Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: June 17, 2024, 2:57 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Creationism and Ignorance
#51
RE: Creationism and Ignorance
But I did google those definitions. "Change in allele frequency over time" is a pretty good, concise definition for evolution. Of course there's more to it than that one sentence, but it's not like that definition is false or made up by creationists. And it would be good for there to be a widely-publicized, concise, accurate definition of evolution, even if it didn't encompass every detail for every mechanism for every case in every time period. It would sure as shit be better than the disaster of terminology word salad that pop culture and layman's science media has now. From my earlier post even:

Quote:"In the broadest sense, evolution is merely change, and so is all-pervasive; galaxies, languages, and political systems all evolve. Biological evolution ... is change in the properties of populations of organisms that transcend the lifetime of a single individual. The ontogeny of an individual is not considered evolution; individual organisms do not evolve. The changes in populations that are considered evolutionary are those that are inheritable via the genetic material from one generation to the next. Biological evolution may be slight or substantial; it embraces everything from slight changes in the proportion of different alleles within a population (such as those determining blood types) to the successive alterations that led from the earliest protoorganism to snails, bees, giraffes, and dandelions."
- Douglas J. Futuyma in Evolutionary Biology, Sinauer Associates 1986

"In fact, evolution can be precisely defined as any change in the frequency of alleles within a gene pool from one generation to the next."
- Helena Curtis and N. Sue Barnes, Biology, 5th ed. 1989 Worth Publishers, p.974

And, of course, those changes in allele frequencies are what bring about the heritable changes in the properties of populations of organisms over time. The 'changes in allele frequency over time' definition is a pretty concise, neat working definition - but some people just refuse to accept that changes in allele frequency can lead to substantial changes, for whatever reason.
In every country and every age, the priest had been hostile to Liberty.
- Thomas Jefferson
Reply
#52
RE: Creationism and Ignorance
(May 2, 2018 at 2:03 pm)Tizheruk Wrote:
(May 2, 2018 at 1:14 pm)Anomalocaris Wrote: Look up evolution by natural selection.
He won't he will just keep demanding we spoon feed him one . Then he will play dumb again .

I already gave one. Anyone who reads up on evolution should have recognized it as valid. For those who don't, FAF quoted a biology textbook as giving the same as a "precise" definition.

I sometimes wonder if you're just stupid, or so partisan that you're blinded to the reality of what's been written in a thread. I suspect it's the latter.
Reply
#53
RE: Creationism and Ignorance
That is the broadest possible definition, similar to defining thinking as neurological state change. But a narrower definition is more useful.

When definition is used for rhetorical argument rather than to help guide an edifying experience, it is well to tailor the scope of the definition to the actual argument at hand.
Reply
#54
RE: Creationism and Ignorance
https://phys.org/news/2005-09-poll-docto...heory.html

Quote:A national survey of 1,472 physicians indicates more than half -- 63 percent -- believe the theory of evolution over that of intelligent design.

A third of doctors need some re-education...
Reply
#55
RE: Creationism and Ignorance
(May 2, 2018 at 2:20 pm)Anomalocaris Wrote: That is the broadest possible definition, similar to defining thinking as neurological state change. But a narrower definition is more useful.  

When definition is used for rhetorical argument rather than to help guide an edifying experience, it is well to tailor the scope of the definition to the actual argument at hand.

Anom, what definition would you use if someone asked you to define evolution?  Without spending paragraphs outlining every specific, "changes in allele frequency over time" is a pretty darn good starting point.  And changes in allele frequency + time = speciation.  if that were the definition that was popularized, I think we'd be in a hell of a lot better position than half the country thinking evolution means "your granddad was a monkey" or some shit like that. "Changes in allele frequency over time" isn't incorrect, and it's not misleading.
In every country and every age, the priest had been hostile to Liberty.
- Thomas Jefferson
Reply
#56
RE: Creationism and Ignorance
Quote:I already gave one. Anyone who reads up on evolution should have recognized it as valid. For those who don't, FAF quoted a biology textbook as giving the same as a "precise" definition.
Did i say you didn't?And no your definition left out a shit ton of other stuff it was too narrow and it shown to be too narrow . And the text fat quoted went further than your definition so again it's you dumbass .

Quote:I sometimes wonder if you're just stupid, or so partisan that you're blinded to the reality of what's been written in a thread. I suspect it's the latter.
Then you would be wrong on both counts . Dumbass . Or are you just projecting ?
Seek strength, not to be greater than my brother, but to fight my greatest enemy -- myself.

Inuit Proverb

Reply
#57
RE: Creationism and Ignorance
The differing definitions of evolution cause an equivocation problem. I accept evolution when defined as I did above, and the 50 writers in the book I linked presumably do as well.
Reply
#58
RE: Creationism and Ignorance
(May 2, 2018 at 2:27 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote:
(May 2, 2018 at 2:20 pm)Anomalocaris Wrote: That is the broadest possible definition, similar to defining thinking as neurological state change. But a narrower definition is more useful.  

When definition is used for rhetorical argument rather than to help guide an edifying experience, it is well to tailor the scope of the definition to the actual argument at hand.

Anom, what definition would you use if someone asked you to define evolution?  Without spending paragraphs outlining every specific, "changes in allele frequency over time" is a pretty darn good starting point.  And changes in allele frequency + time = speciation.  if that were the definition that was popularized, I think we'd be in a hell of a lot better position than half the country thinking evolution means "your granddad was a monkey" or some shit like that.  "Changes in allele frequency over time" isn't incorrect, and it's not misleading.
But it's too narrow a term and leaves out much
Seek strength, not to be greater than my brother, but to fight my greatest enemy -- myself.

Inuit Proverb

Reply
#59
RE: Creationism and Ignorance
(May 2, 2018 at 2:34 pm)Tizheruk Wrote:
(May 2, 2018 at 2:27 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote: Anom, what definition would you use if someone asked you to define evolution?  Without spending paragraphs outlining every specific, "changes in allele frequency over time" is a pretty darn good starting point.  And changes in allele frequency + time = speciation.  if that were the definition that was popularized, I think we'd be in a hell of a lot better position than half the country thinking evolution means "your granddad was a monkey" or some shit like that.  "Changes in allele frequency over time" isn't incorrect, and it's not misleading.
But it's too narrow a term and leaves out much

So I'll ask you the same question.  If someone asked you to define evolution, what would you say?

And what exactly does it "leave out"? It's easy to throw a link to a 50 pages scientific paper that dives into every specific of the theory (that nobody will read, especially if they don't accept evolution to begin with), but if someone just ask you, Tiz, face to face, to "define evolution", what would you say?
In every country and every age, the priest had been hostile to Liberty.
- Thomas Jefferson
Reply
#60
RE: Creationism and Ignorance
Quote:The differing definitions of evolution cause an equivocation problem. I accept evolution when defined as I did above, and the 50 writers in the book I linked presumably do as well.
Only so you and your creationist flunkies can avoid the grander implications  of a broader definition .And there are not different definitions nice try mudding the waters .
Seek strength, not to be greater than my brother, but to fight my greatest enemy -- myself.

Inuit Proverb

Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Is the Afro-Asiatic linguistics incompatible with Young-Earth Creationism? FlatAssembler 17 1511 July 13, 2023 at 5:45 pm
Last Post: FlatAssembler
  Creationism out in Youngstown brewer 17 2828 September 25, 2016 at 7:48 am
Last Post: c172
  The ignorance of science and the big bang in christianity dyresand 10 2321 May 1, 2016 at 2:25 pm
Last Post: BrianSoddingBoru4
  My case against Creationism and Infinite regression ErGingerbreadMandude 60 10385 April 26, 2016 at 10:59 am
Last Post: Mister Agenda
  BBC's Conspiracy Road Trip: Creationism Cyberman 5 1518 March 12, 2016 at 8:45 am
Last Post: Fidel_Castronaut
  Fundie Creationism song 2016 drfuzzy 17 3776 January 29, 2016 at 8:50 am
Last Post: Edwardo Piet
  Creationism lulz Longhorn 14 2942 June 15, 2015 at 2:56 pm
Last Post: Longhorn
  Jason Lisle: Creationism exists, but atheism doesn't Cyberman 51 11701 June 11, 2015 at 6:30 am
Last Post: Rhondazvous
  Billion + believe in Satan. Should all schools be mandated to teach Creationism? Greatest I am 20 5151 December 2, 2014 at 7:26 pm
Last Post: dyresand
  Evidence for Creationism Mudhammam 51 11747 June 18, 2014 at 6:56 am
Last Post: Esquilax



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)