Killer Whales Are Evolving Into Two Different Species

[LifeToTheFullest!]

Unfortunately professional creationists/agnotologists paint an utterly wrong and laughable model of evolution. If creationism was all I was taught, I'd think ToE was pretty silly too. Fortunately, there are tens of thousands of real smart people world wide who do understand the ToE is and are educating and promoting the facts of evolution.

 

[UnionJack]

There is only evolution. Not 'microevolution', not 'macroevolution', not 'slightlyinbetweenevolution'. Just evolution.

Open your dictionary or if you don't own one, use an online one. Or several online ones. Look up microevolution. Then look up macroevolution.

You don't understand. No wonder you reject evolution.

Please note my avatar, it is a parody of your avatar, how lovely.

Actually it is not my avatar. It is widely circulated on the internet. It is the first picture on google images if you search atheism. I invite you to try it.

But I'm sure yours will catch on too.


Bananaslug:

I'd be lying if I said I read that diagram.

 

[Freysinn]

Actually it is not my avatar. It is widely circulated on the internet. It is the first picture on google images if you search atheism. I invite you to try it.

Yeah, its from a video by Thewayofthemaster, I raged when i saw that video since ahteism has nothing to do with the big bang theory nor any thing else, Its just a lack a belief in god.

My avatar is also circulated on the internet and often used as a responce to your avatar insted of replying to the factual incorectness. I saw your avatar yesterday and i decided to change my avatar to the widly used responce

 

[UnionJack]

Cool

 

[Freysinn]

Indeed, i dont think our posts are too much off topic, a friendly natter is probably not a deadly sin. Haha

 

[UnionJack]

I actually think it is visually appealing on a forum with avatars like ours, especially when we're posting right after each other.

 

[SithDoughnut]

Open your dictionary or if you don't own one, use an online one. Look up microevolution. Then look up macroevolution.

They exist as words. I dislike the use of the terms because while they make sense, creationists misuse them and invent extra definitions to fit in ID around evolution.

Microevolution: Evolutionary change involving the gradual accumulation of mutations leading to new varieties within a species.

Macroevolution: Major evolutionary transition from one type of organism to another occurring at the level of the species and higher taxa.

Both those words are correct, but you seem to believe that both of them are supposed to happen in the same time.

Microevolution happens over short period of time. Let's go back to my earlier post, but change a few words around:

Microevolution happens repeatedly, with each generation being slightly different to its parents and ancestors through small variations. As each generation goes by, these differences add up. Microevolution continues to happen, with variation each time. And what happens when you get lots of variations?

Macroevolution.

Eventually, the differences have mounted up to the point where the descendant is considered a different species to it's ancestors.

See how they are the same yet? The only difference between microevolution and macroevolution is the length of time you give it to happen.

As a result, to avoid confusion, stick with just using evolution. You can use microevolution and macroevolution if you really want but you have to understand what they are first, which you clearly didn't. And the words have all those dangerous side-effects too, don't forget them.

 

[TheBlueBlurr]

UnionJack think all Whales are the same species. GG.

 

[SithDoughnut]

I actually think it is visually appealing on a forum with avatars like ours, especially when we're posting right after each other.

It's confusing, that's what it is...

 

[laconicstudent]

This is the Cetaean clade:

With a visual aid, can we all start to comprehend why modern delphinidae do not evolve into modern felines? Yes? Good.

 

[laconicstudent]

This is the Cetaean clade:

With a visual aid, can we all start to comprehend why modern delphinidae do not evolve into modern felines? Yes? Good.

 

[Agonaces of Susa]

Why would it turn into a cat or a bird? That's just dumb.

I agree evolution is dumb.

 

[laconicstudent]

I agree evolution is dumb.

I agree that your straw man of Evolution that ignores cladistics is dumb.

 

[Agonaces of Susa]

Saw this on Diggs, Reading it now, but thought I'd still share it.

Killer Whales Are Evolving Into Two Different Species : Planetsave

I just read this ridiculous article.

For those who haven't read it, which I assume is everyone because it's useless Darwinist drivel, the article makes the claim that whales with bad teeth are a separate species from whales with good teeth because they have a different diet.

I guess that makes people with bad teeth who don't eat fish nonhuman.

 

[laconicstudent]

.

 

[Nuka]

LOL.

A killer whale is a killer whale.

It's babies are also killer whales not some new mythological species.

Send me a PM when they grow legs, so I can keep an eye out.

I'll believe that mutation, selection and drift can produce two new species through incremental steps when I see a killer whale give birth to a cat.

Peter

The killer whale is evolving into......another killer whale?????

Let me know when the whale breeds a cat or a bird.

Oh look, it's THIS **** again.

 

[Obzocky]

“They seem to have occupied completely different ecological niches and have started to diverge morphologically. This divergence may eventually lead to the two types becoming different species,” said Foote.

This is actually pretty fascinating, would've loved to of taken part in that study!

I am struggling to understand how anyone can not see that a different primary diet would lead to changes in the biological make-up of a species as it adapts? I think the title of the article is misleading people into the usual "haha, how stupid, it can't evolve into what it already is" argument, it is stating that Orcinus orca may possibly be evolving ever so slowly into two seperate subspecies, which would be the most likely scenario if it was proved that they are sufficiently seperated to preventing breeding, will not breed together, or the offspring are unable to survive in either natural environment, or perhaps even more excitingly an offshoot that warrants its own species name within the Orcinus genus, which would be amazing! They are members of the family Delphinidae, the world of cetaceans is wonderful, explore it!

It is not a killer whale evolving into another whale, it is not a whale evolving into a cat, it's Orcinus orca splitting off into a possible rca subspecies which could in turn eventually be split off entirely and become a new member of the Orcinus genus, which would be utterly amazing, it is something that people who actively work in marine mammal conservation have to know if they are to understand the dynamics of the natural world they are working in.

And now i'm repeating myself, so i'll shush up and go.

 

[UnionJack]

Nuka, why do you even bother posting?

 

[Nuka]

Nuka, why do you even bother posting?

Because I feel obliged to exclaim how disgruntled these posts are making me.

 

[Washington]

It is not a killer whale evolving into another whale, it is not a whale evolving into a cat, it's Orcinus orca splitting off into a possible rca subspecies which could in turn eventually be split off entirely and become a new member of the Orcinus genus

A point that so many overlook. Creationists invariably think that at 10:32 AM there is species X m, which at 10:57 AM gives birth to species X r, most not even aware that before X r can make an appearance (if at all) there first has to be an X m t.

For those who may not have caught on here,

X = a particular genus

m = a particular species of that genus

t = a particular subspecies of that species

r = a particular species that arose through t from m