Evolution has been Debunked

... flat nonsense.



Must we put up with this lunacy? Theists are pushing more and more unsupported nonsense on the forum every day, it seems. Maybe SF should just go ahead and rename itself "GodForums". Or maybe that would be too wide a focus: Malaysia might have a grande mal freakout, for example. We could call it "DeistForums" or "ReligioForums".
 
Geoff,

I am completely ignorant of kmguru's beliefs, but for all the religious people that feel drawn to this site, I fully agree. In my mind they wish they could convert this to "CreationScienceForums". What's really bizarre is that they sometimes pretend they're speaking on behalf of all the world religions, yet in a pinch most seem to break down and reveal their Inner Fundamentalist (LG, wynn, jan . . . you could ID them better than me.)
 
my favorite example of demonstrating that evolution is the pet dogs you may have living in your house. due to the human selective pressure, dogs went from being scavengers that ate or garbage, to a range of hunting species from saluki's that could chase down rabbits and hares to pointers and retrievers for bird hunting, then further expanded to include herder species such as the collie. the species further evolves in an expansive way when the aristocratic segments of society cross culture began seeing "useless" dogs as a fashion statement and started selecting for things such as being small, hairless, or having a weird straight such as floppy ears or a curly tail. dogs in the time it took humans to go from inventing fire making tools to now have become one of the most diversified animals on that planet to not to have speciation occur.
 
Write4U said:
Please explain what the true cause for change is and why it it is not natural.

btw. My use of the term Natural Selection has nothing to do with choice or decision making. It is a Default position, that anything which is able to survive its environment (by any means) and is able to have offspring has been passively "selected" by Nature to survive and evolve. IMO. This is why there are so many species, there are a lot of ways to survive and we have the living proof all around us.

There are no species on earth that were selected for survival. On the contrary, having been selected is the condition for a living organism that manages to be around after all other competing organisms have died before procreating. That's how you get "selected". Sometimes you get selected "by accident", ain't that a crock?
Click to expand...
Most changes in the genome have no effect on the organism and are thus not affected by natural selection.
 
Or a passing starship dumped a load of garbage here.

From some of the posts presented, not much has changed. :D
 
spidergoat said:
Most changes in the genome have no effect on the organism and are thus not affected by natural selection.
Click to expand...

Ask that question of the 90+% of all species that have ever lived and are now extinct.
Natural selection is a "mindless" process that can affect every living thing, regardless of its genomes. If you die (from any cause) before procreating your genomes will not be passed on and your particular line will have been "selected out".
 
Write4U said:
Ask that question of the 90+% of all species that have ever lived and are now extinct.
Natural selection is a "mindless" process that can affect every living thing, regardless of its genomes. If you die (from any cause) before procreating your genomes will not be passed on and your particular line will have been "selected out".
Click to expand...
Random death also has little effect on the genome, unless the population is very small or the death is very widespread.
 
spidergoat said:
Random death also has little effect on the genome, unless the population is very small or the death is very widespread.
Click to expand...

I agree with that and my response was primarily addressing the term "natural selection", which is a mindless process, regardless of the viability of the genome. And dare I say that extinction of a species usually involves a widespread calamity, such as ice ages, asteroid impact, plate tectonics, pandemic disease, etc.
IMO, this still falls under the general term of Natural selection, even as no individuals are specifically selected and regardless of their ability to survive a more stable environment.

Adaptive evolution itself is a mindless process and usually involves a certain amount of lucky circumstances. One example of a dead end evolutionary path is the "silvery salamander" which can only produce female offspring which are identical clones of the mother. There are but a few survivors, now protected from certain extinction, by closely monitoring its environment for possible contamination, which would affect all offspring equally as any weakness in the genome of the mother is inherited in all offspring.

I would say that variety in the genomes is in fact beneficial to the evolution of species as a whole.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top