most creationist arguments can be summarised as "complexity, complexity, complexity - therefore god".
we have all heard the illustrations about the odds of (insert favourite example) evolving, being less than 10,000 monkeys typing macbeth by pure chance.
evolution is not like that.
Hooby there is no kind way of saying you are entirely wrong about how evolution works.
This is the sort of stuff that is covered in chapter one of a basic introduction to biology. I'm typing on my useless phone but if I really have to I will explain again later this evening. Shouldn't be necessary if you would just make a little bit of effort.
most creationist arguments can be summarised as "complexity, complexity, complexity - therefore god".
we have all heard the illustrations about the odds of (insert favourite example) evolving, being less than 10,000 monkeys typing macbeth by pure chance.
evolution is not like that.
In the illustration the words "all the other pages are scrapped" means the percentage of the population who do not have the favourable mutation gradually decrease in the population.
Remember the illustration about monkeys and typewriters was chosen by creationists.
most creationist arguments can be summarised as "complexity, complexity, complexity - therefore god".
we have all heard the illustrations about the odds of (insert favourite example) evolving, being less than 10,000 monkeys typing macbeth by pure chance.
evolution is not like that.
Hooby are you being obtuse on purpose?
Let's say one individual in a population of 10,000 acquires a favourable mutation. That has no effect on how many offspring the other 99,999 have. But over many generations the percentage of individuals with the mutation will gradually increase. Each generation of individuals with the mutation will do slightly better at leaving descendants. No change in the overall population will occur but the percentage of the whole population who have the favourable mutation will increase from 0.001% to closer to 100% while those without it gradually move in the opposite direction.
It really is a very simple concept.
evolution explains how everything descended from a common ancestor over millions of years.
creationists only seem to want to talk about what came before that common ancestor.
just for the sake of discussion let's pretend that the following is true.
evolution explains how everything descended from a common ancestor over millions of years.
creationists only seem to want to talk about what came before that common ancestor.
just for the sake of discussion let's pretend that the following is true.
Because it is not what I think. It is a fact.
evolution explains how everything descended from a common ancestor over millions of years.
creationists only seem to want to talk about what came before that common ancestor.
just for the sake of discussion let's pretend that the following is true.
Duuning-Kruger thank you for that information. I have been unable to find any Islamic source that endorses human evolution.
evolution explains how everything descended from a common ancestor over millions of years.
creationists only seem to want to talk about what came before that common ancestor.
just for the sake of discussion let's pretend that the following is true.
How about - "Resistance to evolution is almost entirely found among Muslims and Protestant Evangelicals"?
most creationist arguments can be summarised as "complexity, complexity, complexity - therefore god".
we have all heard the illustrations about the odds of (insert favourite example) evolving, being less than 10,000 monkeys typing macbeth by pure chance.
evolution is not like that.
"At that point all the other pages are scrapped and every monkey is given a copy of this page."
This is the part that takes many generations in the real world.
most creationist arguments can be summarised as "complexity, complexity, complexity - therefore god".
we have all heard the illustrations about the odds of (insert favourite example) evolving, being less than 10,000 monkeys typing macbeth by pure chance.
evolution is not like that.
Hooby you really don't get it.
It illustrates how natural selection accumulates complexity - it doesn't get there in one lucky jump.
The population is not reduced to just that individual who hosts the favourable mutation. The advantageous gene just gradually becomes more frequent in the population which doesn't get any smaller as a result.
You made the mistake of taking a simple illustration that explains one aspect of a complex subject and tried to make it apply to the whole subject.
most creationist arguments can be summarised as "complexity, complexity, complexity - therefore god".
we have all heard the illustrations about the odds of (insert favourite example) evolving, being less than 10,000 monkeys typing macbeth by pure chance.
evolution is not like that.
That is because you totally misunderstood the illustration Hooby.
