What is Evolution?

Podcasts of Dr. Zachary Moore discussing particular topics within Evolutionary Biology. In this episode Dr. Moore discusses the what the principle mechanisms and processes which Evolution uses and how these are testable.
Education
• 2005. Doctor of Philosophy in Pathobiology and Molecular Medicine, University of Cincinnati, Ohio
• 2001. Bachelor of Science in Biology, University of Cincinnati, Ohio
http://www.drzach.net/

Category:

Education

Tags:

• evolution
• biology
• education
• fossil
• evidence
• genes
• DNA

[MrNewkingjames]

Three forces, three particles, three dimensions ,three states of matter, three variables in every basic axiom(E=M(c) inThree quarks in each fundamental particle .Thesis Antithesis Synthesis.Beginning ,middle end Birth life deathTriangulation trigonometry a triangle is the most rigid shape tripod Spirit tbody soul

[agentorange20]

@MrNewkingjames ' you are a normal human who insists on your own will being done in spite of Gods claimsRIGHT?

If I assume I have no free will, then I am a mere puppet, & this whole dialog is pointless as it would imply fate has sealed by destiny. In that case, the mere fact that I reject the premise of a gods existence is odd as it implies that my fate was to deny its existence thereby making belief in said deity impossible for my sake.

[MrNewkingjames]

On the contrary I see gods hand in every aspect of his creation.If you cannot perceive his hand in his creation it is because you have been blinded by the GOD OF THIS If you want to see Gods hand ask him and he will reveal it to you.WORLD who is the devilThe more I know about science the more I see Gods hand

[agentorange20]

@MrNewkingjames ' to prove god's non-existance is a logical impossibility there fore you can simply accept his reality. '

Just b/c I cannot logically disprove X doesn't exist is no reason to believe it does. For a proposition to be believed positive evidence is needed, not non negative evidence. I cannot disprove the Russels celestial teapot either, but I am not obliged to believe in it as there is zero positive consistent evidence for it in the first place.

[MrNewkingjames]

Whether you invoke NATURE as the agency which brings to pass complex ordered symbiotic systems from atomic elements,or call The Spirit of God is really a matter of semantics since the outcome is the same .So why do people object so strongly to the use of the nameG-O-D as the author of the natural world?Ask yourself which world you would prefer? of course you would prefer a cosmos WITHOUT an intelligent creator since this would remove culpability for your actions while in his creation.

[agentorange20]

@MrNewkingjames Besides, in many respects the concept of an omniscient, omnipotent, benevolent being is logically impossible, so the premise refutes itself. Philosophers have found many internal inconsistencies with such a premise composed of such properties, so one or more properties is wrong. & this isn't new, Epicures riddle pondered this very thing & whole libraries are devoted to addressing theodicy & still it's a viable question unanswered.

[NihilisticAgnostic]

The reason behind that is the increase in oxygen in the atmosphere allowing more complex organisms to survive, thus giving rise to a rapid burst of evolution. All as predicted.

[BenkaiDebussy]

Haha, yeah. The "macro vs micro" thing is particularly funny because "macro" evolution is a direct consequence of "micro" evolution. Once you accept that any mutations can occur, it's logically necessary to accept that evolution occurs.

[bigglyguy]

I find it very sad that we are supposed to cackle with glee at Ken Hovind being jailed for taxes. Since when have the American people being raving fans of the IRS? For shame people, for shame.

[Gorzynskii]

your covering a lot of genetics.

[MrNewkingjames]

God is the FATHER SON HOLY SPIRIT 1/3=.3333333333333333333......­..

[kleenex3000]

@MrNewkingjames You see an UNKNOWN NUMBER of Heavenly CreatorZ (0,1,100s,1000s...?!) with UNKNOWN PROPERTIES that these govern every aspects of Creation.

The least thing that you could (I suggest to) do IS, that if you (unfoundedly/dishonestly) identify all them CreatorZ with your man-made Abrahamic G-D, that you honestly start to TRUST him, to have brought and to bring every aspects of his creation FORTh, exactly in those ways, as that SCIENCE brilliantly reveals.

[TCupUK]

@TCupUK Can genetic inheritance give rise to new species, and can you prove so?

8:14 You do know that physicists know that gravity theory is not complete?

You also know that E does not =MC² right?

[TCupUK]

@TCupUK 4:28 Does this change create a new species?

Can you show me a slide with two flies that eventually create something that is no longer a fly?

Can you prove that this genetic defect will be beneficial?

If not, can you show me one that is?

Can you say that the environment that this test on flies was carried out was the replication of natural selection, and not selective breading?

Do we really need evolution to prove genetic inheritance?

[TCupUK]

Hello Zak

Great to find someone whom I can debate with who can hopefully provide me with more than "It is a fact".

2:46 Would you agree that Evolution is the label we use to describe the phenomena we observe, and the phenomena is the actual fact, and the label we use to describe this is evolution?

Do you agree that scientific theory's can be proven wrong?

Do you agree that scientific theory's are explanations of the the phenomena, and not in themselves the fact?

[agentorange20]

@Mogley52 sorry, deleting spammed copied stuff. You're free to comment, but not free to endlessly paste the same drivel over & over.