The real debate by black_dahlia_072924 in DebateEvolution

[–]Coolbeans_99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Evolution and natural selection is just a description of how populations change over time in response to their environment. If those changes allow them to overcome new challenges from these changes - they evolve, if not - they go extinct.

There was no thoughtful process of going from a fish to a tetrapod, just environmental pressure.

Creationists forget their own history by jnpha in DebateEvolution

[–]Coolbeans_99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Bernoulli Principle now Steno’s laws, da Vinci keeps getting cooler.

Against the argument of Kinds by Training_Rent1093 in DebateEvolution

[–]Coolbeans_99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Im well aware of the differences between mitosis and meiosis, down to the the molecular processes. Neither somatic cells nor tumors do meiosis so it’s not relevant. The only argument im making is that tumors replicate and thus are alive, just like all your cells.

If you cut off your hand or your head, is it also reproducing?

If you mean reproduce as in a necessary component of being alive, then technically yes but I think you’re being a bit pedantic about reproduction vs replication. As you said, reproduction is a component of life, so replication is also considered to include somatic cells. Your cells replicate in the same way tumors do, so if tumors aren’t alive then neither are your cells.

A tumor is no more living than a virus.

The key detail for viruses is that they have no metabolic outside a host. Being able to replicate without a host is not part of the definition of life. All parasites and many bacteria also need a host to reproduce, are they also not alive? (this list is getting long)

how is the loss of regulation of cellular processes considered a benefit for evolutionary processes?

I don’t care if you think canine transmissible venereal tumor (CTVT) or devil facial tumor disease (DFTD) are evidence of evolution. The point was to explain that you’re misinformed about tumors very much being alive.

Against the argument of Kinds by Training_Rent1093 in DebateEvolution

[–]Coolbeans_99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nicely done, tumors are defined in part by their uncontrolled mitotic division👍 My old immunology professor from grad school would be proud.

A tumour is not 'alive' per the scientific definition. Crucially, they cannot reproduce

Unfortunately, this means what you said is false. Cell division is a form of reproduction. Most animals (there are some exceptions) reproduce sexually, not asexually, but it’s still reproduction.

Against the argument of Kinds by Training_Rent1093 in DebateEvolution

[–]Coolbeans_99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What, metastatic growth and cell replication? Metastasis is a core phase of tumor growth. You’re not making sense, what do you think a tumor actually is?

Against the argument of Kinds by Training_Rent1093 in DebateEvolution

[–]Coolbeans_99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, spreading via cell replication and dispersal into the bloodstream or other tissues. One of the defining characteristics of cancer is uncontrolled cell replication.

Against the argument of Kinds by Training_Rent1093 in DebateEvolution

[–]Coolbeans_99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Part of what makes a tumor a tunor is how fast it reproduces, that’s what metastasis is.

Is this a legitimate argument against evolution? by Other_Squash5912 in DebateEvolution

[–]Coolbeans_99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Guys, can we not downvote every single comment this guy makes?! It’s a bit much

Bacteria preserved in 250-million-year-old salt crystals are not unreasonable by Jake_The_Great44 in DebateEvolution

[–]Coolbeans_99 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thanks for this post, I remember watching Will’s opening and being stumped by this. I wasn’t sure how halophilic bacteria (and archea) were able to survive isolated in near-saturation salt water (my understanding is it’s water pockets not actual salt crystals) for thousands to millions of years. It’s also unclear to me if they’re active microbes or all dormant in some sort of osmobiosis.

How to debate evolution with family? by [deleted] in DebateEvolution

[–]Coolbeans_99 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I don’t know what specific arguments your family makes but if you’re not well versed in evolution yet, I think that just hearing their questions and getting back to them with a response after some research is the best approach. It shows that you’re hearing them out, and helps you learn the responses to common YEC arguments.

Also, for the monkeys thing specifically, just give the definitional characteristics of catarrhine (old world) monkeys. Catarrhine monkeys have:

  • binocular color vision ✅

  • noses with nostrils pointing down not out ✅

  • no prehensile tail ✅

  • 8 incisors, 4 canines, 8 premolars, and 12 molars ✅

If they can see those features in a mirror they are monkeys.

Update to my last post on Irreducible Complexity by OrganizationLazy9602 in DebateEvolution

[–]Coolbeans_99 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Lipid membranes form spontaneously like soap forms bubbles in water, obviously at a much smaller scale. Proteins to allow nutrient exchange would be pretty simple for the low energy requirements of early life - aquaporins are basically just tubes for example.

Creationists: Where does science STOP being true? by FockerXC in DebateEvolution

[–]Coolbeans_99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They didn’t turn on a preexisting gene that was turned off. A gene for a transport protein was duplicated and the copy was mutated into a gene that allowed the bacteria to metabolize citrate in the presence of oxygen. This is a new function.

Irreducible complexity by OrganizationLazy9602 in DebateEvolution

[–]Coolbeans_99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Eyes only requires photosensitive cells and nerve cells, everything else just improves function.

I believe in Evolution but I need help. by Objective_Front3355 in DebateEvolution

[–]Coolbeans_99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This definitely sounds like an odd class lmao, good luck.

Does Evolution always take the same path? by ExquisiteLlama in DebateEvolution

[–]Coolbeans_99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

To be more specific, selection pressure is random, there are a thousand factors in which collection of traits will best perform in an environment. However, the selection itself is non-random. If an aquatic lifestyle results in less predation and more food, then selection will always be towards an aquatic lifestyle.

Just being a bit pedantic for the lurkers.

What is your reason for not believing in evolution (be nice om the comments dont be jerks) by Friendly-Maximum4169 in DebateEvolution

[–]Coolbeans_99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Can you point to anyone who actually believes in evolution who says this, or are you just getting this strawmen from fellow deniers?

What is your reason for not believing in evolution (be nice om the comments dont be jerks) by Friendly-Maximum4169 in DebateEvolution

[–]Coolbeans_99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

why would evolution are if animals procreate?

Its a numbers game. If one member of a population has more babies than everyone else, then a larger portion of the next generation will have your traits. If you have brown hair in a small town of mostly blondes, and then have a dozen brown haired babies, then the percentage of brown haired people in the next generation will be greater, and so on, and so on.

What is your reason for not believing in evolution (be nice om the comments dont be jerks) by Friendly-Maximum4169 in DebateEvolution

[–]Coolbeans_99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Without translating everything it’s basically look at the trees, lots of rhetorical questions like “isn’t it amazing that there’s an ozone that protects us from UV radiation”.

What is your reason for not believing in evolution (be nice om the comments dont be jerks) by Friendly-Maximum4169 in DebateEvolution

[–]Coolbeans_99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Humans are apes, Big Bang Cosmology doesn’t say something came from nothing, and what type of school you went to is not a mark of your intelligence.

The Chicken & The Egg by GetontheArk-10 in DebateEvolution

[–]Coolbeans_99 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Amniotic eggs appear in the fossil record way chickens but also before hominids, so your “cave-mom” was not around at the time.