How Fast Is Evolution?

Science & Reason on Facebook: http://tinyurl.com/ScienceReason

Facts of Evolution (Chapter 5): How Fast Is Evolution?

---
Please subscribe to Science & Reason:
• http://www.youtube.com/Best0fScience
• http://www.youtube.com/ScienceMagazine
• http://www.youtube.com/ScienceTV
• http://www.youtube.com/FFreeThinker
---

EVOLUTION IS REAL SCIENCE:

1. Does The Evidence Support Evolution?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1R8w_QEvEU
2. Vitamin C And Common Ancestry
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SF2N2lbb3dk
3. Are We Descended From Viruses?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIsWZCSMSSs
4. Does The Fossil Record Support Evolution?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QWVoXZPOCGk
5. Where Are The Transitional Forms?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfTbrHg8KGQ

FACTS OF EVOLUTION:

1. Introduction
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43SskX-pEqA
2. Universal Common Descent
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0UGpcea8Zg
3. Good Design, Bad Design
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Mtr3Cum74A
4. Speciation And Extinction
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5kumHLiK4A
5. How Fast Is Evolution?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6XgeSi1EGkU
6. What Can Embryos Tell Us About Evolution?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uAZmLYWEPGk
7. The Molecules Of Life
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvJFI3ChOUU
8. Molecular Evolution: Genes And Proteins
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mA7BE3mEb64
9. Retroviruses And Pseudogenes
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ZvTmgCk1Lo

---

Rates of Evolution

Evolutionary rates can be measured quantitatively for a character within a lineage, and we begin by seeing how this is conventionally done. We then look at a large compilation of over 500 such measurements and ask whether fossil evolutionary rates fit in with the theory of population genetics.

Punctuated equilibrium is an influential modern idea about evolutionary rates in fossils and we discuss the theory, how to test it, evidence for and against it, and its conceptual relation with the modern synthesis.

The rate of evolution is a measurement of the change in an evolutionary lineage over time.

The method for measuring the rate of evolution can be illustrated by work done by MacFadden on horse teeth: horse teeth are classic materials in the study of evolution.

The rate of evolution is measured as follows:

Suppose that a character has been measured at two times, t1 and t2 ; t1 and t2 are expressed as times before the present in millions of years.

The time interval between the two samples can be written as:Dt = t1 - t2,

which is 1 million years if t1 = 15.2 and t2 =14.2 The average value of the character is defined as x1 in the earlier sample and x2 in the later sample; we then take natural logarithms of x1 and x2 (the natural logarithm is the log to base e where e = 2.718, and it is symbolized by ln).

The evolutionary rate (r) then is

r = (ln(x2) - ln(x1)) / Dt

The rate of evolution is measured in 'darwins'.

Haldane defined a 'darwin' as a unit to measure evolutionary rates; one darwin is a change in the character by a factor of e in one million years.

The formula above for r gives the rate in darwins provided that the time interval is in millions of years.

• http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/ridley/tutorials/Rates_of_evolution1.asp
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_%28unit%29
.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• evolution
• natural
• selection
• charles
• darwin
• biology
• common
• decent
• ancestry
• fossils
• transitional
• forms
• science
• evolutionary
• theories
• rates
• intelligent
• design
• speciation
• genetics
• haldane

[directorygod]

Cool Video, Thanks for shared

[knowwaie]

Good, now lets measure how fast all these animals die, and compare.

Death has no concern with how fit you are, apparently. Damn nature.

[proadmin1]

@tubewatch59 Avian and Mitchel's basic work cover this pretty thoroughly - we at least agree there is no free lunch - just time and change.

[tubewatch59]

@proadmin1

But if one were to genuinely model a Darwinian algorithm such that it's careful not to incorporate features that need to first get there via Darwinian evolution, not by the dictates of "simple rules" that are in reality extraordinarily sophisticated compartments for hidden complexity - THEN you will see just how limited evolutionry algorithms are when they are simulated the way the must occur in nature. When fudging of the system cannot take place. There's no free lunch in GA's.

[tubewatch59]

@proadmin1

"but (the GOL) give(s) an example of how seemingly "impossibly" complex machines - up to and INCLUDING a full Turing machine, can arise from a system with very simple rules."

No it doesn't. The GOL rules take advantage of some of that vast built-in functionality. The simple rules you refer to are extremely high level summary of many layers of detailed functionality which must first exist before GOL can.

There's no basis for thinking we're seeing genuine "emergence" here!

[tubewatch59]

@proadmin1

Look at all of the underlying functional complexity in the electrical circuit forming the computer on which the OS runs on which the compiler runs on which perpares the GOL code for execution!

Now consider the functional complexity inherent in the many companies and engineers plans that built the computer and the operating systems. Look at all the knowledge that went into achieving such technology over many many many years?

Have you ever considered that hidden complexity?

[tubewatch59]

@proadmin1

For example, in something like GOL, one can state an apparently very "simple rule" dictating when or when not replication takes place. Or it may have a simple rule stating that the digital organisms can combine sexually according to a combination of either parents traits etc. But are such rules (that can be stated in a sentence) really simple? Not at all. Look at all of the underlying code for the program. Look at all of the underlying code to write the OS.

[tubewatch59]

@proadmin1

GOL shows us nothing new. Systems can arise commensurate with their causes. Given a system with simple rules, one expects (and gets) simple outcomes. However in the GOL one my see some level of complexity not apparent from the simple rules, because much of the complexity is hidden in various layers. For example, want something to be copied in a game like this? Then a "simple rule" dictates that the copy shall take place...

[tubewatch59]

@proadmin1

So while life from nonlife can certainly be engineered and isn't mystical in that sense, the evidence shows that life probably couldn't have come about without any deliberate engineering = ID. You're wrong in saying that we now know it does not require outside intervention. That is complete hype that is unsupported by the evidence. It's what naturalists need to be true, and what they believe is true. It's logic. IF naturalism is true, then life must have come about naturally.

[tubewatch59]

@proadmin1

Why use the word "mystical". While I consider God to be an absolutely mysterious entity, the idea God created life, while grand and awe inspiring, isn't exactly what I'd call mystical. It's more along the lines of engineering. Creationists and IDists wouldn't say that very simple life (ie. pre-bioticstyle replication chemistry) was totally beyond human engineering. Though engineering life much beyond that, is well beyond our capabilities, at least for a very long time to come.