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.
You're going to have to move your goal posts. Speciation has been observed, both in the lab and in the wild. Those fruit-fly experimenters weren't attempting to produce new species.
Do you understand that speciation is a gradual process?They were aiming to go as far as they could get, but probably didn't expect to produce a new species. All died far before they produced a new species which should tell you something. Speciation has not been observed in the animal kingdom. What are the studies? What species of animals was observed transforming into what species?
I'm wondering whether you've even done a simple Google search on this.Speciation has not been observed in the animal kingdom. What are the studies? What species of animals was observed transforming into what species?
Show me this proof.. It's been proven that mutations have limits.
When constantly mutating fruit flies, scientists found that the flies would at best get different color eyes or longer or shorter legs. After generations of mutating, the flies would eventually become so deformed that they are unable to reproduce or just die. So all subjects die long before becoming a new species. No study conducted has proven macromutation within the animal kingdom.
...to the question in the OP, I'm not a biologist either-
I'm not a 'YEC' and I've no idea who that is, I used to live near the Field museum in Chicago and visited it frequently, Sue the T Rex etc.
I take your point, but I agree with Raup on this
Huh...Let us see some real examples of this evidence pointing to 'predetermination, information, instructions specifying how life develops.'
No essays, please - actual research demonstrating 'predetermination' in DNA.
All died far before they produced a new species which should tell you something.
It's been proven that mutations have limits.
I think he's referring to lab experiments where continuously induced mutations in a small population in a spatially restricted clean environment would eventually result in unsupportable damage, as might be expected. Not representative of what happens in natural environments.So I guess you have no proof or evidence of this and are just spewing nonsense.
Typical.
There's that, and the general tendency of creationists to believe that evolutionary biologists see themselves in combat against the absolute truth of the Bible, and must "prove" speciation to win. Consequently, any genetic experiment--with fruit flies, say--which does not result in demonstrable speciation must be a failure.I think he's referring to lab experiments where continuously induced mutations in a small population in a spatially restricted clean environment would eventually result in unsupportable damage, as might be expected. Not representative of what happens in natural environments.
Dozens of posts made after this, no response from spammer @Guy Threepwood ...What is your evidence that the structure of the eye was pre-programmed?
but a cell that is able to detect design isnt that simple. even if you want to make a minimal system that can detect design you will need at least several parts. so it cant evolve stepwise.Worms don't even have that. But if you think about it an eye is basically cells for detecting light, and worms have that.
Annelid Vision - Photoreceptor Cells as Visual Sensors.
even if you want to make a minimal system that can detect design you will need at least several parts. so it cant evolve stepwise.
Pseudologia phantastica?You've been repeatedly shown how multi-part systems can evolve, but you keep ignoring or otherwise dismissing those examples.
Why is that?
Evidence please.but a cell that is able to detect design isnt that simple. even if you want to make a minimal system that can detect design you will need at least several parts. so it cant evolve stepwise.
Evidence please.
Enzymes are "parts"?here is one:
Dissecting Darwinism
"However, biochemists have shown that even a simple light-sensitive spot requires a complex array of enzyme systems."
Among other errors, the article makes the traditional creationist mistake of thinking that systems that are the product of ~3 billion years of evolution are representative of early life, thereby invalidating the entire argument.here is one:
Dissecting Darwinism
"However, biochemists have shown that even a simple light-sensitive spot requires a complex array of enzyme systems."
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?