Darwin's Natural Selection Still at Work in Humans

Originally posted by Magee
I think for a lot of people ID is quite difficult to beleive. Over the past couple of months I've come to the realisation that ID and evolution could be connected. I've always been a firm beleiver of Darwins theory but I could never quite understand how life first came about on this planet, and ID was really the only way i could see it happening. I mean why is it we can come about by sheer coincidence and luck (to a point) but not by a "creator". Put the two theories together and it just makes more sense (to me atleast).

This is how I see the point of the beginning of life. The problem is how we see what life is. We have a very narrow view on life. In Buddhism, we believe that all things, alive or not, have a Buddha nature. In other words, all things are alive, even a rock. Life waits for the conditions to be right, and when they are, life appears. 😄

Originally posted by whobdamandog
The foundation of Evolutionary theory is based on a philosophical ideology. That ideology being..matter somehow formed sentient physical beings, without having any "intelligence" guiding it. Where is the hardcore empirical evidence used to support this claim? Well..to be quite frank..there isn't any. It's just another religion, that masks it's philosophical outlooks on life with scientific jargon/half truths in order to substantiate it's credibility.

Darwin´s theory is not based on a philosophical ideology, it is sustained by scientific evidence, what does agree with empirism. Unless you are contesting the scientific method itself.

Darwin´s theory does not imply that there is no intelligent design in nature, it just tells that evolution, and natural selection happen. Because of that Darwin´s theory does not imply that "matter somehow formed sentient physical beings, without having any "intelligence" guiding it" or that "spontaneous generation and random mutations created life as we know it".

perhaps even Darwin's theory is evolving ... I think it is maybe possible to redefine his theory into something that works with ID

However, I am also not convinced that we aren't evolving in a traditional sense. Perhaps not quickly. However, there are many things we don't understand about the mind and even tho we can't perhaps see how we are evolving doesn't mean it's not happening on a dna level as the original article suggests.

Not convinced. Not unconvinced. Just curious.

A scientific view of the world can be as blind and ignorant as a religious one based on faith.

NO, how can you think that?

Thats nothing new to me to know that we are still evolving(thats a good thing I think), and it has to happen since evolution is associated with mutation, and mutation must happen in a molecular level, its what molecular chemistry tells. The physical laws that rules over molecules tells that mutation happen.

Originally posted by Atlantis001
Thats nothing new to me to know that we are still evolving(thats a good thing I think), and it has to happen since evolution is associated with mutation, and mutation must happen in a molecular level, its what molecular chemistry tells. The physical laws that rules over molecules tells that mutation happen.

Maybe mutations are not so random. Maybe they are not mutations in the sense of not intensional.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Maybe mutations are not so random. Maybe they are not mutations in the sense of not intensional.

Oh... I see... and I agree. We know that mutation happens for what biochemistry can tell, but the physical laws that rules over molecular processes(which is not in the domain of biology anymore, and what means that biology can´t make any supositions about this) are not entirely know, and of course they could have something to do with a inteligence behind them.

🙂 Mutagens are increaing in number all the time.
Things like Xenobiotic hormones are affected human mutation quite severely.

This thread is really to simple to discuss what mutation truly is for a molecular biologist if people wish to discuss it at the cause, effect, frequency v spontaneous level (both happen) i.m. me

Originally posted by Atlantis001
Oh... I see... and I agree. We know that mutation happens for what biochemistry can tell, but the physical laws that rules over molecular processes(which is not in the domain of biology anymore, and what means that biology can´t make any supositions about this) are not entirely know, and of course they could have something to do with a inteligence behind them.

I personally believe that we as a species act like a living being. I call this the human entity. The human entity grows in response to the environment, and when the time is right, it will divide and the human race will be two or more species. However, this takes millions of years and we will never see it happen until it is done, and it is never done.

Anyway, ID state that christian genesis is the answer, and the alternative would mean Adam, and Eve... humans not evolving from monkeys... that kind of thing, and the Inteligent creator would be the christian God. I only agree that a inteligence could be behind everything that exists, but I don´t know what this inteligence is.

Do you really believe in intelligent design?

Originally posted by Da preacher
Do you really believe in intelligent design?

I know you were asking Atlantis001, but I am butting in anyway. 😂

No, intelligent design is just a code word for Christian thinking. To agree with it is to agree with everything else in Christianity. You see, if you find a common truth, you can pile a hole lot of shit on it and every one will eat it, even if it tastes bad.

in my experience with logic, which isn't loads but some. There are flaws in pretty much any premise. Admittedly some flaws seem a little more attractive than others, however, then we open up the ethical/value debate ... and that has got to be one of the most contentious areas of philosophy and everything.

'intelligent design as a code word for christian thinking' ... that is quite a limited view. Scientific thinking is based on cause and effect. If this is the case then science is also grounded in design. The world as predictable, do this and then this will happen. Surely this can only be possible in a predictable world where everything follows a set 'design' if you like. Even if we are not aware of what particular design that is for now.

Da preacher .... I personally like the scientific view of the world. Just think it is good to be aware of its flaws. As all views of the world has its strength and weaknesses. The more adament one is about a particular theory ... well, the more likely to crash and burn really. But aside from personal opinion ... there is evidence, scientific, that the results of an experiment change depending on how it is observed and there is a whole bunch of phenomena that indicate science is not quite as bomb proof as we all would like to think (or some of us any way).

The human mind is a complex thing; and it is with this that we understand science or anything for that matter ... already there is distortion.

Intelligent design's just like 'Christianity goes science' or something.
It's like some Christian trying to look scientific and attract larger masses into christianity.
I tell u, it's shit!

They're now even giving it in Biology lessons in certain schools in the US.
Wacko!

Originally posted by StrangeDays
in my experience with logic, which isn't loads but some. There are flaws in pretty much any premise. Admittedly some flaws seem a little more attractive than others, however, then we open up the ethical/value debate ... and that has got to be one of the most contentious areas of philosophy and everything.

'intelligent design as a code word for christian thinking' ... that is quite a limited view. Scientific thinking is based on cause and effect. If this is the case then science is also grounded in design. The world as predictable, do this and then this will happen. Surely this can only be possible in a predictable world where everything follows a set 'design' if you like. Even if we are not aware of what particular design that is for now.

Da preacher .... I personally like the scientific view of the world. Just think it is good to be aware of its flaws. As all views of the world has its strength and weaknesses. The more adament one is about a particular theory ... well, the more likely to crash and burn really. But aside from personal opinion ... there is evidence, scientific, that the results of an experiment change depending on how it is observed and there is a whole bunch of phenomena that indicate science is not quite as bomb proof as we all would like to think (or some of us any way).

The human mind is a complex thing; and it is with this that we understand science or anything for that matter ... already there is distortion.

I basically agree with you. However, I listen to the right wing radio programs (I do this to keep up on the topics, I listen to both sides) and when they use the term intelligent design, they mean Christian thinking, like Jesus is god and sinners are going to hell.

Originally posted by Da preacher
Do you really believe in intelligent design?

No I do not agree with it. I just think that a Intelligence could be behind everything which is something that Darwin´s theory does not deny.

Yay, ANOTHER religion vs. evolution thread. I never get sick of these.

(Damn us close-minded Christians who just can't seem to open our eyes and even bother to look at a viewpoint from the evolutionists' viewpoint! DAMN US! With their exemplary actions that show how open-minded they are, they should be given awards.)

After studying how hemoglobin works, I was like, "Wow. Lactic acid...aerobic and anaerobic respiration...working together...breaking my mind. No way this happened just by chance."

Originally posted by FeceMan
...No way this happened just by chance."

Nothing happens by chance, it is cause and effect (karma).

People are too quick to use teh word "chance"
It wasn't chance, it was SELECTION. The most effective organism survived. And early on it was the one who could do cellular respiration the most efficiently (this is back in the days of single celled organisms) And from this it simply became more and more efficent. If an organism developed a system that was NOT as efficent, then is simply died out. Simple as that.
And yes, Natural selection is still at work with humans, but we are on too short of a time scale to even begin to notice. And advances technology changes that. Its would be interesting to see how technology affects evolution.

"Natural selection is still at work with humans, but we are on too short of a time scale to even begin to notice."

I noticed that I evolved from instant coffee to percolated ... does this count? *lol*