RE: Evolution/Creation debate

RE: Evolution/Creation debate (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

GotSteel -> RE: Evolution/Creation debate (2/8/2014 7:47:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Paladinagain can anyone give an actual example of evolution? You know, an actual incedent where something gave birth to something else? I wonder why that is? You, unless you're a clone of your parent, are an actual example of evolution.

Dvr22999874 -> RE: Evolution/Creation debate (2/8/2014 8:48:09 PM)
No, I can't give you an example of evolution but then again, I can't give you an example of anybody sane talking with god.

Dvr22999874 -> RE: Evolution/Creation debate (2/8/2014 8:49:46 PM)
or at least not a two-way conversation

jlf1961 -> RE: Evolution/Creation debate (2/8/2014 9:08:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Dvr22999874 No, I can't give you an example of evolution but then again, I can't give you an example of anybody sane talking with god. I have to disagree with the "talking to god" part of this statement. I talk to god all the time, and although I have some mental health issues, I am not classified as insane. In my life, I have seen things that have happened that cannot be explained rationally. I had a blood clot in my right leg that required a bypass, funny thing is that I had been having problems for months before they actually found a clot and a small bit of plaque. The time from my first doc visit till the bypass surgery was significant, and the cardiovascular surgeon could not understand why that my leg had not developed gangrene or a massive blood born infection because of radically reduced circulation. The ct scan I had to find the leg problem was also a bit weird. The tech messed up and started the scan higher on my torso than he should have, resulting in the discover of a tumor in my kidney. The tumor was cancerous. I kinda think that someone who I refer to as god, was looking out for me. Now if you are talking about people who have two way conversations with god, I would tend to agree. Considering that, according to the bible, he only talks to the very righteous or sends his angels to give them direct messages. I hardly think there is a person on the planet that qualifies.

crazyml -> RE: Evolution/Creation debate (2/8/2014 9:08:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Paladinagain can anyone give an actual example of evolution? Yes. I can think of thousands. quote: You know, an actual incedent where something gave birth to something else? Erm... there are 100's of billions of examples of this. There are around 6 billion humans for starters. There are thousands of plant varieties that have been created using the kind of genetic engineering that has been practised in agriculture for millennia. quote: I wonder why that is? Well.... the reason all those examples can be so readily be given, is because that is how evolution works. <big smile!>

Dvr22999874 -> RE: Evolution/Creation debate (2/8/2014 9:20:15 PM)
It certainly leaves me out jlf.......I won't wait up for a call then huh ? That means they can take all those solid gold phones out of the churches too I guess

epiphiny43 -> RE: Evolution/Creation debate (2/8/2014 10:03:16 PM)
Somehow the idea speciation has to be evidenced by failure of crosses to produce living fertile offspring isn't an essential part of Evolution as it's been found inadequate. Other definitions are also used and being developed/ (See: Wikipedia>Species>Biologists working definitions.) I have a Cockatoo who is a cross between two entirely different species that have not shared geography or genes for considerable time. NOBODY has classed them as within the same species. They look similar but each gene pool has consistent genotypes and phenotypes immediately identifiable as separate. Many genus of birds and mammals are similar. Long separate species are often Different but still cross fertile. Others, of course, aren't. Most interesting to me are the close (Recently separated) species who share geography, have very close if not identical taxonomy and exploit similar if not identical resources and still don't cross breed unless no conspecies mates are available. Behavior alone is sufficient to define separate "gene pools", maybe the better definition of 'species'.

Dvr22999874 -> RE: Evolution/Creation debate (2/8/2014 10:19:57 PM)
Don't they get crosses between lions and tigers ? I vaguely remember seeing news items on them a few years ago. I think one was born in the London Zoo. I am sure there have been other instances of crosses like that too. Damned if I can remember what they were though.

EdBowie -> RE: Evolution/Creation debate (2/8/2014 10:34:53 PM)
Ligers and tigons, oh my... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liger quote: ORIGINAL: Dvr22999874 Don't they get crosses between lions and tigers ? I vaguely remember seeing news items on them a few years ago. I think one was born in the London Zoo. I am sure there have been other instances of crosses like that too. Damned if I can remember what they were though.

EdBowie -> RE: Evolution/Creation debate (2/8/2014 10:38:43 PM)
Scripture on the Sons of Ham, once very popular among the racial purists and some fundy preachers. quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 I hate to say this, but some of these "Creationist" arguments remind me of some groups claiming that people of color are an entirely seperate species from European descended humanity. No one has actually said that, but I have seen the same basic arguments on White Supremacist web pages.

farglebargle -> RE: Evolution/Creation debate (2/8/2014 10:45:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen DNA can be thought of as a 4 letter code (A, C, G, T). It could be. By people who don't know what they're talking about and are totally incorrect in even the most basic aspects of the topic. I mean, who would parade such ignorance as to confuse the nucleobases (guanine, adenine, thymine, and cytosine) with the actual molecule! Someone who was describing what DNA does inside the cell. Which was the part you edited out. Would you have me spend a few thousand lines discussing sugars, bases, RNA, transcription, translation, ribosomes and all the rest of the stuff actually necessary to explain mutations? If you need a few thousand lines to get the facts correct, then write them. It's to your own benefit to be able to convey FACTUALLY CORRECT INFORMATION. I imagine many people can simply use the correct terminology, as I did, and not require that much exposition. But you do whatever you need to do to not appear ignorant. Or appear ignorant. Not my problem either way, since I'm smart enough to ignore the bullshit.

Moonhead -> RE: Evolution/Creation debate (2/9/2014 5:48:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: EdBowie Scripture on the Sons of Ham, once very popular among the racial purists and some fundy preachers. quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 I hate to say this, but some of these "Creationist" arguments remind me of some groups claiming that people of color are an entirely seperate species from European descended humanity. No one has actually said that, but I have seen the same basic arguments on White Supremacist web pages. Also some Victorian biologists were keen on the idea that different ethnic groups evolved from different simians. That was a flaky idea back then, but I wouldn't be surprised if some white supremacists (or black supremacists, come to that: google "yakub") didn't still take that one seriously.

vincentML -> RE: Evolution/Creation debate (2/9/2014 7:21:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead So the emergence of a form of prion that attacks cattle from a form of prion that attacks sheep because cattle have been fed sheep's brains is not speciation because nobody can prove that rogue proteins are alive? Well, yeah. This conversation is about the lineage of living things. The prion seems more analogous to a toxin.

vincentML -> RE: Evolution/Creation debate (2/9/2014 7:26:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: While studying the genetics of the evening primrose, Oenothera lamarckiana, de Vries (1905) found an unusual variant among his plants. O. lamarckiana has a chromosome number of 2N = 14. The variant had a chromosome number of 2N = 28. He found that he was unable to breed this variant with O. lamarckiana. He named this new species O. gigas. If I understand this it looks like genome doubling occurred and that may be rare but not unheard of. But, Ken, does the above tell us anymore than I found a lion and a tiger and could not mate them to produce fertile progeny? New species are frequently identified. But the discovery of new species is not evidence in itself of evolution. It is just information we did not have before. There is plenty of evidence for evolution otherwise. Of course it is evidence of evolution. At one point the there was one population of evening primrose, one with 14 chromosomes. Then a mutation occurred and an individual was born with 28 chromosomes making it a new species born from the old species. I will concede this one to you, Ken. ATM I just don't have the resources to dispute it.

vincentML -> RE: Evolution/Creation debate (2/9/2014 7:35:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML Genetic drift is microevolution and is prelude to speciation. However, if the variants can still mate and produce fertile progeny they are still the same species despite their differences. If some become isolated in a different environment in which their variation is better adapted the new variants will eventually continue to undergo modification that will inhibit reproduction with the original variant, or so goes the Theory. Only in the very rarest of cases would there be a bright line between species. like the polyploidy plant discussed above. More usually it will be a slow build up of differences over many generations. There has been a debate between paleontologists who argue that catastrophic environmental events are required to promote evolutionary change (punctuated equilibrium) and biologists who argued that change took place gradually over long periods of time (microevolution) The rock guys see five major extinctions in the fossil record and long periods of equilibrium between. The compromise between the two is that micro-evolutionary changes occur during the flat step of equilibrium and that macro-evolutionary changes occur when there is a catastrophic event (the riser in the staircase) It is difficult to deny the rock evidence.

vincentML -> RE: Evolution/Creation debate (2/9/2014 7:40:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML Genetic drift is microevolution and is prelude to speciation. However, if the variants can still mate and produce fertile progeny they are still the same species despite their differences. If some become isolated in a different environment in which their variation is better adapted the new variants will eventually continue to undergo modification that will inhibit reproduction with the original variant, or so goes the Theory. Only in the very rarest of cases would there be a bright line between species. like the polyploidy plant discussed above. More usually it will be a slow build up of differences over many generations. The primates seem clearly distinguishable. But they are unlikely to mate or if so produce fertile progeny. Somewhere along the way there must have been clear separation. Maybe there are no 'bright lines' because they are lost to history. Maybe they will be identified or have been identified by comparative genome study. I will try to search that.

vincentML -> RE: Evolution/Creation debate (2/9/2014 7:43:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML Sexual selection doesn't really lead to new species, does it? I would discount the mule since it is infertile. I call Liger! quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML And artificial selection is sorta outside the box. I would disagree, Darwin named natural selection thusly in order to differentiate it from artificial selection. The Liger is infertile and so does not meet the biological definition of species. Plus, the 'mating' occurred in a zoo. Obviously artificially induced. You are not likely to see a lion mating with a tiger in the wild. (I wonder who milked the lion)

vincentML -> RE: Evolution/Creation debate (2/9/2014 7:55:23 AM)
quote: I have a Cockatoo who is a cross between two entirely different species that have not shared geography or genes for considerable time. NOBODY has classed them as within the same species. They look similar but each gene pool has consistent genotypes and phenotypes immediately identifiable as separate. Many genus of birds and mammals are similar. Long separate species are often Different but still cross fertile. Others, of course, aren't. There are a number of natural behavioral barriers that inhibit breeding between bird species in the wild. So, two questions: 1) how and where did the mating take place? 2) is your Cockatoo fertile? quote: Most interesting to me are the close (Recently separated) species who share geography, have very close if not identical taxonomy and exploit similar if not identical resources and still don't cross breed unless no conspecies mates are available. Behavior alone is sufficient to define separate "gene pools", maybe the better definition of 'species'. Behavior is an important metric. Yes. Which recently separated species that share the same geology?

GotSteel -> RE: Evolution/Creation debate (2/9/2014 8:33:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: EdBowie Ligers and tigons, oh my... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liger And don't forget the Liliger! These are examples that different species being incompatible isn't a hard fast rule. [image]local://upfiles/566126/9798323253FE4D0E8B71B0FD95CEE269.jpg[/image]

thishereboi -> RE: Evolution/Creation debate (2/9/2014 8:44:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Dvr22999874 It certainly leaves me out jlf.......I won't wait up for a call then huh ? That means they can take all those solid gold phones out of the churches too I guess You mean we are supposed to get gold phones? Damn that's another memo I missed. But it sounds interesting. Do you suppose you can post a link so I can see these phones for myself. I would love to know which churches you mean because all the ones I went to had the boring plastic kind and I know you wouldn't have said it if it wasn't really true.

Page: << < prev 7 8 [9] 10 11 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875