Scientific and logical objections to evolution...

[Techne]

I don't understand your question. Yes there is confusion as to what constitutes a new species. That is evolution's problem though.

In the context I think it's safe to say that speciation would be marked by differentiation in all definitions. Gene flow prevents differentiation and therefor speciation whatever your definition of it is.

That is the thing, you can't claim that something prevents or promotes speciation if you don't even know what a species is or at least provide a coherent and consistent definition of what species means.

In some instances (depending on your definition of species, in this case, the "biological species concept") gene flow may promote speciation. For example, gene flow can occur between two different species which may result in the formation of a new species, different from the other two.

[Slootvreter]

Intentionality, teleology, defining each and every word and still not an ounce of on-topic discussion, phrony. You really do go out of your way to fsck up threads. This is why you have been banned on at least three occasions from this forum and from PD.

Please remove yourself...

LOL, true story! They are throwing words around, and being as vague as humanly possible.

You had a simple request: State the evidence that disprove evolution.

[alloytoo]

The very wiki article on gene flow states it "strongly acts against speciation" and therefor must act against evolution.

um no.

It merely means that population isn't likely to develop into two different species, not that the popuation as a whole cannot evolve.

[Techne]

LOL, true story! They are throwing words around, and being as vague as humanly possible.

You had a simple request: State the evidence that disprove evolution.

What appears to be vague to you may be crystal clear to others. Don't generalize like this .

Also, you don't prove or disprove something with evidence, you confirm or doubt a certain hypothesis with evidence. If you want to disprove or prove something, use deductive logic.

[Swa]

That is the thing, you can't claim that something prevents or promotes speciation if you don't even know what a species is or at least provide a coherent and consistent definition of what species means.

I don't know what you mean. The species problem is one for evolution. The whole premise is that differentiation leads to speciation. Well fine but without a proper definition of species it's hard to say when a new species arises and therefor impossible to prove.

It's not a problem when arguing against it! Gene flow prevents speciation because it prevents differentiation. But more than that if existing genes are simple exchanged then the species (whatever your definition of one is) as a whole stay constant.

In some instances (depending on your definition of species, in this case, the "biological species concept") gene flow may promote speciation. For example, gene flow can occur between two different species which may result in the formation of a new species, different from the other two.

I don't see how that can happen. The offspring would need to be separated from the other species in order to prevent gene flow back to the other two species. Yet gene flow implies no separation between two species and therefor not between them and their offspring either.

[Swa]

um no.

It merely means that population isn't likely to develop into two different species, not that the popuation as a whole cannot evolve.

And there's that word again. In order for something to evolve there needs to be new genetic information added. Gene flow does not create new genes or alter existing ones.

[Techne]

It's not a problem when arguing against it! Gene flow prevents speciation because it prevents differentiation. But more than that if existing genes are simple exchanged then the species (whatever your definition of one is) as a whole stay constant.

Gene flow does not necessarily prevent differentiation. A simple example would be hybridization of wild crops with agriculturally modified crops. The hybridization may result in increased differentiation.

I don't see how that can happen. The offspring would need to be separated from the other species in order to prevent gene flow back to the other two species. Yet gene flow implies no separation between two species and therefore not between them and their offspring either.

Gene flow may happen between say, chimpanzees and humans via horizontal gene transfer. A simple example would be a retroviral virus infection in chimpanzees resulting in the the formation of endogenous retroviral elements in the chimp genome. These incorporated retroviral elements may undergo various sequence change over a few generations (since they are part of the chimp genome) and then form active retroviruses (due to their expression in the chimp genome) and this may be transferred and incorporated into human DNA via retrotranpostition.

[Techne]

And there's that word again. In order for something to evolve there needs to be new genetic information added. Gene flow does not create new genes or alter existing ones.

No, evolution just means change. In order for something to evolve it just has to undergo some sort of change. It may be epigenetic (not genetic) or even something else without necessarily being a genetic change.

[Slootvreter]

What appears to be vague to you may be crystal clear to others. Don't generalize like this .

Also, you don't prove or disprove something with evidence, you confirm or doubt a certain hypothesis with evidence. If you want to disprove or prove something, use deductive logic.

There you go again. LOL All about the words.

[Slootvreter]

DJ... as asked the impossible question.

Techne and Swa will argue about the meanings of words, and this will carry on until many of us lose interest in this thread, like me...

[Techne]

There you go again. LOL All about the words.

It's plain English...

[alloytoo]

And there's that word again. In order for something to evolve there needs to be new genetic information added. Gene flow does not create new genes or alter existing ones.

So?

Who said Gene flow created new information?

[Swa]

Gene flow does not necessarily prevent differentiation. A simple example would be hybridization of wild crops with agriculturally modified crops. The hybridization may result in increased differentiation.

Now you're picking an example of artificially modified organisms. I did not say it would necessarily prevent it but it does act strongly against it.

No, evolution just means change. In order for something to evolve it just has to undergo some sort of change. It may be epigenetic (not genetic) or even something else without necessarily being a genetic change.

Evolution requires the change of genes for real change to occur. Suppose you get someone of medium stature that has a short mother and a tall father. This is not change it's simply a merging of different traits. Fast forward a billion years and if no genes have changed the human species as a whole would still be identical to now. Epigenome and something (hypothetical unknown?) else? What besides genetic change have been incorporated into any evolutionary model?

[Swa]

So?

Who said Gene flow created new information?

I think you missed the irony here. Gene flow was supposed to be evidence for evolution. It actually acts against speciation and the claim of common ancestors for species. It can actually therefor be used as an objection to evolution.

[Techne]

Evolution requires the change of genes for real change to occur.

No, not necessarily. Epigenetic changes is one example.

Suppose you get someone of medium stature that has a short mother and a tall father. This is not change it's simply a merging of different traits. Fast forward a billion years and if no genes have changed the human species as a whole would still be identical to now. Epigenome and something (hypothetical unknown?) else? What besides genetic change have been incorporated into any evolutionary model?

Epigenetic change is being incorporated.

Anyway, gene duplications, chromosomal rearrangements, gene deletions, etc. all happen, resulting in morphological and functional changes all the time in humans and other species. This is evolution, it happens. You basically evolved from your parents. You and your siblings (if you have any) basically have common ancestors, your parents. Your grand parents are common ancestors to you and your cousins. None of this implies that you were not created. The same applies if you follow the emergence of life to the very beginning, last universal common ancestor if you want. This is just change, simple evolution.