>From first principles of infinite time and random fluctuations of nothingness, humans can evolve.
Said in simple terms, given enough time, the human species can come into existence as a result of random chance. The way modern theological though handles this sort of argument in terms of intelligent design: Since God’s plan made infinite time and random fluctuations possible, so God rightly gets credit for all the possibilities that these concepts engender; if it has happened, then God must have done it. On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 8:27 AM, Jojo Jaro <[email protected]> wrote: > ** > Hello gang, > > In honor of my bet with Terry, this is my first post on the Fallacies of > Darwinian Evolution. Before I continue, I would like to lay the ground > work and define a few basic terms that we will be using in my series of > posts. Hopefully, people read this post so that I do not have to redefine > my terms repeatedly. I do hope Jed engages me in a Debate between > Darwinian Evolution and Intelligent Design. Maybe I'll learn something. I > hope that if you decide to engage in this discussion, that you would keep > the exchange civil. I will not initiate an Ad hominem attack unless > attacked first. Let's discuss your ideas and why you absolutely believe in > Darwinian Evolution and I'll discuss my belief in Intelligent Design. But > if you want to exchange insults, I can surely accomodate you. > > What is Darwinian Evolution? > > Darwinian Evolution is the theory of evolution espoused by Charles Darwin > in his book "The Origin of Species". Later he wrote "The Descent of Man" > specifically to address man's evolution from lower life forms. The basic > Tenet of Darwinian Evolution is a random mutation process that results in > "features" that allow an individual animal or plant life to survive a > stress in its environment. When it survives, it passes down this "Trait" > to its progeny thereby allowing its progeny to successfully live in this > new stressful environment thereby passing this trait down to its progeny > also. The trait enables the individual to survive hence the term "Survival > of the Fittest", or "Natural Selection". Darwin then takes this idea of > Natural Selection one step further and hypothesizes that this natural > selection process is the means by which variouis species emerge. Hence > species A mutates, survives, passes on its traits, then after several > generations. becomes another species B - hence the term "The origin of > Species". The nature or origin or mechanism of the mutation was unknown > to Darwin. DNA was not discovered in his lifetime. > > Darwinian Evolution presupposes that the mutation or the change is small, > and the mutation process in passed down only via the mechanism of natural > selection. In other words, a new trait must not be so complex and the > change so huge as to cause people to suspect that there might be some > directed process, or an Intelligence causing the change; other than > natural selection that would cause the change. In other words, Darwinian > Evolution says that it is impossible to evolve a complex organ like a fully > developed human eye in a single generation. The development of a complex > organ must take place slowly, one minor change at a time, one minor change > per generation. This also implies that the minor changes must be > commulative, or additive. One small minor change within each generation > that adds up generation after generation until it becomes an organ as > complex as an eye. > > Darwinian Evolution implies the following: > > 1. The change must be small and minor and slow in an individual. The > mutation results in a small change or small feature. If the change is big, > there must be some other mechanism or directed Intelligence behind that > change. Darwin recognized this and said so in his book. > > 2. The change or the new trait or feature must confer to that individual > a survival advantage. Otherwise, that useful trait will simply die with > that individual. A trait that may be useful but does not confer a survival > advantage is a trait that does not result in natural selection hence > Darwinian Evolution is NOT in operation here. > > 3. The trait must not cause any impairment or susceptibility to the > individual. In other words, a trait that confer an increased survival > advantage but also causes an increased susceptibility to some other > stress will not result in natural selection. For example, a trait that > results in an individual to survive a drought in food must not make that > same individual be more susceptible to Cold weather. If it does, the > chances of the trait being sucessfully passed down commulatively generation > after generation is minimized and the survival of that individual will not > be any better statistically compared to another individual without that > mutated trait. > > 4. The trait or change must be permanent. In other words, the change > must not revert back or disappear once the stress is removed. If it does, > it will not be additive and hence can not result in a complex organ like an > eye. This will result in natural selection only for a few generations and > then that advantage dissappears and other individuals can compete again > which will result in a dilution of that trait in the general population. > > 5. Each successive additive change must confer a survival advantage each > and every step until a complex organ results. To illustrate, lets say it > takes 5 steps to develop an eye. Change A, Change B, Change C, Change D > and Change E results in a fully developed eye. (I am using only 5 steps to > simplify the discussion. In reality, the steps required to develop a human > eye requires billions of steps.) Change A must confer a survival > advantage to the individual. An additive change B is added to change A > that results in his children having a survival advantage also. Change C is > added and must also confer a survival advantage to his grandchildren. > Change D must also confer a survival advantage to his great grandchildren > and change E results in a fully developed eye conferring a survival > advantage also. Each additive change must confer a survival advantage for > natural selection to work. If only one step in the chain does not confer a > sruvival advantage, the entire series of changes previous to the change > could be lost when that individual does not outperform the rest of the > population. All the hard work and useful changes will simply be diluted in > the population again. Natural selection is broken and a complex organ can > not develop. > > 6. The evolution process occurs and operates over many generations. An > evolution or mutation that occurs in one individual is NOT Darwinian > Evolution, since no Natural selection is in operation. > > 7. The change or trait must not affect an individual's reproductive > ability. If there is no reproduction, there is no natural selection, hence > no Darwinian Evolution. > > 8. The change must have a random mechanism. If the cause of the change > is not random, that evolution is NOT Darwinian Evolution by definition. > > 9. Natural Selection is the only mechanism that will differentiate one > change from another change. In other words, within an individual we can > not say a change is useful or not, until it enables that individual to have > a survival advantage. Hence, natural selection operates between > generations, not within a single generation. There is not natural > selection process within a generation or within an individual. Natural > selection can not be invoked within a generation to explain what mutation > is useful and what is not useful. A process that operates within a > generation is NOT natural selection. A process that does not confer a > survival advantage is NOT natural selection. Survival is the criteria for > natural selection. An individual has no mechanism wherein it can decide > which change to retain or to not retain. The change is retained and acts > only if the individual survives. I can not emphasize this enough. > > 10. The change must enable the individual to "outsurvive" other > individuals in his group. It is not enough to merely allow the individual > to survive, but it must cause that individual to "outsurvive" others. If > it is not outsurviving other individuals, the change will merely get > diluted in the gene pool and lost. > > > In the next post, I will define the difference between Microevolution (aka > Adaptation) and Macroevolution (aka Darwinian Evolution). > > > Enjoy > > Jojo > > >
