You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: “Don’t change… evolve” – is that so? Three misconceptions about evolution that you might have involuntarily assimilated.
Couldn't one say that an experiment where a bacteria with no antibiotic resistance being put into an environment that selects for that and gaining a resistance be an example of evolution? An example of what I am talking about is here in this video here or watching the embeded link.
I'd say it's an example of the selection of a certain strain of a species.
The holy grail of proving that evolution exists, is to observe how a whole new species arises. A separate species usually cannot produce fertile offspring from mating with members of other species.
Holy grail? Isn't that Arthurian / religious nonsense?
Evolution has been proven to occur. As the vast majority of scientists will testify. And I think the phrase you're looking for is speciation, anyway. Evolution doesn't have to involve speciation.
"Holy grail" is a figure of speech and if you believe Dan Brown the original wording actually means "royal blood" ;-).
So yes, proving the evolutionary theory is definitely a royal deed. And to my knowledge, the Finch study that @irime describes is the first example where speciation (thank you for helping with the term) was observed, as this is one of the most decisive statements of the evolutionary theory.
While I strongly believe in the evolutionary theory, as it is so powerful to explain a lot of macroscopic, microscopic, cellular and molecular aspects of biology, I wouldn't say it has been proven. That is a hard thing to accomplish given that we can't time-travel.
There is a mountain of evidence. From the microscopic to the enormous, genetic to the palaeontological. Life once had humble beginnings. It's got a lot more complex since. The species roaming the earth have been shown to change with time (once dinosaurs disappeared, where did birds and mammals come from? Out of thin air - if you're religious?).
You could go into a courtroom and once you're through with the nonsense that is swearing on the bible, you'd be hard-pressed to find a jury of sane people that wouldn't unanimously accept the theory of evolution to be the way life works. Finding a suitable jury could cause a problem, I suppose, with the religion in the world. People will believe in their superstitious nonsense when it suits them. But they wouldn't be able to fly off on their holidays without inventors and engineers, nor would they be able be cured of their illnesses half the time, without the scientific community and the field of medicine. So, they'll also believe in science when it suits them, too. Some people are weird like that, eh?
What would you need to time-travel for by the way? Do 'religious' people need to time-travel to acquire their religion? Of course not, they just swallow myths passed down the generations. A myth that a lot would say was created simply to control people. Religious people are often the most unethical of people and anyone who needs a belief in god to keep them on the straight and narrow should be viewed with caution. If you're able to read a scientific text then you should be able to accept that for all intents and purposes evolution has been proven to be true. I'm sorry - not sorry - but it really is as simple as that.
Ps. I knew what you meant with the expression, 'holy grail'. I was just failing at being funny. :)
Didn't actually watch the video, but yes, kryzsec, bacteria do evolve resistance to antibiotics. That's why certain sexually transmitted diseases are on the increase, unfortunately (amongst other diseases). We mustn't beg our doctors for antibiotics unless we really need them. They shouldn't over-prescribe them, either. Farmers shouldn't be adding antibiotics to their feedstuffs, also
Because when the shit really does hit the fan....
I think you may have missed the point of my reply. I was asking if bacteria gaining antibiotic resistance would count as an example of evolution, not if it happened. Sorry for any confusion
Well, yes, it is evolution. As opposed to speciation (which is also evolution). Hence, I used the word 'evolve' in my first sentence above. (But I do appreciate the distinction you're making.)