@Canageek I see, so you are basically catching up to some unwritten social rules that slipped through you, am I getting your goals right?
How is it going with your self improvement project? Care to tell me about it? We may be on a similar path atm
There's a #JOSM plugin to continue the 'Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett' message?
@Tmo Welome mate! Where are you from?
@freemo this cracked me!
I'm a free speech lover and I like this place to be a platform for our users to get in touch with as much as they want of the fediverse, as long as there is no **active** harassment of any of us.
The rest is up to the users and the clients, they have a lot of power in carving their own informational niche, and that one of the big reasons why AP exists in the first place.
I understand that people may not be familiar with the technology, which has never had this scale of usage, but if you want freedom and independence is it too much to ask that you just search "mastodon how to silence instance", or whatever you may need?
We as mod are also always here to answer doubts and help our users to get the best out of this place, but no, I personally would never take the arrogant decision of what is good or bad for others to be exposed to.
Please, @evaristus , if we want to talk about it in a serious way could you please open a topic on discourse? We encourage this kind of discussion and it would be easier for anyone to follow.
@kosame well, I'm very happy an "alternative" is being developed, especially since reddit has been in general quite lax on censorship, but we don't know how it may go in the future. Also, prismo has access to all the fediverse content, being federated with AP, so it doesn't have to start really from scratch, content-wise
With that said, I agree that atm reddit is not replaceable by anything. I myself am a very active reddit user, and I kind of love the crowd.
However yes, I also find the reddit format more close to how my mind works. There is #prismo which is an AP based project aiming for what you are saying, but it's still in its early stages. You can see more at https://prismo.xyz/ .
You can follow them at @prismo
redraft for grammar
2) Even I would sign off there. Mutation and natural selection are not enough to explain life (if you don't chip in the drift I say it's a pretty bad framework in general), and I totally agree that all evidence should always be carefully examinated. Darwin also had some things wrong, and at the time genetics didn't even exist, so of course we need to work on it. How is this a list of people refusing evolution? Am I missing something?
a) Again, you have some parts of the onthogenesis which are the same regardless of the species for all vertebrates, like gastrulation, or the development of the notochord. You have many body parts which are evidently analogous, I am not a zoologist so I may not have all the comparative anatomy straight regarding vertebrates. Of course there are going to be differences, otherwise they would be the same organisms.
b) just because we don't know the tree of life it means that life originated multiple times? How so? Just consider for a moment that evolution happened from a single organism: why, in this case, you reckon that it would be easy to trace all of the existing life forms lineages? Data is messy, and spans billion of years.
c) For example the evolution of cetacea, where you still see unused appendeces useful for land movement today, you have fossils of transition and you have molecular evidence. I'm sure it makes sense to you that it's more difficult to gather all the evidence for something that took millions of years, but we have a lot of stuff.
Some changes may often be due to how the DNA works, especially in terms of mutations on a regulatory gene, like the Hox. But I really am trying to avoid being too technical.
@design_RG it was a reply, right. Thanks for letting me know, I must have deleted the user reference by mistake!
does any of my followers play the #banjo ?
1) We have explosions, like the cambrian explosion, which have a massive radiation, and we also have transitional forms, like we have for many of the horse ancestors. Some speciation events even happen in a single season, others in millions of years. Evolution does not have a fixed rate, but varies. This is called, in the field, punctuated equilibrium and saltation, proposed by stephen j gould (just to give you some keywords to search)
2) Who? And how was the challenge proposed, and how did it developed?
a) The vertebrate embryos develop in a very similar way actually. Have you ever seen an embryo development? Do you think you can have one without gastrulation, just to say one?
b)Yep, we do not have a single tree of life. We have many different trees, with support for branches, oftentimes based on the traits we use in our matrix. I don't think we'll ever know the real tree (even if we knew wouldn't know that is the one), but we can make guesses and those are developing very quickly. We can get closer and closer, and in the past 40 years we have major jumps in the field. What is exactly the point here? Is like saying that tectonic isn't real because I can't tell you exactly where a single rock was formed. We use those methods daily in the medical field when we look at virus evolution and changes, agronomical pest control because they evolve pretty fast, etc. Rebuilding the tree is a corner stone of such researches, and it works pretty well even without a 100% probability.
c) We do have evidence for both macro and microevolution. The mechanisms involved are the same (mutation, drift, selection, etc) but the scale of course changes. The methods could be paleonthological, molecular, you name it.
So, what's really your point? All of the methods of inquiry we have agree (with higher or smaller variance) on the results. You'll never have a rabbit in the precambrian.
@realcaseyrollins half of the people, yes, I know the stats.
How many of the scientists, though? Like all of us.
When to keep a conversation the person I'm talking to, ie you, forces me to use hours of my time reading resources and watching videos, while I managed to keep most of the very complex evolutionary theory stuff down to a few lines, I'm sorry buddy, but seems like a dick move, and I'm out of the conversation.
@realcaseyrollins there is not a single biologist/naturalist/ecologist/scientist working with this stuff who doesn't support evolution. The consensus is basically unanimous.
The fact that scientists disagree on the details is because we are scientists. Even on the mechanisms involved in the cell there are disagreement and there is still stuff to explore, doesn't mean the cell theory should collapse.
This was just to keep the example, but you can choose whatever theory and you'll see scientists debating on the details, consequences, relative importance of every factor and so on.
@realcaseyrollins cells are also part of a theory: it's called "cell theory". A theory, in scientific language, is an hypothesis that has withstood a massive amount of falsification attempts and is now universally recognized as true. That's a theory. Like cell theory. Like theory of relativity. Like evolution.
Are you ironic by saying that the bible is the most reliable sum of texts of all time?
@namark Now I see where you are coming from, thanks.
Actually yes, evolution deals with modification in generations of what's already here. The beginning of life is a different topic and it's a matter for biochemists, more than naturalists (as I am).
Since day 1 to now, and since 100 years ago to now, dynamics are the same.
I see that it is something that could confuse a high school student though
@namark Sorry, I don't get what you mean. What are the claims about single-celled organisms existing today? Like, that they should have evolved in more complex forms, given the time?
QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves. A STEM-oriented instance.
No hate, No censorship. Be kind, be respectful
We federate with all servers: we don't block any servers.