GaryGaulin
Posts: 5385
Joined: Oct. 2012
|
| Quote (midwifetoad @ Dec. 29 2012,12:34) | | I was kind of hoping Gary would cite a specific instance where evolution has exhibited foresight or has gone straight to some major modification without futzing around with variation. |
Human chromosome speciation was the result of a "good guess" which likely led to almost immediate reproductive isolation (a new species).
Before that was only the obligatory Darwinian answer, where human origin was said to have been unarguably shown to have been slow imperceptible change with no species defining moment even possible. I recall that (essentially incorrect) answer because of myself repeating the same thing too. That changed for good, after I found this mainstream literature:
Francisco J. Ayala and Mario Coluzzi, “Systematics and the Origin of Species: Chromosome speciation: Humans, Drosophila, and mosquitoes”, PNAS 2005 102:6535-6542; doi:10.1073/pnas.0501847102
http://www.pnas.org/content....35.full
Then there was further evidence from the (reproductively isolated) "44 Chromosome Man" provided a living example of this possibly trying to happen now:
The 44 Chromosome Man, And What He Reveals About Our Genetic Past, The Tech Museum, 2010
http://genetics.thetech.org/origina....news124
With all else surprising included, science went in the direction creationists expected where somehow there is an intelligence directed "Poof!" then Adam is there, then Eve. Properly explaining all this requires cognitive (intelligence) theory which simply does not exist in the Darwinian model, so you're still stuck having to make it seem like chromosome speciation and such is unimportant.
All you really have are excuses for living in a scientific past, while the rest of us have for years been embracing a stream of new discoveries from science, which you don't even care about and mostly ignore. The result is that we're now way ahead of the science curve with important research. Researchers can be thankful at least we find it as important as they do.
Science teachers only have to teach what the researchers are explaining in their papers and articles like the 44 Chromosome Man, not something found in the Theory of Intelligent Design. It's here very real staying ahead in science, not behind like you're happy with. Once a student has that, the theory is no big deal anymore. It's then just a framework science teachers were introduced to such things as chromosome speciation, which in turn helped make their classroom more up to date than usual.
Creationists just happen to have good reasons to love the faith-friendly change this brings to the science classroom, even where all it adds is a teacher spending a few minutes on chromosome speciation to their regularly scheduled curriculum. There are already lesson plans for Chromosomal Speciation too, so as far as education is concerned there is no issue. It's all very mainstream.
Change in time on its own happens, via the power of science that comes from having a scientific method able to challenge theory once thought impossible. It keeps going the (her words) "scientific pursuit" Kathy finds lacking from the insisting that "evolution" is (in itself) a well defined theory. Having a cognitive theory to go past that with is a very scientific pursuit, that sure did not come from what was preached from here that tries stopping it. You blindly believe the Darwinian world-view covers all just fine, by including phylogenetics theory and all else in science that exist as separate theory which should not even be confused as though it came from Darwinian theory.
You have less than you think going for you in real-science, that thrives on new theories which never stop for you they have a way to sweep you up in them, like happened to me so I understand your dilemma. It has been said that scientists have to learn to be wrong, a lot, and now there is a Theory of Intelligent Design science teachers can find worth the read. They end up empowered by a faith friendly way of explaining things that makes a meeting with concerned creationist parents go surprisingly well, and the teacher is only committed to including chromosome speciation and such in the science curriculum. The theory most requires a very up to date science classroom, that in time can on its own (at most hint coaxing) lead to the inference of "Chromosomal Adam and Eve" existing in the phylogenetic evidence, science. It's best that students know why science makes the couple colloquially there, to be found, as I did. Students are taught what they need to know to on their own figure out the rest. That is a compliment to the science teachers who gave them the necessary basics, to properly navigate science.
Leaving out the useless Popper philosophy and other baggage is a classroom time saver. The scientific method here made easy, proved itself. Science is being made easier to understand, and teach, with no student needing to be left out of the fun.
--------------
The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.
|
