there must be more to it

[IndiReloaded]

anyway, I'm done. I will let Indi get the last word in b/c it obviously means more to her to impress a bunch of strangers on LF.

Are you kidding?? LOL, this coming from a guy who posts nearly nude pics of his body? Oh dear, Neo, you are quite busted on this one.

Perhaps you should also have a look at how your comments in Blue's recent thread were appreciated? Sure, you are perfectly reasonable, Neo. Grow up already.

[Mish]

Thanks Indi, I'll have a look at the videos when I get home.


Well in scientific conclusion to this thread (from a bible thumper point of view, not my own) I would like to say that theory of evolution (as well as all other recent innovations) is most likely the work of satan. The Amish got it right

[IndiReloaded]

Did you watch Dan Dennett's vid? You gotta admit--sticking one's fingers in your ears & making the devil warding sign is the perfect defense against this kind of thing.

[ecojeanne]

Dan Dennett's vid made a point that i agree with about teaching kids facts about all religions. i think that would make people understand and be less afraid of each other. completely agree. having thought about it; i still believe in God, i don't think i will ever let that go, however i have to admit that my education was very bad growing up, i went to a mixture of catholic and 1 protestant all girls school (the protestant school i was in boarding from the age of 10 and there was no classes on religion or understanding of our origins). i remember vaguely some talk about monkeys but nothing of significance. i was always a rebel against the heads so i didn't care very much about my education tbh. now that i'm older i do. anyway, i still haven't changed my belief.

[IndiReloaded]

But you are THINKING about it. That is what matters. Good for you, Eco.

[Mish]

Here. For those of you with an open mind, Dan Dennett says it far better than I & has some interesting ideas about teaching religion in schools. Mish, the issue I think you are having is explained around 11 min.

I've watched it Indi and I agree with a lot of what he said. By the way a lot of Religious schools here in Australia teach their students about other Religions. My ex went to a catholic school and she told me they had subjects and exams dedicated to other religions. I thought it was interesting.

Mish, I don't have a problem with the bacterial studies. In fact, they are perfect examples of how evolution works. All I am saying is you seem to be confused about HOW it works. The lactose was not the cause of the evolution, merely the selection criteria. In other words, the mutation that allowed for lactose (or other sugars, in other experiments) occurs regardless, its just that the presence of lactose selects for its emergence. I can't think of anyway to say it more clearly than that.

Fair enough. My main problem was with the fact that you only focus on mutation concept of evolution and not enough on adoptation bit which I think is also very important. Especially when you talk about evolution of mammals. I suppose you can bring an example of the fish where they are left to fend for themselves from almost the very beginning, mammals tend to rely more on skill, fitness and learning curve, without their parents at the very beginning they are as good as dead. Skills are aquired and are passed on from generation to generation be it for humans or for monkeys or wolves. E.g. monkeys generation after generation improvising bag snatching techniques from tourists. But to me it seemed like you pretty much put it all into the same compartment with random mutation, that random mutation alone decides all that and there is no room for adoptation and adoptability and I disagree with that with evidence to support my argument.

[IndiReloaded]

But to me it seemed like you pretty much put it all into the same compartment with random mutation, that random mutation alone decides all that and there is no room for adoptation and adoptability and I disagree with that with evidence to support my argument.

Not at all. I understand *adaptation* (that's the term, btw) exists. However, the initial question of Eco's was the mechanism for how something like human/biological complexity arises. I'm just stating that there is a clear, well understood mechanism that need not rely on an 'intelligent designer' (i.e. god) to make the whole thing possible. Random, stochastic events followed by natural selection processes, explains the lot. Ppl just have a hard time comprehending just how MUCH evolution can happen over millions of years. Its easier to invoke a God. I suppose if you showed a car to cavemen, they would think likewise.