an example of evolution from NYT

[rmwilliamsll]

from: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/22/national/22canine.html

A new, highly contagious and sometimes deadly canine flu is spreading in kennels and at dog tracks around the country, veterinarians said yesterday.

The virus, which scientists say mutated from an influenza strain that affects horses, has killed racing greyhounds in seven states and has been found in shelters and pet shops in many places, including the New York suburbs, though the extent of its spread is unknown.

this is a new virus
check out parvo in dogs:

see: http://instruct1.cit.cornell.edu/research/parrish_lab/html_files/virus_evolution.htm
for clades

Canine parvovirus (CPV) type-2 emerged as a new virus infecting dogs in 1978, and it was probably derived as a variant of feline panleukopenia virus or of a closely related virus infecting another carnivore.
from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=8560765&dopt=Citation


it is another new virus, derived from a feline virus.

now, how do you understand or even read articles like this if you strongly deny evolution happens? rather than fighting the science YECists ought to be discussing the metaphysics (wrongly) derived from the science.

or did God just create these dog viruses?
or did the evil one do it?


.....

 

[YellowStar]

So before it was a virus... and now it is a virus.

 

[rmwilliamsll]

So before it was a virus... and now it is a virus.

so viruses are all one "YECist kind"?
what ever happened to "YECist kinds" = genus or species?
these two virus are at least different families, perhaps orders, i'm not a virologist and don't see a clear classification scheme i can quote quickly.

so you are proposing a "YECist kind" definition at the order level?
moving goalposts penalty.


why don't you just propose a kind barrier at the kingdom level, effectively that is what your statement says.
a virus is a virus.

a plant is a plant
a bacteria is a bacteria
an animal is an animal


tautologies have no information content.
....

 

[Remus]

these two virus are at least different families, perhaps orders, i'm not a virologist and don't see a clear classification scheme i can quote quickly.

The H3N8 equine virus is a subspecies of the species Influenza A virus. The article didn't give a name for this new virus, but I'm sure it'll just be another subspecies like the hundreds of other viruses in this same species.

Same problem with the canine parvovirus. It is consider a subspecies and it is of the same species as Feline Panleukopenia Virus.

 

[rmwilliamsll]

The H3N8 equine virus is a subspecies of the species Influenza A virus. The article didn't give a name for this new virus, but I'm sure it'll just be another subspecies like the hundreds of other viruses in this same species.

Same problem with the canine parvovirus. It is consider a subspecies and it is of the same species as Feline Panleukopenia Virus.

thanks i found

Classification

The family Parvoviridae has two subfamilies, Parvovirinae and Densovirinae.
Subfamily Parvovirinae has three genera and two generic groups. The important veterinary viruses in these categories are as follows:

* Parvovirus:
o Feline panleucopenia virus
o Canine parvovirus
o Porcine parvovirus
o Virus of mink and raccoon enteritis
o Goose parvovirus
o Canine minute virus

from: http://www.ivis.org/advances/Carter/Part2chap9/chapter.asp?LA=1#Parvovirus

appears to be a species difference between CPV and FLV, but i'm still not sure.

the interesting thing is the jump into a different host
there ought to be an isolating and island effect now, with CPV and FLV diverging into very different viruses.

CPV is a nice evolutionary example because we have seen it happening.

...

 

[Remus]

appears to be a species difference between CPV and FLV, but i'm still not sure.

00.050.1.01.007. Feline panleukopenia virus (FPLV)
00.050.1.01.007.00.007. Feline panleukopenia virus [M75728] (FPLV)
00.050.1.01.007.00.005. Canine parvovirus [M19296] (CPV)
00.050.1.01.007.00.015. Mink enteritis virus (MEV)
00.050.1.01.007.00.018. Racoon parvovirus [M24005] (RPV)
00.050.1.01.008. Feline parvovirus (FPV)
00.050.1.01.010. HB virus (HBPV)

Italics added to indicate subspecies. Is green on original site.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ICTVdb/Ictv/fs_parvo.htm#Genus11

the interesting thing is the jump into a different host
there ought to be an isolating and island effect now, with CPV and FLV diverging into very different viruses.

What are you basing your "very different" on?

CPV is a nice evolutionary example because we have seen it happening.

 

[Saucy]

There's micro evolution and macro evolution. I cannot deny that micro evolution happens because it's been seen. But the name evolution shouldn't be on there. Evolution is the change of one species to another. It can't happen. An alligator can't turn into an owl. An alligator will always be an alligator. Through God's hand, a species can better itself, but it'll never change.

 

[rmwilliamsll]

What are you basing your "very different" on?

as the CPV adapts to it's new host it will diverge from its original FLV form. the prediction is based on past performance of living creatures as they colonize a new ecological niche and adapt to it.
adaptive radiation

 

[Dracil]

So before it was a virus... and now it is a virus.

What's next? Before it was matter, now it's still matter?

 

[notto]

There's micro evolution and macro evolution. I cannot deny that micro evolution happens because it's been seen. But the name evolution shouldn't be on there. Evolution is the change of one species to another. It can't happen. An alligator can't turn into an owl. An alligator will always be an alligator. Through God's hand, a species can better itself, but it'll never change.

'alligator' and 'owl' are not species names. There are different species of alligators and owls within the classifacation you are using.

Basically, you are saying that a species = 'reptile' or 'bird'. You are not using the terminology correctly.

Speciation has been observed in fish and in birds. Ring species are a good example of this in birds where two species of birds (just like darwins finches) came out of one population.

Macro evolution = speciation. It has been observed and documented.

Your claim that speciation can't happen is incorrect. Based on that, you should now have no problem excepting evolution because by your own definition, it has been observed and well documented.

 

[immortalavefenix]

Once and for all...

Can the creationist please provide their EXACT defenition of what constitues a "kind".

 

[Remus]

Once and for all...

Can the creationist please provide their EXACT defenition of what constitues a "kind".

A "kind" is defined as the separate creatures that were created by God at the beginning.

 

[rmwilliamsll]

A "kind" is defined as the separate creatures that were created by God at the beginning.

A helicopter was flying around above Seattle yesterday when an electrical malfunction disabled all of the aircraft's electronic navigation and communications equipment. Due to the clouds and haze, the pilot could not determine the helicopter's position and course to steer to the airport.

The pilot saw a tall building, flew toward it, circled, drew a handwritten sign, and held it in the helicopter's window. The pilot's sign said "WHERE AM I?" in large letters.

People in the tall building quickly responded to the aircraft, drew a large sign, and held it in a building window. Their sign said "YOU ARE IN A HELICOPTER."

The pilot smiled, waved, looked at his map, determined the course to steer to SEATAC airport, and landed safely.

After they were on the ground, the co-pilot asked the pilot how the "YOU ARE IN A HELICOPTER" sign helped determine their position.

The pilot responded "I knew that had to be the MICROSOFT building because, similar to their help-lines, they gave me a technically correct but completely useless answer."

from: http://www.huumor.com/joke_2667

 

[Remus]

heh, funny joke. How would you like me to answer the question so as to be more helpful?

 

[rmwilliamsll]

heh, funny joke. How would you like me to answer the question so as to be more helpful?

A "kind" is defined as the separate creatures that were created by God at the beginning.

they gave me a technically correct but completely useless answer."

this definition of kind is useless. you have no scientific access to God nor to what happened at the beginning. you have only fingerprints of God and evidence left from the creation to work with.

for example:
is a lion and a tiger in the same kind?
how about a chimp and human?
how about the northern gulls ring species?

you can't use this definition to do any useful scientific work.
at least the pilot had the ability to use Microsoft personnels answer to navigate back, he had an advantage over the YECists who propose such a definition. but then again YECists are not concerned with science, the fruitlessness of this definition is more evidence for that.

....

 

[Remus]

You didn't answer my question. I'm willing to give it another shot, but you have to tell me what it is you want. Do you want me to give you an exact definition of "kind" in modern scientific terms or something like that?

but then again YECists are not concerned with science, the fruitlessness of this definition is more evidence for that.
....

You assume that I'm not concerned with science because I'm YEC? I find this very presumptuous. Your assumptions have already bit you in the rear once this thread. I would think you would be more careful of this by now.

 

[f U z ! o N]

There's micro evolution and macro evolution. I cannot deny that micro evolution happens because it's been seen. But the name evolution shouldn't be on there. Evolution is the change of one species to another. It can't happen. An alligator can't turn into an owl. An alligator will always be an alligator. Through God's hand, a species can better itself, but it'll never change.

evolution does not state an alligator will turn into an owl. that is a misrepresented claim about evolution.

 

[immortalavefenix]

A "kind" is defined as the separate creatures that were created by God at the beginning.

What does this mean? We can only know of the kinds God spoke about in the Bible?

What are the differnt kinds God created in the begining?

Or, let me guess, we can never know.... isnt that a nice little coincidance.

Do you want me to give you an exact definition of "kind" in modern scientific terms or something like that?

YES.

Does it say somewhere on my sig that I should be played for a fool?
For the secound time:

Can the creationist please provide their EXACT defenition of what constitues a "kind"?

 

[Smidlee]

Could evolution itself be the result of intelligent designed? what irony.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/print.php?url=/releases/2005/05/050518175350.htm

"This brought Romesberg to the conclusion that mutation is a programmed stress response-a survival mechanism."

Notice this was discovered in spite of Darwinism since they didn't believe mutations (evolution) could be stop. So bacteria seemed to be programmed to adapt to it's surrounding.... hmmm that's sound like what the creationists has been saying all along.
So it seems that bacteria are programmed to adapt but scientists so far haven't found the program the changes it to a fruitfly yet.

 

[Remus]

What does this mean? We can only know of the kinds God spoke about in the Bible?

I didn't say this. I'm sure we can eventually get an idea. But it's going to take more time, data, and testing.

What are the differnt kinds God created in the begining?

I don't know. There are a few examples, but I fear that we'll have to wait for more testing, but it's going to take time.

Or, let me guess, we can never know.... isnt that a nice little coincidance.

Your contempt is showing.

YES.

I can't give you an exact definition of a "kind" in modern scientific terms since the terms that you want me to use do not have static definitions are subject to change.

For the secound time:

Can the creationist please provide their EXACT defenition of what constitues a "kind"?

I answered this. I gave you a complete and exact definition. If you wanted something different then you should have asked it in a different way.