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 are making a category error.human isnt an ape like a car isnt a truck.
human isnt an ape like a car isnt a truck.
Did he say that? Any chemical change by definition involves atoms.
Right. Now you've got two different species of chicken, they've got new names and "chicken" has become a genus. And they split some more and pretty soon some of the lines are becoming rather less chicken-like, and after more splitting, some of them don't look much like chickens at all, and now the biologists are thinking about splitting the chickens into two genera and "chicken" has become a "family," and so on...
So what do you think distinguishes "adaptation" from "evolution?"
Are they still bacteria?
I want to know the 'trigger' for change at the atomic level. A detailed explanation will suffice.
Fascinating...I see claims of something changing from a chicken into something that is less "chicken-like" so what do they look like and can you provide images, in sequence, of that happening? Or, is it only speculation? Let me guess, no, because it takes billions of years for it to happen and there is no physical evidence or images that validate that claim...am I close?
Not even. I expect, however, that you will continue to ignore such things because there is too much at stake for you. Somebody else can post it if they want to waste the time.Fascinating...I see claims of something changing from a chicken into something that is less "chicken-like" so what do they look like and can you provide images, in sequence, of that happening? Or, is it only speculation? Let me guess, no, because it takes billions of years for it to happen and there is no physical evidence or images that validate that claim...am I close?
Nothing. But consider the following:In real simple everyday common English..."adaptation in biology", adapting to the environment for the purpose of surviving. "Evolution in biology", changing from one species into an entirely different species that neither looks, act like or breeds with the previous species. IOW, it does not matter how one labels the process, semantics has nothing to do with the process, would you agree?
So what do you think distinguishes adaptation from evolution, if anything?
OK, what was the next species they "evolved" into? Do you have some verifiable evidence other than someone's claims? Can you begin with bacteria and follow through with perhaps the next 10 or so steps, in sequence? IOW, what "creature" came immediately after the bacteria, then what "creature evolved" from that, and so on? I am not interested speculations, conjectures, what may have happened, what looks impressive on some chart but what can actually be proven to have happened, are you up to that?Until they evolve into multicellular organisms along a number of possible routes.
OK, if I understand you correctly, when I ask if someone can provide evidence of one "kind" evolving into a different "kind", they know very well what I am adking so are just using, "what is your defintion of kind" as a deflection. Therefore, from what you have given, from now on I will ask, can you provide an unaltered image of one species evolving into a different species and that should get a straight answer, correct?
OK, what was the next species they "evolved" into? Do you have some verifiable evidence other than someone's claims? Can you begin with bacteria and follow through with perhaps the next 10 or so steps, in sequence? IOW, what "creature" came immediately after the bacteria, then what "creature evolved" from that, and so on? I am not interested speculations, conjectures, what may have happened, what looks impressive on some chart but what can actually be proven to have happened, are you up to that?
And this seems important exactly why?
Remember evolution is change over time. It isn't limited solely to within some specific grouping.
Which is kind of what bacteria do. They develop the ability (through the wonders of biochemistry) to ADAPT and NOT BE KILLED BY ANTIBIOTICS that could kill most of them just two generations earlier.
tevans9129;n45092 said:Are they still bacteria?
Chemical reactions are a result of the second law of thermodynamics in action. If it doesn't occur spontaneously, heat will usually help a chemical reaction along by breaking any existing bonds between atoms.
https://www.quora.com/Why-do-chemic...lecules-What-is-the-property-that-causes-them
Of course, you could have googled that for yourself.
No images is not the same thing as no evidence, sunshine, as I am sure must have been pointed out to you multiple times by now. There is nothing like a wilful ignorance, which is determined to remain wilfully ignorant, is there?
Not even. I expect, however, that you will continue to ignore such things because there is too much at stake for you. Somebody else can post it if they want to waste the time.
No, that is what I mean about people asking questions but refuse to give clear, straightforward answers to questions as they are asked.Is that what you mean by "adaptation?"
Does this meet your requirements.
I won't copy and paste it because there's rather a lot there, the sequence is clear though.
Evolution of the horse - Wikipedia
So heat is a trigger for evolution.
I will answer that question if you can give me a day by day account of how Latin evolved into present day French, over a 2,000 year period.
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?