Letters to the Editor
rupert_c
Published Letters: 1213 Editor's Choice: 12
-
@Taliesan
[Read the article: The evolution of creationism]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]ev·o·lu·tion (ěv'ə-lōō'shən, ē'və-) Pronunciation Key
n.
A gradual process in which something changes into a different and usually more complex or better form. See Synonyms at development.
The process of developing.
Gradual development.
Change in the genetic composition of a population during successive generations, as a result of natural selection acting on the genetic variation among individuals, and resulting in the development of new species.
The historical development of a related group of organisms; phylogeny.
Biology
Change in the genetic composition of a population during successive generations, as a result of natural selection acting on the genetic variation among individuals, and resulting in the development of new species.
The historical development of a related group of organisms; phylogeny.
A movement that is part of a set of ordered movements.
Mathematics The extraction of a root of a quantity.
one cell ->multicelluar colonies ->specialisation of cells ->invertebrates ->shelled invertebrates ->boney fishes ->amphibians ->reptiles ->birds ->mammals ->apes ->people
or in some cases:
one cell ->multicelluar colonies ->specialisation of cells ->invertabrates ->shelled invertebrates ->boney fishes ->amphibians ->reptiles ->birds ->mammals ->apes ->people ->troll
apparently it is a two way street.
small changes believable, big changes, not so much.
not that it matters.
-
@SanePerson
[Read the article: The evolution of creationism]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I tend to agreee as most of the IDs do already have an answer to all of the questions but it is not exactly a compelling one.
alternates to random mutation and god:
1. All basic forms were orginally seeded in the past from external sources - pansperma
2. All basic forms were orginally seeded in the past from internal sources - geosperma
These both would indicate a wider variety of lifeforms in the past most of which would go extinct. The more complex a lifeform is or the more vulnerable a lifeform is to the environmental changes, the less likely would the lifeform survive long term.
3. Evolution is engineered by the biological systems of DNA, RNA and the ribosome. The code rewrites itself according to certain general principles.
4. Retrovirii cut and past genetic material from different species together as they go from one host to another.
5. The action of parasites. Parasites are known to govern the behavior of thier hosts in nature to reproductive advantage. A symbiotic relationship between parasites and retrovirii is possible. Not all of your mechanisms share the same code. Incorporation of other DNA or RNA code through ingestion or damage.
6. Specific genetic engineering. We have progressed that far in a couple of hundred years. Who is to say that we had not progressed that far in the distant past? Or someone else?
7. Lamarckism or neo lamarckism - feedback mechanism from nervous system to code?
8. Activation of unused DNA code. Misreading of legacy code or slippage into active code segments.
9. Presence of alternate DNA code (folded in or compressed)
10. Everything is happening in higher order dimensions which our consciousnesses are ill-equipped to percieve or concieve of much like a cartoon character would not be able to conceptualize the artist which draws their world and them. Also like expecting awareness from people's images on video or film.
All of those we thrown out in the time to type them and I am sure that others can come up with just as many. I do not hold any of them as the truth or fact, just some alternatives to random mutation as the mechanism and natural selection as the filter. I do tend the favor the last one though.
But wait, natural selection is not thrown out of the mix, nor is random mutation.
A number of factors are invovled and not all are understood yet.
-
IN CONCLUSION . . .
[Read the article: The evolution of creationism]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]In conclusion I would just like to say that taking at face value any scientific theories formulated and promoted by hominid domesticated apes would be most certainly a foolish course of action and thought to any intelligent species.
Hey, they are APES.
/throws thighbone into air