Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Seems legit...

As an aside, mutations are fairly rare and almost never are actually beneficial to the creature who receives them. Judging all of evolution based off of mutations alone is a bit iffy.

Or more accurately, mutations do not often survive the generations unless they have a positive effect, such as sickle cell anemia, the heterogeneous form of which provides immunity to certain diseases.

BlapBlapBlap wrote:

Melissia wrote:more like great great grandparents. Evolution takes place over dozens of generations, not just one or two.

Although seriously, not even that fast. We're talking millions of years for a single change to come to fruition.

Actually we've watched it in action and documented it. Specifically in species of insects with very short lifespans and thus quick breeding cycles. Certain species of moths (or was it flies?), off the top of my head, changed color over generations to become better adapted to their environment.

#3 I...but...different beliefs...we come from different cultures...

This video brings back bad memories of high school.

Melissia wrote:As an aside, mutations are fairly rare and almost never are actually beneficial to the creature who receives them.

Cancer!

I'm not a big fan of Gary Trudeau, but I think he nailed it here.

Mannahnin wrote:

BlapBlapBlap wrote:

Melissia wrote:more like great great grandparents. Evolution takes place over dozens of generations, not just one or two.

Although seriously, not even that fast. We're talking millions of years for a single change to come to fruition.

Actually we've watched it in action and documented it. Specifically in species of insects with very short lifespans and thus quick breeding cycles. Certain species of moths (or was it flies?), off the top of my head, changed color over generations to become better adapted to their environment.

Selective breeding of silver foxes is a decent example of coaxing evolution of a species as well. The foxes who were allowed to breed exhibited behavioral traits that would actually not be beneficial in the wild and would not likely to be passed on in a natural selection setting. As a result of the selective breeding a tame fox was bred that looked and acted much different than its' ancestors. Like the flies a short lifespan/ quick breeding cycles is important here. For nature to do this alone it would take MUCH longer.

Melissia wrote:As an aside, mutations are fairly rare and almost never are actually beneficial to the creature who receives them. Judging all of evolution based off of mutations alone is a bit iffy.

Or more accurately, mutations do not often survive the generations unless they have a positive effect, such as sickle cell anemia, the heterogeneous form of which provides immunity to certain diseases.

There are different sorts of mutations, but single nucleotide mutations are actually quite common, but they are difficult to detect through genetic analysis and usually have no impact upon the organism. It's very much a spectrum, there are beneficial ones, and some distinctly fatal ones, but most are somewhere in between or have no effect.

The other argument from creationists is that "mutations don't create new/more information". I don't really understand this one, because genetic material can certainly be duplicated and then each duplicate can mutate differently so that you end up with two different genes. There are plenty of examples so I don't know where the argument that mutations can't lead to complexity comes from.

Mannahnin wrote:

BlapBlapBlap wrote:

Melissia wrote:more like great great grandparents. Evolution takes place over dozens of generations, not just one or two.

Although seriously, not even that fast. We're talking millions of years for a single change to come to fruition.

Actually we've watched it in action and documented it. Specifically in species of insects with very short lifespans and thus quick breeding cycles. Certain species of moths (or was it flies?), off the top of my head, changed color over generations to become better adapted to their environment.

indeed. As the engine of change is mutation it can come slowly or in fits and starts. Or as the boys down at the bar like to say M-U-T-A-T-I-O-N!!!!!

I am so fed of having science bashed by religious nutters, maybe I should descend to their level and have a bumper stick that says "God is a @@@@"

I do deliberately antagonize them, I had an argument with an RN Chaplain once, where he said you shouldn't use Wikipedia because it's not properly referenced.

My response was, neither is the bible.

mwnciboo wrote:I am so fed of having science bashed by religious nutters, maybe I should descend to their level and have a bumper stick that says "God is a @@@@"

I do deliberately antagonize them, I had an argument with an RN Chaplain once, where he said you shouldn't use Wikipedia because it's not properly referenced.

My response was, neither is the bible.

Actually he's right and you have issues.

Frazzled, I was trying to think of a more tactful way to express that very sentiment.

But, anyway, there it is.

I had an argument with a chaplain once, I wanted his God in a bag kit and he refused to give it to me, Bastard.
I also pitched him my idea to be an Army chaplain as a Jedi, best job ever. You have a whole kit bag of good "scripture" to quote, no one actually takes you seriously, and the BN commander you are supposed to advise will probably never consult you in times of moral dilemma...because you're a Jedi...

The Men Who Stare at Goats Chaplain.

How about Agnostic Evangelist Chaplain you could spread the good news that there may be a God and argue for semi-intelligent design.

Mostly I was pointing out some of the ridiculous possibilities available to the Chaplain Corps given enough time spent to fight for it.

Frazzled wrote:

mwnciboo wrote:I am so fed of having science bashed by religious nutters, maybe I should descend to their level and have a bumper stick that says "God is a @@@@"

I do deliberately antagonize them, I had an argument with an RN Chaplain once, where he said you shouldn't use Wikipedia because it's not properly referenced.

My response was, neither is the bible.

Actually he's right and you have issues.

Sort of, Wikipedia is just like any source in that you shouldn't trust it. The real controversy that surrounds it is mostly about academics getting antsy over the ivory tower getting that much shorter.

dogma wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

mwnciboo wrote:I am so fed of having science bashed by religious nutters, maybe I should descend to their level and have a bumper stick that says "God is a @@@@"

I do deliberately antagonize them, I had an argument with an RN Chaplain once, where he said you shouldn't use Wikipedia because it's not properly referenced.

My response was, neither is the bible.

Actually he's right and you have issues.

Sort of, Wikipedia is just like any source in that you shouldn't trust it. The real controversy that surrounds it is mostly about academics getting antsy over the ivory tower getting that much shorter.

Ewww good point Dogma!