I Am Bored

Loads of viral videos, games, memes, lists and social networking for when you're bored. Updated every day, so visit often.
LatestPopularMost BookmarkedMost EmailedTop RatedMy FavoritesRandomChat
AllGamesFunnyEntertainmentQuizzesWeirdTechLifestyle, Arts & Lit.News & PoliticsScienceSportsMisc
Submit Content  





rss

friendsmore friends | add your site
Asylum

Holy Taco

Funny Videos

BuzzFeed

NothingToxic

Oddee

Mousebreaker

Online Games

Eat Liver

Online Games

Gorilla Mask

Full Downloads

Norway Games

Damn Cool Pics

Kontraband

Extreme Humor

X Hollywood

I Dont Like You

123 Games

Hollywoodtuna

Funny Games

Cool Stuff

Viva La Games

X - Vids

Smit Happens

Funny Videos

Funny Stuff

ebaumsworld



Back to Listing

Evolution:Addressing Falsehoods, Explaining Basics

Hits: 20896 | Rating: (3.4) | Category: Science | Added by: cobrakiller
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next >   Jump to: Bottom    Last Post
dielaughing
Female, 13-17, Western US
 130 Posts
Wednesday, November 24, 2010 12:06:09 AM
Wow...really informative video. And I have a biology test Monday so thanks! :D

kingadaQ
Male, 18-29, Canada
 21 Posts
Monday, November 15, 2010 4:39:29 PM
YAWN!

Angilion
Male, 40-49, Europe
 11060 Posts
Tuesday, November 09, 2010 12:03:50 AM
Theory: a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena

Fact: a truth known by actual experience or observation; something known to be true

That is why evolution is a theory and not a fact.



That's why evolution is a fact - it is known to be true by observation. Also, humans have used it for millenia - selective breeding is evolution in which the selection is made by people instead of nature. If evolution didn't exist, selective breeding wouldn't work.

The theory of evolution is a theory to explain how the fact of evolution works. The theory of evolution is not evolution itself.

JGsox33
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
 48 Posts
Monday, November 08, 2010 11:14:39 PM
(damnit, got cut off)
It's funny that some people find comfort in "rules" like that... If there is no ultimatum, no form of eternal punishment, they might not have morals.
I heard one devout Christian argue that he truly believed people would not know it is wrong to murder a person unless they read the bible, believed in God, etc. It was actually from that documentary by Bill Maher.
BUT ANYWAY. Evolution is true. Duh.

mvangild
Male, 30-39, Midwest US
 528 Posts
Monday, November 08, 2010 8:28:06 PM
As for my last post on this thread:

Theory: a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena

Fact: a truth known by actual experience or observation; something known to be true

That is why evolution is a theory and not a fact. As I said before, being a theory does not diminish it. Sure, the fossil record shows it to be viable. But the fossil record isn't complete, and won't be completed within our lifetimes. As I said previously, maybe there's data that could disprove evolution as we know it, but I am not holding my breath on that one.

mvangild
Male, 30-39, Midwest US
 528 Posts
Monday, November 08, 2010 8:15:23 PM
Anyways, old thread is old. I'll rejoin this interesting discussion (meant with respect) on the next thread on evolution.

No problem, Davy. I look forward to it.

mvangild
Male, 30-39, Midwest US
 528 Posts
Monday, November 08, 2010 8:14:25 PM
Davy, poodles were more artificial selection as opposed to gradualism. Animals were being bred for beneficial traits. I won't go into the definition of gradualism here. Horses weren't as gradual as you think they were. There were times when there was some gradualism, but others where the evolutionary line changed rather abruptly, where a species and its 'ancestor' to coexist, even if only for a short time.

mvangild
Male, 30-39, Midwest US
 528 Posts
Monday, November 08, 2010 7:13:15 PM
At risk of coming across as an ass (not my intention):

Davy, I'll concede that point, that evolution doesn't attempt to explain our existence. What it does, however, is attempt to explain the origin of the species that have been observed.

I apologise if I'm missing something, but isn't that the same thing? As I stated, evolution explains the diversity of life we observe on the planet. Nothing to do with origins of where, when, or how life started. That would be abiogenesis.

No problem, Davy. I appreciate this type of debate. Origin of species isn't my wording, it's Darwin's. I couldn't come up with a way to word it originally that still got the point across. My best understanding is that evolution theorizes how each species originated, which is what you said in your last comment.

PringleMan
Female, 13-17, Canada
 1364 Posts
Monday, November 08, 2010 3:35:37 PM
very nice, but i don't think the people needing to be convinced evolution is real would do so by learning all the facts about it, or taking the time out of their busy schedules to watch this vid. Because it's boring. sorry.

I-IS-BORED
Male, 18-29, Canada
 2432 Posts
Monday, November 08, 2010 10:28:30 AM
"Your rebuttal is true, but it's rebutting a point that's invalid anyway."

I was just showing that even when assuming it was valid, you still get the same conclusion.

NottaSpy
Male, 40-49, Western US
 870 Posts
Monday, November 08, 2010 9:01:18 AM
I've seen a lot of arguments about Evolution before, but this is the first time I'm seen both people on the same side arguing basically the same thing.

SvampeBob
Male, 18-29, Europe
 3088 Posts
Monday, November 08, 2010 4:42:46 AM
the worst thing is that I've heard of people saying "my grandparents are not monkeys and "I wasn't born a monkey look at this picture" < insert face palm >

PunchFace
Male, 18-29, Europe
 30 Posts
Monday, November 08, 2010 2:40:31 AM
The main problem with using dogs as the example here, is that the resultant offspring can still successfully breed. Granted, it shows a variation in physical characteristics caused by genetic manipulation, but no speciation. Human manipulation of the Equus genus however, different story.. Through artificial selection by humans we have created a few species within this genus which do not produce viable offspring when they breed. Hinny (offspring of a male horse and female donkey) are all infertile. The two parents are genetically different due to a different number of chromosomes (Horse 64, donkey 62). Speciation caused by a gradual variation in genetics. We chose to breed larger, more elegant animals (horses) and the more docile pack animals (donkeys) and while doing this created two distinct species.

Angilion
Male, 40-49, Europe
 11060 Posts
Sunday, November 07, 2010 11:35:53 PM
Dude, Wolf --> Poodle. In an evolutionary blink of an eye, a couple of centuries. Sure, that was human engineering, but it proves it can happen, if the right environmental pressures are applied.


I'm going to emphasise this point.

Selective breeding *is* evolution. It's not just dogs. It's almost all animals closely connected with humans. We've used evolution to significantly alter them.

Sure, it's evolution by human selection rather than by natural selection, but it's still evolution.

It's like farming. Humans don't actually create the crops. They direct a natural process.

Farming is also an example of evolution by human selection, as food crops have also been changed by selective breeding.

Angilion
Male, 40-49, Europe
 11060 Posts
Sunday, November 07, 2010 11:28:05 PM
Is is really that hard to see the connection without isolating a two populations of one species and observing them until they can no longer mate?


That has been observed in nature. Your rebuttal is true, but it's rebutting a point that's invalid anyway.

It has also been partially observed by people doing exactly what you (correctly) state isn't necessary - isolating two populations of one species (in different environments) and observing them until they can no longer mate. The animals tested could have mated between the groups after they were rejoined, but chose not to. It can't have been a conscious choice - the experiments were done on flies. Run the experiment longer and they'd be seperate species. Not that it's necessary, because there are numerous examples of speciation occuring in nature.

I-IS-BORED
Male, 18-29, Canada
 2432 Posts
Sunday, November 07, 2010 10:57:28 PM
It's kinda like saying "well I KNOW this hollow glass ball used to contain water and NOW it contains steam, but I didn't see it change so obviously the water poofed out of existence and the steam poofed into existence."

I-IS-BORED
Male, 18-29, Canada
 2432 Posts
Sunday, November 07, 2010 10:54:21 PM
"Not one species has been directly observed to change into a different species. Only adaptations have been directly observed."

1. There are species that we know existed Y years ago but don't exist now.

2. There are species that exist now that didn't exist X years ago.

3. There is no magical machine that made the new species appear to replace the old ones.

Is is really that hard to see the connection without isolating a two populations of one species and observing them until they can no longer mate? I mean... if that's your reason for evolution not existing then i guess God doesn't either right? When did we directly observe him/it/her?

Angilion
Male, 40-49, Europe
 11060 Posts
Sunday, November 07, 2010 7:42:55 PM
The greater picture is this: we are confusing facts and theories for one another, even with overwhelming evidence to support said theory. Fact: we're being pulled to the earth by some force. Theory: gravity. Fact: we exist, and there are some interesting similarities between species. Theory: evolution.


Aha, now I see your mistake. You're doing what you think other people are doing - confusing facts and theories.

Fact: Objects are pulled towards each other by a force that we've called 'gravity'.

Theory of gravity: An explanation of how gravity works.

Fact: Living things evolve.

Theory of evolution: An explanation of how evolution works.

You're also confusing facts and theories with other facts and theories - evolution does not cover the existence of life, just its development.

Angilion
Male, 40-49, Europe
 11060 Posts
Sunday, November 07, 2010 7:35:21 PM
@Angilion, I don't get your hostilty?


Hopefully my last post will help you understand it.

I am hostile to people who are hostile to science and misrepresent it. I have numerous very good reasons for that, philosophical, practical and personal. Here's a good personal one - without science, my mother would be dead. In fact, she would have died before I was born and so I wouldn't exist.

Angilion
Male, 40-49, Europe
 11060 Posts
Sunday, November 07, 2010 7:32:16 PM
Please remind me of the numerous false statements I made or what I presented as fact other than no one knows how it all began.


1) That the existence of your particular god is a proven fact.

2) That "alot" of people who don't deny the existence of evolution say that it directly disproves the existence of all gods.

3) That a larger "alot" of people preach evolution.

Since there's no such word as "alot", you might have meant anything by it, but I'm sure you meant it to mean a large number.

4) That thinking that humanity can have a significant effect on the environment makes it impossible to acknowledge that evolution exists.

5) That people who acknowledge that evolution exists think that it has stopped.

All in your post on Friday, November 05, 2010 3:16:22 PM.

They're all false to the point of being bizarre. 4 and 5 don't even make any sense at all.

davymid
Male, 30-39, Europe
 12015 Posts
Sunday, November 07, 2010 7:26:14 PM
Sorry for quad post guys.

Sure we see natural selection, but that's a different process altogether.

Yes, yes it is. Evolution is a fact, natural selection is a theory/mechanism/explanation. See previous.

You're descending to the same level of confusion that you originally accused me of. Evolution is a fact, if we accept that species observably change over time (ignoring the obvious religious freaks who shout otherwise). Darwinian natural selection is one part of one theory to explain Evolution, but many modern evolutionary biologists refute that natural selection is the driving force behind evolution. Citing Natural Selection=Evolution is as wrong as stating that Einstein's Theory of Relativity=Gravity. The latter is an observable fact, the former is an espoused scientific theory which attempts to explain the fact.

Anyways, old thread is old. I'll rejoin this interesting discussion (meant with respect) on the next thread on evolution.

davymid
Male, 30-39, Europe
 12015 Posts
Sunday, November 07, 2010 7:19:55 PM
Also, we haven't been around for nearly long enough to be able to directly observe gradual shifts in species.

Dude, Wolf --> Poodle. In an evolutionary blink of an eye, a couple of centuries. Sure, that was human engineering, but it proves it can happen, if the right environmental pressures are applied.

davymid
Male, 30-39, Europe
 12015 Posts
Sunday, November 07, 2010 7:16:27 PM
I make that point because there are competing theories for specie differentiation, the most popular being punctuated equilibrium

That theory was popular in the early 70s, which made scientific sense at the time. Since then, the fossil record has become much more complete, and would more suggest Lyellian gradualism. I'd hardly call it "the most popular" amongst evolutionary biologists in 2010.

This was developed to account for the lack of gradualism in the fossil record.

There's an astounding amount of gradualism in the fossil record, if we examine it. The evolution of the horse springs to mind. I won't insult you by providing a link, you know where to find that info, you seem to be well-versed in evolutionary science (no attack or sly dig).

davymid
Male, 30-39, Europe
 12015 Posts
Sunday, November 07, 2010 7:16:03 PM
At risk of coming across as an ass (not my intention):

Davy, I'll concede that point, that evolution doesn't attempt to explain our existence. What it does, however, is attempt to explain the origin of the species that have been observed.

I apologise if I'm missing something, but isn't that the same thing? As I stated, evolution explains the diversity of life we observe on the planet. Nothing to do with origins of where, when, or how life started. That would be abiogenesis.

mvangild
Male, 30-39, Midwest US
 528 Posts
Sunday, November 07, 2010 5:23:19 PM
I think there's another issue here. Many here think that if one does not subscribe to evolution, then one must subscribe to creationism. There is the possibility that more than one scientific theory fits the evidence at hand. That's why I'm not completely on the evolution bandwagon: I think there may be another theory that better fits the fossil record.

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next > 

You Must be Signed in to Add a Comment

If you've already got an I-Am-Bored.com account,
click here to sign in.

If you don't have an account yet,
Click Here to Create a Free Account
 

Back to Listing ^top


Bored | Suggest a Link | Advertise | Contact I Am Bored | About I Am Bored | Link to I Am Bored | Live Submission | Privacy | TOS | Ad Choices | Copyright Policy |
© 2014 Demand Media, Inc. All rights reserved.