Religions > Atheism > Clarification on what Evolution is! Gene frequency not Darwinism or Speciation.
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"JC" |
| Date: |
17 Jan 2004 08:42:56 PM |
| Object: |
Clarification on what Evolution is! Gene frequency not Darwinism or Speciation. |
Hi All
I understand now why there is so much confusion on the part of why Evolution
is a Fact. While Darwinism and Speciation are just theories.
The true definition of Evolution is:
"Change in the frequencies of various genes in a population over
generations."
But many of us like to include a bit of Darwinism and/or Speciation in the
definition. A more or less natural tendency to do this as the consequence of
Evolution is the RISE of new species. That is - a population that becomes so
different from its ancestors that they no longer breed together. But this
does not necessarily mean that they cannot produce off spring that can them
selves give birth. A well documented example of this is a cross between a
tiger and a lion. Sometimes the off spring of the hybrid animals them selves
can still reproduce.
One of my former biology professors stated that if you want to start an
argument just as a group of biologist - "What is the best/correct definition
of what is a species?"
Just adding fuel to the "fire." Your welcome! : )
JC
P.S. Yes the real JC! Living and breathing. Ah, but not breeding - yet.
Jeremy Cook. : )
.
|
|
| User: "Editor of EvilBible.com" |
|
| Title: Re: Clarification on what Evolution is! Gene frequency not Darwinism or Speciation. |
18 Jan 2004 03:05:41 AM |
|
|
"JC" <Jeremy_Cook@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:QomOb.33600$n44.17133@clgrps13...
Hi All
I understand now why there is so much confusion on the part of why
Evolution
is a Fact. While Darwinism and Speciation are just theories.
The true definition of Evolution is:
"Change in the frequencies of various genes in a population over
generations."
If I were you I would write a letter to your biology professor and demand
your money back for giving you such a lousy education. This definition is
*totally incorrect*. Did you go to one of those Bible colleges?
.
|
|
|
| User: "JC" |
|
| Title: Re: Clarification on what Evolution is! Gene frequency not Darwinism or Speciation. |
18 Jan 2004 01:29:40 PM |
|
|
I hear you. But no - not a bible college, and the prof was definitely an
atheist. Also the text book went on to talk about the "logical necessity" of
species arising from this process. And it goes on about "normal" evolution
shortly after that.
What I like about the definition "The true definition of Evolution is:
"Change in the frequencies of various genes in a population over
generations."" is it is undeniable, and thus plants firmly in the minds of
all those who are taught it. Perhaps it was chosen so that even Christians
can't deny it. And think about the long term consequences of their accepting
the basis of the principle and then the at least some might then accept the
layman's definition over time. Sneaky?
JC
P.S. Of course what ever people accept as the definition of a word, right or
wrong, becomes the accepted definition over time. "Today's good English was
yesterday's bad English."
"Editor of EvilBible.com" <Dont_Reply@Here.com> wrote in message
news:F%rOb.1848$Fp1.1145873@news1.news.adelphia.net...
"JC" <Jeremy_Cook@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:QomOb.33600$n44.17133@clgrps13...
Hi All
I understand now why there is so much confusion on the part of why
Evolution
is a Fact. While Darwinism and Speciation are just theories.
The true definition of Evolution is:
"Change in the frequencies of various genes in a population over
generations."
If I were you I would write a letter to your biology professor and demand
your money back for giving you such a lousy education. This definition is
*totally incorrect*. Did you go to one of those Bible colleges?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Editor of EvilBible.com" |
|
| Title: Re: Clarification on what Evolution is! Gene frequency not Darwinism or Speciation. |
18 Jan 2004 02:07:28 PM |
|
|
"JC" <Jeremy_Cook@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:E8BOb.30044$De.13395@edtnps84...
I hear you. But no - not a bible college, and the prof was definitely an
atheist. Also the text book went on to talk about the "logical necessity"
of
species arising from this process. And it goes on about "normal" evolution
shortly after that.
What I like about the definition "The true definition of Evolution is:
"Change in the frequencies of various genes in a population over
generations."" is it is undeniable, and thus plants firmly in the minds of
all those who are taught it. Perhaps it was chosen so that even Christians
can't deny it. And think about the long term consequences of their
accepting
the basis of the principle and then the at least some might then accept
the
layman's definition over time. Sneaky?
JC
P.S. Of course what ever people accept as the definition of a word, right
or
wrong, becomes the accepted definition over time. "Today's good English
was
yesterday's bad English."
My point is that this is *not a correct definition*! "Changes in the
frequencies of various genes in a population over generations" occurs even
in populations that are not evolving. Evolution *requires* phenotype
changes, not just genotype changes.
.
|
|
|
| User: "JC" |
|
| Title: Re: Clarification on what Evolution is! Gene frequency not Darwinism or Speciation. |
18 Jan 2004 06:33:17 PM |
|
|
But remember that Phenotype is a combination of genetic and environmental
factors.
"Phenotype: The observable properties of an individual as they have
developed under the combined influences of the genetic constitution of the
individual and the effects of environmental factors."
So observable changes need not apply. Their internal organs could change or
even have change in the number of chromosomes without affecting appearance.
For example Wildebeest have been around for some 3 million years - so
today's variety may no longer be able to breed with those of the past. Yet
their physical appearance apparently remains the same.
My teachers point and the text book's author was in fact that evolution does
not require a change in phenotype. In fact evolution is ALWAYS occurring as
the frequency of the genetic make up changes. Even when it is not apparent.
JC
"Editor of EvilBible.com" <Dont_Reply@Here.com> wrote in message
news:4IBOb.2013$Fp1.1297539@news1.news.adelphia.net...
"JC" <Jeremy_Cook@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:E8BOb.30044$De.13395@edtnps84...
I hear you. But no - not a bible college, and the prof was definitely an
atheist. Also the text book went on to talk about the "logical
necessity"
of
species arising from this process. And it goes on about "normal"
evolution
shortly after that.
What I like about the definition "The true definition of Evolution is:
"Change in the frequencies of various genes in a population over
generations."" is it is undeniable, and thus plants firmly in the minds
of
all those who are taught it. Perhaps it was chosen so that even
Christians
can't deny it. And think about the long term consequences of their
accepting
the basis of the principle and then the at least some might then accept
the
layman's definition over time. Sneaky?
JC
P.S. Of course what ever people accept as the definition of a word,
right
or
wrong, becomes the accepted definition over time. "Today's good English
was
yesterday's bad English."
My point is that this is *not a correct definition*! "Changes in the
frequencies of various genes in a population over generations" occurs even
in populations that are not evolving. Evolution *requires* phenotype
changes, not just genotype changes.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Editor of EvilBible.com" |
|
| Title: Re: Clarification on what Evolution is! Gene frequency not Darwinism or Speciation. |
18 Jan 2004 07:45:33 PM |
|
|
"JC" <Jeremy_Cook@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:hBFOb.33803$wf1.944@edtnps89...
But remember that Phenotype is a combination of genetic and environmental
factors.
"Phenotype: The observable properties of an individual as they have
developed under the combined influences of the genetic constitution of the
individual and the effects of environmental factors."
So observable changes need not apply. Their internal organs could change
or
even have change in the number of chromosomes without affecting
appearance.
For example Wildebeest have been around for some 3 million years - so
today's variety may no longer be able to breed with those of the past. Yet
their physical appearance apparently remains the same.
My teachers point and the text book's author was in fact that evolution
does
not require a change in phenotype. In fact evolution is ALWAYS occurring
as
the frequency of the genetic make up changes. Even when it is not
apparent.
What textbook are you getting these lousy definitions from? My American
Heritage Dictionary has better definitions than these. For example:
Phenotype: 1a. The observable physical or biochemical characteristics of an
organism, as determined by both genetic makeup and environmental influences.
b. The expression of a specific trait, such as stature or blood type, based
on genetic and environmental influences. 2. An individual or group of
organisms exhibiting a particular phenotype.
Evolution: 3. Biology a. Change in the genetic composition of a population
during successive generations, as a result of natural selection acting on
the genetic variation among individuals, and resulting in the development of
new species. b. The historical development of a related group of organisms;
phylogeny.
Your definition of evolution "change in the frequencies of various genes in
a population over generations." is inaccurate because of the following
reasons:
1) It talks only about frequency of genes, instead of changes within a gene.
2) It does not require any changes in traits for something to be called
evolution.
3) Changes in gene frequencies can occur in populations that are not
evolving.
4) It says absolutely nothing about natural selection.
These factors mean your definition is totally inaccurate and makes it
useless as a starting point for any discussion of evolution.
.
|
|
|
| User: "JC" |
|
| Title: Re: Clarification on what Evolution is! Gene frequency not Darwinism or Speciation. |
18 Jan 2004 09:15:58 PM |
|
|
I like what Al Klein has to say. See his added comments on this discussion
in the newsgroup.
But what he said:
"Dictionaries don't define scientific terms, not even dictionaries of
scientific terms, which are designed to introduce lay people to
scientific concepts."
As per your points:
Editor of Evil said:
"Your definition of evolution "change in the frequencies of various genes in
a population over generations." is inaccurate because of the following
reasons:
1) It talks only about frequency of genes, instead of changes within a gene.
JC replies - No definition of evolution would include an article on gene
form. As this is a separate topic. A paper on the topic of evolution would
but not a definition.
2) It does not require any changes in traits for something to be called
evolution.
JC replies - That is correct and the point!
3) Changes in gene frequencies can occur in populations that are not
evolving.
JC replies - Yes and no. Evolution is the change in gene frequencies. Thus
almost every time something breeds evolution is occurring. As the frequency
of some gene is changing.
4) It says absolutely nothing about natural selection."
JC replies - Any statement about natural selection is adding information
about "a theory" into "a topic of fact."
Editor of Evil Bible says:
"These factors mean your definition is totally inaccurate and makes it
useless as a starting point for any discussion of evolution."
JC says: "Your confusing Evolution with Natural Selection and Speciation."
Although it is a common mistake to do so as we infer from Evolution the long
term consequences of "Changes in the genes."
JC
PS I still love you - my child.
"Editor of EvilBible.com" <Dont_Reply@Here.com> wrote in message
news:1FGOb.2248$Fp1.1388206@news1.news.adelphia.net...
"JC" <Jeremy_Cook@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:hBFOb.33803$wf1.944@edtnps89...
But remember that Phenotype is a combination of genetic and
environmental
factors.
"Phenotype: The observable properties of an individual as they have
developed under the combined influences of the genetic constitution of
the
individual and the effects of environmental factors."
So observable changes need not apply. Their internal organs could change
or
even have change in the number of chromosomes without affecting
appearance.
For example Wildebeest have been around for some 3 million years - so
today's variety may no longer be able to breed with those of the past.
Yet
their physical appearance apparently remains the same.
My teachers point and the text book's author was in fact that evolution
does
not require a change in phenotype. In fact evolution is ALWAYS occurring
as
the frequency of the genetic make up changes. Even when it is not
apparent.
What textbook are you getting these lousy definitions from? My American
Heritage Dictionary has better definitions than these. For example:
Phenotype: 1a. The observable physical or biochemical characteristics of
an
organism, as determined by both genetic makeup and environmental
influences.
b. The expression of a specific trait, such as stature or blood type,
based
on genetic and environmental influences. 2. An individual or group of
organisms exhibiting a particular phenotype.
Evolution: 3. Biology a. Change in the genetic composition of a
population
during successive generations, as a result of natural selection acting on
the genetic variation among individuals, and resulting in the development
of
new species. b. The historical development of a related group of
organisms;
phylogeny.
Your definition of evolution "change in the frequencies of various genes
in
a population over generations." is inaccurate because of the following
reasons:
1) It talks only about frequency of genes, instead of changes within a
gene.
2) It does not require any changes in traits for something to be called
evolution.
3) Changes in gene frequencies can occur in populations that are not
evolving.
4) It says absolutely nothing about natural selection.
These factors mean your definition is totally inaccurate and makes it
useless as a starting point for any discussion of evolution.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Editor of EvilBible.com" |
|
| Title: Re: Clarification on what Evolution is! Gene frequency not Darwinism or Speciation. |
18 Jan 2004 11:53:08 PM |
|
|
[Please don't top post, respond at the end, or at the bottom of the part
you are responding to, as it makes it easier to follow long threads.]
"JC" <Jeremy_Cook@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OZHOb.35903$De.35503@edtnps84...
I like what Al Klein has to say. See his added comments on this
discussion
in the newsgroup.
But what he said:
"Dictionaries don't define scientific terms, not even dictionaries of
scientific terms, which are designed to introduce lay people to
scientific concepts."
I am not a lay person. I have a Master's degree in Biochemistry and
Molecular Biology and have been working in the field for nearly 20 years. I
know what I am talking about.
As per your points:
Editor of Evil said:
"Your definition of evolution "change in the frequencies of various genes
in
a population over generations." is inaccurate because of the following
reasons:
1) It talks only about frequency of genes, instead of changes within a
gene.
JC replies - No definition of evolution would include an article on gene
form. As this is a separate topic. A paper on the topic of evolution would
but not a definition.
Since genetic mutations, deletions, insertions, and recombination are nearly
100% of the heritable changes an organism can pass on to its offspring, it
would be absurd to say that no definition of evolution would include this.
2) It does not require any changes in traits for something to be called
evolution.
JC replies - That is correct and the point!
That is just plain wrong. There must be changes in traits. They don't have
to be observable to the naked eye, but they must be changes. A change in a
gene that has no effect is not evolution.
3) Changes in gene frequencies can occur in populations that are not
evolving.
JC replies - Yes and no. Evolution is the change in gene frequencies. Thus
almost every time something breeds evolution is occurring. As the
frequency
of some gene is changing.
Evolution is not a change in gene frequencies. Where did you get this awful
definition? However, evolution can be caused by changes in gene frequency.
4) It says absolutely nothing about natural selection."
JC replies - Any statement about natural selection is adding information
about "a theory" into "a topic of fact."
Scientists like myself don't use the term "topic of fact". There are just
theories that are very well proven. Evolution has been observed and natural
selection has been observed.
Editor of Evil Bible says:
"These factors mean your definition is totally inaccurate and makes it
useless as a starting point for any discussion of evolution."
JC says: "Your confusing Evolution with Natural Selection and Speciation."
Although it is a common mistake to do so as we infer from Evolution the
long
term consequences of "Changes in the genes."
No I'm not confusing these concepts. I know what all of these terms mean.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Clarification on what Evolution is! Gene frequency not Darwinism or Speciation. |
20 Jan 2004 09:41:16 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 05:53:08 GMT, "Editor of EvilBible.com"
<Dont_Reply@Here.com> posted in alt.atheism:
[Please don't top post, respond at the end, or at the bottom of the part
you are responding to, as it makes it easier to follow long threads.]
"JC" <Jeremy_Cook@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OZHOb.35903$De.35503@edtnps84...
I like what Al Klein has to say. See his added comments on this
discussion
in the newsgroup.
But what he said:
"Dictionaries don't define scientific terms, not even dictionaries of
scientific terms, which are designed to introduce lay people to
scientific concepts."
I am not a lay person. I have a Master's degree in Biochemistry and
Molecular Biology and have been working in the field for nearly 20 years.
You're a lay person in logic and English. Dictionaries of scientific
terms are written for lay persons.
Since genetic mutations, deletions, insertions, and recombination are nearly
100% of the heritable changes an organism can pass on to its offspring, it
would be absurd to say that no definition of evolution would include this.
Since the definition of evolution is change in allele frequencies in a
breeding population over time, there's something wrong with your
logic.
2) It does not require any changes in traits for something to be called
evolution.
JC replies - That is correct and the point!
That is just plain wrong. There must be changes in traits.
Not for there to be changes in allele frequencies - which is the ONLY
thing needed for evolution.
They don't have to be observable to the naked eye, but they must be changes. A change in a
gene that has no effect is not evolution.
A change in allele frequency is a change in trait, even if it's not an
expressed trait or an expressed change, but that has nothing to do
with the definition of the word.
Evolution is not a change in gene frequencies.
That's how the word is defined.
However, evolution can be caused by changes in gene frequency.
Stop making things up.
4) It says absolutely nothing about natural selection."
JC replies - Any statement about natural selection is adding information
about "a theory" into "a topic of fact."
Scientists like myself don't use the term "topic of fact". There are just
theories that are very well proven.
Oh, nonsense. Any "scientist" who says that there are no facts is a
fool.
Evolution has been observed and natural selection has been observed.
Evolution - change in allele frequency - is observed every time
something is born or hatched. Natural selection can be inferred - it
can't be observed.
Editor of Evil Bible says:
"These factors mean your definition is totally inaccurate and makes it
useless as a starting point for any discussion of evolution."
JC says: "Your confusing Evolution with Natural Selection and Speciation."
Although it is a common mistake to do so as we infer from Evolution the long
term consequences of "Changes in the genes."
No I'm not confusing these concepts. I know what all of these terms mean.
If you did you wouldn't say that natural selection has been observed.
--
"To assume the existence of an unperceivable being ... does not facilitate understanding
the orderliness we find in the perceivable world."
- Letter to an Iowa student who asked, What is God? July, 1953; Einstein Archive 59-085
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Editor of EvilBible.com" |
|
| Title: Re: Clarification on what Evolution is! Gene frequency not Darwinism or Speciation. |
20 Jan 2004 11:01:35 PM |
|
|
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:1rsr009e6uoftv97jbkg57umgmg6qifc25@Pern.rk...
On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 05:53:08 GMT, "Editor of EvilBible.com"
<Dont_Reply@Here.com> posted in alt.atheism:
[Please don't top post, respond at the end, or at the bottom of the part
you are responding to, as it makes it easier to follow long threads.]
"JC" <Jeremy_Cook@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OZHOb.35903$De.35503@edtnps84...
I like what Al Klein has to say. See his added comments on this
discussion
in the newsgroup.
But what he said:
"Dictionaries don't define scientific terms, not even dictionaries of
scientific terms, which are designed to introduce lay people to
scientific concepts."
I am not a lay person. I have a Master's degree in Biochemistry and
Molecular Biology and have been working in the field for nearly 20 years.
You're a lay person in logic and English. Dictionaries of scientific
terms are written for lay persons.
Since genetic mutations, deletions, insertions, and recombination are
nearly
100% of the heritable changes an organism can pass on to its offspring,
it
would be absurd to say that no definition of evolution would include
this.
Since the definition of evolution is change in allele frequencies in a
breeding population over time, there's something wrong with your
logic.
Here you go again with you absurd definitions. Please show where you got
this lie from.
2) It does not require any changes in traits for something to be called
evolution.
JC replies - That is correct and the point!
That is just plain wrong. There must be changes in traits.
Not for there to be changes in allele frequencies - which is the ONLY
thing needed for evolution.
Once again you haven't shown that your definition is correct. It seems like
you just pulled it out of your *****. You seem to do this quite a bit.
They don't have to be observable to the naked eye, but they must be
changes. A change in a
gene that has no effect is not evolution.
A change in allele frequency is a change in trait, even if it's not an
expressed trait or an expressed change, but that has nothing to do
with the definition of the word.
Wrong again. It seems like nearly everything you write is totally
fabricated. A change in a gene that is not expressed is not a change in
trait.
Evolution is not a change in gene frequencies.
That's how the word is defined.
You keep saying this but you haven't posted the source of your definition.
That's a bad habit you have.
However, evolution can be caused by changes in gene frequency.
Stop making things up.
This is absolutely true and very basic genetics I might add.
4) It says absolutely nothing about natural selection."
JC replies - Any statement about natural selection is adding
information
about "a theory" into "a topic of fact."
Scientists like myself don't use the term "topic of fact". There are
just
theories that are very well proven.
Oh, nonsense. Any "scientist" who says that there are no facts is a
fool.
There you go twisting words around again. Read what I said.
Evolution has been observed and natural selection has been observed.
Evolution - change in allele frequency - is observed every time
something is born or hatched.
Wrong again.
Natural selection can be inferred - it can't be observed.
It most definitely has been observed. Bacterial resistance to antibiotics
is a great example.
Editor of Evil Bible says:
"These factors mean your definition is totally inaccurate and makes it
useless as a starting point for any discussion of evolution."
JC says: "Your confusing Evolution with Natural Selection and
Speciation."
Although it is a common mistake to do so as we infer from Evolution the
long
term consequences of "Changes in the genes."
No I'm not confusing these concepts. I know what all of these terms
mean.
If you did you wouldn't say that natural selection has been observed.
What is your problem? Are you one of those assholes who like to argue about
things they can't win.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Clarification on what Evolution is! Gene frequency not Darwinism or Speciation. |
18 Jan 2004 08:06:07 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 20:07:28 GMT, "Editor of EvilBible.com"
<Dont_Reply@Here.com> posted in alt.atheism:
My point is that this is *not a correct definition*! "Changes in the
frequencies of various genes in a population over generations" occurs even
in populations that are not evolving.
Since change in allele frequency DEFINES evolution, populations in
which allele frequencies are changing (existing populations) ARE
evolving.
Evolution *requires* phenotype changes
In your world, not in this one, in which "evolution" is defined - by
those in the field - as "change in allele frequency in a breeding
population over time". Which is just a more precise way of saying
"change in the frequencies of various genes in a population over
generations".
--
"I am a deeply religious nonbeliever.... This is a somewhat new kind of religion."
- Letter to Hans Muehsam March 30, 1954; Einstein Archive 38-434
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Editor of EvilBible.com" |
|
| Title: Re: Clarification on what Evolution is! Gene frequency not Darwinism or Speciation. |
19 Jan 2004 12:07:34 AM |
|
|
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:hoem00908297urj83n55jjd3hacriihn0l@Pern.rk...
On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 20:07:28 GMT, "Editor of EvilBible.com"
<Dont_Reply@Here.com> posted in alt.atheism:
My point is that this is *not a correct definition*! "Changes in the
frequencies of various genes in a population over generations" occurs
even
in populations that are not evolving.
Since change in allele frequency DEFINES evolution, populations in
which allele frequencies are changing (existing populations) ARE
evolving.
First of all let me tell you that I have a Master's degree in Biochemistry
and Molecular Biology and have worked in the field for nearly 20 years. I
know what I am talking about.
Evolution is not defined by changes in allele frequencies. Evolution is
defined by changes in traits in populations over many generations. Usually
(almost always) this is caused by genetic changes such as changes in allele
frequencies, mutations, insertions, deletions and recombination.
There are plenty of non-evolving populations that have changes in allele
frequencies. These changes do not affect the traits of the population so
they are not considered to be evolving.
Evolution *requires* phenotype changes
In your world, not in this one, in which "evolution" is defined - by
those in the field - as "change in allele frequency in a breeding
population over time". Which is just a more precise way of saying
"change in the frequencies of various genes in a population over
generations".
In my 20 years of experience I have never seen this definition. I suspect
it is an internet version of an urban myth.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Clarification on what Evolution is! Gene frequency not Darwinism or Speciation. |
20 Jan 2004 09:44:19 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 06:07:34 GMT, "Editor of EvilBible.com"
<Dont_Reply@Here.com> posted in alt.atheism:
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:hoem00908297urj83n55jjd3hacriihn0l@Pern.rk...
On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 20:07:28 GMT, "Editor of EvilBible.com"
<Dont_Reply@Here.com> posted in alt.atheism:
My point is that this is *not a correct definition*! "Changes in the
frequencies of various genes in a population over generations" occurs
even
in populations that are not evolving.
Since change in allele frequency DEFINES evolution, populations in
which allele frequencies are changing (existing populations) ARE
evolving.
First of all let me tell you that I have a Master's degree in Biochemistry
and Molecular Biology and have worked in the field for nearly 20 years. I
know what I am talking about.
That paragraph alone says that you don't.
Evolution is not defined by changes in allele frequencies.
Since that's the definition of the word, it is.
There are plenty of non-evolving populations that have changes in allele
frequencies.
Since that's self-contradictory, it's nonsense.
These changes do not affect the traits of the population
Then there aren't any changes in allele frequency, unless you're
talking about junk genes.
so they are not considered to be evolving.
Every birth or hatching is an example of evolution.
Evolution *requires* phenotype changes
In your world, not in this one, in which "evolution" is defined - by
those in the field - as "change in allele frequency in a breeding
population over time". Which is just a more precise way of saying
"change in the frequencies of various genes in a population over
generations".
In my 20 years of experience I have never seen this definition.
Then you're not that experienced.
I suspect it is an internet version of an urban myth.
And I suspect that you're talking through your hat.
--
"If we really know Truth, we do not fear hearing falsehoods or half-truths; if we are not sure of the truth - we shudder and try to shout down every utterance." - A. J. Mims
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Editor of EvilBible.com" |
|
| Title: Re: Clarification on what Evolution is! Gene frequency not Darwinism or Speciation. |
20 Jan 2004 11:08:49 PM |
|
|
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:q7tr00dhm1oa969p1limleeb6chfgi6i57@Pern.rk...
On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 06:07:34 GMT, "Editor of EvilBible.com"
<Dont_Reply@Here.com> posted in alt.atheism:
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:hoem00908297urj83n55jjd3hacriihn0l@Pern.rk...
On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 20:07:28 GMT, "Editor of EvilBible.com"
<Dont_Reply@Here.com> posted in alt.atheism:
My point is that this is *not a correct definition*! "Changes in the
frequencies of various genes in a population over generations" occurs
even
in populations that are not evolving.
Since change in allele frequency DEFINES evolution, populations in
which allele frequencies are changing (existing populations) ARE
evolving.
First of all let me tell you that I have a Master's degree in
Biochemistry
and Molecular Biology and have worked in the field for nearly 20 years.
I
know what I am talking about.
That paragraph alone says that you don't.
Maybe in you twisted warped world where the only reality is you own
incorrect opinion.
Evolution is not defined by changes in allele frequencies.
Since that's the definition of the word, it is.
That's not the definition.
There are plenty of non-evolving populations that have changes in allele
frequencies.
Since that's self-contradictory, it's nonsense.
It's not self-contradictory. You just don't have the slightest idea of what
you are talking about.
These changes do not affect the traits of the population
Then there aren't any changes in allele frequency, unless you're
talking about junk genes.
Some genes are not expressed. And some genes are transcribed but not
translated.
so they are not considered to be evolving.
Every birth or hatching is an example of evolution.
Nope. Doesn't it hurt to have you head suck up your *****?
Evolution *requires* phenotype changes
In your world, not in this one, in which "evolution" is defined - by
those in the field - as "change in allele frequency in a breeding
population over time". Which is just a more precise way of saying
"change in the frequencies of various genes in a population over
generations".
In my 20 years of experience I have never seen this definition.
Then you're not that experienced.
You are just a fool who doesn't seem to posses the intelligence of a 10 year
old child.
I suspect it is an internet version of an urban myth.
And I suspect that you're talking through your hat.
And I know you are talking out your *****.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Clarification on what Evolution is! Gene frequency not Darwinism or Speciation. |
18 Jan 2004 05:35:00 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 19:29:40 GMT, "JC" <Jeremy_Cook@hotmail.com>
wrote:
I hear you. But no - not a bible college, and the prof was definitely an
atheist. Also the text book went on to talk about the "logical necessity" of
species arising from this process. And it goes on about "normal" evolution
shortly after that.
What I like about the definition "The true definition of Evolution is:
"Change in the frequencies of various genes in a population over
generations."" is it is undeniable, and thus plants firmly in the minds of
all those who are taught it. Perhaps it was chosen so that even Christians
can't deny it. And think about the long term consequences of their accepting
the basis of the principle and then the at least some might then accept the
layman's definition over time. Sneaky?
It was chosen because it is parsimoniously accrurate.
It might come as a surprise to you, but people investigating reality
don't give a thought to Hinduism, Sikhism, Christianity, Judaism,
Islam, Zoroastrianism, Shinoto, Buddhism or any of the religions.
However speciation happens. It has been observed both in the wild and
in the lab.
Darwinism, like evolutionism, is of course a fantasy of creationists,
who invent an -ism that they imagine competes with their own one
because they don't understand how reality works, or the methods people
who investigate reality use to derive testable conclusions about it.
JC
P.S. Of course what ever people accept as the definition of a word, right or
wrong, becomes the accepted definition over time. "Today's good English was
yesterday's bad English."
"Editor of EvilBible.com" <Dont_Reply@Here.com> wrote in message
news:F%rOb.1848$Fp1.1145873@news1.news.adelphia.net...
"JC" <Jeremy_Cook@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:QomOb.33600$n44.17133@clgrps13...
Hi All
I understand now why there is so much confusion on the part of why
Evolution
is a Fact. While Darwinism and Speciation are just theories.
The true definition of Evolution is:
"Change in the frequencies of various genes in a population over
generations."
If I were you I would write a letter to your biology professor and demand
your money back for giving you such a lousy education. This definition is
*totally incorrect*. Did you go to one of those Bible colleges?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Editor of EvilBible.com" |
|
| Title: Re: Clarification on what Evolution is! Gene frequency not Darwinism or Speciation. |
18 Jan 2004 06:14:32 PM |
|
|
"Christopher A. Lee" <calee@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:q16m00hdhtp2o2288tusd1rlouqfc6e2u5@4ax.com...
On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 19:29:40 GMT, "JC" <Jeremy_Cook@hotmail.com>
wrote:
I hear you. But no - not a bible college, and the prof was definitely an
atheist. Also the text book went on to talk about the "logical necessity"
of
species arising from this process. And it goes on about "normal"
evolution
shortly after that.
What I like about the definition "The true definition of Evolution is:
"Change in the frequencies of various genes in a population over
generations."" is it is undeniable, and thus plants firmly in the minds
of
all those who are taught it. Perhaps it was chosen so that even
Christians
can't deny it. And think about the long term consequences of their
accepting
the basis of the principle and then the at least some might then accept
the
layman's definition over time. Sneaky?
It was chosen because it is parsimoniously accrurate.
But this definition is not accurate at all. In fact it is downright
incorrect. Here is an example of a good definition of evolution from The
McGraw-Hill Dictionary of Scientific & Technical Terms: "The processes of
biological and organic change in organisms by which descendants come to
differ from their ancestors."
.
|
|
|
| User: "JC" |
|
| Title: Re: Clarification on what Evolution is! Gene frequency not Darwinism or Speciation. |
18 Jan 2004 07:18:05 PM |
|
|
McGraw-Hill Dictionary of Scientific & Technical Terms: "The processes of
biological and organic change in organisms by which descendants come to
differ from their ancestors."
Note that is says nothing about speciation. Although that can be inferred.
Which is again adding to the definition when you talk about speciation or
Darwinism.
It says nothing about phenotypes.
It only talks about differing from the ancestors. Which goes back to the
definition I gave which is: Change in gene frequency.
JC
"Editor of EvilBible.com" <Dont_Reply@Here.com> wrote in message
news:IjFOb.2191$Fp1.1358993@news1.news.adelphia.net...
"Christopher A. Lee" <calee@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:q16m00hdhtp2o2288tusd1rlouqfc6e2u5@4ax.com...
On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 19:29:40 GMT, "JC" <Jeremy_Cook@hotmail.com>
wrote:
I hear you. But no - not a bible college, and the prof was definitely
an
atheist. Also the text book went on to talk about the "logical
necessity"
of
species arising from this process. And it goes on about "normal"
evolution
shortly after that.
What I like about the definition "The true definition of Evolution is:
"Change in the frequencies of various genes in a population over
generations."" is it is undeniable, and thus plants firmly in the minds
of
all those who are taught it. Perhaps it was chosen so that even
Christians
can't deny it. And think about the long term consequences of their
accepting
the basis of the principle and then the at least some might then accept
the
layman's definition over time. Sneaky?
It was chosen because it is parsimoniously accrurate.
But this definition is not accurate at all. In fact it is downright
incorrect. Here is an example of a good definition of evolution from The
McGraw-Hill Dictionary of Scientific & Technical Terms: "The processes of
biological and organic change in organisms by which descendants come to
differ from their ancestors."
.
|
|
|
| User: "Editor of EvilBible.com" |
|
| Title: Re: Clarification on what Evolution is! Gene frequency not Darwinism or Speciation. |
19 Jan 2004 12:15:24 AM |
|
|
"JC" <Jeremy_Cook@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:hfGOb.33825$wf1.5318@edtnps89...
McGraw-Hill Dictionary of Scientific & Technical Terms: "The processes of
biological and organic change in organisms by which descendants come to
differ from their ancestors."
Note that is says nothing about speciation. Although that can be inferred.
Which is again adding to the definition when you talk about speciation or
Darwinism.
Evolution does not require speciation.
Darwinism is not a scientific term.
It says nothing about phenotypes.
What do you think "biological and organic change" is referring to? It's
talking about phenotypes (traits).
It only talks about differing from the ancestors. Which goes back to the
definition I gave which is: Change in gene frequency.
Changes in gene frequency does not automatically result in any changes in
traits. There are plenty of examples in nature where non-evolving (not
changing traits) populations have changes in gene frequencies.
.
|
|
|
| User: "JC" |
|
| Title: Re: Clarification on what Evolution is! Gene frequency not Darwinism or Speciation. |
19 Jan 2004 01:55:30 AM |
|
|
See end. Not intended as Joke. Concept of "top posting."
"Editor of EvilBible.com" <Dont_Reply@Here.com> wrote in message
news:0CKOb.2327$Fp1.1449347@news1.news.adelphia.net...
"JC" <Jeremy_Cook@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:hfGOb.33825$wf1.5318@edtnps89...
McGraw-Hill Dictionary of Scientific & Technical Terms: "The processes
of
biological and organic change in organisms by which descendants come to
differ from their ancestors."
Note that is says nothing about speciation. Although that can be
inferred.
Which is again adding to the definition when you talk about speciation
or
Darwinism.
Evolution does not require speciation.
Darwinism is not a scientific term.
It says nothing about phenotypes.
What do you think "biological and organic change" is referring to? It's
talking about phenotypes (traits).
It only talks about differing from the ancestors. Which goes back to the
definition I gave which is: Change in gene frequency.
Changes in gene frequency does not automatically result in any changes in
traits. There are plenty of examples in nature where non-evolving (not
changing traits) populations have changes in gene frequencies.
Not sure how you can separate Evolution from Gene Frequencies.
But some interesting points. But this is a conflict in definitions. But not
insignificant either. I stand-by - in defense - of gene frequencies as
evolution. The apprentice often takes on his masters battles. Sometimes
blindly and sometimes rightly.
I will have to look into this further to see what "More People" have to say.
As one of my profs pointed out that even the definition of what a species
is - is grounds for argument among the professionals.
And like I said before - "Today's good grammar was yesterday's bad grammar."
So, we have a changing/conflicting definition of what the "population" says
is Evolution. And unfortunately - many many wrongs do in the end make a
right. In language anyhow. We need to explore this further. As only by
exploration of the possibilities can we uncover - some facts.
Science changes. It was a well known "fact" that the Earth was once the
center of the solar system and the universe. Etc....
Only time and knowledge can correct our mistaken concepts of what is a fact.
And that usually starts with some - hypothesis. And in this case - a
definition that we can find useful.
But I must say that I prefer my prof's definition as it can be used to
infiltrate the minds of the non-evolutionists.
JC
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Clarification on what Evolution is! Gene frequency not Darwinism or Speciation. |
18 Jan 2004 08:10:33 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 00:14:32 GMT, "Editor of EvilBible.com"
<Dont_Reply@Here.com> posted in alt.atheism:
"Christopher A. Lee" <calee@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:q16m00hdhtp2o2288tusd1rlouqfc6e2u5@4ax.com...
It was chosen because it is parsimoniously accrurate.
But this definition is not accurate at all.
Since it *IS* the definition of evolution used by those in the field,
it's completely and 100% accurate.
In fact it is downright
incorrect. Here is an example of a good definition of evolution from The
McGraw-Hill Dictionary of Scientific & Technical Terms
Dictionaries don't define scientific terms, not even dictionaries of
scientific terms, which are designed to introduce lay people to
scientific concepts.
--
"I am a deeply religious nonbeliever.... This is a somewhat new kind of religion."
- Letter to Hans Muehsam March 30, 1954; Einstein Archive 38-434
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
You and I would not want to be the wife of a Early Christian Man
Re: Are "shredded" computer files really gone? Probably NOT cccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc - 181dfr.txt [1/1]
pp1.txt MAKE SUPER EASY MONEY using only PAYPAL!! You will only HURT YOURSELF by NOT TRYING AT LEAST ONCE.. READ IN (0/1)
Christians Do Not Accept Free Will
OT: Good riddance is not enough
OT: The Policy: Five Not-So-Easy Pieces
Is *not* collecting stamps a hobby? "Aye," sayeth one wanker for Jebus!
Re: Church and State Need Not be Seperate, Quote the Bugboy
| Commentary: Not Intelligent, and Surely Not Science
--- You might not neet it.
Why does God not speak to us???
The Ten (Er, well; not *really* 'Ten'...) Commandments...
'Blind, torture, kill', church leader confesses, no not Bush.
Re: Omphalism, not ID, should be taught as alternative in schools
Jesus Christ! No, not you, the OTHER Jesus Christ.
|
|
|
