No such thing as evolution

[Shredderbeam]

Dont get me wrong Sredderbeam, I love wiki as much as the next person who needs a fast source of information, I haven't looked at the article, but wikipedia is always full of holes, lies, and bias oppinions, ill take a look at it, but I'm not willing to consider wikipedia, unless the information is backed by a better source.

I had a look, and verified it. It's safe to read.

Within wikipedia so far I have read "best examples of evolutionary history" which is backed by a fossil found of a Hyracotherium or small horse, (about the size of a fox) that then evolved into the horse we have today? It shows no picture, of the fossil found, and only pictures, of what the exolution was THOUGHT to be like.

Oh, go run a Google search for the pictures of the fossil.

To my understanding this Small Horse is much like the miniture horses we have today. So from my understanding with in 54 million years, we have a normal hourse, and a miniture hose, but none in between. These are still both alive today. I am not saying the miniture horses of today are that same as the Hyracotherium supposidley 54 million years old, but it seems very similar

Our small horses today are just that - small horses. The ancestors of horses, by contrast, were a totally different species, due to different foot structure, anatomical differences, etc.

 

[imnotcrazy357]

from what I found on wikipedia about the Hyracotherium

to my reading, I am assuming that there has been only one fossil found, as it only mentions one. A tooth of another was found, and it must of been considered similar, so they concluded that the creature was related. What I seem to believe of this, as that since only one fossil was found, couldn't this fossil just be a deformed miniture hourse? since the only differences are the teeth are worn, which could of happened from eating too much, and grinding the enamal away, or a lack of calcium, causing the teeth not to grow properly? the hooves of the Hyracotherium could also be a simple deformity.

 

[Shredderbeam]

How many fossils have been found of the Hyracotherium fossils have been found? has it only been a few or has it been a large ammount in the way of fossils?

I don't know. For the species to be definitely established, I would hazard a guess at probably more than 10.

 

[imnotcrazy357]

I don't know. For the species to be definitely established, I would hazard a guess at probably more than 10.

looking upon the Florida Museum of Natural history, there is only one picture, and it doesn't say of any other discoveries, accept the teeth, that are proclaimed related.

and I changed my post above

 

[Shredderbeam]

looking upon the Florida Museum of Natural history, there is only one picture, and it doesn't say of any other discoveries, accept the teeth, that are proclaimed related.

and I changed my post above

I had a quick look, and I can't find too much about the numbers of fossils found. I saw that it was discovered in the 1870's, though, leaving plenty of time for others to be discovered.

 

[imnotcrazy357]

I had a quick look, and I can't find too much about the numbers of fossils found. I saw that it was discovered in the 1870's, though, leaving plenty of time for others to be discovered.

Yes, but because other might not of been discovered, you should consider that facts, that this could be nothing more then a deformed horse at birth.

 

[Shredderbeam]

Yes, but because other might not of been discovered, you should consider that facts, that this could be nothing more then a deformed horse at birth.

On the off chance that no others were discovered, I will consider the rare possibility that 55 million years ago, there was a horse that looked exactly like modern ones, and happened to have a mutant child that had perfectly serviceable mutations.

 

[imnotcrazy357]

On the off chance that no others were discovered, I will consider the rare possibility that 55 million years ago, there was a horse that looked exactly like modern ones, and happened to have a mutant child that had perfectly serviceable mutations.

well I don't believe that either I'm just looking at the possibilites, since the this little horse, would be about the size of a pony after birth wouldn't it? it may have died right after birth, with these deformities, Whats the possibility of these animals 55 million years ago, and only one been fossilized, and found today? shouldn't there be others?

 

[Shredderbeam]

well I don't believe that either I'm just looking at the possibilites, since the this little horse, would be about the size of a pony after birth wouldn't it? it may have died right after birth, with these deformities, Whats the possibility of these animals 55 million years ago, and only one been fossilized, and found today? shouldn't there be others?

It was actually the size of a terrier.

But yes, there should be many more. I just don't know of any since I started looking for them just tonight.

 

[imnotcrazy357]

I still don't know much about the theory of evolution, but this thought has always crossed my mind.

If evolution is true, why are there still other species on the earth. If everything was to evolve from sing cells, and continue evolving, wouldn't it make sense of everything to evovle the same way? you can't adapt for life better, by becoming different creatures, which hunt and prey on one another, all coming from the same ancestors.


The other thing I can't understand is why it is possible to still have things like sponges, aren't they considered to be 500 million years old or something like this? something so old, would of continued to evolve wouldn't it? or why would one of the first life forms, still survive, when things that evolve off of it die off.


Why don't other creatures besides humans have a close form of comparable intelligence, a language that is able to be understood, or comprehended, no other forms of really intilligent communicable life.


The last thing I dont understand is why there is no true evidence of evolution? so undenyable proof that its real. Its taught as fact in public school where I come from, but to me it seems far from fact, and is still a theory. With all the animals that have evolved and passed, why don't we have undenyable evidence, the earth has had, what is it now like 4 billion years or something like that?






also shredder your video in your siggy, I consider part of it inaccurate. I don't have time to watch all of it, I skipped around a bit, but with their philosophy they consider Jesus Christ to be born on December 25th Which he wasn't.

 

[Shredderbeam]

If evolution is true, why are there still other species on the earth. If everything was to evolve from sing cells, and continue evolving, wouldn't it make sense of everything to evovle the same way? you can't adapt for life better, by becoming different creatures, which hunt and prey on one another, all coming from the same ancestors.

Well, evolution is not a conscious force trying to make all animals better. All it is is survival of the fittest, and natural selection.

The other thing I can't understand is why it is possible to still have things like sponges, aren't they considered to be 500 million years old or something like this? something so old, would of continued to evolve wouldn't it? or why would one of the first life forms, still survive, when things that evolve off of it die off.

Well, survival of the fittest means that those who are fit to survive in their environments will survive. The sponge is a very successful animal/plant - there's no need for it to evolve.

Why don't other creatures besides humans have a close form of comparable intelligence, a language that is able to be understood, or comprehended, no other forms of really intilligent communicable life.

We don't know. Perhaps the answer lies in the luck of humans, perhaps other intelligent species did exist, but were able to produce nothing, etc.

The last thing I dont understand is why there is no true evidence of evolution? so undenyable proof that its real. Its taught as fact in public school where I come from, but to me it seems far from fact, and is still a theory. With all the animals that have evolved and passed, why don't we have undenyable evidence, the earth has had, what is it now like 4 billion years or something like that?

First, we've only known about evolution for around 150 years. Not too much macro-evolution happens in that time.

Second, micro-evolution does occur. Look at drug-resistant bacteria, look at moths that cling to bark, look at dogs, etc.

Third, there is undeniable evidence. The fossil record, the tendency of less-evolved animals to be closer to the source of where they developed, the genetic similarities, the anatomical similarities!

 

[imnotcrazy357]

The sponge is a very successful animal/plant - there's no need for it to evolve.

What was the need of evolving past a single cell? didn't they survive fine, they had no preditors



I myself to beleive in micro evolution, but nothing so absurd as an animal evolving so much as changing into another species, I believe, and know that change is happening all around us. Again I will state my reason, for not being Athiest is that believe that everything around us devolped from nothing to what it is today, Is completely Impossible for me to comprehend. This includes the theory of evolution, I have nothing against it, but I cannot accept it myself.

Shredder, can I ask how old you are?

 

[Shredderbeam]

What was the need of evolving past a single cell? didn't they survive fine, they had no preditors

They did survive just fine, but some were able to grow, and probably eat, or out-eat, the others. Those that didn't evolve, died.

I myself to beleive in micro evolution, but nothing so absurd as an animal evolving so much as changing into another species, I believe, and know that change is happening all around us. Again I will state my reason, for not being Athiest is that believe that everything around us devolped from nothing to what it is today, Is completely Impossible for me to comprehend. This includes the theory of evolution, I have nothing against it, but I cannot accept it myself.

Something being beyond your comprehension is no reason to doubt it. When did humans have to deal with millions and billions of years? That's just not a number we deal with on a day-to-day basis.

Remember, though, this is all taking place over tens and hundreds of millions of years! A thousand sets of a thousand years is in each million year, and every single individual of the species has the opportunity for change!

 

[imnotcrazy357]

How could a bombardier beetle evolve?

the hydrogen peroxide and hydroquinone would explode on contact the beetle adds an inhibitor to keep this from happening. the beetle squirts the anti-inhibitor when being attacked, to create the reaction

 

[Shredderbeam]

How could a bombardier beetle evolve?

the hydrogen peroxide and hydroquinone would explode on contact the beetle adds an inhibitor to keep this from happening. the beetle squirts the anti-inhibitor when being attacked, to create the reaction

You would think that its firing system is irreducibly complex; however, you would be mistaken.

1. Quinones are produced by epidermal cells for tanning the cuticle. This exists commonly in arthropods. [Dettner, 1987]
2. Some of the quinones don't get used up, but sit on the epidermis, making the arthropod distasteful. (Quinones are used as defensive secretions in a variety of modern arthropods, from beetles to millipedes. [Eisner, 1970])
3. Small invaginations develop in the epidermis between sclerites (plates of cuticle). By wiggling, the insect can squeeze more quinones onto its surface when they're needed.
4. The invaginations deepen. Muscles are moved around slightly, allowing them to help expel the quinones from some of them. (Many ants have glands similar to this near the end of their abdomen. [Holldobler & Wilson, 1990, pp. 233-237])
5. A couple invaginations (now reservoirs) become so deep that the others are inconsequential by comparison. Those gradually revert to the original epidermis.
6. In various insects, different defensive chemicals besides quinones appear. (See Eisner, 1970, for a review.) This helps those insects defend against predators which have evolved resistance to quinones. One of the new defensive chemicals is hydroquinone.
7. Cells that secrete the hydroquinones develop in multiple layers over part of the reservoir, allowing more hydroquinones to be produced. Channels between cells allow hydroquinones from all layers to reach the reservior.
8. The channels become a duct, specialized for transporting the chemicals. The secretory cells withdraw from the reservoir surface, ultimately becoming a separate organ. This stage -- secretory glands connected by ducts to reservoirs -- exists in many beetles. The particular configuration of glands and reservoirs that bombardier beetles have is common to the other beetles in their suborder. [Forsyth, 1970]
   
   
9. Muscles adapt which close off the reservior, thus preventing the chemicals from leaking out when they're not needed.
10. Hydrogen peroxide, which is a common by-product of cellular metabolism, becomes mixed with the hydroquinones. The two react slowly, so a mixture of quinones and hydroquinones get used for defense.
11. Cells secreting a small amount of catalases and peroxidases appear along the output passage of the reservoir, outside the valve which closes it off from the outside. These ensure that more quinones appear in the defensive secretions. Catalases exist in almost all cells, and peroxidases are also common in plants, animals, and bacteria, so those chemicals needn't be developed from scratch but merely concentrated in one location.
12. More catalases and peroxidases are produced, so the discharge is warmer and is expelled faster by the oxygen generated by the reaction. The beetle Metrius contractus provides an example of a bombardier beetle which produces a foamy discharge, not jets, from its reaction chambers. The bubbling of the foam produces a fine mist. [Eisner et al., 2000]
13. The walls of that part of the output passage become firmer, allowing them to better withstand the heat and pressure generated by the reaction.
14. Still more catalases and peroxidases are produced, and the walls toughen and shape into a reaction chamber. Gradually they become the mechanism of today's bombardier beetles.
15. The tip of the beetle's abdomen becomes somewhat elongated and more flexible, allowing the beetle to aim its discharge in various directions.

www.talkorigins.org. You should really read some of the things that they have on that site. It's truly fascinating.

 

[Lvl 125]

I dont understand how we turned into us from fish. Order can not come out of chaos (no big bang)

 

[Shredderbeam]

I dont understand how we turned into us from fish. Order can not come out of chaos (no big bang)

You demonstrate a flawed understanding of the second law of thermodynamics. It applies only to a closed system, which the Earth is not (sunlight pouring in, geothermal vents, etc.).

Have you tried to keep magnets apart? It's hard, right? They naturally go into a certain state. That's what happened with the Big Bang. Once things had cooled a bit, atoms could form, and thus, molecules of hydrogen. These naturally drifted together to form stars, which fused together the heavier elements. Their explosions seeded the universe with debris, which naturally began to clump together in its own right.

 

[Lvl 125]

So out of nothing. Came little molecules. Which then managed to get brains and give birth Nd all that. How can you believe that?

 

[Shredderbeam]

So out of nothing. Came little molecules. Which then managed to get brains and give birth Nd all that. How can you believe that?

That is not in the least what evolution is.

I'm not going to walk you through every single step of the theory, so go to www.talkorigins.org, and educate yourself.

 

[TJ]

Ok people learn what Naturual Selection is!

Definition here :

Natural selection is the process by which favorable traits that are heritable become more common in successive generations of a population of reproducing organisms, and unfavorable traits that are heritable become less common. Natural selection acts on the phenotype, or the observable characteristics of an organism, such that individuals with favorable phenotypes are more likely to survive and reproduce than those with less favorable phenotypes. If these phenotypes have a genetic basis, then the genotype associated with the favorable phenotype will increase in frequency in the next generation. Over time, this process can result in adaptations that specialize organisms for particular ecological niches and may eventually result in the emergence of new species.


as species go on, some members of the species gain different traits, if they are not helpful to the organism then they organism wont survive. If it is helpful it will end up passing the trait on.