|
My friend contacted me, saying, "since I know you're a part of this community with vast intellectual minds interested in this subject matter, could you ask them to critique my argument?" Well, since I owe him one, here we are.
[begin] Okay look, this is all that needs to be said The law of biogenesis The principle that living organisms develop only from other living organisms of the same kind and not from nonliving matter. that being said how could this happen? and if "vertical evolution", or evolution from one species to another, were true why would we have the diversity in species and animals we have today? wouldnt there just be one superanimal that could survive anything? why would this evolve into us... and a gorilla, whats the point when evolving into a human would be the best option?
this type of speculation of evolution is crazy.
This theory would require an entire species, or at least one male and one female, to evolve into the exact same thing at relatively the same time. If you know anything about the sheer complexity of DNA, atoms, or any other single organ of the body then you should easily realize how crazy evolution really is!
There are so many other reasons but I dont have the time to post them all.
If you have any responses, questions, comments, etc then please feel free to ask tell or whatever.
challenge me i need some practice arguments.
Open your eyes people! Evolution from one species to another is easily destroyed by basic scientific principles.
[end]
|
Entropy.
I win.
further clarification:
Your friend's argument rests on vast overgeneralizations that indicate a very basic understanding of the concept of evolution.
Firstly: The definition of life itself is that all life must come from other life. But the origins of the first cell are unknown at this time. However, various experimentation has demonstrated that it is possible to generate amino acids under primordial earth conditions-the basis for proteins and the beginnings of life. Entropy dictates that such chaos would eventually produce something.
The second idea, that other organisms "evolve" into something else, is something that came from Pokemon. A creature doesn't evolve into one thing, it has many different things. But these things are for the most part similar to the original parent. However, over time, as these small differences accumulate, and various conditions occur that favor one set of differences over the other, eventually you will have a different species that can no longer mate with the original parent to produce viable offspring. But organisms and evolve into multiple other organisms: for instance, the primates have demonstrated how they can evolve into thousands of different primates. Some are with us still today, some aren't. But it's not that vertical evolution takes place, it's a tree. This is expected by entropy.
Again, your friend's argument that the sudden change of a male and a female of a given type to turn into a different species demonstrates ignorance of how it works. Like I said, the various changes accumulate in these different variations of the same species until they become no longer able to reproduce with the original parent's type to produce a viable child. However, keep in mind that organisms have multiple offspring, and due to the processes of crossing over and random mutation, the offspring will be different from each other. But these changes are gradual-a gorilla didn't give birth to a baby. This is also expected by entropy.
Your friend also assumes that DNA assorts randomly. This is false, there is a concept called linkage, and he simplifies vague biological concepts to support his answer. This isn't an argument, this is rhetoric.
Q.E.D.
|
Organisms evolve to match an environmental niche. There is more than one type of environment on earth. In other words, a penguin wouldn't survive very well in the tropics.
Honestly I think that's a terrible argument. This is just the first way I thought of to disprove it.
|
I couldn't agree more, personally I think the guy is an imbecile. But, like I said, you guys are rather more versed on the issue than I am and are more adequately equipped to hand his ass to him, so to speak.
|
United Arab Emirates5090 Posts
right now i need someone to photoshop darwin's head onto the tshirt guy and on the shirt it says "bitches dont know bout my theory of evolution"
a disturbingly large portion of the anti-evolution crowd don't really know what evolution is.
"evolution from one species to another" solid proof that you have a crappy understanding as to what evolution is.
+ Show Spoiler +
|
On May 21 2009 01:20 Track wrote:
[begin] Okay look, this is all that needs to be said The law of biogenesis The principle that living organisms develop only from other living organisms of the same kind and not from nonliving matter. that being said how could this happen? and if "vertical evolution", or evolution from one species to another, were true why would we have the diversity in species and animals we have today? wouldnt there just be one superanimal that could survive anything? why would this evolve into us... and a gorilla, whats the point when evolving into a human would be the best option?
Evolving into a human isn't always the best option. Species evolve traits that prove useful to individuals within the species enough to make them more likely to survive to breeding age. If a species of bird feeds primarily on nuts with a tough shell, the individuals with the strongest beaks/muscles powering those beaks will 1. waste less energy cracking them open and 2. be able to eat some nuts that the others just can't crack, and therefore be more likely to survive. As time progresses, the longer surviving tough-beaked birds will pass on their tough beaks while the weaker beaked ones will die out. Tada, evolution. However, just because these beaks are good for the nut-eating birds, doesn't mean they are good for all species of birds. Birds that eat insects will need an entirely different beak setup, so not every species of bird will need to develop tough beaks, and for some species it would even be detrimental. Tada, diversification.
this type of speculation of evolution is crazy.
This theory would require an entire species, or at least one male and one female, to evolve into the exact same thing at relatively the same time.
Evolution is a SLOW process. It isn't like some thursday millions of years ago the birds in the above example decided they should all have tougher beaks. Good traits get passed on more frequently than bad traits (due to survival rates) and when you take those changes and throw in millions of years, you see species evolution.
If you know anything about the sheer complexity of DNA, atoms, or any other single organ of the body then you should easily realize how crazy evolution really is!
The people that know the most about those things hold evolution as truth...sorry.
There are so many other reasons but I dont have the time to post them all.
If you have any responses, questions, comments, etc then please feel free to ask tell or whatever.
challenge me i need some practice arguments.
Open your eyes people! Evolution from one species to another is easily destroyed by basic scientific principles.
[end]
To the last line: Perhaps if you only have a high school freshman's understanding of those 'basic scientific principles', it may seem 'destroyed', but once you start to actually study them you realize that evolution is the only theory in existence that supports all of them.
Edit: I can let somebody else handle the abiogenesis part, as I don't understand it yet as fully as I would like to.
|
United States24483 Posts
On May 21 2009 01:24 Caller wrote: The second idea, that other organisms "evolve" into something else, is something that came from Pokemon. Hahaha nice.
Man, I'm so sick of anti-evolution arguments already D:
|
On May 21 2009 01:34 Lemonwalrus wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2009 01:20 Track wrote:
[begin] Okay look, this is all that needs to be said The law of biogenesis The principle that living organisms develop only from other living organisms of the same kind and not from nonliving matter. that being said how could this happen? and if "vertical evolution", or evolution from one species to another, were true why would we have the diversity in species and animals we have today? wouldnt there just be one superanimal that could survive anything? why would this evolve into us... and a gorilla, whats the point when evolving into a human would be the best option? Evolving into a human isn't always the best option. Species evolve traits that prove useful to individuals within the species enough to make them more likely to survive to breeding age. If a species of bird feeds primarily on nuts with a tough shell, the individuals with the strongest beaks/muscles powering those beaks will 1. waste less energy cracking them open and 2. be able to eat some nuts that the others just can't crack, and therefore be more likely to survive. As time progresses, the longer surviving tough-beaked birds will pass on their tough beaks while the weaker beaked ones will die out. Tada, evolution. However, just because these beaks are good for the nut-eating birds, doesn't mean they are good for all species of birds. Birds that eat insects will need an entirely different beak setup, so not every species of bird will need to develop tough beaks, and for some species it would even be detrimental. Tada, diversification. Show nested quote + this type of speculation of evolution is crazy.
This theory would require an entire species, or at least one male and one female, to evolve into the exact same thing at relatively the same time.
Evolution is a SLOW process. It isn't like some thursday millions of years ago the birds in the above example decided they should all have tougher beaks. Good traits get passed on more frequently than bad traits (due to survival rates) and when you take those changes and throw in millions of years, you see species evolution. Show nested quote + If you know anything about the sheer complexity of DNA, atoms, or any other single organ of the body then you should easily realize how crazy evolution really is!
The people that know the most about those things hold evolution as truth...sorry. Show nested quote +
There are so many other reasons but I dont have the time to post them all.
If you have any responses, questions, comments, etc then please feel free to ask tell or whatever.
challenge me i need some practice arguments.
Open your eyes people! Evolution from one species to another is easily destroyed by basic scientific principles.
[end]
To the last line: Perhaps if you only have a high school freshman's understanding of those 'basic scientific principles', it may seem 'destroyed', but once you start to actually study them you realize that evolution is the only theory in existence that supports all of them. Edit: I can let somebody else handle the abiogenesis part, as I don't understand it yet as fully as I would like to. i did already
|
On May 21 2009 01:37 Caller wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2009 01:34 Lemonwalrus wrote:On May 21 2009 01:20 Track wrote:
[begin] Okay look, this is all that needs to be said The law of biogenesis The principle that living organisms develop only from other living organisms of the same kind and not from nonliving matter. that being said how could this happen? and if "vertical evolution", or evolution from one species to another, were true why would we have the diversity in species and animals we have today? wouldnt there just be one superanimal that could survive anything? why would this evolve into us... and a gorilla, whats the point when evolving into a human would be the best option? Evolving into a human isn't always the best option. Species evolve traits that prove useful to individuals within the species enough to make them more likely to survive to breeding age. If a species of bird feeds primarily on nuts with a tough shell, the individuals with the strongest beaks/muscles powering those beaks will 1. waste less energy cracking them open and 2. be able to eat some nuts that the others just can't crack, and therefore be more likely to survive. As time progresses, the longer surviving tough-beaked birds will pass on their tough beaks while the weaker beaked ones will die out. Tada, evolution. However, just because these beaks are good for the nut-eating birds, doesn't mean they are good for all species of birds. Birds that eat insects will need an entirely different beak setup, so not every species of bird will need to develop tough beaks, and for some species it would even be detrimental. Tada, diversification. this type of speculation of evolution is crazy.
This theory would require an entire species, or at least one male and one female, to evolve into the exact same thing at relatively the same time.
Evolution is a SLOW process. It isn't like some thursday millions of years ago the birds in the above example decided they should all have tougher beaks. Good traits get passed on more frequently than bad traits (due to survival rates) and when you take those changes and throw in millions of years, you see species evolution. If you know anything about the sheer complexity of DNA, atoms, or any other single organ of the body then you should easily realize how crazy evolution really is!
The people that know the most about those things hold evolution as truth...sorry.
There are so many other reasons but I dont have the time to post them all.
If you have any responses, questions, comments, etc then please feel free to ask tell or whatever.
challenge me i need some practice arguments.
Open your eyes people! Evolution from one species to another is easily destroyed by basic scientific principles.
[end]
To the last line: Perhaps if you only have a high school freshman's understanding of those 'basic scientific principles', it may seem 'destroyed', but once you start to actually study them you realize that evolution is the only theory in existence that supports all of them. Edit: I can let somebody else handle the abiogenesis part, as I don't understand it yet as fully as I would like to. i did already Thanks.
Edit: When I started writing my first post nobody had responded yet...lemonwalrus types slloooooowwwwww.
|
Consider that things don't have to be exactly perfect for mating to work. Donkeys can mate with horses and you get a mule, for instance.
Humans even have different DNA depending on their location. Africans are typically black from hundreds or thousands of years of living in an environment with very little shade, and have adapted to it by having skin with much better protection than white people do. The natives of northern canada/alaska typically have an easier time gaining weight than someone in, say, Mexico, in order to retain heat.
DNA just has to be somewhere close in order for mating to be successful, and it takes thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of years for evolution to make such a significant impact on a species that it can no longer mate with its ancestral link. Meanwhile, the maximum life of animal organisms is a couple of hundred years (sea turtles/certain birds), and all of them, including us, are pre-programmed to mate like crazy.
It's not just possible, it's probable that humans and gorillas share a common ancestor, and as one got smaller and stood up straight, the other got bigger and much, much stronger.
|
Out of curiosity, what age/schooling is this guy?
If I would have to guess, I would say High School Junior that thinks he knows already what others spend years in college to learn...or he is in college but in a religious school or is an english major or something that thinks he understands biology.
|
Katowice25012 Posts
This theory would require an entire species, or at least one male and one female, to evolve into the exact same thing at relatively the same time. If you know anything about the sheer complexity of DNA, atoms, or any other single organ of the body then you should easily realize how crazy evolution really is!
marsupials and placental mammals evolved separately in different environments to produce similar species in a nearly exact time frame
BOOM
DESTROYED
COME BACK WHEN YOU HAVE A HIGH SCHOOL EDUCATION BOYAAAAAAAAA
|
Its quite obvious that a superanimal doesn't exist, because most 'features' come with trade-offs, for example size. Plus a lot of species require others to live, every carnivore for example.
And as far as I see, that was the only actual point he made, so *yawn* try harder.
|
Argument's been refuted.
BYAH!
|
Tell your friend to read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies
If he wants practice arguing, just tell him to take Philosophy 101. If he takes any kind of debate extra curricular activity, he's pretty much doomed to be a moron.
|
Besides, if every living thing evolved into a human...what would we fucking eat?
We would have to be photosynthetic carnivores that both mated with and ate the same species, not to mention we would have to evolve the ability to create all of the molecules necessary for life that we currently leave to bacteria.
|
I appreciate it guys. Well done!
|
all life on this planet was given to it by the others. call them gods or aliens or anunaki or whatever. evolution is the "science" that the eugenicist elites force feed you. the masses are just as dogmatic about their beloved science as they ever were about religion.
|
On May 21 2009 02:16 omninmo wrote: all life on this planet was given to it by the others. call them gods or aliens or anunaki or whatever. evolution is the "science" that the eugenicist elites force feed you. the masses are just as dogmatic about their beloved science as they ever were about religion. Then who created the gods/aliens/anunaki?
You haven't explained anything, just put another step into the process and then felt smug because you aren't one of the 'masses'. I'm guessing you haven't heard of or don't care about occam's razor, but it is ok because nobody with half a brain cares about what you or your kind say anyways. You are just light entertainment to the scientific community they enjoy between learning the truth and using it to save your life/make it better.
|
Evolution is just a gene that didnt copy itself well, and ended up giving its host different traits, most of the time theyre bad for its enviroment so the hosts die, but then a very rare one gives them good traits, so they survive, reproduce and thus pass on those genes, its not like evolution comes from a necessity, its just chance.
And scientists have created molecules, 'life', by creating an enviroment similar to what is thought to the one at the beginning of life on Earth, with the same nonliving elements and stuff.
|
|
|
|