Which aspect of natural selection is unclear to you?
Originally posted by @kazetnagorraReally lock step beliefs for every single one of them. I will have to spend a little time validating this.
The evidence in favour of the Big Bang is overwhelmingly strong; I am not aware of any cosmologist rejecting it. It would be like a surgeon denying the existence of the liver.
Originally posted by @kazetnagorraIf you cannot get out of the starting block the race isn’t even ran. The starting of every process is also vital to understanding it the processes mechanics.
Abiogenesis isn't an aspect of the theory of evolution.
"The nature of good mutations verses (sic) bad ones" probably refers to natural selection. Which aspect of natural selection is unclear to you?
Originally posted by @kazetnagorraNatural selection only passes along the improvements to facilitate the changes in DNA. Notice the changes come before they are passed along, which means it doesn’t direct change only filters them. Yet without a guide you believe among all the changes that are randomly taking place, nothing that would kill off life occurs and sticks around, only the good even though more bad happens than good?
Abiogenesis isn't an aspect of the theory of evolution.
"The nature of good mutations verses (sic) bad ones" probably refers to natural selection. Which aspect of natural selection is unclear to you?
Originally posted by @kellyjayNo, it's not. You don't need to know anything about how Usain Bolt was born to understand how he is winning races. Your statement betrays ignorance about the basics of the theory of evolution. I suggest you start reading a bit about it.
If you cannot get out of the starting block the race isn’t even ran. The starting of every process is also vital to understanding it the processes mechanics.
Originally posted by @kellyjayYep. The "guide" is called natural selection. Since this is apparently the first time you hear about, I suggest you read more about it here:
Natural selection only passes along the improvements to facilitate the changes in DNA. Notice the changes come before they are passed along, which means it doesn’t direct change only filters them. Yet without a guide you believe among all the changes that are randomly taking place, nothing that would kill off life occurs and sticks around, only the good even though more bad happens than good?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_selection
Without some interaction of the phenotype with the environment, the notion of "good" and "bad" mutations aren't even well-defined.
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 29244
Denying evolution is akin to denying the existence of dinosaurs.
Fossil progressions are a 'no-brainer.'
Edit:
Case Study: Evolution of the Modern Horse.
Highly detailed fossil records have been recovered for sequences in the evolution of modern horses. The fossil record of horses in North America is especially rich and contains transition fossils: fossils that show intermediate stages between earlier and later forms. The fossil record extends back to a dog-like ancestor some 55 million years ago, which gave rise to the first horse-like species 55 to 42 million years ago in the genus Eohippus...
The original sequence of species believed to have evolved into the horse was based on fossils discovered in North America in the 1870s by paleontologist Othniel Charles Marsh. The sequence, from Eohippus to the modern horse (Equus), was popularized by Thomas Huxley and became one of the most widely known examples of a clear evolutionary progression. The sequence of transitional fossils was assembled by the American Museum of Natural History into an exhibit that emphasized the gradual, “straight-line” evolution of the horse.
https://courses.lumenlearning.com/boundless-biology/chapter/evidence-of-evolution/
Originally posted by @kazetnagorraIf it is impossible for him to leave the starting block the race doesn’t matter.
No, it's not. You don't need to know anything about how Usain Bolt was born to understand how he is winning races. Your statement betrays ignorance about the basics of the theory of evolution. I suggest you start reading a bit about it.
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-dukeThe horses skeletons could be horses skeletons and the dog like skeletons could be dog skeletons. Finding the bones doesn’t prove the horse used to be a dog. Unless of course you have a vivid imagination.
Denying evolution is akin to denying the existence of dinosaurs.
Fossil progressions are a 'no-brainer.'
Edit:
Case Study: Evolution of the Modern Horse.
Highly detailed fossil records have been recovered for sequences in the evolution of modern horses. The fossil record of horses in North America is especially rich and contains transi ...[text shortened]... e horse.
https://courses.lumenlearning.com/boundless-biology/chapter/evidence-of-evolution/
The actual evolution of the dog that can be observed starts with dogs and ends with different species of dogs. Yes the dogs change but at the end they’re still dogs.
Originally posted by @dj2beckerHave you considered submitting your novel findings about the evolution of dogs and horses to a biology journal?
The horses skeletons could be horses skeletons and the dog like skeletons could be dog skeletons. Finding the bones doesn’t prove the horse used to be a dog. Unless of course you have a vivid imagination.
The actual evolution of the dog that can be observed starts with dogs and ends with different species of dogs. Yes the dogs change but at the end they’re still dogs.