14 Feb 12
1 edit
Originally posted by sonhouseRight.
http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/338230/title/Classic_sooty-moth_tale_bolstered_by_new_results
This is a true evolutionary change driven by natural forces.
http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/photo_database/image/the_peppered_moth
Firstly choose an example with scientific credibility. Secondly, natural selection within a species is not evidence of evolution of one species into another.
14 Feb 12
Originally posted by divegeesterits the best they can do.
Right.
http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/photo_database/image/the_peppered_moth
Firstly choose an example with scientific credibility. Secondly, natural selection within a species is not evidence of evolution of one species into another.
14 Feb 12
2 edits
Originally posted by divegeesterWhat do you mean by evolution of one species into another? Do you think, for example, that evolution says that at some point an ape gave birth to a human as we humans are now!???
Right.
http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/photo_database/image/the_peppered_moth
Firstly choose an example with scientific credibility. Secondly, natural selection within a species is not evidence of evolution of one species into another.
If we start off with some creature C and suppose for each generation the offspring undergo at least one mutation, it is not an intrinsic property of creature C that prevents us from calling one of its descendants a creature of type D after some number of mutations; instead It is humans who make the designation for among many reasons, ease of classification.
Do you think that say, a fruit fly could (hypothetically) undergo infinitely many mutations and yet it would still always be most similar to a fruitfly than any other creature!??? 😕
14 Feb 12
Originally posted by sonhouseThey should have said this is “a compelling example of adaptaion in action.”
http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/338230/title/Classic_sooty-moth_tale_bolstered_by_new_results
This is a true evolutionary change driven by natural forces.
This is how God created it to work.
15 Feb 12
Originally posted by divegeesterEvolution of one species into another? What would that be?
Right.
http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/photo_database/image/the_peppered_moth
Firstly choose an example with scientific credibility. Secondly, natural selection within a species is not evidence of evolution of one species into another.
15 Feb 12
Originally posted by VoidSpiritAgain, you evolutionists are confusing evolution with adaptation and the way
new species are evolving all the time.
this one has been observed in the lab.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14094-bacteria-make-major-evolutionary-shift-in-the-lab.html
God created things to work. Evolution simply does not happen no matter
how much you wish it would. We have only evidence of God's program in
action to allow adaptation of the organisms, not evolution. 😏
15 Feb 12
Originally posted by RJHindsEvolution = adaptation. It's as simple as that.
Again, you evolutionists are confusing evolution with adaptation and the way
God created things to work. Evolution simply does not happen no matter
how much you wish it would. We have only evidence of God's program in
action to allow adaptation of the organisms, not evolution. 😏
15 Feb 12
Originally posted by AgergI understand the theory of evolution, and you explaining it again does not validate the clumsy OP which uses an example of scientific fakery to try give evidence of "evolution in action".
What do you mean by evolution of one species into another? Do you think, for example, that evolution says that at some point an ape gave birth to a human as we humans are now!???
If we start off with some creature C and suppose for each generation the offspring undergo at least one mutation, it is not an intrinsic property of creature C that prevents us fro ...[text shortened]... tions and yet it would still always be most similar to a fruitfly than any other creature!??? 😕
Whether of not the theory of evolution of species is factual, I do not accept that natural selection within a species is evidence of that fact. In the OP for example the moths were still moths it was mearly a matter of one characteristic (colour) being naturally selected.
15 Feb 12
Originally posted by Proper KnobAre you saying you do not understand 'classification of species' and you don't accept that the theory of evolution provides a long-term genetic platform for one species, through natural selection over millions of years to become so changed, that it would be re-classified as a different species?
Evolution of one species into another? What would that be?
15 Feb 12
2 edits
Originally posted by Proper Knobmy my the insults are flying today, and actually i brought this very species to the
And the self confessed closed-minded ignoramus would of course know all about these things.🙄
attention of Andrew Hamilton when he used to frequent the site !
15 Feb 12
Originally posted by RJHindsno doofus, that's not a mere "adaptation." it's evolution of new species.
Again, you evolutionists are confusing evolution with adaptation and the way
God created things to work. Evolution simply does not happen no matter
how much you wish it would. We have only evidence of God's program in
action to allow adaptation of the organisms, not evolution. 😏