• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Evolution: the Facts.

Let's face it, how many creationists have we managed to get through to on this forum? Not many.

Probably closer to zero than "not many".

Plus, it's clear that so many myths abound about evolution that it would be nice to have facts collated here. Preferably something more user-friendly than TalkOrigins or other sites. Coincidentally, it'll fit in nicely with the new organisation of forums.
 
Our nearest neighbouring galaxy is the Canis Major Dwarf GalaxyWP. At only 25,000 ly, our solar system lies closer to it than to the centre of our own galaxy.
You're right. I ignored irregular dwarf galaxies when I thought about Andromeda. But my main point has been that Meadmaker's argument is far from being trivial.

Herzblut
 
Let's face it, how many creationists have we managed to get through to on this forum? Not many.

I'm with TA, its probably none, but this forum tends to attract the crazies and intransigents who will never change their minds on anything. I have seen a number of people on other forums who have, at the very least, abandoned YECism.
 
I'm with TA, its probably none, but this forum tends to attract the crazies and intransigents who will never change their minds on anything. I have seen a number of people on other forums who have, at the very least, abandoned YECism.

Yep, that sounds about right, but what we might be able to do is get people to use the facts here to improve their own arguments.

That's how I'd use it personally - it came to me when I asked in a thread ytf people bothered posting refutation of YECs and a poster replied that they gained facts from the threads, so even if the YEC is still an idiot at the end, the JREF member had increased his knowledge. That must be a good thing.

I'm going to try to write an introduction later on today.

Be kind - as I keep telling everyone, I'm a businessman, not a bleeding scientist!
 
I have to agree with qayak we are not going to convince anyone of something they don't want to understand or believe. You can easily see this in the arguments that creationist follow. Which consist of circular logic and dead end questions that refute the most basic principles of science and rational thought. My question is if you choose to believe in God why do you need to try and refute evolution or any other scientific theory? Further more then why do you try to get your belief taught as fact in the classroom as many creationist do so. In short why can't belief be simply that belief and not fact! On another note the second law of thermodynamics which deals with entropy stands on its own in physics. This leads to the belief by many scientists that it will never be over turned or refuted, since it is a principle of itself and not based on any other principles or assumptions. So even if evolution did stand on its own, which it doesn't, it would only lend credence to evolution not detract from it.:cool:
 
I have to agree with qayak we are not going to convince anyone of something they don't want to understand or believe.

Luckily, that's not what we're doing here.

This will [hopefully] be a simple-to-follow guide on facts about evolution to help members & guests have as much actual knowledge as possible.

If we only bothered about correcting people's lunatic ideas, there wouldn't be much of a forum as I have yet to see any one of : paranormalist, christian or CTist change their idiotic opinions through facts presented.
 
[swiki]Malthus and Evolution[/swiki]

All comments again are welcome, but particularly those that are fawningly appreciative ... even the occasional pat on the head would not go amiss.

I suppose offers of sexual intimacy are completely out of the question?
 
This is the part I'd like to keep the smallest bit of the whole thing. On its own, a good strand on evolution should read like a short story, backed by facts and be bulletproof defence against IDiots. Because of that, I'd like them to have as small a presence as possible - half a page of the most-common, specious arguments they use, so I won't be focusing on any one IDiot.

Thanks for the link, though - obviously we're going to have to read some of this drivel to find out what they do .... um, I hesitate to use the word "think" there.... find out what they claim, sounds better.
Erm, I think you misunderstand: the link is to a site with articles that debunk Hovind's infantile conceptions – don't be fooled by the URL. As such, the site deals with many of the usual fantasies put forward by IDers and creationists.

'Luthon64
 
Erm, I think you misunderstand: the link is to a site with articles that debunk Hovind's infantile conceptions – don't be fooled by the URL. As such, the site deals with many of the usual fantasies put forward by IDers and creationists.

'Luthon64

Ok, thanks. I'll check it out.
 
What are some examples of intermediate species?

The way I word this one, using 'form' instead of 'species':

I assume you have parents (and didn't spontaneously generate from primordial ooze or something), they are intermediate forms.
Do you have kids? If so, you are one too.
 
How do species evolve? When does one species "break away" from the other?
[swiki]Species[/swiki]

What are some examples of intermediate species?
[swiki]Intermediate Forms Between Classes[/swiki]

See also the section on dinosaur evolution in the [swiki]Dinosaurs[/swiki] article.
 
Last edited:
The way I word this one, using 'form' instead of 'species':

I assume you have parents (and didn't spontaneously generate from primordial ooze or something), they are intermediate forms.
Do you have kids? If so, you are one too.

Wait till I tell them that!

Cheers, as I noted at the start, I'm a businessman not a scientist!

Forms it is.

[swiki]Species[/swiki]

[swiki]Intermediate Forms Between Classes[/swiki]

See also the section on dinosaur evolution in the [swiki]Dinosaurs[/swiki] article.

Thanks!
 
I've added a short piece on [swiki]Development and Evolution[/swiki].

Er ... does anyone else want to have a go?
 
Ok, here goes:


Give me some feedback on the intro, please, then I'll try to sort out the technical information into some semblance of order. I've gone with the strictly amateur approach, being strictly an amateur myself.


The Idiots' Guide to Evolution Facts.

Evolution. We go to school, we learn some very basic facts about evolution and think we have it sussed:

Primordial soup -> life + ~3-4 bn years = humans doing repairs in space to a vehicle capable of carrying them there and [hopefully] getting them back.

What this thread hopes to do is show how the process works, but in such a way that techo-dummies like me can understand it, and far more importantly, so we can all use the information in it to explain the facts to others with a degree of authority. It's a very big jump from a few amino acids sitting on a rock to a species capable of space travel, but luckily, no big steps are required, just millions and millions of tiny little ones and it has taken an extraordinarily long time to do it in. Since life began, all of humankind's history since the invention of the wheel accounts for roughly 0.0002% of it.

Oddly, and maybe thanks to the basic nature of the information given to us as kids on such an enormous subject, in the past 40-odd years, significant numbers of people have started to believe that evolution is wrong and that the earth was literally created in 4004 BC.

Now, that is plainly silly; there are trees almost that old, glaciers far older and also the most perfect preservation system the planet has, the Antarctic ice sheet. Since the precipitation rate is incredibly low and the evaporation rate zero, antarctic ice can be read far more accurately than any tree's rings. We know when Krakatoa and Santorini erupted and we can tell when the ash deposited in Antarctica, and by tracing back through millions of years, there is no question at all that the planet is far older and the question can be dismissed without recourse to further discussion.

With a vast subject like evolution, it's important to approach it rationally, asking the most basic questions of "why" "when" and "how".

The study of evolution is a science which comprises many other branches of science - it started in biology when Charles Darwin made a number of famous discoveries and wrote a book called Origin of the Species. Darwin lived a long time ago, however - long before the discovery of DNA - and the science has come a long way since then.

To ensure that we deal with the science of evolution rather than opinion, let's look at the prescriptive formula for "science": the knowledge gained must be based on observable phenomena and capable of being tested for its validity by other researchers working under the same conditions. That's the level to aspire to when dealing with any subject rationally, and it's fortunate, with evolution as the subject, that the JREF forum has a strongly scientific-based membership who are also highly qualified to ensure factuality.
 

Back
Top Bottom