Evolution

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
What?

You seemed not to understand evolutionary theory, so I cleared up your mistake. Why are you talking about paleontologists?

No, no. I accepted your counter and deduced that the only place where this speciation (beyond the level of an order) would therefore be available for examination would be in the fossil record.

Originally posted by Halitose
No, no. I accepted your counter and deduced that the only place where this speciation (beyond the level of an order) would therefore be available for examination would be in the fossil record.

"...speciation (beyond the level of an order)" isn't proper use of terminology. You're referring to the establishment of a new order or class I think. Speciation is the establishment of a new species. And no, no one has directly observed two species of the same genus diverge over time until they can be classified as separate orders or classes. The fossil record is one source of evidence for this idea, as are morphological and genetic observations in living organisms and observations of speciation occurring in nature.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
[b]So that would mean that the chiuaua and the great dane should be regarded as different species?

No. They haven't varied enough from one another yet. However they might end up becoming different species if selective pressures, whether human or natural, select for them to be more and more different.[/b]

No. They haven't varied enough from one another yet.

Do you mean that they are still evolving???

However they might end up becoming different species...

This again sounds like wishful thinking...


...if selective pressures, whether human or natural, select for them to be more and more different.

But wouldn't they still be dogs?

Originally posted by dj2becker
[b]No. They haven't varied enough from one another yet.

Do you mean that they are still evolving???

However they might end up becoming different species...

This again sounds like wishful thinking...


...if selective pressures, whether human or natural, select for them to be more and more different.

But wouldn't they still be dogs?[/b]

Do you mean that they are still evolving???

Absolutely. All life on Earth is constantly evolving.

But wouldn't they still be dogs?

That depends on how you define "dogs". Probably, just as both dogs and cats are still mammals, vertebrates, and animals. However "dogs" would come to be a broader category with more variation within it than it is today.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
[b]Do you mean that they are still evolving???

Absolutely. All life on Earth is constantly evolving.

But wouldn't they still be dogs?

That depends on how you define "dogs". Probably, just as both dogs and cats are still mammals, vertebrates, and animals. However "dogs" would come to be a broader category with more variation within it than it is today.[/b]

Absolutely. All life on Earth is constantly evolving.

You mean all life is evolving in the same sense as Beethoven is decomposing in his grave?

What is the apex of Evolution? A fern? (It has 300 chromosomes compared to the 30 odd of the human being, or should I say genus humanus?)

Originally posted by dj2becker
[b]Absolutely. All life on Earth is constantly evolving.

You mean all life is evolving in the same sense as Beethoven is decomposing in his grave?

What is the apex of Evolution? A fern? (It has 300 chromosomes compared to the 30 odd of the human being, or should I say genus humanus?)[/b]

Given that evolution has no purpose, I would find it difficult for anyone to name an "apex"; the only useful or meaningful application of the word "apex" to evolution that I can surmise is to refer to a period of either extremely rapid or extremely slow change.

Originally posted by dj2becker
[b]Absolutely. All life on Earth is constantly evolving.

You mean all life is evolving in the same sense as Beethoven is decomposing in his grave?

What is the apex of Evolution? A fern? (It has 300 chromosomes compared to the 30 odd of the human being, or should I say genus humanus?)[/b]

What is the apex of Evolution? A fern? (It has 300 chromosomes compared to the 30 odd of the human being, or should I say genus humanus?)

Genus hominid I think. Species homo sapiens sapiens.

Originally posted by dj2becker
[b]Absolutely. All life on Earth is constantly evolving.

You mean all life is evolving in the same sense as Beethoven is decomposing in his grave?

What is the apex of Evolution? A fern? (It has 300 chromosomes compared to the 30 odd of the human being, or should I say genus humanus?)[/b]

Tell me what you mean by "apex" and I will tell you what the "apex" is.

Given that evolution has no purpose, I would find it difficult for anyone to name an "apex"; the only useful or meaningful application of the word "apex" to evolution that I can surmise is to refer to a period of either extremely rapid or extremely slow change.

That's a great answer to your question.

Originally posted by echecero
Given that evolution has no purpose, I would find it difficult for anyone to name an "apex"; the only useful or meaningful application of the word "apex" to evolution that I can surmise is to refer to a period of either extremely rapid or extremely slow change.

If evolution has no purpose, then man has no purpose in life.

What differentiates man from animals and plant material?

How did morality evolve?

Originally posted by dj2becker
How did morality evolve?

What's your opinion?

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
What's your opinion?

I am of the opinion that morality did NOT evolve.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
Tell me what you mean by "apex" and I will tell you what the "apex" is.

[b]Given that evolution has no purpose, I would find it difficult for anyone to name an "apex"; the only useful or meaningful application of the word "apex" to evolution that I can surmise is to refer to a period of either extremely rapid or extremely slow change.

That's a great answer to your question.[/b]

That answers my question.

Now for the next question:

What differentiates a human from an animal and plant material?

Do you think it is wrong to kill a fellow human being? Why? What's the difference between killing a human being and squishing a bug?

Originally posted by dj2becker
I am of the opinion that morality did NOT evolve.

You don't think moral values have changed one little bit over the years in all the cultures around the world?

Originally posted by dj2becker
What's the difference between killing a human being and squishing a bug?

There is no difference. We shouldn't squish bugs.

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
You don't think moral values have changed one little bit over the years in all the cultures around the world?

They have always been moral values. They did not come form a puddle of mud.