-
Features
Did earth evolved?
- Thread starter Syed
- Start date
Cheerful Charlie
Contributor
Evolution, properly understood is a property of living things with DNA/RNA. So mo, the Earth did not evolve.
bilby
Fair dinkum thinkum
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2007
- Messages
- 40,360
- Gender
- He/Him
- Basic Beliefs
- Strong Atheist
Populations of living things evolve. The Earth is a single non-living thing, so no, it did not evolve.
Your question makes as much sense as asking 'Can this cricket ball sing three-part harmony?'
But thank you for providing such clear evidence to refute the common claim that there is no such thing as a stupid question.
James Brown
Suspended by Member Request
It depends on the definition of 'evolved.' Lots of things are said to have evolved. Automobile models, musical genres, software code--anything that changes over time is said at some point to have evolved.
Evolution of living things, as we know it, does indeed consist of the interactions of DNA/RNA. But the Earth is not a living thing.
What we do generally understand is that the Earth 'evolved' or 'formed' or 'accreted' out of the molecular cloud of gas and dust during the formation of our sun. It's a fascinating subject.
Formation_and_evolution_of_the_Solar_System
Evolution of living things, as we know it, does indeed consist of the interactions of DNA/RNA. But the Earth is not a living thing.
What we do generally understand is that the Earth 'evolved' or 'formed' or 'accreted' out of the molecular cloud of gas and dust during the formation of our sun. It's a fascinating subject.
Formation_and_evolution_of_the_Solar_SystemNo. The Earth is an inanimate object and they don't evolve (or really do amything else for that matter).
Earth started as a single speck of space dust and went from there to become the rags to riches success story of the Solar System known as the Solar System. It was tough going at first, but Earth persevered. It just goes to show what one can accomplish if you grab every rock that whistles by and hang on to it for 4.5 billion years.
earth indeed evolved, early earth did not contain 1000 0f ingredient for life like water and iron, i am sure other planets in our solar do not have ingredient for life
it was god who brought all the ingredient for life to the earth
fast
Contributor
First, that seems like a good answer.It depends on the definition of 'evolved.' Lots of things are said to have evolved. Automobile models, musical genres, software code--anything that changes over time is said at some point to have evolved.
Evolution of living things, as we know it, does indeed consist of the interactions of DNA/RNA. But the Earth is not a living thing.
What we do generally understand is that the Earth 'evolved' or 'formed' or 'accreted' out of the molecular cloud of gas and dust during the formation of our sun. It's a fascinating subject.
Strange how others are saying no. When an answer is yes or no depending on the definition, the one word answer should be yes because it accurately describes the truth to the question when at least one definition is used.
We shouldn't say no with the reasoning being that one possible definition would result in a no answer.
Can people fly? Yes.
Can people fly? Yes, according to one use of the term, as people fly all the time, as they board and ride as passengers in airplanes. Like a bird, no, people cannot fly. So, in common usage, it's both true and false that people fly, and it's not a contradiction precisely because of the underlying ambiguity.
So, to me, (and perhaps you as well), it's most assuredly true that our planet Earth has evolved over time, yet (as others have pointed out), our planet has not evolved--and that is of course true and does not stand as a contradiction, since the usage is a usage that is different and distinct to how it is nevertheless most assuredly true.
It depends on the definition of 'evolved.' Lots of things are said to have evolved. Automobile models, musical genres, software code--anything that changes over time is said at some point to have evolved.
Evolution of living things, as we know it, does indeed consist of the interactions of DNA/RNA. But the Earth is not a living thing.
What we do generally understand is that the Earth 'evolved' or 'formed' or 'accreted' out of the molecular cloud of gas and dust during the formation of our sun. It's a fascinating subject.
So, to me, (and perhaps you as well), it's most assuredly true that our planet Earth has evolved over time, yet (as others have pointed out), our planet has not evolved--and that is of course true and does not stand as a contradiction, since the usage is a usage that is different and distinct to how it is nevertheless most assuredly true.
so earth evolved or not?
It was the various aspects of stellar evolution that created the ingredients within the dust cloud that accreted into planets and moons. But the earth 'evolved" in a way similar to how a jar of mixed liquids and minerals might settle into layers, if you want to call that "evolution".
There’s no evidence anything was “brought” from anywhere to anywhere.
God-believers think they’re imaginative, when that’s very exactly what they are not. God is a failure of imagination.
Yes or no. Or, yes and no. Depending on how you want to define your terms. There are better words for the making of planets, like "formed" for example. You probably selected "evolved" because you're fishing for a way to say that evolution is not enough to explain life and so it takes God to make it work.
Gila Guerilla
Junior Member
- Joined
- May 24, 2009
- Messages
- 84
- Basic Beliefs
- No religious beliefs held
There are at least two meanings for the word evolved. One meaning is simply anything which develops from one state to another gradually. The sand dunes of the Sahara evolve, (gradually move, change size, shape and possibly composition).
Another meaning is a specific sub-set of the first, namely a change in a living organism, (animal, plant, fungus, bacterium etc.), due to mutations in DNA, in which such mutations cause a change in the properties of the organism. Such changes may benefit the survival of the organism and its descendants, which means that they will have an advantage over those organisms of the same type, that do not have that beneficial property. This means that the mutation will most likely survive down the later generations, because its owners will survive better than the ones without it.
In the case of sexual reproduction, the beneficial property will only show up in the second generation, (and from then on), because for the mutation to be passed on, it must exist in a sperm or an ovum. If the mutation occurs in a skin cell for example, then 99.999%, (or so) of the cells in the organism will not have the mutation. When the organism dies, the mutation will die with it. If the mutation occurs in a sperm or an ovum, (or pollen etc.), then 99.999%, (or so), of the cells in the organism will not have the mutation. However, if the sperm or ovum, (or pollen etc.), gets joined with the sex cell of a mate/partner of the other sex, then offspring may result, and all of the offspring's cells will have the mutation in them.
Note also that a mutation may have a negative effect on the survival of the organism and its offspring, and so the mutation will tend to get extinguished - its owners at a disadvantage will be less able to survive. This is also a part of Darwinian evolution, in which benefits accrue, and disadvantages tend to disappear. Modern humans have acquired medical techniques that can help people with disadvantageous mutations to survive, (eg. cystic fibrosis, cancer).
Since all of this complexity does not apply to the earth as a whole, (although it has, and does continue to change and develop gradually), it did/does-not do so by the complicated mechanism I describe as biological or Darwinian evolution. Note also that changes in the planet, may be developments which are bad for the life on it, (eg. pollution, loss of habitat etc.). As humans we are able to work to solve the problems of pollution, (for example), just as we work medically to battle cystic fibrosis or cancer etc.
So the answer to your question: "Did earth evolved or not?" depends on what you mean by evolved. Whether a god is responsible for all this is another question.
That's things on Earth evolving. Saying that's Earth evolving is like saying the pot you put your plant in grew into a fern.
1000s of ingredients for life does not come from one place and not all minerals are good for life and mixed liquids dont make layers of minerals
early earth did not had water and 1000s 0ther ingredient for life
- - - Updated - - -
early earth did not had water and 1000s 0ther ingredient for life
indeed early earth did GROW from small to BIG
Asteroids "brought" it. But there are better words because the word "brought" implies an intention that isn't in evidence. But you seem to mean to imply it. I get the impression it takes tricks of words to prove God.
What are the thousands of other ingredients for life?
That's not what evolution is.
Keith&Co.
Contributor
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2006
- Messages
- 22,444
- Location
- Far Western Mass
- Gender
- Here.
- Basic Beliefs
- I'm here...
Bones, skin, hair, and 997 grams of MAGIC
- - - Updated - - -
Frankly, I knew that when i saw the name on the OP.
Here a good series of lectures about Evolution and Biology, not so much about the Evolution of planets though.
http://oyc.yale.edu/ecology-and-evolutionary-biology
http://oyc.yale.edu/ecology-and-evolutionary-biology