Cause of speciation observed

Aggie

Soldier of Knowledge
Jan 18, 2004
1,903
204
40
United States
Visit site
✟17,997.00
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Libertarian
My apologies if someone here has mentioned this article already: http://www.vanderbilt.edu/exploration/stories/speciation.html

Basically, this was a test to determine whether speciation is a direct result of adaptations due to natural selection. The test determined that it is, with a certainty of about 250 to 1.

Does this mean anything to the creationists who think that only “micro” evolution is possible? You may need to come up with a new definition of what constitutes “macro” evolution now that speciation has been observed as the direct result of natural selection.
 

Late_Cretaceous

<font color="#880000" ></font&g
Apr 4, 2002
1,965
118
Visit site
✟18,015.00
Faith
Catholic
Haven't you heard. YEC's have conceded that speciation occurs. Only now "speciation is not evolution".
(the goal posts have just been moved to another continent)

Loss of interbreeding ability is called "speciation." Speciation is not evolution, though it is often claimed to be. Speciation is actually the isolation of an ancestral type into varieties which have lost the ability to interbreed. Speciation is best explained by the isolation of groups of organisms following the Flood and dispersion from the Ark. Instead of being the acquisition of new and better characteristics, speciation is the loss of interbreeding capability. This is not evolution. It is degradation.
from http://www.lewisdt.com/research/evolution4.html (but you can find this type of statement being made at many other creationist websites).

Not only have the goalposts been moved, but the sport was changed as well.
 
Upvote 0

corvus_corax

Naclist Hierophant and Prophet
Jan 19, 2005
5,588
333
Oregon
✟14,911.00
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Late_Cretaceous said:
Not only have the goalposts been moved, but the sport was changed as well.
It would appear so
We are still playing football, and the Creationists are now playing skiing aerials while claiming its been the same game all along


I still find it difficult to grasp that some of them apparently now accept what "evolutionists" have been claiming all along, but do so only by mangling the language to the point that words cease to have any meaning at all.
 
Upvote 0

Late_Cretaceous

<font color="#880000" ></font&g
Apr 4, 2002
1,965
118
Visit site
✟18,015.00
Faith
Catholic
%7B7A4AF8A4-E591-44AB-9FCC-0924B75B4196%7D.gif


Mmany YECs accept speciation but according to their own "definition" of speciation even God is limited in His ability to go beyond KIND.
 
Upvote 0

Mocca

MokAce - Priest of the Flying Spaghetti Monster
Jan 1, 2006
1,529
45
37
✟16,937.00
Faith
Atheist
Politics
US-Libertarian
Speciation is not an arbritrary term!

A species is a group of organisms that can produce fertile offspring with any other mature member of that group.

Edit: This is for sexually reproducing organisms. A different definition is used for asexually reproducing organisms.

A species is a group of organisms that share a gene pool and can interbreed to produce fertile offspring.
 
Upvote 0

truth above all else

Senior Member
Apr 22, 2005
558
13
melbourne
✟15,775.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Mocca said:
Speciation is not an arbritrary term!

A species is a group of organisms that can produce fertile offspring with any other mature member of that group.

Edit: This is for sexually reproducing organisms. A different definition is used for asexually reproducing organisms.

A species is a group of organisms that share a gene pool and can interbreed to produce fertile offspring.
it is still arbitrary since it implies that when a maladapted organism cannot interbreed then presto we have a new species, such thinking is immature at best, what is at issue here is the ability to create new organisms not separated breeding populations
 
Upvote 0

corvus_corax

Naclist Hierophant and Prophet
Jan 19, 2005
5,588
333
Oregon
✟14,911.00
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
truth above all else said:
it is still arbitrary since it implies that when a maladapted organism cannot interbreed then presto we have a new species
It does not imply such, since the ToE states that populations evolve.
Individual "maladapted" organisms do not a species make
 
Upvote 0

Mocca

MokAce - Priest of the Flying Spaghetti Monster
Jan 1, 2006
1,529
45
37
✟16,937.00
Faith
Atheist
Politics
US-Libertarian
truth above all else said:
it is still arbitrary since it implies that when a maladapted organism cannot interbreed then presto we have a new species, such thinking is immature at best, what is at issue here is the ability to create new organisms not separated breeding populations

How well an organism is adapted to its environment is irrelevant to the question of speciation.

I'm not sure if I understood your post. Could you explain?
 
Upvote 0

Phred

Junior Mint
Aug 12, 2003
5,373
998
✟22,717.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
truth above all else said:
it is still arbitrary since it implies that when a maladapted organism cannot interbreed then presto we have a new species, such thinking is immature at best, what is at issue here is the ability to create new organisms not separated breeding populations
No, it is NOT arbitrary or immature. (Claiming "goddidit" is arbitrary and immature.)

Speciation means much more than just a lack of the ability to interbreed. This is the key to evolution as any change that affects a population will not pass to any other populations... such as those that cannot be bred with any longer. Evolution can't NOT happen because of this.

You might want to change your name to something like "blind to anything but scripture." If you were really interested in truth you'd care about what the evidence shows us... not just your interpretation of mythology.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

truth above all else

Senior Member
Apr 22, 2005
558
13
melbourne
✟15,775.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
corvus_corax said:
It does not imply such, since the ToE states that populations evolve.
Individual "maladapted" organisms do not a species make
they evolve by crossing the species border that is to say do not interbreed with the mainstream thus forming another variety of the same organism
 
Upvote 0

Mocca

MokAce - Priest of the Flying Spaghetti Monster
Jan 1, 2006
1,529
45
37
✟16,937.00
Faith
Atheist
Politics
US-Libertarian
truth above all else said:
they evolve by crossing the species border that is to say do not interbreed with the mainstream thus forming another variety of the same organism

Whether an organism breeds with the population is different from whether an organism can breed with the population.
 
Upvote 0

truth above all else

Senior Member
Apr 22, 2005
558
13
melbourne
✟15,775.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Phred said:
You might want to change your name to something like "blind to anything but scripture." If you were really interested in truth you'd care about what the evidence shows us... not just your interpretation of mythology.
charming, I assume a social drink is out of the question then,
because the definition of species is so loose it makes it easier to show that a species(a breeding population) can evolve into another
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

rmwilliamsll

avid reader
Mar 19, 2004
6,006
334
✟7,946.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Green
Mocca said:
Speciation is not an arbritrary term!

A species is a group of organisms that can produce fertile offspring with any other mature member of that group.

Edit: This is for sexually reproducing organisms. A different definition is used for asexually reproducing organisms.

A species is a group of organisms that share a gene pool and can interbreed to produce fertile offspring.

how do ring species fit into this definition? (is the relationship "is a species- transitive?)

there is an additional problem with the word "can" in "that can produce fertile offspring", for instance, does that mean that corn with the Texas sterile gene is another species? or that two populations which never interbreed but can are still one species? for example, some insects which mature at different times never interbreed yet potentially can, yet are considered two species.

defining species is not nearly that easy.
 
Upvote 0

Late_Cretaceous

<font color="#880000" ></font&g
Apr 4, 2002
1,965
118
Visit site
✟18,015.00
Faith
Catholic
Speciation is actually quite the opposite to hybridization.

The definition of a species is rather clear, what is often unclear are the actual boundries between one species and another in nature. Remember, reality does not always obey our attempts at compartmentalization.

Take the species of Frog called Rana pipens. Individuals from the norhern most extent of the range cannot breed successfully with individuals from the southern extent of thier range. Oddly enough, there is another species of Rana that overlaps much of the range of pipens, In many cases individuals from Rana pipens can breed successfully with individuals from the other Rana species.

See what I mean. One Rana pipens may not necessarily be able to breed with another Rana pipens, but could with a different species of Rana. In theory, a species is quite clear but in practce (nature) it is not.
 
Upvote 0

Mocca

MokAce - Priest of the Flying Spaghetti Monster
Jan 1, 2006
1,529
45
37
✟16,937.00
Faith
Atheist
Politics
US-Libertarian
rmwilliamsll said:
how do ring species fit into this definition? (is the relationship "is a species- transitive?)

there is an additional problem with the word "can" in "that can produce fertile offspring", for instance, does that mean that corn with the Texas sterile gene is another species? or that two populations which never interbreed but can are still one species? for example, some insects which mature at different times never interbreed yet potentially can, yet are considered two species.

defining species is not nearly that easy.

Yes, I agree, defining species is not that easy.

But it is easy to see that in observed instances speciation is not arbitrary.
 
Upvote 0

Late_Cretaceous

<font color="#880000" ></font&g
Apr 4, 2002
1,965
118
Visit site
✟18,015.00
Faith
Catholic
Look at it this way. We can define colors. Orange and red for example are quite clearly different. But open up the color palet on your computer and try to find the exact spot where the boundry between orange and red is. Not so easy is it?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums