The evidence for Evolution.

[Justatruthseeker]

Let's see the evidence for evolution:

Finches interbreeding right in front of people's noses and still refusing to correct the mistaken classification. Oh wait, that's evidence against, my bad.

How about Asian mates with Asian and produces only Asian. African mates with African and produces only African. Only when Asian mates with African and produces an Afro-Asian is variation ever seen in the species. Oops, another observation against evolution not for it, I'll try to do better.

Husky mates with Husky and produces only Husky. Mastiff mates with Mastiff and produces only Mastiff. Only when Husky mates with Mastiff and produces the Chinook is variation seen in the species. Oh man, another one against not for, sorry, tried my best to find at least one observation of the world around us.

 

[JonFromMinnesota]

Finches interbreeding right in front of people's noses and still refusing to correct the mistaken classification. Oh wait, that's evidence against, my bad.

How about Asian mates with Asian and produces only Asian. African mates with African and produces only African. Only when Asian mates with African and produces an Afro-Asian is variation ever seen in the species. Oops, another observation against evolution not for it, I'll try to do better.

Husky mates with Husky and produces only Husky. Mastiff mates with Mastiff and produces only Mastiff. Only when Husky mates with Mastiff and produces the Chinook is variation seen in the species. Oh man, another one against not for, sorry, tried my best to find at least one observation of the world around us.

You have no idea how evolution works. Perhaps you should attempt to learn what evolution says before displaying utter ignorance on the topic.

 

[AV1611VET]

Perhaps you should attempt to learn what evolution says before displaying utter ignorance on the topic.

It's been changed so much since Darwin wrote The Preservation of Favoured Races, it's hard to keep up.

Besides, I like to look at the pictures:

 

[Subduction Zone]

It's been changed so much since Darwin wrote The Preservation of Favoured Races, it's hard to keep up.

Besides, I like to look at the pictures:

Why the image of Haeckel? Though right on some ideas he was wrong on others.

And your creationist source made a rather idiotic mistake. Can you spot it?

 

[AV1611VET]

And your creationist source made a rather idiotic mistake. Can you spot it?

Ya ... he misspelled EMBRYO.

I'm proud of him.

After all, we creationists don't use that kind of language every day.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Ya ... he misspelled EMBRYO.

I'm proud of him.

After all, we creationists don't use that kind of language every day.

Nope, though that is an error that your creationist made it was not what I was referring to, try again. Here is a hint:

Creationists tend to be extremely ignorant.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

You have no idea how evolution works. Perhaps you should attempt to learn what evolution says before displaying utter ignorance on the topic.

Or perhaps you should just admit to their mistake in classification and stop trying to preserve your incorrect classifications and beliefs?

But then I am not the one that claimed Darwins Finches were seperate species because they were reproductively isolated and then when DNA tested found they had been interbreeding since arriving on the islands.

So please provide support where speciation ever occurred since they were interbreeding from the start?

You may be correct in that no one understands how evolution works, since it doesn't work at all.

But claiming someone doesn't understand is usually the tactic employed by those that lack any defense to the subject matter of the post, so they can just ignore the post and not have to actually answer.

And your ad hominem attack only shows your fear. Another tactic often employed by those that can't defend against the subject matter at hand, attack the poster instead of the post itself, since the post itself can't be defended against.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Or perhaps you should just admit to their mistake in classification and stop trying to preserve your incorrect classifications and beliefs?

But then I am not the one that claimed Darwins Finches were seperate species because they were reproductively isolated and then when DNA tested found they had been interbreeding since arriving on the islands.

So please provide support where speciation ever occurred since they were interbreeding from the start?

You may be correct in that no one understands how evolution works, since it doesn't work at all.

Are you still stuck with this busted claim? You have never been able to show that they all interbred, you have only shown that some could interbreed at times. It appears that you still don't understand speciation.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Are you still stuck with this busted claim? You have never been able to show that they all interbred, you have only shown that some could interbreed at times. It appears that you still don't understand speciation.

Because you deny reality, it's hard to show to someone that refuses to accept reality the truth.

Genomes reveal Darwin finches' messy family tree - BBC News

"They sequenced the genomes of multiple individuals from all 15 species of Darwin's finches, one of which inhabits the rather more distant Cocos Island, along with two related bird species that live on the South American mainland and the West Indies."

That you refuse to accept the truth that every single species was found to be interbreeding is simply your denial mechanism at work to protect your belief system. I understand, it's hard to accept the truth when the truth doesn't go with what you believe. Instead you choose to ignore the truth, showing the truth and science have no part in your beliefs.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Because you deny reality, it's hard to show to someone that refuses to accept reality the truth.

Genomes reveal Darwin finches' messy family tree - BBC News

"They sequenced the genomes of multiple individuals from all 15 species of Darwin's finches, one of which inhabits the rather more distant Cocos Island, along with two related bird species that live on the South American mainland and the West Indies."

That you refuse to accept the truth that every single species was found to be interbreeding is simply your denial mechanism at work to protect your belief system. I understand, it's hard to accept the truth when the truth doesn't go with what you believe. Instead you choose to ignore the truth, showing the truth and science have no part in your beliefs.

That is because the article does not say what you think that it does. They found hybridization, but it does not say that all of the birds could breed with each other.

I would suggest that you look at the second to the last paragraph again.

Do not worry, I will gladly remind you or this error of yours every time that you make it.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Population genetics is the mathematical study of evolution. It's also what I do for a living, by the way.

BOOM!

 

[Jimmy D]

Husky mates with Husky and produces only Husky. Mastiff mates with Mastiff and produces only Mastiff. Only when Husky mates with Mastiff and produces the Chinook is variation seen in the species.

Much as I enjoy re-reading your repetitive nonsense every few months, you still haven't explained where the mastiff and husky came from. Are you asserting that god created mastiffs and huskys separately?

How about Asian mates with Asian and produces only Asian. African mates with African and produces only African. Only when Asian mates with African and produces an Afro-Asian is variation ever seen in the species. Oops, another observation against evolution not for it, I'll try to do better.

What is your explanation for the origin of these different races? Why do we have asians, africans etc when mankind was wiped out in a worldwide flood? Do you not accept the Biblical flood story?

 

[JonFromMinnesota]

But then I am not the one that claimed Darwins Finches were seperate species because they were reproductively isolated and then when DNA tested found they had been interbreeding since arriving on the islands.

You haven't shown that all of them were interbreeding, just that some were. You don't know how speciation works.

You may be correct in that no one understands how evolution works, since it doesn't work at all.

I never said nobody understands evolution, I said that you do not understand it. You just repeat the same nonsense over and over again. Which line of evidence would you like to discuss? Comparative anatomy, embryology, DNA, fossil record, observations in nature and in the lab?

But claiming someone doesn't understand is usually the tactic employed by those that lack any defense to the subject matter of the post, so they can just ignore the post and not have to actually answer.

I can defend it just fine. You have to show an elementary understanding of biology before we can even begin to discuss the evidence. You don't even understand that evolution takes place in populations, not individuals. Every species ever born was the same as its parents.

And your ad hominem attack only shows your fear. Another tactic often employed by those that can't defend against the subject matter at hand, attack the poster instead of the post itself, since the post itself can't be defended against.

Fear of what? You repeat the same nonsense ad nauseum and pretend to know more than experts in the field of study. Could you demonstrate a basic understanding of biology? Then we can move onto the evidence.

 

[Godexists]

Principal Meanings of Evolution in Biology Textbooks 1

Principal Meanings of Evolution in Biology Textbooks

What is fact :
1. Change over time; history of nature; any sequence of events in nature
2. Changes in the frequencies of alleles in the gene pool of a population
3. Limited common descent: the idea that particular groups of organisms have descended from
a common ancestor.
4. The mechanisms responsible for the change required to produce limited descent with modification; chiefly natural selection acting on random variations or mutations

What is not fact:
5. Universal common descent: the idea that all organisms have descended from a single common ancestor.
6. Blind watchmaker thesis: the idea that all organisms have descended from common ancestors through unguided, unintelligent, purposeless, material processes such as natural
selection acting on random variations or mutations; the idea that the Darwinian mechanism of natural selection acting on random variation, and other similarly naturalistic mechanisms, completely suffice to explain the origin of novel biological forms and the appearance of design in complex organisms.

1.http://www.jodkowski.pl/ke/Meanings2000.pdf

 

[Speedwell]

Principal Meanings of Evolution in Biology Textbooks 1

Principal Meanings of Evolution in Biology Textbooks

What is fact :
1. Change over time; history of nature; any sequence of events in nature
2. Changes in the frequencies of alleles in the gene pool of a population
3. Limited common descent: the idea that particular groups of organisms have descended from
a common ancestor.
4. The mechanisms responsible for the change required to produce limited descent with modification; chiefly natural selection acting on random variations or mutations

What is not fact:
5. Universal common descent: the idea that all organisms have descended from a single common ancestor.
6. Blind watchmaker thesis: the idea that all organisms have descended from common ancestors through unguided, unintelligent, purposeless, material processes such as natural
selection acting on random variations or mutations; the idea that the Darwinian mechanism of natural selection acting on random variation, and other similarly naturalistic mechanisms, completely suffice to explain the origin of novel biological forms and the appearance of design in complex organisms.

1.http://www.jodkowski.pl/ke/Meanings2000.pdf

That was a very interesting paper.

My first reaction was, where are we going to get the "informed biology teachers" the paper refers to? High school biology teachers rarely have even an undergraduate preparation in biology. In the high school I attended, biology was the required science for non-college prep students and was taught as a part-time assignment by the basketball coach.
The second problem which caught my eye was the treatment of metaphysical issues, which reflected a distinctly Protestant (and consequently rather shallow) point of view. In particular, there is no reason to assume that an apparently complete set of natural causes for any phenomenon excludes divine providence.

 

[HitchSlap]

Principal Meanings of Evolution in Biology Textbooks 1

Principal Meanings of Evolution in Biology Textbooks

What is fact :
1. Change over time; history of nature; any sequence of events in nature
2. Changes in the frequencies of alleles in the gene pool of a population
3. Limited common descent: the idea that particular groups of organisms have descended from
a common ancestor.
4. The mechanisms responsible for the change required to produce limited descent with modification; chiefly natural selection acting on random variations or mutations

What is not fact:
5. Universal common descent: the idea that all organisms have descended from a single common ancestor.
6. Blind watchmaker thesis: the idea that all organisms have descended from common ancestors through unguided, unintelligent, purposeless, material processes such as natural
selection acting on random variations or mutations; the idea that the Darwinian mechanism of natural selection acting on random variation, and other similarly naturalistic mechanisms, completely suffice to explain the origin of novel biological forms and the appearance of design in complex organisms.

1.http://www.jodkowski.pl/ke/Meanings2000.pdf

Nested hierarchy is just one of those MILE's I mentioned. Back to the drawing board for you.
I really suggest you get your science from actual scientists.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That was a very interesting paper.

My first reaction was, where are we going to get the "informed biology teachers" the paper refers to? High school biology teachers rarely have even an undergraduate preparation in biology. In the high school I attended, biology was the required science for non-college prep students and was taught as a part-time assignment by the basketball coach.
The second problem which caught my eye was the treatment of metaphysical issues, which reflected a distinctly Protestant (and consequently rather shallow) point of view. In particular, there is no reason to assume that an apparently complete set of natural causes for any phenomenon excludes divine providence.

Sadly in the U.S. many high school science teachers are grossly uneducated. I was shocked when I talked with a young man that was studying to be a physics teacher in high school. I asked him how he was handling the calculus and I was amazed when he said that he was not taking any because it was not needed. One cannot understand even basic Newtonian physics without calculus. The connection between various formulas is obvious with calculus and mere memorization without it. If one only memorizes formulae one does not really understand them.

 

[JonFromMinnesota]

Sadly in the U.S. many high school science teachers are grossly uneducated

From my experience in highschool, the teachers would just ramble off a bunch of facts and give a true or false/multiple choice exam and never bothered to teach the explanations of those facts. The intro courses in college are much more comprehensive.

 

[Subduction Zone]

From my experience in highschool, the teachers would just ramble off a bunch of facts and give a true or false/multiple choice exam and never bothered to teach the explanations of those facts. The intro courses in college are much more comprehensive.

Maybe I was lucky. The school that I went to in Minnesota when I was a lad seemed to have teachers that understood the subject. I am not sure if the physics/chemistry teacher understood calculus, but I remember one "lab" where we plotted the orbit of a hypothetical comet on a rather large piece of paper and the reasoning used was very similar to how one calculates an integral. Our math classes did cover trigonometry and calculus in the senior year. Though I do remember a couple of losers too. So it was not quite the perfect schools of old TV dramas, but it was close.

 

[JonFromMinnesota]

Maybe I was lucky. The school that I went to in Minnesota when I was a lad seemed to have teachers that understood the subject

It really depends what district you're in. Schools are funded by property taxes here so the upper class suburbs are going to have the nicer schools and the better teachers will gravitate towards those schools. North Minneapolis suffers. Perhaps we need to start requiring science teachers to have a graduate degree in the subject they are teaching instead of letting the gym teacher write notes on the board and issuing multiple choice tests.