Printable View
Now i have an essay to hand in and i want some info regarding evolution for and against.:) Now i dont kno how to start and what is against evolution.:( Please any tips and proper info related to for and against evolution would be much appreciated. :) :D :D
Evolution as a whole or simply the mechanism of natural selection as the main vehicle for evolutionary progress?Quote:
Originally Posted by gamer4eva
That is, are you to discuss the pro and cons of say Darwinian natural selection with something like Lamarck's theories or are they expecting some sort creationist critique? The latter is a mite trickier in that you are comparing a faith based system (with a priori assumptions about the nature of the Universe) and a scientific theory which is being continually subjected to the scientific processes of examination and modification.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamarck
Edit: I haven't read through the Wiki entry for Lamarck so if it is a bit sketchy apologies.
Pro Evolution - Scientists
Anti Evolution - Religion
We are learning about darwins adaptation and natural selection. I need to know the for and against these points.
Oh, ffs... :blink:Quote:
Originally Posted by 100%
If you had a look at the Lamarck piece you will see there were pros and cons for his argument. Likewise there are areas where natural selection has been subject to discussion and modification - for this I presume you are not flying blind and have been given text books.
However, the main bulk of the anti-natural selection argument comes primarily from certain (but not all) religious quarters. The crux of their argument is that there is no evidence for one species changing into another. They have I believe conceded that variations do occur within species. However, as more and more fossil evidence turns up for developmental stages (missing links as it were) they are forced to retreat ever further into arguing that each missing link is a distinct species in its own right. Thus, consequently, there never can be a missing link.
The other stand point is ID (which some argue is just the religious argument toned down to look less strident) which, put simply, takes the watchmakers argument postulated by a 19th century Rector (William Paley). It argues that anything so complex as life must have a designer and that it could not be subject to simple random development. This argument is backed with some questionable (in my view) probability maths.
Edit: If you are using the ID type arguments against natural selection I dare say it would be useful to look at irreducible complexity although again many biologists consider these arguments deeply flawed.
:lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4Oh, ffs... :blink:Quote:
Originally Posted by 100%
unless you're a raelion or scientologist, what alternative to evolution do you believe in that isn't down to supernatural forces?
The one thing that always stood out to me is the existince of a little one cell organism that moves itself my using something called a flagel.
Scientiest have come to the conclusion that this creature cannot be the result of evolution because it wouldn't be able to live if any one of its features were removed or reduced.
Fascinating, isn't it?
SkweekyQuote:
Originally Posted by Skweeky
That is the irreducible complexity I was talking of. However, the author (a Mr Behe) has conceded a flaw in his logic and is currently working on a yet unpublished correction. The argument as it stands is back to front. If you took any of its (very few) current components it would indeed fail as an organism. However, that does not determine that it reached its current form through developing each of these components independantly and completely as they are now.
I believe his book "Darwin's Black Box" (I think) was used in a court case to support ID in a US school and that in part the case lost because of the logical flaw in the argument.
What exactly is your paper suppossed to be about? All you said was "for or against evolution", do you mean what 100% said? And are you sure the essay is not about how YOU feel on the topic? If it is, pick the side your for and explain why then just explain why your against the other. Your not gonna find FACTS about for or against evolution(only opinions & beliefs) and usually an essay is based on yours.
Skweeky: Evolution/adaptation does work that way. It doesn't remove or reduce traits needed to survive. Natural selection enhances favorable traits while trying to minimize the heredity of bad ones(much like a breeder would).
Anywho how come anti-evolution folks(the religous type) cant accept evolution? They say evolution teaches that there is no "Creator/God/Buddha/Allah", whatever name you use. Why cant they just accept the bit of evolution that we see evidence of, but know that life had 2 have come from somewhere else(evolution does not cover the actual creation of life, merely how we all came to be).
Besides if you think God directly created every living thing here then you must believe that you could fit 2 of every living species on a boat.
Agreed.Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4Oh, ffs... :blink:Quote:
Originally Posted by 100%
That's the type of simplistic shite that we have to put up with constantly.
Do they actually have courses in bigoted pre-conceived nonsense now, or is it still ... oh never mind.
The point is that nothing is so simple, including your own inquisitive assertion, and you damn well know it, The.Quote:
Originally Posted by GepperRankins:lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
unless you're a raelion or scientologist, what alternative to evolution do you believe in that isn't down to supernatural forces?
A cudgel will not dispose of either argument, and I believe we've done this to death already.
Well put Biggles. You work with genetics too?
If you decide to be condescending it's probably best not to end sentences with a preposition.Quote:
Originally Posted by ram82082
Yeah?Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaulIf you decide to be condescending it's probably best not to end sentences with a preposition.Quote:
Originally Posted by ram82082
thats true, it's easy to write about thatQuote:
Originally Posted by 100%
1st para - intro
2nd - pros of evolution
3rrd - religion
4th - compare
5- conclusion
5 Paragraphs, nice one.Quote:
Originally Posted by BrolyBoothats true, it's easy to write about thatQuote:
Originally Posted by 100%
1st para - intro
2nd - pros of evolution
3rrd - religion
4th - compare
5- conclusion
Sorted, well done that man.
didnt know you could condescend in agreement
Me either:)Quote:
Originally Posted by ram82082
Of course you did, you're a bright enough lad to understand that.Quote:
Originally Posted by ram82082
You can do better than that, Shirley.Quote:
Originally Posted by Proper BoMe either:)Quote:
Originally Posted by ram82082
Over here thats called sarcastic, why couldnt you just leave it alone. You were wrong in assuming I was being condescending. Back to the actual topic evolution. I accept your sincere apology.
I can, and don't call me Shirley.Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaulYou can do better than that, Shirley.Quote:
Originally Posted by Proper Bo
It's "shirley", we don't capitalise our interweb names:snooty:
What in the name of fuck is that all about. Let me break that down for you, it may be easier that way.Quote:
Originally Posted by ram82082
1. Where is "over here"
2. What was sarcastic.
3. Leave what alone.
4. Who assumed you were being condescending.
5. Who apologised, to whom.
6. Do you actually know what sarcastic means.
Please try to make your drivel a bit clearer, it's probably best all round.
How many interweb names do you have like.Quote:
Originally Posted by Proper BoI can, and don't call me Shirley.Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
It's "shirley", we don't capitalise our interweb names:snooty:
You could research other reasonable scientific arguments besides evolution.Quote:
Originally Posted by gamer4eva
You could touch on the possible religious part of man's beginnings like intelligent design.
You could then write about how they both are entirely different (science and religion) and explain how one is based on evidence and the other is based on faith.
well there's "the web", "the internet", "the net", "the interweb" and if I'm wanting to sound twatful, "the world wide web".Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaulHow many interweb names do you have like.Quote:
Originally Posted by Proper Bo
Or even research the possibility that lots of people believe that God created the Universe, but also accept that there may also have been an evolutionary process. :OQuote:
Originally Posted by Busyman™You could research other reasonable scientific arguments besides evolution.Quote:
Originally Posted by gamer4eva
You could touch on the possible religious part of man's beginnings like intelligent design.
You could then write about how they both are entirely different (science and religion) and explain how one is based on evidence and the other is based on faith.
Just because one is Christian doesn't automatically make one a 7 day creationist. Or is that just a popular misconception.
lol can someone be this mans friend please... he's just TOO smart to understand normal ppl. Why did you even come and post here? You didnt say anything about evolution. Way to contribute buddy. PEACE
Can a mod come close this, its through.
Oh satire, that's one of my favourite methods of deflection.Quote:
Originally Posted by Proper Bowell there's "the web", "the internet", "the net", "the interweb" and if I'm wanting to sound twatful, "the world wide web".Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
So when did you become the arbitrator of discussion.Quote:
Originally Posted by ram82082
Was there a memo I missed.
I wonder if I have that power too.
Without question, some things are taken as read.Quote:
Originally Posted by Karen DiConcet
:lol:
Ram thank you for agreeing with me - However I am not a biologist just a man of parts (some of which still work).
I see you are relatively new - you will come to appreciate JPs finer points in time.
Yeah, I'm just polite to the twunt so he doesn't do a gillian. That way he posts some entertaining pish on Friday nights.
:noes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Biggles
Speak for yerself, ya whippersnapper.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biggles
He may just get bored with him.
:lol: GeniousQuote:
Originally Posted by Busyman™Speak for yerself, ya whippersnapper.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biggles
He may just get bored with him.
:shifty: Perhaps notQuote:
Originally Posted by JPaul:noes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Biggles
You reckon :OQuote:
Originally Posted by Biggles:shifty: Perhaps notQuote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
I couldn't possibly comment.