What evolution is NOT, Installment 1: "How coud it all happen by chance?"

by seattleniceguy 46 Replies latest jw friends

  • seattleniceguy
    seattleniceguy

    As a supplement to my series on simple evidences for evolution, I thought I would also write occasional articles addressing common misunderstandings regarding evolution. In this one, we'll address that common stumbling block, "But how could something so complex have come about by chance? The probability is just too small."

    To address this, we need to understand the role that randomness plays in evolution. Imagine you are standing in a room with a white and black checkerboard tile floor. Each tile is one foot (30 centimeters for our international friends) on a side. In your hands you hold a deck of cards. You hurl the cards into the room, scattering them all over the floor. By simple chance, we should expect that roughly half the cards land on black squares and half on white squares.

    However, in this particular room, the black squares are actually not tile at all; they are "liquid hot magma," as my friend Dr. Evil would say. Any card that touches a black tile is incinerated, while the ones that land on white squares are safe.

    Now imagine that an observer enters the room at this point. She might be given to wonder how it is that all the cards in the room are on white squares. Surely this could never have happened via a random process! What are the odds that all the cards in the room would just happen to be on white squares? Surely some intelligent being placed the cards there! Right?

    As we have seen, our friend would be incorrect in her conclusion. No one intelligently placed the cards on the white squares. They were scattered by random forces. It just so happened that the environment killed off the cards that landed on the squares that were not conducive to card-existence. The only cards that were left were the ones that, by chance, happened to land on safe squares.

    Now let's move our analogy to the natural world. The hand that hurls the cards is reproduction. Every day, entire new batches of cats, dogs, yeast, tulips, wheat, and so on are being thrown out into the world, millions of little creatures that are different in various ways from each other and from their parents. Random forces create the diversity.

    The floor in our analogy is the local environment. All of creatures land in a different spot and try to make it in the world, but some of them will be swiftly wiped out if their design is not appropriate for the environment. It's cold and harsh, but that's the way it happens, just like with the cards. The only remaining creatures will be the ones that the environment "selected" as being fit.

    Notice that I say that it is the local environment that does the selecting. This is because the environment changes dramatically from place to place. What might be fit in one spot is not fit in another. Consider the lion in Africa versus the lynx in North America. Neither would survive for long in the other's environment. By wiping out all but the most successful versions of each batch of offspring, the environment causes a species to gradually become more and more suited to it, because the ones that happen to be more suited to it are successful. One can easily imagine a feline progenitor living in a cold, snowy environment becoming more and more honed toward lynx-like features over generations because the offspring with the longer hair, the bigger feet, the tufts of hair in their ears, and so on, will be more adept at survival in that harsh environment.

    So what we have are two competing forces at play. Random chance in reproduction throws out a million different candidate versions of a species. The cold, hard realities of the local environment "choose" which of those versions are worthwhile. It's a lot like selective breeding, except in this case the breeder (the local environment) brings the axe down hard on any that he doesn't like.

    Therefore, random chance does play a very important role in evolution. However, it is meaningless without an environment to do the selecting. Chance only provides the raw material for the environment to select from. To say that evolution does not make sense because of the chance involved would be to vastly misunderstand what evolution is. Indeed, evolution can only occur because of random events.

    SNG

    Appendix: Links to articles so far in my "evidences for evolution" series:
    Retroviral sequences: http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/6/86797/1.ashx
    Cytochrome c: http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/6/87238/1.ashx

  • Bas
    Bas

    Very good explaining, seattleniceguy. Did you write this yourself? Well, since you seem to have some good understanding on the subject I'm going to ask you the million-dollar question which should be very difficult to answer: How did life originate in the first place?

    Bas

  • seattleniceguy
    seattleniceguy

    Hello Bas,

    Thanks! Yes, I wrote that myself. Glad you like it. I thought of the card and checkerboard floor illustration as I was going to bed last night.

    How did life originate in the first place?

    That question is indeed very difficult to answer. Actually, it's one that falls outside the bounds of evolution. Evolution takes over after the first self-replicating organisms exist.

    The hypothesis that life arose from non-life is called abiogenesis and is distinct from evolution. I hesitate to call it a theory because the data on this question is very scant, as opposed to the mountainous data in support of evolution.

    I began studying abiogenesis a little, but I grew tired of it because at this point we just don't have much to go on. So I'm afraid I don't have a good answer for you. Evolution is much more interesting because there is so much evidence.

    SNG

  • Bas
    Bas

    Hi Seattleniceguy, thanks for your swift reply. I know my question was difficult, I happen to have a friend who almost has his master-degree in biology. We talked alot about evolution and also the origins of life. What i remember from talking to him is that "they" now think that the diffrent organels within a cell have originated seperately and then got to work together in symbiosis to form the first cell, after which the evolution began. What are your thoughts on this?

    Bas

  • seattleniceguy
    seattleniceguy

    Yes, I have heard that hypothesis, and it certainly seems reasonable. This is especially reasonable in light of the fact that mitochrondria carry their own set of DNA which is completely independant of the DNA that codes for our body features. It does look for all the world like a separate little creature invaded the cell and began living symiotically with it.

    I was reading Freeman Dyson and he was suggesting that the precursors for life arose twice: once as a self-replicating RNA machine, perhaps similar to a crude virus, which could not metabolize on its own, and once as a metabolizing machine that did not have reproductive capabilities (it may have just divided roughly in half to "reproduce"). The RNA machine invaded the metabolizing machine and in some cases it was actually helpful to the metabolizer. Thus was born the basic machinery from which all cells are made.

    Again, for those following along, I want to stress that the above is not evolutionary theory. It is speculation on possible methods of abiogenesis. The two are very different. (Sorry, Bas, I know you're totally aware of that. I just wanted to make sure no one gets confused.)

    SNG

  • Golf
    Golf

    I'm not into evolution and doctrinal matters, however, a few thoughts came to mind. You say, "The only remaing creatures will be the ones that the environment 'selected' as being fit." You then gave the analogy of the cards landing on either the black or white squares. The black squares are not really tiles but "liguid hot magma" so when all the cards that land on the black squares they will be liguidated but not those that land on the white tiles. As such, you equated these cards that are incinerated as being 'unfit' but not those that landed on the white tiles. The white tiles are the real tiles in your analogy, right? If so, then were dealing with imaginary tiles, one is and one is not. These tiles do not really represent tiles at least not the black ones.

    You are assuming that as you 'hurl' these cards across the room that half will fall on the white and the other half on the black tiles, right? That's an assumption, correct? Can I assume that the person who 'hurled' the cards was once upon a card that landed on the white tile? If so, how, where and when does this person enter the picture?

    About this environment thing, am I to assume that if 'you' grew up in a warm environment you wouldn't be able to adjust to a cold climate? Am I to underatnd that an Eskimo wouldn't be able to survive in Jamaica and a Jamaican can't survive in the Arctic?

    So, mankind was 'randomly' thrown into an environment and 'if' he so happens to land on the black tile, he's unfit? This person is not given a chance to adjust to the environment, that explains evolution?

    Personally, I can't 'imagine' liking people to a deck of cards in this scenario. I'm trying to follow your reasoning and that's why I'm asking questions. Do you follow my drift?


    Golf

  • Carmel
    Carmel

    SNG, your "Natural Selection 101" was a nice summary. However, in all its wonder, it does not limit itself to only one conclusion, randomness. Your last sentence is not supported by exclusive evidence.

    carmel

  • Golf
    Golf

    SNG, as an ironworker since 1962, I can't imagine having a unified structure assembled together without a 'blueprint.'


    Golf

  • Bas
    Bas

    Golf, DNA is the blueprint of you, me, everybody

  • Golf
    Golf

    Bas, I'm familiar with our personal blueprint. Now, why and how did it come about, did it evolve over time? What does evolution recognize?

    Golf

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit