I Cannot Embrace Evolution... I Just Can't.

[Ouroboros]

When it comes to natural selection and the chance that we exists as a result of it, yes, it's like rolling the dice and be on a winning streak. It doesn't happen all the time,

 

Maybe I misunderstand, but I disagree with this statement. More accurately, it would be like looking back at all the rolls of the dice and saying, this is the result that ended up.

 

Put another way, If I predict beforehand the outcome of 1 million rolls of the die, odds are vastly against me being correct. Yet, if I simply record the rolls of a million die, the results just are what they are. They could have been something else, but this is what they gave.

The conditions that led to our ancestors to evolve a better brain were very special and unique. It was draughts, at the right time and right place, and a setup for a clever ape to figure out how to survive ice age, etc. We don't see the tracks of other species before apes having the same conditions. It's fairly unique. Not impossible, but it's a bit like winning the Lotto. This world could just as well have been devoid of higher intelligence today. There were several bottlenecks where only a handful individuals survived. That's the reason why we all share the same mDNA. One woman. One mother. If she hadn't survived, we might not have ended up here.

 

Moving on.

 

Evolution is far more than just the rolls of a die. It is driven by more than just random mutations. It is also driven by the environment in which an organism evolves.

Here's the kicker though. Yes, you're right, environment is the "selector". However, environment changes and with the wrong conditions, not only individuals die out but whole species, i.e. not just natural selection against a small variation in the DNA, but a selection against a very large branch of species. There are many homonoids species that died out, more than the ones that survived. Only one did.

 

The puddle doesn't just randomly and fantastically fit the shape of the pool, the puddle fits the shape of the pool.

That's a bit misrepresenting the variations and chances of right environment conditions to lead a higher intelligent being.

 

The environment isn't stable and it's changing, sometimes more "random" or complex than we can think. Natural selection is dependent on environment. Environment is not planned or guided in any way. So really, there are random parameters within selection as well, for that part.

 

White moths have a disadvantage when acid rain turns birch bark black, meaning that black moths have an advantage as the birds can't see them in contrast to the bark as easily, thus the population changes in this particular trait. This isn't a roll of the die.

The event of the acid rain was planned or part of natural processes? Was the acid rain planned?

 

If the acid rain didn't happen on another planet? Then we'd have more of the white moths on that planet. In other words, the event either gave black moths on our planet and white moths on another one, and which one had white or black depends on which planet you were on. You have a 50/50 chance of being on either one.

[LifeCycle]

The numbers game... A cosmic roll of the dice and this being the product of it... I don't accept it.

 

Why?

 

Where does life come from?

[LifeCycle]

The numbers game... A cosmic roll of the dice and this being the product of it... I don't accept it.

I think I understand what you're thinking.

 

Some scientists are suggesting that the bonding of molecules to produce proteins and such might be a natural effect of chemistry, i.e. biochemistry is a natural occurrence and not just pure chance. Put it this way, the Universe has the potential and "drive" to always produce life. We don't know if that's true or not, but if it is, it means that life is naturally forming as a result of physical laws, a natural cause and effect, more powerful and beyond than we thought before. That would explain abiogenesis, the beginning of life, and almost put it at a spiritual level. The Universe, our God, however, not conscious or personal, it just is what it is. You could say that the Universe might place the cosmic roll with loaded dice. The dice having a higher chance of rolling the numbers for life.

 

When it comes to natural selection and the chance that we exists as a result of it, yes, it's like rolling the dice and be on a winning streak. It doesn't happen all the time, but it does happen once in a while. Chances are that we'll in the future find planets where life got stuck and didn't evolve higher beings like humans. Chances are that they will far outnumber the ones that have higher beings. But there will be some.

 

When it comes to the numbers game of the universe, do understand that the Universe is extremely huge and the number of stars is far beyond our comprehension. When you play a numbers game, the number of times you play do matter. Let's say it's almost impossible to win Lotto. It is. You have a better chance of getting struck by lightning. Funny thing though, almost every week there is a winner or two. Impossible? No! Because you have so many players and statistically you will have a higher chance of having one winner. It doen't mean that you're the winner or you know who's going to win, but the potential that someone does, is higher.

 

Currently the estimated number of stars in our universe is 20 sixtillion. That's 20,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 stars. That means there are something like 3,000,000,000,000 (3 trillion) stars per person. In other words, you could name 3 trillion stars as your own. If you name each star each second it would take you 95,000 years to go through them all. And this is only the current low-ball estimate, we might discover that the universe is even bigger than this. So playing the numbers game, no problem, there probably are a large amount of other planets like ours out there. We just haven't found them (yet).

 

Great info here with a perspective I feel I can align myself with more. Thanks.

[Ouroboros]

Where does life come from?

From Nature. It's an inherit property of nature itself. There's no fine line between "dead matter" and "living matter." There are lines that we have created to make a distinction that makes sense, based on behavior and processes, but these categories are somewhat artificial. Atoms are "alive" in a simpler sense than biological life. Your question should perhaps be, where did quarks come from, or Higgs bosons?

[Ouroboros]

Great info here with a perspective I feel I can align myself with more. Thanks.

You're welcome.

[Vigile]

The conditions that led to our ancestors to evolve a better brain were very special and unique. It was draughts, at the right time and right place, and a setup for a clever ape to figure out how to survive ice age, etc. We don't see the tracks of other species before apes having the same conditions. It's fairly unique. Not impossible, but it's a bit like winning the Lotto. This world could just as well have been devoid of higher intelligence today. There were several bottlenecks where only a handful individuals survived. That's the reason why we all share the same mDNA. One woman. One mother. If she hadn't survived, we might not have ended up here.

 

I agree, but don't you think it's like a lottery winner saying "what are the chances?" The numbers were going to end up something. You just happened to be the one that picked them. Someone else could have.

 

IOW, the odds that the numbers ended up something are 1:1 even if the odds of you picking the right number are 1:10Billion.

 

I'm pointing this out because the OP is having trouble with the idea of randomness and the possibilities of evolution occurring. Evolution is going to occur in living organisms regardless. The direction that evolution goes might be measured by chance from certain perspectives, but to simply characterize evolution as a chance outcome (which is what your statement sounded like to a casual observer) is going to confuse that observer and give them the wrong impression about how it actually works. This is why I wanted to clarify.

 

The environment isn't stable and it's changing, sometimes more "random" or complex than we can think. Natural selection is dependent on environment. Environment is not planned or guided in any way. So really, there are random parameters within selection as well, for that part.

 

Yes, I agree. My puddle analogy was just a simple way to introduce a much more complex idea.

 

The event of the acid rain was planned or part of natural processes? Was the acid rain planned?

 

Huh? I didn't say anything about planned. I was only giving an example of how nature, in collusion with environment, selects. This is an example I remember from a college text book. I didn't just make it up. It's an example of evolution we have actually observed in our own lifetimes. It occurred in New England in the 1960s and 70s.

 

I suspect you are trying to argue that the fact that we evolved as sentient animals is the result of a lot of fortunate accidents. I suppose that could be correct. This, is an entirely different question than "does evolution occur in living organisms?" which is what I'm addressing and I think the OP has questions about.

[Ouroboros]

I agree, but don't you think it's like a lottery winner saying "what are the chances?" The numbers were going to end up something. You just happened to be the one that picked them. Someone else could have.

Exactly. To have a winner, very likely. You being the winner... you were the lucky one?

 

IOW, the odds that the numbers ended up something are 1:1 even if the odds of you picking the right number are 1:10Billion.

Kind'a.

 

Let's say life is out there in the universe. It will look different on each planet we could find it. Some planets (most of them) don't have higher intelligent life but only lower life. The planets with higher intelligent life will have lifeforms that look very different from us. The smart lizards from Xzyghly will not have the same complexion as us. In other words, it isn't predictable that a certain shape, form, color, etc would take the same path. It's not predictable to conclude where higher lifeforms exist or not.

 

As an example, evolution helps with many things. It does help us understand that mutation and selection occurs. Here's the problem though. No one has been able to predict exactly what mutations, when they will happen, if they will happen, and what will be selected for or against, for any future event. For the simple reason that the complexity is on the order of chaos. Chaos, unpredictable, but yet deterministic, also controls dice. Rolling the dice is the same physical and natural processes. Mutations aren't predictable, yet most likely deterministic.

 

I'm pointing this out because the OP is having trouble with the idea of randomness and the possibilities of evolution occurring. Evolution is going to occur in living organisms regardless. The direction that evolution goes might be measured by chance from certain perspectives, but to simply characterize evolution as a chance outcome (which is what your statement sounded like to a casual observer) is going to confuse that observer and give them the wrong impression about how it actually works. This is why I wanted to clarify.

Okay.

 

The event of the acid rain was planned or part of natural processes? Was the acid rain planned?

 

Huh? I didn't say anything about planned. I was only giving an example of how nature, in collusion with environment, selects. This is an example I remember from a college text book. I didn't just make it up. It's an example of evolution we have actually observed in our own lifetimes. It occurred in New England in the 1960s and 70s.

I know. But how did the acid rain happen? You were saying that natural selection is not random. Of course the selection isn't. But the underlying parameters most definitely can be (and are). The underlying factors of natural selection is the environment. The environment is chaotic. Acid rain, not a natural occurrence. Man made, a result of unplanned and thoughtless actions. So it wasn't planned. But yet no one saw it coming. The moths didn't know about it. People missed that problem of acid rain in England. It could have been different, however, and someone could have figured out that acid rain would be a problem. The outcome, the environment, the chances for the white moths, would have been different. It's a little bit like rolling the dice on a cosmic scale.

 

I suspect you are trying to argue that the fact that we evolved as sentient animals is the result of a lot of fortunate accidents. I suppose that could be correct. This, is an entirely different question than "does evolution occur in living organisms?" which is what I'm addressing and I think the OP has questions about.

True. Well, the title says "evolution" so I ran with that part rather than abiogenesis.

 

Let's say the dinosaurs had evolved to a higher intelligence, or specifically the T-Rex. The smart T-Rex were living happy, and big, and dominated the world. Oops. They didn't think of the comet. Now they're gone. The comet wasn't planned. Was it deterministic? Sure. Was it possible to foresee it? No. Not at that point. They weren't smart enough yet. So they're gone. How is that not being the unlucky one?

 

We don't know all the different conditions that led to the "Big Bang of the Brain" (as they call it), but it is known that there were many lucky steps for us to evolve. And there were many failed "attempts" of smart homonoids, but not smart enough (Neanderthals, had tools, shelter, and such, but still died out probably because of their 6,000 cal/day brain and an ice age without food).

[mymistake]

The numbers game... A cosmic roll of the dice and this being the product of it... I don't accept it.

 

Why?

 

Where does life come from?

 

Then your problem is not with evolution but rather with abiogenesis. Know the difference. Don't discard one over the sake of the other.

[Vigile]

It's as I suspected Hans, you are arguing how "we" got here and I'm discussing the process of ToE in general terms, so we are talking past one another.

 

Acid rain, not a natural occurrence.

 

I have to jump on this one because this is something I learned from you.

 

We naturally evolved, thus the products we create are also natural, just like bird nests are natural.

[Ouroboros]

It's as I suspected Hans, you are arguing how "we" got here and I'm discussing the process of ToE in general terms, so we are talking past one another.

 

Acid rain, not a natural occurrence.

 

I have to jump on this one because this is something I learned from you.

 

We naturally evolved, thus the products we create are also natural, just like bird nests are natural.

Concur.

 

That's where the "oneness" comes in.

 

The reason I went on the tangent about us/humans and the slim chance there, is because of LC's comment "being the product of it." We are the product of evolution. It's very hard to understand that chances that we are here. But we are here. We were the one who drew the short or long stick (whichever way we look at it).

 

Life is natural. A physicist said something akin to (my paraphrase), "The Universe contains the potential for life." Which I interpret as all the factors and forces needed to "create" life is (and was from the beginning) an inherent part of the very structure/fabric of reality. We are here because this is what a Universe can do. The fact that it is exactly us being exactly here on this exact planet and this exact time... well, that was just a matter of picking the right number.

[Guest Babylonian Dream]

One ironic thing I've found about chance and randomness, is that 9/10 it tends to be neither random nor by chance, but things that have so many damn variables, and a change in any one of those variables will lead to different outcomes. I think the randomness and chance in evolution we see might be one of those things.

[mcdaddy]

If you can't embrace it.....fuck it?

[Wings]

Hi LC, I also struggled (kind of still am) for a long time with accepting evolution... mostly because I just couldn't understand it. I'd had all these anti-evolution arguments built in me, I was picturing a crocodile with a duck body and could not comprehend how evolution could be possible. I don't have a background in science and I find it really difficult to imagine the amount of time that it could've taken for transition. Mostly, I'm extremely uncomfortable with the knowledge that I exist for this short time in billions of years and then I'm nothing... no point. It's hard to accept that.

 

On the other hand, my experience with religion was worse and I believe that less. Therefore, for me, it's a matter of time overcoming my feelings of discomfort. I don't really understand or want to accept evolution, but when I step back, it seems to make the most sense to me, especially as I try to focus on the positives (how cool, I'm here to observe this world!) and learning.

 

I recently signed up for an intro to genetics and evolutionary biology course online. Www.coursera.com They have free courses from world-renowned universities and researchers (lol, I can't stop promoting this site!), and it might help, too. I'm an auditory learner and reading about science doesn't work well for me-- hope this helps more. Just keep learning and asking questions... wishing you the best on this journey.

 

Also, I watched the history of the world in 2 hours that pudd posted, and it's awesome!

[Vigile]

https://www.coursera.org/

 

Really cool resource. Thanks!

[silentknight]

This course in particular looks useful:

https://www.coursera.org/course/geneticsevolution

[LifeCycle]

The numbers game... A cosmic roll of the dice and this being the product of it... I don't accept it.

 

Why?

 

Where does life come from?

 

Then your problem is not with evolution but rather with abiogenesis. Know the difference. Don't discard one over the sake of the other.

 

Is Abiogenesis not part of Evolution. Could Evolution exist without it?

 

Didn't think so.

[Thought2Much]

Is Abiogenesis not part of Evolution. Could Evolution exist without it?

 

Didn't think so.

 

They're different answers to different questions. Evolution can't happen without abiogenesis happening first, but they are separate problems.

[freeasabird]

The numbers game... A cosmic roll of the dice and this being the product of it... I don't accept it.

 

Why?

 

Where does life come from?

 

Then your problem is not with evolution but rather with abiogenesis. Know the difference. Don't discard one over the sake of the other.

 

Is Abiogenesis not part of Evolution. Could Evolution exist without it?

 

Didn't think so.

 

There are some excellent videos from CDK007 that address both questions which I will find and share when I get home tonight.

[mymistake]

Is Abiogenesis not part of Evolution. Could Evolution exist without it?

 

Evolution exists period. That is a known fact. It's unknown if evolution exists with or without abiogenesis. However people are working on that.

 

Didn't think so.

 

You have already demonstrated that you are choosing to be ignorant. If you don't want to learn the details then why don't you trust the people who devoted their entire lives exploring the science and subjecting their findings to peer review?

[midniterider]

I just don't see it... All these variables coming together to get us to where we are today. Fully-functional beings with the balance of nature and all it's spectacular features to coax us along. I don't understand how intermediate creatures can evolve. Flight for example... How does that even work? How does a creature have an arm that later turns into a wing - thrive while it's in the intermediate state? How is half of an arm and half of the makings of a wing even useful? How can a creature survive this state to later achieve it's later greatness? They would be sitting ducks.

 

I just don't see how imperfect creatures can thrive and flourish when they are not fully functional - especially with creatures that require the use of other creatures in their final state, to survive. I think there's a mention of symbiotic relationships and evolution... But that idea baffles me. Whales and plankton for example... It all seems a little too perfect to be coincidence... And it is in this subject that my agnosticism really becomes magnified. I simply don't know enough to embrace the idea that all of this is mere coincidence. It seems awfully and magnificently unlikely to me.

 

Anyone else in this place of confusion?

 

Buying into evolution will not make or break you. I wouldnt worry too much about it.

[Wings]

This course in particular looks useful:

https://www.coursera...neticsevolution

 

Thanks for correcting the link, Vigile.

That's the "course" that I'm doing, SK. They have quizzes and start at intro level, so I know I"ll pay attention. I love this site,

[skepticalme]

Is Abiogenesis not part of Evolution. Could Evolution exist without it?

 

Didn't think so.

 

They're different answers to different questions. Evolution can't happen without abiogenesis happening first, but they are separate problems.

 

Evolution is completely independant and indifferent to biogenesis. Even if life were created by a supernatural being, it would still evolve.

[skepticalme]

LC, go to iTunes and search for a podcast called "Evolution 101". Its free and was recorded by a former member of this forum, Dr. Zachary Moore. It is an excellent primer to evolution.

 

To address a few things you've mentioned already.

- All species are intermediate species

- "Half a wing/half an arm is no benifit"; (answer) evolution never starts from scratch. Evolution "Macgyver's" solutions by co-opting what the organism already has. If an population is consuming a food source that lives in water, individuals with more webbing between their digits and can hold their breath longer have an advantage. The ones who don't have that aren't helpless, they can still get the food provided their isn't someone who can get their first. However, mutations occur, some of which are benifitial, and competition occurs for limited resources. Over time, the individuals who are better adapted out compete others and become a larger percentage of the population.They are getting food, they are staying healthier and they are making babies more than the next guy. Eventually the entire population has those benifitial mutations and the process continues.

 

It's actually a lot like an economy. You have a bunch of companies renting DVD's out of a store, then a mutation happens and one of them starts renting them online. Competition happens and suddenly the oddball is the big kid on the block and the former big kids are closing up shop.

[TheBluegrassSkeptic]

Abiogenesis, creationism, something from nothing, evolution.

 

I think you need to understand that NOTHING has 100% answers. You have to go with seems the more likely.

 

Personally, I do not understand all the aspects of evolution. I do NOT agree with it being abiogenesis either.

 

With that said, and after some digging, reading, more digging, and reading both sides of the aisle, I've come to my own thoughts.

 

Abiogenesis, no. Exogenesis, YES.

 

Creationism, no. Big Bang Theory. Yes.

 

Creationsism, no. Evolution, YES.

 

These make more sense and have much more testable points to them. So, my own inclination leans towards what is most likely, and honestly, after they found the building blocks for proteins and more in the tails of comets and on asteroids, that pretty much cemented it for me. Especially in regards to abiogenesis vs exogenesis.

 

You have to understand there isn't a definitive answer and being the miniscule little peons that we are, and considering we are still very much lacking in our understanding of the Universe, you should drop the ego that you must know with 100% certainty. If at one point in your life, you could muster faith in a fake idol, why can you not muster enough courage to just make up your mind and put it to rest?

[mcdaddy]

Exogenesis???

 

What that iz?

 

I know what the word means, but not in relation to the origin of life.