Split Rock
Conflation of Blathers
Why would he bother doing that? He might actually learn something that conflicts with his religious dogma. Besides, he has all the answers already.
Upvote
0
-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Why do YE Creationists insist on a simplistic literal reading of the bible?
- Thread starter Amora
- Start date
- Status
Why would he bother doing that? He might actually learn something that conflicts with his religious dogma. Besides, he has all the answers already.
It is false to say a Ring Species cannot mate. They can mate perfectly well within their own herds, and across nearby herds. There is no danger of extinction (or at least no more danger than any other kind of animal. It is just herds at the extreme end of the chain that cannot interbreed -- and that only with herds at the other extreme end. But each, along with the nearby herds that they can interbreed with are present in more than sufficient numbers to survive.
And you still have not addressed my question. What, exactly do you mean by A becoming B?
Dogs "become" Great Danes and chihuahuas. Neither is the same as the other, but both are still dogs. Panthers "became" lions and tigers. Neither is the same as the other, but both are still panthers. The difference between dogs and panthers is that there is no longer a species called "panther." All panthers belong to lion species, tiger species, leopard species or jaguar species.
So again, are all panthers one kind? Or are lions, tigers, jaguars and leopards all different kinds? Or are the specific species of leopard and the specific species of tiger, etc. all different kinds? And what about those leopards that are not panthers? What about other Great Cats? Other Large Cats? And will your answer change once lions and tigers can no longer produce tigons and ligers?
Upvote
0
EternalDragon
Counselor
You mean read some particular current conclusion to evidence based on a particular presupposition that could be outdated and overturned in ten years?
Evolution dogma can take a hike.
Upvote
0
TLK Valentine
I've already read the books you want burned.
- Apr 15, 2012
- 64,493
- 30,322
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Agnostic
- Marital Status
- Single
It's not dogma if it can be overturned.
Anyone who seeks truth must keep themselves open to the possibility that they might be wrong, and be willing to change if they are shown wrong -- true or false?
Upvote
0
EternalDragon
Counselor
What you are describing above is the result of special creation, then that special creation being subject to sin and everything running down. It has produced variety up to a point and right now we are at the near end of that speciation. Natural selection has done it's job but it is going the opposite of evolution. Species are losing genetic variety and complexity. The universe is running down, not getting better.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
EternalDragon
Counselor
Species do still have the ability to adapt. They still retain some variety. That is called natural selection which I mentioned. (Not evolution) So why did you post this?
Upvote
0
EternalDragon
Counselor
It's not gaining anything. If natural selection can work then the abilities are already there. It just turns the switch back on. Neutral or less information is what is happening. Evolution does not design or create complex new features. Natural selection does not do that. Mutations do not do that.
Upvote
0
They gained cecal valves. They didn't have them before. We kow this because they were studied before they came to the island, and we still have the population they came from, which doesn't have the feature. It wasn't there before. Now it is. These are the facts.
Upvote
0
It is speciation, which is an aspect of (some would say it is the aspect of) evolution. What do you think it is? And what do you think evolution is that you figure this isn't it?
What is it if it isn't evolution? What do you think evolution is?
A definition of evolution (for sexually reproducing species):
1) Evolution is a process that works on populations over many generations; individuals do not evolve.
2) A new offspring requires genetically compatible parents. Generally this means that the parents are the same species. Occasionally members of closely related species can hybridize, usually with difficulty. The hybrid offspring, if it survives is usually sterile. Except for such hybrids, the offspring is the same species as the parents.
3) Because it has two parents, and because of mutations and ERVs and other modifications, the offspring is not identical to either parent. Genetic differences generally manifest as physical differences.
4) New traits can be strongly deleterious, in which case, it is likely the carrier will die before infecting the gene pool, or they can be neutral, or nearly neutral, and be passed on to offspring, and over a number of generations, slowly spread through the population, or they can be beneficial, in which case the spread will be a little faster because those with the new trait will live longer and have more offspring. Likewise, dominant traits will spread faster than recessive traits.
5) One of the factors determining whether a trait is beneficial or deleterious is the environment. If the environment changes or if a branch of the population expands into new territory, formerly neutral traits could become beneficial, and formerly beneficial traits could become neutral, or even deleterious. The percentage distributions of various traits will change in only a few generations, and the branch population will start looking quite different from the root stock
6) Mutations, ERV insertions, gene swapping, and broken and (mis-)repaired breakdowns in DNA will continue to happen. if the two populations don't interbreed, or only rarely interbreed, then the changes in one will not spread to the other and vice versa. They become separate populations. At some point there genetics will not be any closer than two different species that are close on the Linnean taxonomic table. They may even be no longer be able to reproduce. Were it not for old records, it might not be absolutely possible to prove that they ever were able to interbreed.
1) Evolution is a process that works on populations over many generations; individuals do not evolve.
2) A new offspring requires genetically compatible parents. Generally this means that the parents are the same species. Occasionally members of closely related species can hybridize, usually with difficulty. The hybrid offspring, if it survives is usually sterile. Except for such hybrids, the offspring is the same species as the parents.
3) Because it has two parents, and because of mutations and ERVs and other modifications, the offspring is not identical to either parent. Genetic differences generally manifest as physical differences.
4) New traits can be strongly deleterious, in which case, it is likely the carrier will die before infecting the gene pool, or they can be neutral, or nearly neutral, and be passed on to offspring, and over a number of generations, slowly spread through the population, or they can be beneficial, in which case the spread will be a little faster because those with the new trait will live longer and have more offspring. Likewise, dominant traits will spread faster than recessive traits.
5) One of the factors determining whether a trait is beneficial or deleterious is the environment. If the environment changes or if a branch of the population expands into new territory, formerly neutral traits could become beneficial, and formerly beneficial traits could become neutral, or even deleterious. The percentage distributions of various traits will change in only a few generations, and the branch population will start looking quite different from the root stock
6) Mutations, ERV insertions, gene swapping, and broken and (mis-)repaired breakdowns in DNA will continue to happen. if the two populations don't interbreed, or only rarely interbreed, then the changes in one will not spread to the other and vice versa. They become separate populations. At some point there genetics will not be any closer than two different species that are close on the Linnean taxonomic table. They may even be no longer be able to reproduce. Were it not for old records, it might not be absolutely possible to prove that they ever were able to interbreed.
That's it. That is evolution. What in evolution is it that you are having issues with? (I suspect that it is point 6, but I have no idea what you might think is wrong with it)
Upvote
0
Evolution is change, and does not have a direction. "Better" and "worse" relate only to fitting in to the demands of the environment today, and have no objective meaning in evolution. If tomorrow, the land should dry up and become a desert, "better" or "worse" changes would mean one thing, but if the land should flood, they would mean the opposite.
Upvote
0
EternalDragon
Counselor
If the land did that most animals would go extinct. They would not evolve.
Do you believe that it takes millions of years for the desert to become a desert?
Upvote
0
Yes the environment can change dramatically rather quickly, an when it does, many species -- usually most species, and occasionally all species -- tend to die out just as quickly. Say bye bye to the giant dinosaurs. How does that change how what I said affects the survivors, or the inhabitants of the next valley over, who now have all this empty land to move into, if they can?
Upvote
0
EternalDragon
Counselor
I think you already know what any opponent of Darwinian Evolution has a problems with. It is this:
All life on Earth is descended from a last universal ancestor that lived approximately 3.8 billion years ago. Repeated speciation and the divergence of life can be inferred from shared sets of biochemical and morphological traits, or by shared DNA sequences.
All organisms on Earth are descended from a common ancestor or ancestral gene pool.
The hominoids are descendants of a common ancestor.
Upvote
0
EternalDragon
Counselor
Because your drastic environment change is not compatible with the millions of years it takes Darwinian evolution to happen. It is also not compatible with "the present is the key to the past".
The dinosaurs died in a world wide flood by the way and the ones surviving on the ark died out because of the drastic climate changes brought on by that very flood. (Short ice age)
Upvote
0
How did the flood cause an ice age? You've asserted this many times, but never explained it.
Upvote
0
Split Rock
Conflation of Blathers
There is no "evolution dogma." There is creationism, though. Actually, I just read that again, and you managed to contradict yourself in two sentences. If evolution is dogma, then how can it be overturned in ten years? You guys are soooooo confused, its sad to watch.
I haven't seen any "truth" from creationists here, and I've been posting here for years.
How many times do you have to be told that natural selection is a mechanism of evolution? Ten? Fifty? One Hundred???
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
