Originally posted by scottishinnzScott, have you even once seen me assert the age of the earth? That is not what is being addressed here. I am asking you to think about the definitions you are using for the term natural selection, how you and other evolutionists are classifying it, its supposed characteristics, and etc. I am simply asking for science to be scientific.
Please, illustrate for us then exactly what did happen, why things are the way that they are, why the world appears to be 4.5 byo, why there is a fossil record. The whole shi-bang please, we want to know exactly what happened why, and how.
1 edit
Originally posted by FreakyKBHAnd we are simply asking for you to go out and get some education on the matter.
Scott, have you even once seen me assert the age of the earth? That is not what is being addressed here. I am asking you to think about the definitions you are using for the term natural selection, how you and other evolutionists are classifying it, its supposed characteristics, and etc. I am simply asking for science to be scientific.
From wiki;
Natural selection; The process in nature by which, according to Darwin's theory of evolution, only the organisms best adapted to their environment tend to survive and transmit their genetic characteristics in increasing numbers to succeeding generations while those less adapted tend to be eliminated.
You seem to think that there need be some force which "selects", but this is not the case. When you play a game of chess who selects whether you win or lose, or is it dependant upon how much skill (and, to a lesser extent, luck) you have as a player?
Luck only really matters on the individual game basis though; it's less important on the multi-game scenario, because sometimes things will go for you and sometimes it'll go against you. I like the saying that "we make our own luck".
Originally posted by no1marauderYou made a claim and now you don't want to waste your time
Never mind; I'm not going to waste my time with someone who refuses to concede that new species have arisen in nature in the last 6000 years.
backing it up, that is completely up to you. You are better off
just talking to others that agree with your belief system if that is
the way of things with you.
Kelly
Originally posted by scottishinnzI'm aware of the term fittest, and as I said it is the lucky not the
WRONG!!! And again you demonstrate your ignorance on this subject.
If you'd actually read any evolution literature (rather than the garbage that the church spews out) you'd know that "fittest" means "best adapted to the environment", which often has little to do with being fast or strong or whatever. If it was only about being strong or fast evolut ...[text shortened]... ility, go read a book on it. And no, the bible doesn't count as a stats textbook.
fastest or strongest as I said. If it was true, and a change occured,
that gave creatures an advantage of being short or slow, than it
works for the short and slow over the tall and fast. No big deal as
far your complaints go and what I said, snails like all other things
are here, your process is what is there seems to be a lack of.
You are better off avoiding mixing odds and evolution, since
numbers really don't add up for that process and reality.
Kelly
1 edit
Originally posted by scottishinnzThat is the strongest evidence in your opinion? We can talk about
No, the strongest evidence of evolutionary biology is Staphylococcus aereus in our hospitals, mutating and evolving in reaction to a pressure, becoming resistant to antibiotics.
Staphylococcus aereus and deal with the strongest piece of
evolutionary evidence you are aware of?
Kelly
Originally posted by KellyJayWhy don't you go and read a good book instead of blathering on with your baseless assertions. Evolution only works because of stats and probability. That's the entire point. You can feel free to go round and round in circles in your own head, but you only debase your own arguments.
I'm aware of the term fittest, and as I said it is the lucky not the
fastest or strongest as I said. If it was true, and a change occured,
that gave creatures an advantage of being short or slow, than it
works for the short and slow over the tall and fast. No big deal as
far your complaints go and what I said, snails like all other things
are here, you ...[text shortened]... ng odds and evolution, since
numbers really don't add up for that process and reality.
Kelly
Staph a. is an excellent example of evolution in action. An organism's genetic code changing in response to a selection pressure. What else would you like to call it? Magic, perhaps? As Marauder has pointed out speciation has been both seen (for example Nosil & Crespi, Ecological divergence promotes the evolution of cryptic reproductive isolation, PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY B-BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES 273 (1589): 991-997 APR 22 2006) and modelled, (Gavrilets, The Maynard Smith model of sympatric speciation, JOURNAL OF THEORETICAL BIOLOGY 239 (2): 172-182 MAR 21 2006), and will increasingly be seen over the next few hundred years.
As was pointed out by Theodosius Dobzhansky, "Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution".
Originally posted by scottishinnzThat sounds so much like religion, it's silly.
Why don't you go and read a good book instead of blathering on with your baseless assertions. Evolution only works because of stats and probability. That's the entire point. You can feel free to go round and round in circles in your own head, but you only debase your own arguments.
Staph a. is an excellent example of evolution in action. A ...[text shortened]... y Theodosius Dobzhansky, "Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution".
Originally posted by FreakyKBHNo, the quote simply says that once you accept that evolution is true then biology all ties together nicely, in a unified, sensible manner. Without it, you are left with a bunch of diverse factoids that have no real cohesion.
The quote says that evolution must be true because they can't make any sense of anything without it, not evolution is true because of the evidence.
The quote says nothing about the proofs of evolutionary theory, which, as pointed out on numerous occasions, are numerous and diverse.
1 edit
Originally posted by KellyJayThe problem is you deliberately choose to be ignorant of facts that are known to someone taking a 7th Grade Biology course. You're akin to someone who wants somebody else to "prove" the sky is blue because they refuse to go outside and look.
You made a claim and now you don't want to waste your time
backing it up, that is completely up to you. You are better off
just talking to others that agree with your belief system if that is
the way of things with you.
Kelly
Here's a link to an article describing some (by no means ALL)specific observed speciation events in the scientific literature: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/speciation.html