:proposing A 3rd Theory of Evolution (Pro Creationist)

[Sum14HzWrd]

I'v developed this theory myself. I can honestly say that testing in labs, hospitals and universities around the world verify it.... I'v done a short 8 minute video that explains it nicely in a nutshell

 

[Job 33:6]

The occurance of gradualism does not negate PE nor vise versa. They may occur at varying times. Gould also does not reject the occurance of gradual evolution as this video seems to claim.

And with that, not much more needs to be said. The narrator of the video simply doesn't know what he is talking about

Also, just on a side note, rates of evolution discussed in PE research is not beyond rates of evolution proposed in gradualism, its just a matter of how the fossil record is interpreted. Gould is a paleontologist, so his perspective in rates of evolution are limited by the frequency at which fossils are present in the rock record, which span millions of years. Whereas biologists who propose gradualism, are able to see biological clocks to understand rates of evolution on a mutation by mutation basis.

So PE advocates who use the fossil record to understand evolution, are independently deriving rates of evolution, via a different form of evidence, than biologists who advocate gradualism. But really the two do not contradict the existence of one another, its just a matter of perception of the evidence.

 

[Sum14HzWrd]

The occurance of gradualism does not negate PE nor vise versa. They may occur at varying times. Gould also does not reject the occurance of gradual evolution as this video seems to claim.

And with that, not much more needs to be said. The narrator of the video simply doesn't know what he is talking about

Also, just on a side note, rates of evolution discussed in PE research is not beyond rates of evolution proposed in gradualism, its just a matter of how the fossil record is interpreted. Gould is a paleontologist, so his perspective in rates of evolution are limited by the frequency at which fossils are present in the rock record, which span millions of years. Whereas biologists who propose gradualism, are able to see biological clocks to understand rates of evolution on a mutation by mutation basis.

So PE advocates who use the fossil record to understand evolution, are independently deriving rates of evolution, via a different form of evidence, than biologists who advocate gradualism. But really the two do not contradict the existence of one another, its just a matter of perception of the evidence.

Do you understand the difference with infinite gradualism?

 

[Job 33:6]

Do you understand the difference with infinite gradualism?

Sorry, didnt bother to listen to the rest of the video after I came across the misconceptions with respect to PE, gradualism and Goulds position on the topic.

 

[Sum14HzWrd]

Sorry, didnt bother to listen to the rest of the video after I came across the misconceptions with respect to PE, gradualism and Goulds position on the topic.

Cool, i guess if you cant speak intelligently on the subject, you'll just not post then? And you seem to misunderstand Gould's position... feel free to tell me what you think it is in regards to this discussion... never mind, you'll still not be able to speak intelligently on the subject at hand.. have a great day

 

[Job 33:6]

Cool, i guess if you cant speak intelligently on the subject, you'll just not post then? And you seem to misunderstand Gould's position... feel free to tell me what you think it is in regards to this discussion... never mind, you'll still not be able to speak intelligently on the subject at hand.. have a great day

Do you have a response for my first post?

 

[Job 33:6]

Here, ill help.

Frank Rhodes, "Gradualism, punctuated equilibrium and the Origin of Species," 1983.

"He was not only a gradualist, Darwin was a pluralist"...wait wait, this guy means that rates of evolution can vary? whaaaat? unheard of.

"Punctuated equilibrium is often portrayed to oppose the concept of gradualism, when it is actually a form of gradualism." ~ Dawkins

What....Dawkins also understands that the two concepts do not necessarily negate eachother? No way...

What about Gould?

"The model of punctuated equilibria does not maintain that nothing occurs gradually at any level of evolution. It is a theory about speciation and its deployment in the fossil record. It claims that an important pattern, continuous at higher levels—the 'classic' macroevolutionary trend—is a consequence of punctuation in the evolution of species. It does not deny that allopatric speciation occurs gradually in ecological time (though it might not—see Carson, 1975), but only asserts that this scale is a geological microsecond." ~ Gould

Wait wait, Gould wrote this?!?

------------------------------------------

 

[Job 33:6]

Thank goodness we cleared this whole discussion up. We now see that the youtube video was filled with false information, thanks to directly quoted material from Gould and Dawkins, as well as material from Darwin himself.

 

[Gottservant]

I'm just stoked!

I have waited for ever and a day to reach that point that Evolution was intellectualized properly - and now someone has done it for me!

All you need to do now, is prove that animal gradualism matches human gradualism - to the degree that both are now different!

 

[The Barbarian]

And you seem to misunderstand Gould's position...

What do you think Gould's position is?