Questions on Evolution and the Existence of God and...

by ILoveTTATT 130 Replies latest jw friends

  • adamah

    IluvTTATT asked- Do you think the Lenski experiment will have some other evolution in the next twenty years? Is there anything that can be done to "speed it up"? Or would that violate the "rules of the game" in that it wouldn't be "natural selection"?

    Well, it's not "natural selection", since the scientists are controlling the environment, feeding some colonies different solutions of maltose, citrose, etc. 'Natural selection' is when no one other than 'nature' is controlling the process, so the experiment is more akin to 'artificial selection', except unlike dog breeding, they're likely not picking for certain traits.

    I suppose they could, and you'd better believe that in the past there were germ warfare labs around the World where studies were done on weaponizing viruses and bacteria to make germ warfare a possibility, increasing virulence to make the critters easier to pass to others, but not so deadly that they kill off victims before they can infect others. That latency between exposure and onset of symptoms (leading to death) is important, since viruses that are too lethal (i.e. too fast-acting) end up wiping themselves out of existence by killing their hosts before they can pass on their viruses to other hosts. So in fact, there IS a limiting factor to virulence, namely, the need for a living host.

    IluvTTATT asked- Also, are there different rates of evolution? Is there something that can accelerate it?

    Sure: exposure to ionizing radiation, for one. There are also chemicals which are known as 'mutagens' which also chemically accelerate the rate of mutations by interfering with the replication process of cells (and many of these chemicals are also considered 'carcinogens', since as I said earlier, there's a connection between rates of mutations and rates of various types of cancer; asbestos is a carcinogen that causes lung cancers).

    Even flying in the passanger compartment of a jet aircraft at altitude exposes individuals to higher levels of cancer-causing radiation, which likely accelerates mutations of the genes that matter for evolution (not the genes found in the cells of the body, as much as alterations in the genes of the gametes, the sperm-producing and egg-producing cells).


  • cofty

    Perry - Evidence of the common ancestry of species is on this thread...

    Humans evolved from non-human ancestors. The evidence for this fact is of the same sort that courts use to convict murderers and rapists or settle paternity claims.

  • alecholmesthedetective

    If anyone's interested, here's an update on Lenski's experiment.

  • Perry

    Adamah Says:

    Where'd you get the incorrect idea that science requires replication?

    So just change the definition when it suits you? Information is not simply a tool to attack opponents so long as the end justifies the means. That's unacceptable, to me at least..


    Scientists aim for their studies' findings to be replicable — so that, for example, an experiment testing ideas about the attraction between electrons and protons should yield the same results when repeated in different labs. This goal of replicability makes sense. After all, science aims to reconstruct the unchanging rules by which the universe operates, and those same rules apply, 24 hours a day, seven days a week, from Sweden to Saturn, regardless of who is studying them. If a finding can't be replicated, it suggests that our current understanding of the study system or our methods of testing are insufficient. ... The desire for replicability is part of the reason that scientific papers almost always include a methods section.


    Opponents to your views are going to ignore your posts that are formulated in this manner. Most people don't want to win an argument as much as just sift through some facts and make their own conclusions. Without challenges, You just end up with others with the same mob mentality that agree with you. This is intellectual isolationism.

    You said:

    MOUNTAINS of counter-evidence exists to disprove the Bible

    Really? I've heard similar statements numerous times over the last 13 years on this discussion board. But, I've never heard one convincing argument. I'm willing to give you the opportunity. Instead of a MOUNTAIN, can you just provide one example?

  • Perry

    I should have expected such a response. Your belief system is secure from attack. Congratulations.


    Why the intellectual personal attack? You provided an example to support your conclusion that Darwinian (Macro) Evolution is true. Instead of supporting the fluidity of one "kind" of animal morphing into another "kind" of animal. The experimant in actuality better supports the biblical view that animals were created according to definite "kinds".

    My belief isn't secure from attack as you assert. All you have to do is show me where one "kind" of animal can morph into another kind of animal through the selection process. It is a simple and reasonable request given the assertion of Macro (Darwinian) Evolution. Furthermore, it should be easy to do under controlled circumstances given that the theory claims that this has happened accidentally millions of times.

  • designs

    Galileo, Capernicus, Kepler, the Hershcels, Ives and Stilwell all showed the Bible's Geocentrism was wrong.

  • cantleave
  • designs

    Neanderthal DNA and viruses in humans....oh damn we didn't hear about that in Bible class.....

  • jgnat

    Alecholmes, thank you very much for the update to the Lenski experiment. I-L-TTATT, from the link above, evolutionary change is at a predictable rate:

    Yield Curve

    Given a new stressful environment, initial change will be rapid. It slows down if there are no new stressors. Lenski is still seeing smaller incremental changes towards the ideal adaptation to the environment.

  • designs

    Have you seen GMO bred Trout or the effects of plastics on reptiles.

Share this