Aeyamar
Ecumenist
Like other scientific experiments where fruit flies could be mutated over thousands of generations with not "Significant changes" Define your understanding of "Evolution" in the context of this discussion... Micro or Macro - evolution?
As I said before, micro and macro evolution are indistinguishable. In truth they are invented categories. IF enough small changes in the genetic code of an organism accumulate, it will become a different species.
Can you get a quadrapdeal hip Chimpanzee to change into a Bipedal hip Human?
No, because humans did not evolve from chimpanzees. Chimpanzees are modern animals. Humans and chimpanzees both evolved from some (now extinct) common ancestor that existed millions of years in the past. But one could not discount the possibility that millions of years from now a descendant of chimps could evolve to become bipedal, but the result of such evolution would not be a human.
Seriously man, you can't even get a horse and donkey's offspring to breed their own species. Nor Felix Sylvester and Felix Chaus but they can get a bipedal man from some lesser form of quadrapedal primate, such as a Chimp?
That's not even a counter argument, the thing that make two organisms different species is the inability to breed and create fertile offspring, so obviously the hybrid of a horse and donkey (a mule) would be unable to reproduce. Genetics fully explains the causes of problems with hybridization.
It is not correct for those who call evolution a 'Fact' because the 'theory' itself is constantly in flux and subject to change according to new data.. 'Truth' does not change. it is absolute and unchanging. Therefore 'evolution' is simply an interpretation of evidence based on a heavily biased set of parameters.. From the point of Darwin's original proposition, which he admitted was with fault, to "Punctuated Equilibrium", which Gould proposed to explain why the fossil record which does not support evolution as Darwin proposed.
It is an observable fact that the genetic makeup of various species changes over time. That change in genetic traits is evolution. There are many theories that the observations of evolution support (e.g. Traits are selected for by environmental stress, birds evolved from dinosaurs, homo sapiens evolved from homo erectus), but whether or not these specific claims are true, hav no bearing on whether or not evolution happens.
If you cannot demonstrate how one species, such as, lets' say a salamander can evlove a cat, or a Chimp can evolve into a Human, than I am very dubious of your claim... You see what difficulties are observable in Species level, even in the Subspecies, level, but evolution would have us believe that it must have taken place even on the Genus level.. come on..
I just told you of an experiment where a whole new species of bacteria evolved from another. These experiments, if they could be falsified would only disprove that cats came from salamanders and chimps came from humans (both of which are false claims anyway since again you're stating that modern animals came from each other when in instead the understanding of modern biology is that they share common ancestor species). Again as changes accumulate, it's not surprising that the gulfs between species become greater and greater two species that are separated by 100,000 genetic changes are obviously going to be way more different from each other than two species with only say 10,000 mutations. What's often amazing though is how few changes you need to separate species from one another. Humans and chimps, for example, share over 99.9% of our genetic code.
I am reminded of one point : "Nothing can pass on what it does not already possess.
There are many ways in which additional genetic data can be added where it does not already exist though mistake in the formation of reproductive cells. Including duplication of chromosomes, rearrangements of genetic sequences, additional genes latching on to the wrong chromosomes, etc...
Upvote
0