J-Dog
Posts: 4402
Joined: Dec. 2006
|
| Quote (Zachriel @ May 20 2014,09:43) | We have not watched the Velasco-Nelson debate. We did try to post Uncommon Descent, but the post didn't show. We're pasting it here for safekeeping.
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....rmation
johnnyb: Let me ask you a question – is evolution a theory of similarity, or one of transformation?
Both. This is based on a couple of principles; heredity, meaning children resemble their parents; and variation, children are not exactly like their parents.
johnnyb: How can you possibly say that X came from Y unless you have a theory of transformation?
We observe heredity and variation, even if we don't understand the exact mechanisms. However, those mechanisms are an entailment of the theory! Today, we have evidence of those mechanisms, an entire field dedicated to their study, genetics.
Common descent is one of the primary aspects of evolutionary theory, and is independent of mechanisms of adaptation. We can detect common descent regardless of adaptation. For instance, we can study mutations on human y-chromosomes to determine paternal relationships between humans.
johnnyb: Therefore, the evidence for common descent discussed here is independent of specific gradualistic explanatory mechanisms.
The primary evidence for common descent, the nested hierarchy, is independent of an explanatory framework for heredity and variation. Darwin didn't have a valid theory of genetics, but pointed to observations of heredity and variation.
In isolation, we might suppose from common descent an élan vital propelling evolution forward. Darwin posited natural selection and microevolution, which have since been directly confirmed, while there is no evidence of an élan vital.
johnnyb: This actually puts evolution apart from nearly every other materialist branch of science, because in those you must look at material similarity with known mechanisms.
It's amazing humans can learn anything considering the depths of their ignorance. However, science provides a way to reach reasonable, albeit tentative, conclusions, while leaving most questions unanswered. Newton proposed a theory of gravity, but never explained what gravity actually is. Gas laws were proposed before a mechanism was provided in kinetic theory. Galileo certainly didn't explain what kept the planets in their orbits. And no one really knows why love hurts.
In any case, Darwin proposed natural selection as a mechanism of adaptation, something he couldn't directly observe, but something which is often observed nowadays. |
You're wasting your time... They would much rather talk about How Many Angels Can Dance On The Head of a Pin, or The Evidence For Transubstantiation. You know, serious sciencey issues.
--------------
Come on Tough Guy, do the little dance of ID impotence you do so well. - Louis to Joe G 2/10
Gullibility is not a virtue - Quidam on Dembski's belief in the Bible Code Faith Healers & ID 7/08
UD is an Unnatural Douchemagnet. - richardthughes 7/11
|
