Hey Christians (especially Slowmutant and iamnotaparakeet)
Quote:
The distinction between 'micro' and 'macro' evolution is essentially artificial. You are being fed BS. There is no 'kind barrier' and, in fact, speciation has been observed during human lifespans.
Lol.. Both of those words are true as I see fit.. Im giving you the perspective through my point of view, therefore you can't tell me that the words are meaningless.. artificial? yes.. but not meaningless.
and you'll have to specify what you mean by speciation
Quote:
No, you pompous ass.
Oh?.. anger then?..
ShawnWilliam wrote:
Lol.. Both of those words are true as I see fit.. Im giving you the perspective through my point of view, therefore you can't tell me that the words are meaningless.. artificial? yes.. but not meaningless.
Words don't mean whatever you want them to.
ShawnWilliam wrote:
and you'll have to specify what you mean by speciation
"the establishment of reproductive isolation between two or more previously interbreeding populations"
_________________
"You can take me, but you cannot take my bunghole! For I have no bunghole! I am the Great Cornholio!"
Quote:
Words don't mean whatever you want them to.
No, but you have a problem with someone saying what they want to say if it goes against your superior knowledge. Micro-evolution whether you believe it to be true or not, is a term that represents what I believe. Your only way of suppressing my views are to suppress my vocabulary so that my words are no longer relevant to my own views. That's so lame..
Quote:
"the establishment of reproductive isolation between two or more previously interbreeding populations"
so, dogs that can't breed with other dogs?.. Yeah I've heard that one tonight.. has anyone asked them why?
or do you presume to know everything about these doggies.. or squirrels?
ShawnWilliam wrote:
Quote:
Words don't mean whatever you want them to.
No, but you have a problem with someone saying what they want to say if it goes against your superior knowledge. Micro-evolution whether you believe it to be true or not, is a term that represents what I believe. Your only way of suppressing my views are to suppress my vocabulary so that my words are no longer relevant to my own views. That's so lame..
No, it's reasonable.
We have to have common definitions of words if we want to be understood, obviously.
ShawnWilliam wrote:
Quote:
"the establishment of reproductive isolation between two or more previously interbreeding populations"
so, dogs that can't breed with other dogs?.. Yeah I've heard that one tonight.. has anyone asked them why?
or do you presume to know everything about these doggies.. or squirrels?
_________________
"You can take me, but you cannot take my bunghole! For I have no bunghole! I am the Great Cornholio!"
ShawnWilliam wrote:
Quote:
"the establishment of reproductive isolation between two or more previously interbreeding populations"
so, dogs that can't breed with other dogs?.. Yeah I've heard that one tonight.. has anyone asked them why?
or do you presume to know everything about these doggies.. or squirrels?The establishment of reproductive isolation has been observed dozens of times in the field and in the lab as it occurred. Dogs have not separated into reproductively isolated populations, though I somehow doubt it would be very easy to get a mastiff to mate with a chihuahua. The thing with dogs though is that there is enough crossing between different breeds to ensure adequate gene transfer to keep dogs as one species and not many. If we actually separated two populations of dogs ENTIRELY for a long period of time, and also put different selective pressure on them, we could well end up with two species. But no one has bothered to do that.
_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH
Orwell wrote:
ShawnWilliam wrote:
Quote:
"the establishment of reproductive isolation between two or more previously interbreeding populations"
so, dogs that can't breed with other dogs?.. Yeah I've heard that one tonight.. has anyone asked them why?
or do you presume to know everything about these doggies.. or squirrels?The establishment of reproductive isolation has been observed dozens of times in the field and in the lab as it occurred. Dogs have not separated into reproductively isolated populations, though I somehow doubt it would be very easy to get a mastiff to mate with a chihuahua. The thing with dogs though is that there is enough crossing between different breeds to ensure adequate gene transfer to keep dogs as one species and not many. If we actually separated two populations of dogs ENTIRELY for a long period of time, and also put different selective pressure on them, we could well end up with two species. But no one has bothered to do that.
You people baffle me. Speculation, speculation, speculation... that's all I can say to you.
ShawnWilliam wrote:
You people baffle me. Speculation, speculation, speculation... that's all I can say to you.
Evolutionary biology, even when speculative, requires a higher standard of evidence than believing that the government is run by space aliens based on some guy overacting for The Art Bell Show
You strain at gnats and then turn around to swallow a camel whole
_________________
"You can take me, but you cannot take my bunghole! For I have no bunghole! I am the Great Cornholio!"
Last edited by chever on 18 Sep 2008, 10:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Quote:
No, it's reasonable.
We have to have common definitions of words if we want to be understood, obviously.
We have to have common definitions of words if we want to be understood, obviously.
Okay here's my definition for Micro-Evolution..
Micro-Evolution is evolution that can occur to any species without rendering it a new species. Which means a Dog, after a million years, will still be a dog. There is no proof that after a million years it will be something else.
Quote:
so, dogs that can't breed with other dogs?.. Yeah I've heard that one tonight.. has anyone asked them why?
or do you presume to know everything about these doggies.. or squirrels?

or do you presume to know everything about these doggies.. or squirrels?
I was kidding, no need to stress out.
chever wrote:
ShawnWilliam wrote:
You people baffle me. Speculation, speculation, speculation... that's all I can say to you.
Evolutionary biology, even when speculative, requires a higher standard of evidence than believing that the government is run by space aliens based on some guy overacting for the Art Bell Show
I thought we were debating evolution, not aliens..
ShawnWilliam wrote:
Okay here's my definition for Micro-Evolution..
Micro-Evolution is evolution that can occur to any species without rendering it a new species. Which means a Dog, after a million years, will still be a dog. There is no proof that after a million years it will be something else.
Micro-Evolution is evolution that can occur to any species without rendering it a new species. Which means a Dog, after a million years, will still be a dog. There is no proof that after a million years it will be something else.
Yes, but speciation has been observed
_________________
"You can take me, but you cannot take my bunghole! For I have no bunghole! I am the Great Cornholio!"
ShawnWilliam wrote:
Quote:
No, it's reasonable.
We have to have common definitions of words if we want to be understood, obviously.
We have to have common definitions of words if we want to be understood, obviously.
Okay here's my definition for Micro-Evolution..
Micro-Evolution is evolution that can occur to any species without rendering it a new species. Which means a Dog, after a million years, will still be a dog. There is no proof that after a million years it will be something else.
That is probably more appropriately known as phylogenetic evolution. The species in question is actually fairly likely to have evolved into a new species, but no two populations have been reproductively isolated- rather, one population has changed over time. Reproductive isolation can not be tested here because of the time elapsed, but anatomical characteristics can be compared. Now, apply the same principle, but first have two or more separate populations of the same initial species. You would then observe what is called cladogenesis.
_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH
chever wrote:
ShawnWilliam wrote:
Okay here's my definition for Micro-Evolution..
Micro-Evolution is evolution that can occur to any species without rendering it a new species. Which means a Dog, after a million years, will still be a dog. There is no proof that after a million years it will be something else.
Micro-Evolution is evolution that can occur to any species without rendering it a new species. Which means a Dog, after a million years, will still be a dog. There is no proof that after a million years it will be something else.
Yes, but speciation has been observed
That too. ShawnWilliam, we have watched speciation occur on several occasions. This isn't really something that can be seriously denied, absent a massive conspiracy.
Which means you're likely to deny it.
_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH
