Do you think any aliens exist in the universe?

[pood]

Here on earth, epigenetics suggests a mild form of Lamarckism, though not a driver of evolution.

Source please?

Look it up for yourself. Google is your friend, except for Google AI.

It's not my job to support the claims you make.

It is not my job to respond to you at all. Fortunately, out of the goodness of my heart, I gave you a link to a scientific study that supports just what I said — that epigenetics supports a mild form of Lamarckism in gene expression. You could have looked that up yourself but I did the work for you, without any pay so far.

I do take PayPal.

 

[excreationist]

@Kylie

I'm asking you what would be required in order for Lamarckian evolution to work on another planet.

Some acquired traits can be passed on, if only to a small extent.

On other planets? We do not know. But this is a fact on our planet.

There is the link pood was talking about...

 

[Kylie]

Here on earth, epigenetics suggests a mild form of Lamarckism, though not a driver of evolution.

Source please?

Look it up for yourself. Google is your friend, except for Google AI.

It's not my job to support the claims you make.

I’ve no idea how this would work on other worlds, and neither do you. Maybe on other worlds, Lamarckism, or something we have not even thought of, would drive the development of living things or life-like things (we do not even have a clear definition of life or how to differentiate it from non-Iife. Is a virus alive?).

Hence agnosticism, or perhaps more apposite, philosophical skepticism.

So you think that if we can't rule something out, it must be equally likely?

No I did not say anything of the kind. Where did you get that idea?

I have explained that with one data point (life on earth) we cannot establish probabilities of how many other planets are inhabited or how life or life-like structures develop there.

And you've also suggested that if we can't rule out another explanation, then we should remain agnostic about that explanation.

Yes … and?

So, support the claims you make.

 

[Kylie]

@Kylie

I'm asking you what would be required in order for Lamarckian evolution to work on another planet.

Some acquired traits can be passed on, if only to a small extent.

On other planets? We do not know. But this is a fact on our planet.

There is the link pood was talking about...

That's not a study. That's an article. There was no research done, there is no table of results, there is no analysis of data.

 

[Kylie]

I'm asking you what would be required in order for Lamarckian evolution to work on another planet.

Some acquired traits can be passed on, if only to a small extent.

On other planets? We do not know. But this is a fact on our planet.

Do you think it could have a greater influence on another planet? Can you tell me what kind of conditions would need to exist in order for that kind of Lamarckian evolution to play a more important role in evolution on another planet? I mean, you're the one saying that it could play a more important role, so I think you should be able to demonstrate that you have enough of an understanding of the topic to say what's actually required for it.

You apparently don’t have enough understanding of the topic to know about epigenetics. So why should I cater to your demands for more information? Do your own homework.

By your own admission, you don't even know enough about it! You were going on about how we should be agnostic about it all!

Note also that I cited a scientific study suggesting that not all mutations here on earth are random with respect to the environment.

I mkust have missed that, could you share it again please?

Again, do your own homework. There is a search function on this site and there is also Google.

I don't take homework assignments from you.

If you can't support your own claims, then that's your failure, not mine.

And if you're referring to the link you posted, then that wasn't a study, that was an article.

Once again, your claims have zero evidence supporting them.

We have no idea how any of this would work on other inhabited worlds. I suggest a certain level of uncertainty in talking about any of this.

So we should also consider that there are magical fairies on other planets creating life forms and causing them to change as well, yes?

No, I did not say that. Stop shoving words into my mouth in your petty and argumentative way.

I am not arguing for magic fairies. I am saying that different life forms, under different conditions, might develop in different naturalistic ways, perhaps some that we have never thought of because we have never experienced them. Again, please stop shoving words into my mouth in your petty and argumentative way.

If you want to claim that life exists on other worlds and natural selection works on them exactly as it does here, the burden of proof is on you to demonstrate both claims. I have made no claims but put out ideas that I admitted are speculative for the purpose of stimulating discussion, and not to incur petty personal attacks and hissy fits.

Ah, but you can't rule out the magical fairies, can you? So you have to be AGNOSTIC about them, doncha!

 

[Kylie]

Here on earth, epigenetics suggests a mild form of Lamarckism, though not a driver of evolution.

Source please?

Look it up for yourself. Google is your friend, except for Google AI.

It's not my job to support the claims you make.

It is not my job to respond to you at all. Fortunately, out of the goodness of my heart, I gave you a link to a scientific study that supports just what I said — that epigenetics supports a mild form of Lamarckism in gene expression. You could have looked that up yourself but I did the work for you, without any pay so far.

lol, that was an article, not a study.

Studies include a description of how data was gathered, they include the data that was gathered, and they include an analysis of that data.

The link you posted had none of that.

 

[Kylie]

So you think that if we can't rule something out, it must be equally likely?

No, I did not say that. This would mean that everything is 50/50, so far as I can tell from your comment.

I am saying that with one example of anything, we cannot estimate probabilities at all.

That doesn't mean that Lamarckian evolution is as plausible an explanation as natural selection though, does it?

I don’t know. Nor do you.

In my personal opinion, natural selection is likely the default mechanism for any kind of life anywhere. However, my personal opinion doesn’t mean shit without data, which we do not have except for ONE example, here on earth. And, as noted, you cannot reliably extrapolate from one example to make generalizations.

Yes, neither of us know

In my personal opinion, magical fairies are probably NOT the default mechanism for any kind of life anywhere. However, my personal opinion doesn’t mean shit without data, which we do not have except for ONE example, here on earth. And, as noted, you cannot reliably extrapolate from one example to make generalizations.

Therefore, we must remain open to the possibility that magical fairies are present on other planets.

 

[Kylie]

Here on earth, epigenetics suggests a mild form of Lamarckism, though not a driver of evolution.

Source please?

Look it up for yourself. Google is your friend, except for Google AI.

It's not my job to support the claims you make.

It is not my job to respond to you at all. Fortunately, out of the goodness of my heart, I gave you a link to a scientific study that supports just what I said — that epigenetics supports a mild form of Lamarckism in gene expression. You could have looked that up yourself but I did the work for you, without any pay so far.

I do take PayPal.

Give me something of actual value and I'll consider it.

Like an actual STUDY, not the article you seem to think counts as a study.

 

[pood]

So, support the claims you make.

You are the one making unsupported claims, not me.

Please support them.

 

[pood]

So you think that if we can't rule something out, it must be equally likely?

No, I did not say that. This would mean that everything is 50/50, so far as I can tell from your comment.

I am saying that with one example of anything, we cannot estimate probabilities at all.

That doesn't mean that Lamarckian evolution is as plausible an explanation as natural selection though, does it?

I don’t know. Nor do you.

In my personal opinion, natural selection is likely the default mechanism for any kind of life anywhere. However, my personal opinion doesn’t mean shit without data, which we do not have except for ONE example, here on earth. And, as noted, you cannot reliably extrapolate from one example to make generalizations.

Yes, neither of us know

In my personal opinion, magical fairies are probably NOT the default mechanism for any kind of life anywhere. However, my personal opinion doesn’t mean shit without data, which we do not have except for ONE example, here on earth. And, as noted, you cannot reliably extrapolate from one example to make generalizations.

Therefore, we must remain open to the possibility that magical fairies are present on other planets.

This is a ridiculous non sequitur that proves you are only interested in stirring up a fight and not in having a discussion.

I have never said that any old explanation at all is equally valid for how life might arise or develop on other planets, I certainly have never suggested the possibility of magic fairies. Your tripe is getting quite tiresome.

Epigenetics, a mild and largely non-influential form of Lamarckism, is observed here on earth. It is a fact. It is not “magic fairies.” Who is to say it may not play a larger role on other planets if they are inhabited? Certainly not you.

Do you even know what “agnostic” means?

 

[pood]

Yes, neither of us know

In my personal opinion, magical fairies are probably NOT the default mechanism for any kind of life anywhere. However, my personal opinion doesn’t mean shit without data, which we do not have except for ONE example, here on earth. And, as noted, you cannot reliably extrapolate from one example to make generalizations.

Therefore, we must remain open to the possibility that magical fairies are present on other planets.

Once again, to reiterate — and this is becoming pretty tedious — I never said that magic fairies are a viable or likely option. Please stop shoving words into my mouth.

What I said is that there could be competing naturalistic explanations for how life arises and develops on different planets, and given that we have only one data point, we have no way to compute any probability of alternative explanations or whether to stick with the explanations we have on earth, which themselves are incomplete and defeasible.

Again, please stop deliberately misconstruing what I say and stop putting words into my mouth,

Thanks in advance.

 

[bilby]

..

 

[pood]

Here on earth, epigenetics suggests a mild form of Lamarckism, though not a driver of evolution.

Source please?

Look it up for yourself. Google is your friend, except for Google AI.

It's not my job to support the claims you make.

It is not my job to respond to you at all. Fortunately, out of the goodness of my heart, I gave you a link to a scientific study that supports just what I said — that epigenetics supports a mild form of Lamarckism in gene expression. You could have looked that up yourself but I did the work for you, without any pay so far.

I do take PayPal.

Give me something of actual value and I'll consider it.

Like an actual STUDY, not the article you seem to think counts as a study.

Here is the study, linked right in the article, which itself is a science article.

 

[pood]

lol, that was an article, not a study.

lol, as noted just above, the article is in a science publication, and the link IS RIGHT THERE in the article, which I just gave you right above.

Studies include a description of how data was gathered, they include the data that was gathered, and they include an analysis of that data.

The link you posted had none of that.

Yeah, I just gave you the link to the actual study.

 

[pood]

Ah, but you can't rule out the magical fairies, can you? So you have to be AGNOSTIC about them, doncha!

No, I don’t have to remain agnostic about magical fairies and only you have brought them up. I am talking about remaining agnostic about possible competing naturalistic explanations of how life arose and developed, not magic.

Once again, stop putting words into my mouth.

It is again evident that you are only here to stir up arguments as opposed to having a discussion,

 

[pood]

The efficient Lamarckian spread of life in the cosmos

Study challenges evolutionary theory that mutations are random

I post these not as endorsements, but to encourage discussion. This is a discussion board. I would advise certain people to refrain from nasty snark and smack. Again, if such idiocy needs rebuttal, I do not think that magic fairies and natural selection are equally good accounts for life on other worlds,

 

[excreationist]

Here on earth, epigenetics suggests a mild form of Lamarckism, though not a driver of evolution.

Source please?

Look it up for yourself. Google is your friend, except for Google AI.

It's not my job to support the claims you make.

It is not my job to respond to you at all. Fortunately, out of the goodness of my heart, I gave you a link to a scientific study that supports just what I said — that epigenetics supports a mild form of Lamarckism in gene expression. You could have looked that up yourself but I did the work for you, without any pay so far.

I thought the best way to further the discussion would to be provide the link again. Instead you seem to continue an argument. (though this was a while ago before you provided links to studies)

 

[steve_bank]

We hear it all the time in the news.

A scientific study says ....

On the issue at hand it needs to be more specific with multiple regencies.


From a quick look at the topic there is no conclusive proof. There has been fraud connected to the clams made. There are alternate explanations.

Yes, believe it or not there can be fraud in science.

There are studiess that 'challenge' vaccinations.

 

[Kylie]

So, support the claims you make.

You are the one making unsupported claims, not me.

Please support them.

What unsupported claims did I make?

 

[Kylie]

So you think that if we can't rule something out, it must be equally likely?

No, I did not say that. This would mean that everything is 50/50, so far as I can tell from your comment.

I am saying that with one example of anything, we cannot estimate probabilities at all.

That doesn't mean that Lamarckian evolution is as plausible an explanation as natural selection though, does it?

I don’t know. Nor do you.

In my personal opinion, natural selection is likely the default mechanism for any kind of life anywhere. However, my personal opinion doesn’t mean shit without data, which we do not have except for ONE example, here on earth. And, as noted, you cannot reliably extrapolate from one example to make generalizations.

Yes, neither of us know

In my personal opinion, magical fairies are probably NOT the default mechanism for any kind of life anywhere. However, my personal opinion doesn’t mean shit without data, which we do not have except for ONE example, here on earth. And, as noted, you cannot reliably extrapolate from one example to make generalizations.

Therefore, we must remain open to the possibility that magical fairies are present on other planets.

This is a ridiculous non sequitur that proves you are only interested in stirring up a fight and not in having a discussion.

I have never said that any old explanation at all is equally valid for how life might arise or develop on other planets, I certainly have never suggested the possibility of magic fairies. Your tripe is getting quite tiresome.

Epigenetics, a mild and largely non-influential form of Lamarckism, is observed here on earth. It is a fact. It is not “magic fairies.” Who is to say it may not play a larger role on other planets if they are inhabited? Certainly not you.

So if you agree that it is largely non-influential, why do you propose that it may be important on other planets?

If it is, conditions on other planets would have to be different to what they are here on Earth. Can you say what differences would be required? Because I've asked you many times, and you have refused to answer.

So you are just claiming that MAYBE things on other planets are different and MAYBE those differences mean that a process which is largely uninfluential here has a greater effect on these other planets, but you CAN'T tell us anything about what sort of differences would be required.

In other words, you are making vague claims and offering no support for those claims.

And you wonder why I don't take you seriously?

Do you even know what “agnostic” means?

Yes.