Slashdot Mirror
Rate of Evolution Metrics Observed
eldavojohn notes an article up at Science Daily on research demonstrating that smaller animals with warmer blood evolve faster than larger, colder animals. From the article: "Across species from fish to mammals, they found that rates of protein evolution showed the same body size and temperature dependence as metabolic rate. Specifically, their mathematical model predicts that a 10-degree increase in temperature across species leads to about a 300 percent increase in the evolutionary rate of proteins, while a tenfold decrease in body size leads to about a 200 percent increase in evolutionary rates."
"Rate of Evolution Metrics Observed" -> (then a miracle of logic occurs) -> "proof, suckitcreationists"
What?
Oh, same process as...
"Evolution happens" -> (then a miracle of logic occurs) -> "evolution exhaustively explains origins and incidentally there is no God"
Nevermind.
~ Whence do you come, slayer of men, or where are you going, conqueror of space?
Granted I haven't RTFA, but my immediate reaction was, more complex systems are easier to alter. More highly evolved creatures (if you'll pardon the expression) are more complex (e.g., people vs. bacteria). Warmer things are more complex by virtue of entropy. Larger things are more complex by virtue of being, um, larger.
The problem I have with "creationists" is that there's no science there. If you believe it, fine, but to do so, you have to throw out almost everything we know about everything, and if you think God gave us a brain only to misled us about the truth, well, then that's your problem to sort out, but don't think too hard or you'll end up in Hell, I suppose.
The problem I have with "evolutionists" is that despite all the evidence we have that life has evolved, we've never actually seen it happen, and our understanding of how it happens (gradually vs. abruptly) is changing every year. It's hardly a settled question, and we will probably overturn a lot of long-held beliefs in the next decades.
But mostly I have a problem with the alleged conflict of the two. I personally believe God created evolution, so where do I fit on that spectrum?
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
OK, explain to me where and when evolution from one species to a different species has been witnessed and recorded.
If I'm wrong, I'm mistaken, not lying.
Oh, and ease up on the caffeine or something. You seem way too uptight.
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
Keep it out of a discussion based on reason instead of superstition however.
The topic was the debate around evolution, which makes the comment relevant. You don't need to go out of your way to be condescending, but if you are feeling insecure or something, then maybe you can't help it.
Back to subject at hand, people don't seem to be willing to accept that all the evidence we have for evolution is, ultimately, circumstantial. Now I'm a firm believer in Occam's Razor, and evolution through genetic mutation and natural selection (which is easily observable) certainly seems the best explanation (as opposed to say the FSM materializing and replacing all the dinosaurs with lemurs or something), but until someone actually sees evidence of one species literally and directly leading to another, we still can't say it's a settled "fact".
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.