"Origin of Species"

1. 60

   Beelzedadposted 15 years ago

   Hi folks!
   
   Below is linked one of many sources for an online version of "The Origin of Species" Darwin's Theory of Evolution - it's not a riveting read but is great for reference and understanding.
   
   To put it in a nutshell, evolution requires two things, and two things only:
   
   1. The generation of diversity.
   2. Natural selection - culling of the "less fit".
   
   Process number (1) is essentially a random process, entirely in accordance with the laws of thermodynamics and statistical mechanics. Process number (2), which involves the disproportionate death (or failure to reproduce) of the less fit, could perhaps be regarded as a "running down" process, if you want to look at it that way. But processes (1) and (2) together produce all the forms of life we see on Earth.
   
   Cheers!! 
   
   
   http://www.literature.org/authors/darwi … f-species/

   replyreport
2. 60

   Beelzedadposted 15 years ago

   Bump
   
   For this thread:
   
   http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/36228

   replyreport
3. 60

   Mark Knowlesposted 15 years ago

   LOL
   
   Good luck. I already tried:
   
   http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/7572
   
   I have 600 or so comments attacking me on the hub I wrote about why there is no evolution vs creation debate
   
   And I was lol "Challenged" lol to a debate because I kept "evading" the questions. You know - why I denied dinosaurs existed on the Ark....... sort of Kwestions. The result is here:
   
   http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/30050
   
   Kinda floored me with the "bath ring" and the "dinosaurs in China" arguments.

   replyreport
4. 68

   Rod Marsdenposted 15 years ago

   Let the new monkey trial begin...(Just joking).

   replyreport
5. 74

   skyfireposted 15 years ago

   Adapt ?

   replyreport
6. 60

   marinealways24posted 15 years ago

   Simplified without posting links and giving book references, in your own words, explain why evolution has "no" design.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Mark Knowlesposted 15 years agoin reply to this

      Just can't be bothered to do any work huh?  You sure you are not religious?
      
      LOLOLOLOL
      
      Too funny marine.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         marinealways24posted 15 years agoin reply to this

         Why is this so hard to simplify something? Are you getting mad because the question gives the religious ammo? Should I not ask a question just because you relate it to religion? Part of work is asking questions.

         replyreport
         1. 60

            Mark Knowlesposted 15 years agoin reply to this

            No - I am not getting mad. I am laughing at you being so lazy you cannot be bothered to do any research and keep asking the same kwestion over and over and over.
            
            It is funny because it exactly what the religionists do when they cannot understand the answers they get.
            
            You sure you are not religious?

            replyreport
            1. 60

               marinealways24posted 15 years agoin reply to this

               Lazy? I just started reading my evolution book today to have you know. I keep asking the question because I haven't gotten any logical answers, only answers with links, book references, or telling me to research and stop being lazy.
               
               I understand the answers I am getting, they are lazy. It is much easier than to give someone references than to answer a question having to think. Are you sure you aren't religious?

               replyreport
               1. 60

                  Mark Knowlesposted 15 years agoin reply to this

                  You have gotten logical answers - but you did not understand them. This is why you have bought a book is it not? Still - why not don't bother reading the book and ask the Kwestion again instead of reading the book huh?  That ain't lazy.
                  
                  Is it a good book?

                  replyreport
                  1. 60

                     marinealways24posted 15 years agoin reply to this

                     The answers I saw was that it's not design because it's not predictable. Is this correct?
                     
                     If I find this answer in the book when I am done reading it, I will admit it was my mistake for not reading before asking over and over. It is pretty good so far.

                     replyreport
                     1. 60

                        Mark Knowlesposted 15 years agoin reply to this

                        Let us see what kwestions arise after the book. Which one did you buy again? I think it was one I have not read if I remember correctly.

                        replyreport
                        1. 60

                           marinealways24posted 15 years agoin reply to this

                           http://www.google.com/products/catalog? … s=reviews#
                           
                           
                           Answer the question.
                           If something is unpredictable, does that mean it's not a design?

                           replyreport
                           1. 60

                              Mark Knowlesposted 15 years agoin reply to this

                              Sweetie pie - I have answered that Kwestion so many times I am beginning to think you just like the sound of my voice.
                              
                              What do you think? Express an opinion of your own instead of just challenging other people's answers. If you do not know the possible outcome of something - can you claim to have planned the eventual outcome? And therefore intended it - designed it to be that way?
                              
                              The book looks interesting.

                              replyreport
                              1. 60

                                 marinealways24posted 15 years agoin reply to this

                                 Are you flirting with me? I am a married man.
                                 I think evolution is a design in the fact that it follows patterns. A design doesn't mean it has to predict the future, but I think it can. Because a design has random actions doesn't rule it out as being a design. When scientists and doctors design new medicines, they are making predictions on how the medicines will work based on previous designs. How would any of those medicines work if our bodies were all random and didn't have a design?  I will keep you updated on the book.

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 60

                                    Mark Knowlesposted 15 years agoin reply to this

                                    Good on the book. Perhaps you will be able to see the difference between the example you have just given and evolution.
                                    
                                    Unless you think "trial and error," is purposeful design..... .......

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 60

                                       marinealways24posted 15 years agoin reply to this

                                       Ah, so it has to have purpose to be a design. I thought the purpose of evolution is for life to survive and evolve? Is this not a purpose? Trial and error can be a purposeful design, it naturally separates the strong/most adaptable from the weak/less adaptable.

                                       report