Views on Evolution

MeatProduct

Dear All,

I think it would be interesting if people could give a brief outline of their views on evolution. If necessary just the critical factors, for example for Darwinist evolution I could say:

1: Chance mutation
2: Survival of the fittest

Please do elaborate if you feel like it.

Now I know that this can become a controversial topic so could I request that any discussion is done in a civil manner using logical argument and, where possible, references to any factual data put forward. Naturally it would be nice if there were no personal insults.

Indeed evolution need not be the mechanism for human development so any other theory on how we came to be is valid as long as it can be supported in a logical manner.

Many thanks,

Nick

rde

First of all, I'd have to day don't confuse 'evolution' with 'evolution by natural selection'. Either you believe we sprung fully formed from somewhere or you believe we evolved.

Second, why do you ask? I ask that cos it'd frame any answer I (or anyone else) might give. Without knowing what you're looking for, all most people will do is give you the traditional line, of which you're doubtless well aware.

But in any case, my feelings are thus: we owe our existence to evolution by natural selection (I'm beginning to hate the phrase 'survival of the fittest' as it inevitably requires elucidation). I've no doubt that sexual selection also plays a prominent role, but that role is absolutely secondary to natural selection; that is cumulative random mutation over billions of years.

References? Come off it. There are hundreds of years of evidence, and you're as capable as I of using google to find some of it.

so any other theory on how we came to be is valid as long as it can be supported in a logical manner

Absolutely not. Any other theory is valid as long as it is supported by evidence. We could all come up with theories that are internally consistent without needing to resort to evidence. God is one, alien intervention is another. Pixie dust is a third.

MeatProduct

Originally posted by rde

Second, why do you ask? I ask that cos it'd frame any answer I (or anyone else) might give. Without knowing what you're looking for, all most people will do is give you the traditional line, of which you're doubtless well aware.

I ask because I would like a discussion on peoples views. People know exactly what I am looking for; their views on evolution and such.

References? Come off it. There are hundreds of years of evidence, and you're as capable as I of using google to find some of it.

Could we keep this level-headed please? All I want is a statement of views/beliefs with no added flavourings

That there is hundreds of years of evidence is contestible indeed. Darwin himself remarked how there is little evidence that supports his theory.

Absolutely not. Any other theory is valid as long as it is supported by evidence. We could all come up with theories that are internally consistent without needing to resort to evidence. God is one, alien intervention is another. Pixie dust is a third.

Ok, fair point. When I say supported logically I meant in a scientific context since this is the Science forum, apologies that I did not make that clearer.
To prove God exists scientifically would be impossible IMO. Alien intervention is as plausible, if not more so, than Darwinist evolution. Pixie dust, why not if someone can prove it?

Nick

rde

Darwin himself remarked how there is little evidence that supports his theory

That's hardly surprising. In 1905, the evidence for the Special Theory of Relativity was negligible, too. But since Origin of Species was first published in (I think) 1859, evidence has been steadily accumulating to the point where there're huge amounts of data that point to evolution by natural selection. For a start, Darwin's main concern with regard to his theory was that he'd no idea how inheritance worked. Now, thanks to Mendel and his successors, we know exactly how it works. Add to this our knowledge of DNA and its mechanisms, evidence of mutation (and adaptation) by S. Aureus and its bacterial cousins, and we can be as certain as it's possible to be that we're here because of natural selection. And that's pretty certain.

That there is hundreds of years of evidence is contestible indeed

No it isn't.

Alien intervention is as plausible, if not more so, than Darwinist evolution

Darwin came up with theory (with others), but since then, there've been massive strides made so that the theory is much, much more solid than it was in Darwin's day. The theory is better referred to as the theory of evolution by natural selection, assuming that's what you meant. If it is what you meant, then the contention that there's a huge body of evidence pointing to alien intervention is just silly.

As for people's views of the theory: they're as valid as people's views of the theory of quantum dynamics. You can have any view you like, it won't change the fact that the theory is accurate.