Facebook   Twitter    YouTube    RSS Feed    Android App    iPhone and iPad App     BlackBerry App    
Subscribe to Newsletter



Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 123 4567 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 155

Thread: A fly species shows genetic alteration after being kept in darkness for 57 years.

  1. #31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HapticSimian View Post
    Sorry? I don't speak moron...
    I deduce you don't understand it either, something to do with ... lack of capacity?

  2. #32
    Super Grandmaster HapticSimian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Johannesburg
    Posts
    14,249

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wily me View Post
    I deduce you don't understand it either, something to do with ... lack of capacity?
    You've not demonstrated that you are able to make accurate deductions.

    Evolution isn't complicated in principle; where you have accrued genetic differences from one generation to another and there are according variances in survival, evolution will simply follow. You have, and there are, so it does. There's really no room for discussion on the matter.

    But of course, feel free to continue being wrong.
    In the Age of Information
    ignorance is a choice

  3. #33

    Default

    Aside from the politics in the thread, very interesting reading! Thanks Nicko

  4. #34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wily me View Post
    I have heard the wonderful scientists are now preparing to shine the light on that same fly's to see if they will adapt or re-evolve eyes to see?

    No no... we don't want them to re-evolve eyes... that's child play as they already have the DNA to do that... they need to take a species that has never had eyes, or any optical pick up, and shine a light to see if it can evolve eyes or some optical detection.

  5. #35
    Master
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Next to the post box.
    Posts
    731

    Default

    Everyone is in agreement over micro-evolution.

    Everyone is not in agreement over macro-evolution.

  6. #36
    King of the Hippies copacetic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    DA country...
    Posts
    48,621
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Johnone View Post
    Everyone is in agreement over micro-evolution.

    Everyone is not in agreement over macro-evolution.
    They are the same thing.

    glorp

  7. #37
    Master
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Next to the post box.
    Posts
    731

    Default

    The words changed colour (micro-evolution).

    The words didn't become books (macro-evolution).

  8. #38
    King of the Hippies copacetic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    DA country...
    Posts
    48,621
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Johnone View Post
    The words changed colour (micro-evolution).

    The words didn't become books (macro-evolution).
    No.

    How are you missing the point that micro evolution and macro evolution are exactly the same thing?

    You are incapable of accepting this, not because it's a flawed notion, but because you have decided, before the fact, that macro evolution is impossible (by way of trying to define it as something it is not).

    Your comment about books is a strawman, a distraction that is entirely irrelevant to the point being made in the image I posted.

    The different colours represent 'macro' evolution, and the gradation between the colours demonstrates how 'macro' evolution is simply a lot of 'micro' evolution piled up.
    glorp

  9. #39
    Master
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Next to the post box.
    Posts
    731

    Default

    No. Macro-evolution is not impossible. It is, however, unobserved.

    Macro-evolution could be micro-evolution piled up, or it could be not. It is thus an assumption on your part.

    To insist micro and macro-evolution is the same thing is disengenious on your part. You are just reinforcing the ambiguity surrounding the theory of evolution and confusing guys, like the OP, who doesn't differentiate between the two, and thus doesn't reason clearly.

  10. #40
    King of the Hippies copacetic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    DA country...
    Posts
    48,621
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Johnone View Post
    No. Macro-evolution is not impossible. It is, however, unobserved.

    Macro-evolution could be micro-evolution piled up, or it could be not. It is thus an assumption on your part.

    To insist micro and macro-evolution is the same thing is disengenious on your part. You are just reinforcing the ambiguity surrounding the theory of evolution and confusing guys, like the OP, who doesn't differentiate between the two, and thus doesn't reason clearly.
    Make **** up all you like.

    *shrug*
    glorp

  11. #41
    Super Grandmaster HapticSimian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Johannesburg
    Posts
    14,249

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Johnone View Post
    No. Macro-evolution is not impossible. It is, however, unobserved.

    Macro-evolution could be micro-evolution piled up, or it could be not. It is thus an assumption on your part.

    To insist micro and macro-evolution is the same thing is disengenious on your part. You are just reinforcing the ambiguity surrounding the theory of evolution and confusing guys, like the OP, who doesn't differentiate between the two, and thus doesn't reason clearly.
    The term 'macroevolution' as used and understood scientifically is simply evolution at or above the species level. Speciation has been observed. Because there is no known barrier to large scale change, and because the accumulation of change is expected, microevolution - which no remotely sane person would argue against - quite simply leads to eventual macroevolution.

    If you want to categorise something as being disingenuous it is the hackneyed creationist tactic of simply redefining macroevolution as evolution to an extent great enough that it has not been, and practically cannot have been, directly observed. Your tack on the matter is hardly surprising.
    In the Age of Information
    ignorance is a choice

  12. #42

    Default

    So for those that say the world isn't 4.x billion years old ... What do you think t is?
    http://www.riverbed.com/

    Jägermeiʃter can fix that!

  13. #43

    Default

    Is it just me or are Christians getting dumber? Compared to the posters in this thread Ekstasis was a frikin genius.

    IF YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND EVOLUTION, DO A COUPLE OF GOOGLE SEARCHES. READ 20 ARTICLES, NOT THE ONE POSTED BY A BRAIN DEAD TRUTH BURYING CHRISTIAN SOCIETY OF DENIALISTS.

  14. #44
    Super Grandmaster TJ99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Room 101
    Posts
    7,509

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by unskinnybob View Post
    Is it just me or are Christians getting dumber? Compared to the posters in this thread Ekstasis was a frikin genius.

    IF YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND EVOLUTION, DO A COUPLE OF GOOGLE SEARCHES. READ 20 ARTICLES, NOT THE ONE POSTED BY A BRAIN DEAD TRUTH BURYING CHRISTIAN SOCIETY OF DENIALISTS.
    I have to agree with this. I know people tend to get alll defensive when you call them stupid (even if they clearly are), but are you freaking kidding me? The only people who don't accept evolution are those who don't understand it, and they normally flatly refuse to even find out what they're attacking. I predict imminent massive butthurt and subsequent thread closure.

    I'm also interested in why they disagree with all the science, even if they have no clue about it. Why would there be some big conspiracy, what are the "evil scientists" trying to achieve by making up mountains of evidence that the earth is over 4 billion years old, or where the different forms of life we have come from. What do they have to gain?
    I have never taken the high road. But I tell other people to 'cause then there's more room for me on the low road.

  15. #45
    King of the Hippies copacetic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    DA country...
    Posts
    48,621
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Why?

    Because to accept evolution, means to accept that man is just another animal, not special (although religion and evolution can be and are reconciled by billions of religious people), unique and hand-crafted by god.

    I guess some people find this notion uncomfortable.
    glorp

Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 123 4567 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •