Do you understand that evolution happens?

Question

Do you understand that species do, in fact, incorporate beneficial genetic mutations into their DNA?

Answer 1

Nikki, please read a book

Stephen Jay Gould:
"Well evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape-like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered.

Moreover, "fact" doesn't mean "absolute certainty"; there ain't no such animal in an exciting and complex world. The final proofs of logic and mathematics flow deductively from stated premises and achieve certainty only because they are not about the empirical world. Evolutionists make no claim for perpetual truth, though creationists often do (and then attack us falsely for a style of argument that they themselves favor). In science "fact" can only mean "confirmed to such a degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional consent." I suppose that apples might start to rise tomorrow, but the possibility does not merit equal time in physics classrooms."

Answer 2

In response to Ronin:

What is Gould saying. Here is how the argument is presented.

"I believe in evolution. Therefore Evolution is a fact. Now facts are not real because they can change. This applies only if you do not believe in evolution. If you don't believe in evolution you don't believe in facts. If you do believe in evolution the facts are on our side, but only the facts that support us. Facts that do not support us will not be considered as facts until evolution has found a way to incorporate them into the theory.

And You use this as a proof of Evolution. Get real. I have found it amazing how in debates I get this quoted as if Stephen Gould is saying something that really means something.

When I debate, this quote is thrown up all the time. If I make a ststement of fact that goes against evolution such as, "The first cell required DNA, RNA, protiens, amino acids, enzimes, a method to take in nourishment, a method to expell wastes, a method to replicate, and the host of other requirements", the evolutionist will say, "What you say is not really a fact, we have just not had enough time to prove how it happened."

Evolution is not a theory, nor is it a fact, it is a philosophy which says "I am the only truth". Because Stephen Gould says that it is so, does not make it a fact.

Please do not use that argument again

Answer 3

One of the favorite tactics of evolutionary argument is to take a specific case of what they call Special Evolution, and then in the middle of the argument change the rules, and assert that General Evolution has been proved. If I said that I agreed with a point that I would call Special Evolution, almost immediately the Evolutionary Debater would assert that I have agreed that General Evolution is a fact. However I have done no such thing.

If I say that your Special Evolutionary question is valid, will you then say that General Evolution is proved? I certianly hope not.

Lets look at your question.

You start out with the word species. What is a species? Although there are various definitions probably the most accepted is that oganisms that can mate with each other. Does your question have the underlining assertion that a beneficial mutation will create a new species?

Your Second point is a statement. You make the assertion that something is a fact. What are you saying here? Dogs are a species. Are you saying that if there is a beneficial mutation in a Boxer, that all dogs will be affected? I certianly hope not! Are you saying that the Boxer will become a new species? If so what does this new species mate with? What is the documentation that this has ever happened in any species?

Your third point is that there are beneficial mutations. That sounds good in theory, but does it ever occur in nature. If so what exactly does it do? You have lots of space to add to your original question. Please give any documentation that your hypothesis is true.

Finally you talk about DNA This is usually where the evoutionary argument changes from the Special to the General form of Evolution. Do you realize how exceedingly complicated DNA is? It is not something that changes on a whim.

In closing I guess I might ask

"Do you understand that evolution doesn't happen

There are some extra posts that I am including. One answer has quoted Steven Gould, a leading evolutionist. As a creationist whenever I use him as a reference I regard him as a Hostile Witness (In law a Hostile Witness is more believible than any other type of witness.)

In addition, I want to post a very significant "about face" for a diehard evolutionist, that was prompted by looking at DNA.

STEPHEN J. GOULD, HARVARD, "The Cambrian Explosion occurred in a geological moment, and we have reason to think that all major anatomical designs may have made their evolutionary appearance at that time. ...not only the phylum Chordata itself, but also all its major divisions, arose within the Cambrian Explosion. So much for chordate uniqueness... Contrary to Darwin's expectation that new data would reveal gradualistic continuity with slow and steady expansion, all major discoveries of the past century have only heightened the massiveness and geological abruptness of this formative event..." Nature, Vol.377, 26 10/95, p.682

Stephen J. Gould, Harvard, "Our modern phyla represent designs of great distinctness, yet our diverse world contains nothing in between sponges, corals, insects, snails, sea urchins, and fishes (to choose standard representatives of the most prominent phyla).", Natural History, p.15, Oct. 1990

STEPHEN J. Gould, Harvard , "Every paleontologist knows that most species don't change. That's bothersome....brings terrible distress. ....They may get a little bigger or bumpier but they remain the same species and that's not due to imperfection and gaps but stasis. And yet this remarkable stasis has generally been ignored as no data. If they don't change, its not evolution so you don't talk about it." Lecture at Hobart & William Smith College, 14/2/1980.

S.J.Gould, Harvard, "We can tell tales of improvement for some groups, but in honest moments we must admit that the history of complex life is more a story of multifarious variation about a set of basic designs than a saga of accumulating excellence. ...I regard the failure to find a clear 'vector of progress' in life's history as the most puzzling fact of the fossil record. ...we have sought to impose a pattern that we hoped to find on a world that does not really display it." Natural History, 2/82, p.2

Steven J. Gould, Harvard, "The evolutionary trees that adorn our textbooks have data only at the tips and nodes of their branches; the rest is inference, however reasonable, not the evidence of the fossils.", Nat.His., V.86, p.13


Former Atheist Says God Exists
By: Cliff Kinkaid (Editor of the AIM Report)
Insight On The News
December 21, 2004

It didn't make news, on the front or back pages of leading American newspapers, but Professor Antony Flew, a prominent British philosopher who is considered the world's best-known atheist, has cited advancements in science as proof of the existence of God. This is comparable to Hugh Hefner announcing that he is becoming a celibate.
At a symposium sponsored by the Institute for Metascientific Research, Flew said he has come to believe in God based on developments in DNA research. Flew, author of the book, Darwinian Evolution, declared, "What I think the DNA material has done is show that intelligence must have been involved in getting these extraordinarily diverse elements together. The enormous complexity by which the results were achieved look to me like the work of intelligence."
Associated Press distributed a December 9 story by religion writer Richard N. Ostling about Flew's conversion. Flew told AP that his current ideas had some similarity with those of U.S. "intelligent design" theorists, who believe the complexity of life points to an intelligent source of life, rather than the random and natural processes posited by Charles Darwin's theory of evolution.

Answer 4

Do you understand that the complexity of some of the biological systems couldn't possibly have come about through random chance mutations. Some biological systems are like an engine, where if you remove one part of it, it wouldn't function at all. So these systems couldn't have advanced piece by piece as they would not have been functional until the final necessary part was in place. Take a car for instance. What would be the advantage of sprouting calipers, a cam shaft, and some transmission lines without the rest of the systems that these parts are a part of. Unless of course you believe that a complex system just spontaneously evolved all at once.

Answer 5

Evolution is the THEORY that every living thing evolved from first, single celled organism and then from higher forms of life. However, this has never been defiently proved and science cannot recreate any evolution as it happened in nature. I have found no proof or been shown proof that makes this no more then a THEORY. All evidence shown to me always happens after life had evolved to a certain point and nothing before.

Answer 6

Micro evolution happens but not Macro evolution.

Answer 7

It can't be logically challenged given the weight of evidence-99% of biologists accept it as fact yet creationists glibly state it doesn't happen. They are either ignorant of the facts or just plain bigotted.

Answer 8

But that's not what it says in the bible. And if it's not in the bible it can't be true. Like Gravity: Just a theory and it's not even proven in the bible. Are you gonna believe in gravity? Pfft.

Also: Nooooo.....my parents were not monkeys?!?!?!


:P
Straw Men are fun!!

Answer 9

Their is no such thing as evolution . People and animals just don't evolve .

Answer 10

absolutely. i don't claim extensive knowledge of it, but i understood enough in science class to know that it's just plain silly to dispute it.