There is no reason why type should refer to genus. You have given us no reason why type should refer to genus. I have also demonstrated that all of those animals are the deuterosome type of animal. They are all the same type.
Upvote
0
-
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.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
The 'Macro-Micro' thing....again..
- Thread starter biggles53
- Start date
- Status
There is no reason why type should refer to genus. You have given us no reason why type should refer to genus. I have also demonstrated that all of those animals are the deuterosome type of animal. They are all the same type.
createdtoworship
In the grip of grace
- Mar 13, 2004
- 18,941
- 1,758
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
I assume you mean my evidence on taxonomy. well it's man made for example. Also many endorse phylocode instead of taxonomy. It's an educated guess as to what an animal is basically. But it does imply evolutionary relationship which is not a scientic fact. In order to streamline the conversation I give in to using the system, but it is not perfect.
https://www.americanscientist.org/issues/pub/attacks-on-taxonomy
Upvote
0
Let's go over those claims:
1. "Like I said my sources view the family as what was likely on the ark,"
2. "Also as far as genus barrier, the only reason why I use the illustration is that evolution does not appear on a wide scale."
Let's start with those two.
Upvote
0
createdtoworship
In the grip of grace
- Mar 13, 2004
- 18,941
- 1,758
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
Upvote
0
createdtoworship
In the grip of grace
- Mar 13, 2004
- 18,941
- 1,758
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
I am not sure you understand what you are arguing, or you would recognize the lack of evidence imediately. Am I correct? If not, explain your position.
Upvote
0
createdtoworship
In the grip of grace
- Mar 13, 2004
- 18,941
- 1,758
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
Upvote
0
I understand it just fine. How does the information in your links demonstrate that ERV's are not evidence for shared ancestry?
Upvote
0
createdtoworship
In the grip of grace
- Mar 13, 2004
- 18,941
- 1,758
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
thats not true, a fish (like a salmon, talipia, molly, violet goby, guppy, sword tails and platys species) can desalinate or salinate if it desires, as long as the increase/decrease is small and constant. In fact 1 teaspoon of aquarium salt per 5 gallons actually helps cure some disease.
I had some examples of this, I will have to search my notes,
good comment.
Update: here is some rainbow trout that adjusted to 2/3 ocean salinization in 7-10 days
http://jeb.biologists.org/content/83/1/193.short
Last edited:
Upvote
0
This paper explains it perfectly:
"First, the distribution of provirus-containing loci among taxa dates the insertion. Given the size of vertebrate genomes (>1 × 10^9 bp) and the random nature of retroviral integration (22, 23), multiple integrations (and subsequent fixation) of ERV loci at precisely the same location are highly unlikely (24). Therefore, an ERV locus shared by two or more species is descended from a single integration event and is proof that the species share a common ancestor into whose germ line the original integration took place (14)."
Constructing primate phylogenies from ancient retrovirus sequences
We find over 200,000 ERV's at the same base in both the human and chimp genomes. There are only a relative handful of ERV's in either genome that are not found at the same spot in the other genome.
It begs the question as to whether or not you care about the truth.
Upvote
0
Assuming you meant incompatible . . .
Why can't two animals from the same type be sexually incompatible?
Upvote
0
createdtoworship
In the grip of grace
- Mar 13, 2004
- 18,941
- 1,758
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
inncompatible, yes. And your second sentence contains a double negative, maybe reword?
Upvote
0
createdtoworship
In the grip of grace
- Mar 13, 2004
- 18,941
- 1,758
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
How do you know my previous links didn't refute just that? Did you even read the research?
Upvote
0
You are the one claiming that the links you gave refuted my argument. Are you going to back up your claim, or not?
Upvote
0
What prevents two lineages that share common ancestry from losing the ability to produce viable and fertile offspring?
Upvote
0
createdtoworship
In the grip of grace
- Mar 13, 2004
- 18,941
- 1,758
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
your question is on contradicting bases. You have two lineages of common ancestry which to me is impossible. There is no common ancestry of two lineages of different genra. But if there were in fact common ancestry, then they should reproduce, if not common they they would be sterile.
Upvote
0
createdtoworship
In the grip of grace
- Mar 13, 2004
- 18,941
- 1,758
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
I never said that, I said: "how do you know they didn't, if you didn't read it?"
Upvote
0
- Mar 5, 2008
- 2,819
- 63
- 72
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- In Relationship
- Politics
- AU-Greens
What....??
One of the prime pieces of evidence of the divergence from a CA is the INABILITY to reproduce between the divergent species....!
Do some reading about ring species.....you really are out if your depth....
Upvote
0
createdtoworship
In the grip of grace
- Mar 13, 2004
- 18,941
- 1,758
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
speciation most likely happens like a ring species but more drastic where common characteristics have changed and they change the name of the species taxonomically. But this is not macro evolution so it's fine, its micro evolution. Macro evolution is evolution happening above species levels. For example Homo neanderthalensis and homo erectus are different species but the same kind or genus.
Upvote
0
Atheos canadensis
Well-Known Member
Yeah, but with God, anything is possible, so ark=TARDIS. Problem solved.
True. If you're willing to get extra-biblical as many creationists are (Dad and Aman being prime examples; cue comment from Aman about how his beliefs are 100% scriptural and are not beliefs but facts) then you can explain away any problem at all.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
