The more likely result is thinking infants and children were a different species than adult humans, much as we have mistaken juvenile dinos as being a different species than the adults.
OK, but science is self-correcting. Eventually scientists realized they were wrong when they thought a baby dino was a different species. And I did specify a “trained person.” Besides, if an alien species is sufficiently advanced to travel here they probably know something zoology. (Unlike the idiots in Alien Covenant!)
True that. And of course there is a difference working with bones vs working with fossils as far as anatomic detail, in most cases.
It is all fun and games, as it is unlikely aliens will ever ponder our bone. Highly evolved porpoises, maybe, after land life becomes extinct and they develop thumbs.
Your (unsolicited) responses to me are becoming tiresome - this is a site for an exchange of views - I ask that you cease your repetitive comments to me, and I will not respond to anything from you also from now on.
There are many well-written books that introduce evolutionary theory, at various levels. I think my favorite at the technical end of the spectrum is The Theory of Evolution by John Maynard Smith. First written in 1958, it evolved significantly over subsequent decades. My copy is the Third Edition, first published in 1975. That edition expanded previous editions with three new chapters, one of them a remarkable chapter on chromosome structure and “gene action control.” It’s remarkable because it includes discussion of the fact that genomes are far bigger than they “need” to be to provide structural genes, something that had been deduced by molecular biologists years before DNA sequencing had been invented. I am always impressed and humbled by the things that molecular geneticists figured out with tools that today are completely inadequate.
At the more popular-level end of the spectrum, I like The Greatest Show On Earth by Richard Dawkins, but Why Evolution Is True by Jerry Coyne is also very good. Those are recent books, both surpassed in my view by The Blind Watchmaker. Unfortunately, these authors are also loud and sometimes boneheaded critics of religion, and while those books are not anti-religious books, it would be understandable if believers wished for evolutionary biology overviews without the baggage. Perhaps others will chime in here to provide recommendations.
For a more compendium-like approach to acquiring overviews of evolutionary science, I recommend the series of special issues of PNAS, published over several years as I recall, called “In Light of Evolution.” I think there were at least 4 of these collections, all open access. They should probably be in a collection of links somewhere here on BL, and perhaps they already are.
2 Likes
If porpoises are smart they’ll stay in the water!
Thank you for the welcome, Phil. Yes I am involved in university teaching, but I did my postdoc fellowship in the US.
Do you think it is possible to have kind and gracious dialog with those who come here to argue and have no interest in evidence, just arguing?
That is a good question. No doubt some come here with an agenda, and are only interested in what they have to say, but I think many want to learn from others, and even when the debate gets a bit heated, it is in the interest of defining those positions.
Along with that, I think it serves as a community to some of us who perhaps have no real outlet of expression due to oppression or perhaps just a social setting that does not want to discuss these issues.
1 Like
At least a one-sided gracious dialogue, for sure. I am always amazed by how generously so many people with such expertise handle the things thrown at them from people who probably have no intention of actually changing their mind about anything. And I like to remind people that a very large number of readers/visitors to this site, never post anything. So, if you think of the audience of these conversations as being the many on-lookers who are truly on the fence and open to considering new ideas instead of just the one opinionated and close-minded person who started the debate, then the discussions are obviously more worthwhile. In the big scheme of things, it shows and it matters which “side” has the calm, reasoned, detailed, compassionate side of the conversation.
2 Likes
Hello, and welcome, Roberto!
You bring up a very good concern. Over the long term, you will likely find a wide variety of attitudes in these forums. A very high proportion of the frequent posters here are genuinely interested in dialogue. There are certainly some that are not, but the moderators and most participants place a great deal of importance on gracious dialogue, although we may not always live up to our ideals! I know I have posted several messages that I’ve regretted later…
2 Likes
What does it mean to understand? Darwin said that evolution is indeterminate, which means we really do not understand why it works the way it does, so in that sense we do not understand it.
On the other hand Darwin said that evolution is the product of competition for survival, which it is not. In this sense people do not understand Darwinian evolution because it is not true. It is not the re4sult of the war of nature against itself.
Dawkins sees organism as survival machines which is not accurate. His gene’s eye view of evolution s false, which is another reason to reject evolution as it is taught.
Scientists need to address the problems of Darwinism and the critics need to address the problems that they have in understanding evolution so that we all can understand better, rather than seeking how to disprove each other.
These simplifications and inaccuracies have been addressed before.[quote=“Relates, post:31, topic:36659”]
Dawkins sees organism as survival machines which is not accurate. His gene’s eye view of evolution s false, which is another reason to reject evolution as it is taught.
[/quote]
I think you are trying to say that you disagree with Dawkins, which I won’t address. I personally cannot understand how or why someone would say that the “survival machine” metaphor is “not accurate.”[quote=“Relates, post:31, topic:36659”]
Scientists need to address the problems of Darwinism and the critics need to address the problems that they have in understanding evolution so that we all can understand better, rather than seeking how to disprove each other.
[/quote]
Do you think that your assertions are modeling that? I wouldn’t.
Dawkins does not use the survival machine as a metaphor, but as a model.
Animals and humans are not machines as once was thought.
The object of life is not survival. If that were the case, life is a failure, because no one survives.
Yes, I disagree with Dawkins, because he has not made the case for this scientific model and rejects ecological scientific point of view.
Heck, I’ve posted messages that I regretted in advance.
5 Likes
I must say that I had no idea on the diverse outlook(s) regarding Christianity, and within this context even greater differences regarding science and evolution, until I involved myself in exchanges on this site.
2 Likes
I think many people can quickly jump to false conclusions about evolution, and thinking they know all they need to know about it, never learn any more. The surface differences between evolution’s and Genesis’ account of how the world came to be can easily make the religious person dismiss evolution as blasphemy, or the non-religious to assume that religion is false, and that evolution is proof that God does not exist.
Indeed. I suspect most lay people think “survival of the fittest” means being bigger stronger faster smarter, when it may mean being more shy and reclusive, smaller and easier to hide and pop out more little shy little creatures.
5 Likes
Or being more social, or having more beautiful plumage, or even a more alluring courtship song.
2 Likes
@jpm and @beaglelady,
Indeed!
The fact that smaller male praying mantis’s experience a high rate of death and cannibalism at the “claws of their mate”, physical fitness would seem to be contrary to the general trajectory of mantis reproduction - - which is to provide the new mother a good meal!
1 Like
And sometimes a mother spider is eaten alive by her offspring. It’s a mother’s ultimate sacrifice.
1 Like