Is Darwin's Theory Of Evolution True?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Techno2000
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The thing is that a particular feature, caused by a particular mutation, may be neutral to natural selection. It may then persist among part of the population. Another mutation later may change everything, altering that feature and rendering it positive or negative in terms of natural selection.
 
Depends on a judgement of whether a whale is a conscious being (almost certainly, yes) and then we run into the whole problem of the nature of consciousness. So: we don’t know.
 
The organism seeks efficiency and does not want to carry a useless load.
 
PickyPicky said:
Depends on a judgement of whether a whale is a conscious being (almost certainly, yes) and then we run into the whole problem of the nature of consciousness. So: we don’t know.
Click to expand...
The sharks would have a field day with some of these creatures .
 
Not at all. If it doesn’t have a creature to mate with, it has no descendants. Surely we don’t disagree on that?
 
There are thousands of successive changes required.

Whale Evolution vs. Population Genetics - Richard Sternberg and Paul Nelson

 
Mmm. And yet some of them look worryingly like ID “types”, don’t they.
 
fitness = efficiency Also useless expenditures of energy that confer no advantage won’t happen.
 
May watch that, may not. In be general Youtubistics is not impressive to me.
 
No, no point, it was not a particularly silly comment, but I’ve not the energy to pursue it. My apologies.
 
Aloysium said:
The puns betray the sort of misunderstanding of the science behind Darwinism. That disco was inferior to previous music would be part and parcel of the theory’s view that randomness and the ability to fit with the environment are sufficient to explain changes in Species. It does not address what science observes as a growing complexity in time, but tries to explain it away as simply a random event. In the case of disco, a greater tendency in society towards self-interest, pleasure and vanity would promote music that elicits a sensual as opposed to a spiritual response. This isn’t science; it’s common sense.
Click to expand...
This is, I think, the fatal flaw with Darwinism. It cannot provide sufficient evidence that random mutation coupled with natural selection could possibly invent the myriad of complex morphological features and adaptive behaviours that are taken as a given in the natural world. Random mutations could just as easily have resulted in the extinction of all life, even if some forms initially got off the ground. The sustained “evolution” of life forms in a positive, ever expanding, litany of survival traits and morphological forms cannot be shown by Darwinism. It has to be assumed. The fallacy is one of retrospective determinism: we see it did happen, therefore it had to have happened in the way Darwinians propose. That isn’t an argument, it is a fallacy.

I mean it could have happened as Darwinians propose, but the fact that the apparent “evolution” of life appears to have happened in that way is not proof that it did. At best, it is a weak abductive argument. Of the reasonable options currently available, Darwinism seems to explain things to some degree. How well remains to be seen.

Yes, life, like music, adapts or changes, but does that mechanism explain the plethora of novel life forms that have consistently appeared on the earth over many hundreds of millions of years? Maybe, but maybe not. What is it that drives the existence and development of music? Are changes random or inspired in some sense? What in reality makes music the sustained reality that it is? Perhaps that question is related to what in reality makes life the sustained reality that it is?
 
Last edited:
OK. If the creatures in one herd of a species accrue mutations which, in total, prevent them mating with creatures of another herd of that species, they become, by definition, not two herds of one species, but two separate species. That doesn’t stop them mating with creatures within their own herd.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top