Re: Can there be a mathematical proof of evolution?

On Wed, 8 Apr 2009 08:51:02 -0700 (PDT), Bill254
<spintronic@xxxxxxxxxxx> enriched this group when s/he wrote:

On Apr 8, 4:33 pm, wf3h <w...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Apr 8, 9:37 am, Bill <spintro...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Apr 8, 12:53 pm, wf3h <w...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Apr 8, 6:47 am, Bill <spintro...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
No a nested hierarchy is an observation.

The observation confirms the prediction.

No. The observation, "observes" the rise of "mammals".

It does not *predict* it.

how many predictions would you like? 30? 40?

Try 1, that'll be a start.

OK here you go.

<snip>

A *long* list does *not* change the tense.


Try an easy one.

Try a, so called *prediction* that actually was *before* the event.

He gave you a long list. You dishonestly cut it. Here it is again:-

[quote]
http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/evo_science.html

The following list gives a few of the predictions that have been made
from the Theory of Evolution:



Darwin predicted that precursors to the trilobite would be found in
pre-Silurian rocks. He was correct: they were subsequently found.


Similarly, Darwin predicted that Precambrian fossils would be found.
He wrote in 1859 that the total absence of fossils in Precambrian rock
was "inexplicable" and that the lack might "be truly urged as a valid
argument" against his theory. When such fossils were found, starting
in 1953, it turned out that they had been abundant all along. They
were just so small that it took a microscope to see them.


There are two kinds of whales: those with teeth, and those that strain
microscopic food out of seawater with baleen. It was predicted that a
transitional whale must have once existed, which had both teeth and
baleen. Such a fossil has since been found.


Evolution predicts that we will find fossil series.


Evolution predicts that the fossil record will show different
populations of creatures at different times. For example, it predicts
we will never find fossils of trilobites with fossils of dinosaurs,
since their geological time-lines don't overlap. The "Cretaceous
seaway" deposits in Colorado and Wyoming contain almost 90 different
kinds of ammonites, but no one has ever found two different kinds of
ammonite together in the same rockbed.


Evolution predicts that animals on distant islands will appear closely
related to animals on the closest mainland, and that the older and
more distant the island, the more distant the relationship.


Evolution predicts that features of living things will fit a
hierarchical arrangement of relatedness. For example, arthropods all
have chitinous exoskeleton, hemocoel, and jointed legs. Insects have
all these plus head-thorax-abdomen body plan and 6 legs. Flies have
all that plus two wings and halteres. Calypterate flies have all that
plus a certain style of antennae, wing veins, and sutures on the face
and back. You will never find the distinguishing features of
calypterate flies on a non-fly, much less on a non-insect or non-
arthropod.


Evolution predicts that simple, valuable features will evolve
independently, and that when they do, they will most likely have
differences not relevant to function. For example, the eyes of
molluscs, arthropods, and vertebrates are extremely different, and
ears can appear on any of at least ten different locations on
different insects.


In 1837, a Creationist reported that during a pig's fetal development,
part of the incipient jawbone detaches and becomes the little bones of
the middle ear. After Evolution was invented, it was predicted that
there would be a transitional fossil, of a reptile with a spare jaw
joint right near its ear. A whole series of such fossils has since
been found - the cynodont therapsids.


It was predicted that humans must have an intermaxillary bone, since
other mammals do. The adult human skull consists of bones that have
fused together, so you can't tell one way or the other in an adult. An
examination of human embryonic development showed that an
intermaxillary bone is one of the things that fuses to become your
upper jaw.


From my junk DNA example I predict that three specific DNA patterns
will be found at 9 specific places in the genome of white-tailed deer,
but none of the three patterns will be found anywhere in the spider
monkey genome.


In 1861, the first Archaeopteryx fossil was found. It was clearly a
primitive bird with reptilian features. But, the fossil's head was
very badly preserved. In 1872 Ichthyornis and Hesperornis were found.
Both were clearly seabirds, but to everyone's astonishment, both had
teeth. It was predicted that if we found a better-preserved
Archaeopteryx, it too would have teeth. In 1877, a second
Archaeopteryx was found, and the prediction turned out to be correct.


Almost all animals make Vitamin C inside their bodies. It was
predicted that humans are descended from creatures that could do this,
and that we had lost this ability. (There was a loss-of-function
mutation, which didn't matter because our high-fruit diet was rich in
Vitamin C.) When human DNA was studied, scientists found a gene which
is just like the Vitamin C gene in dogs and cats. However, our copy
has been turned off.


In "The Origin Of Species" (1859), Darwin said:
"If it could be proved that any part of the structure of any one
species had been formed for the exclusive good of another species, it
would annihilate my theory, for such could not have been produced
through natural selection."
Chapter VI, Difficulties Of The Theory
This challenge has not been met. In the ensuing 140 years, no such
thing has been found. Plants give away nectar and fruit, but they get
something in return. Taking care of other members of one's own species
(kin selection) doesn't count, so ants and bees (and mammalian milk)
don't count.


Darwin pointed out that the Madagascar Star orchid has a spur 30
centimeters (about a foot) long, with a puddle of nectar at the
bottom. Now, evolution says that nectar isn't free. Creatures that
drink it pay for it, by carrying pollen away to another orchid. For
that to happen, the creature must rub against the top of the spur. So,
Darwin concluded that the spur had evolved its length as an arms race.
Some creature had a way to reach deeply without shoving itself hard
against the pollen-producing parts. Orchids with longer spurs would be
more likely to spread their pollen, so Darwin's gradualistic scenario
applied. The spur would evolve to be longer and longer. From the huge
size, the creature must have evolved in return, reaching deeper and
deeper. So, he predicted in 1862 that Madagascar has a species of
hawkmoth with a tongue just slightly shorter than 30 cm.
The creature that pollinated that orchid was not learned until 1902,
forty years later. It was indeed a moth, and it had a 25 cm tongue.
And in 1988 it was proven that moth-pollinated short-spurred orchids
did set less seed than long ones.



A thousand years ago, just about every remote island on the planet had
a species of flightless bird. Evolution explains this by saying that
flying creatures are particularly able to establish themselves on
remote islands. Some birds, living in a safe place where there is no
need to make sudden escapes, will take the opportunity to give up on
flying. Hence, Evolution predicts that each flightless bird species
arose on the island that it was found on. So, Evolution predicts that
no two islands would have the same species of flightless bird. Now
that all the world's islands have been visited, we know that this was
a correct prediction.


The "same" protein in two related species is usually slightly
different. A protein is made from a sequence of amino acids, and the
two species have slightly different sequences. We can measure the
sequences of many species, and cladistics has a mathematical procedure
which tells us if these many sequences imply one common ancestral
sequence. Evolution predicts that these species are all descended from
a common ancestral species, and that the ancestral species used the
ancestral sequence.
This has been done for pancreatic ribonuclease in ruminants. (Cows,
sheep, goats, deer and giraffes are ruminants.) Measurements were made
on various ruminants. An ancestral sequence was computed, and protein
molecules with that sequence were manufactured. When sequences are
chosen at random, we usually wind up with a useless goo. However, the
manufactured molecules were biologically active substances.
Furthermore, they did exactly what a pancreatic ribonuclease is
supposed to do - namely, digest ribonucleic acids.



An animal's bones contain oxygen atoms from the water it drank while
growing. And, fresh water and salt water can be told apart by their
slightly different mixture of oxygen isotopes. (This is because fresh
water comes from water that evaporated out of the ocean. Lighter atoms
evaporate more easily than heavy ones do, so fresh water has fewer of
the heavy atoms.)
Therefore, it should be possible to analyze an aquatic creature's
bones, and tell whether it grew up in fresh water or in the ocean.
This has been done, and it worked. We can distinguish the bones of
river dolphins from the bones of killer whales.

Now for the prediction. We have fossils of various early whales. Since
whales are mammals, evolution predicts that they evolved from land
animals. And, the very earliest of those whales would have lived in
fresh water, while they were evolving their aquatic skills. Therefore,
the oxygen isotope ratios in their fossils should be like the isotope
ratios in modern river dolphins.

It's been measured, and the prediction was correct. The two oldest
species in the fossil record - Pakicetus and Ambulocetus - lived in
fresh water. Rodhocetus, Basilosaurus and the others all lived in salt
water.
[end quote]


Then, *prove* it wasn't a guess.

Not very good at this are you?

In this, like everything else, he is far better than you.

--
Bob.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Scientific Americans Faulty Criticism of Expelled
    ... Wallace, co-founder of Darwin's Theory, wanted Darwin to drop his ... first biologist to notice the appearance of variation within species. ... for fossils this is demonstrably false. ... the fossil record is zero evolution over time. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Can there be a mathematical proof of evolution?
    ... Since you haven't provided one for evolution. ... Darwin predicted that Precambrian fossils would be found. ... and the prediction turned out to be correct. ... In "The Origin Of Species", ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Question for Serious Sam: How do new species form?
    ... If evolution is not responsible for the appearance of new species, ... fossils and whale fossils in the same strata. ... The point I want to make is that the stratigraphic record shows that the ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Can there be a mathematical proof of evolution?
    ... from the Theory of Evolution: ... Darwin predicted that Precambrian fossils would be found. ... and the prediction turned out to be correct. ... In "The Origin Of Species", ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Science Disproves Evolution
    ... Evolution, in the context of this newsgroup, unless otherwise qualified, ... "....Evolution postulates that new species are descended from earlier ... And based on this the rocks are dated. ... based on the rocks the fossils found in it are a certain age. ...
    (talk.origins)
Loading