Darwinian evolutionists dismiss catastrophism, because it conflicts at the most fundamental level with the assumptions necessary to support the speculative hypothesis of evolution.
...
Evolution thus could not have occurred as hypothesized had there been any major catastrophes ... that wiped out life forms as the carriers of the DNA digital files. If that happens, then evolution ... would have to start all over from square one and create vast new chains of gradually increased digital information in the DNA molecules, added by chance mutations.
44 comments
Hey guess what? We've had quite a few mass extinctions and they haven't stopped evolution one bit. The lifeforms that survived were the most well adapted to the environment created by the catastrophe that caused the extinction.
Now that's survival of the fittest.
He does have a point. If there had been an extinction event that wiped out 100.0% of all life on the planet, then evolution would have to start over from square one.
Good thing there hasn't been one.
Well, you see there have been numerous catasrophic events in the past, for example the permian mass extiction 95% of sea life was wiped out. These events create massive competitoin and thus serve to drive evoulution, not retard it.
What are you talking about? Mass extinctions as a driver for evolution are one of the basic parts of it. The extra niches allow for evolution to continue with less competition, so more diversity. That's why there appears to be explosions of new life forms after any of the mass extinctions.
And there hasn't been a mass extinction (that we know of) which wiped out ALL life you moron. And WTF is a DNA digital file?
I assume your homeschooling didn't include genetics and any other field of science.
Seems to me like he is supporting evolution. Although he is an idiot and does not know it.
A catastrophe wipes out the dinosaurs. Evolution starts again (ok, not all the way at the beginning) and mammals arise.
Yep, hypothesis matches reality. Evolution is a go.
We have the chicxulub impact. We win.
Starbrewer: That means creationists think the mountains rivers oceans etc were all caused by the catastrophic flood 5000 years age, and nothing very big happened before or since. These things could also be caused by slow changes over millions of years, but since any time longer than 6k years is theologically incorrect, the only explanation is noah's flood - catastrophism. Evolutionists believe gradualism - the Grand Canyon was eroded away for millions of years by an ordinary river, instead of in a few weeks by a really big flood.
What is up with the fundies referring to DNA as "digital"? Kirk Cameron did it during his debate with the Rational Response Squad...for something to be digital, it has to be numerically based. Hence the root of the word, DIGIT. What the hell is digital about DNA?
...vast new chains of gradually increased digital information in the DNA molecules...
DNA is analogue, not digital.
starbrewer
Could someone tell me what the fuck is catastrophism?
*points to the mass-extiction events in the past, and the rather bizzarre life forms in between said events*
What the hell is "catastrophism"?
@#676962: Ones and zeros would be a binary encoding; not all digital systems need be binary. Indeed, early digital computers used decimal or duodecimal encodings. To qualify as digital (in a weak sense), all a system needs is to be topologically discrete (as opposed to analog systems, which are continuous). In a stronger sense the system may use an encoding based on a finite set of symbols. The genetic code is digital in both senses.
If that happens, then evolution ... would have to start all over from square one
Maybe it did. It took a billion and a half years to develop the first life. It took another billion just to develop the first true cell, and almost another billion to develop multi-celled life. That's almost 3 1/2 billion years to develop the simplest multi-celled creature. After that, everything was micro-evolution.
(1) Learn what DNA is
Alternately, sew your mouth shut and step on a stonefish.
@Paler_Face
Technically, DNA can be considered digital becuase it consists of discrete values. It is, however, irrelevant to the validity of evolution, so the puzzlement over its emphasis by creationists is valid.
Also, #676954 is correct in stating there are 5 bases between DNA and RNA. In RNA, thymine is replaced by uracil.
Natural selection is like advertisement and marketing.
The methods that get the most customers continue to be used, while outdated ones are discarded until people being to be appealed by that method once more.
There were plenty of catastrophes, but none of them were worldwide and none cause complete annihilation. Wiping out a species just makes room for another to flourish, thus HELPING evolution.
Oh, and one more thing...only a moron would think that physics and chemistry were "random".
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
