Microevolution -True. Macroevolution ...
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#22 Nov 10, 2013
Thats a knee slapper wrote:
<quoted text>
Without written prior knowledge in books, these two would be considered different species in 50,000 years if their skeletons were found. You know it and I know it.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-H5D60Q8P-lg/UCv5E3n...
Demonstrating that you don't have the slightest clue about comparative anatomy.

“Ask Randy From Ballwin”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

He Is A Sock Know It All

#23 Nov 10, 2013
Thats a knee slapper wrote:
<quoted text>
In college, if you went to college, did you always ask the professor for answers to the test? Do your own research and find your own links. You want handouts go to goodwill. You want answers and results do the work yourself.
Hmmmm. That sounds familiar.

“Evolution is Variation”

Since: Nov 13

Dublin, Ireland

#24 Nov 10, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually it's rather easy to debunk you in one link. But for the heck of it, here's two:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain_%28biolog...
Bacteria represent an entire biological domain. Note where 'domain' is in context of biological classification as compared to species.
And now the other linky:
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/evolution/TMS...
Your position is Godmagic. This means that evidence is irrelevant to your position and it is a lie for you to claim otherwise.
Seriously, did you really think that you'd be able to falsify evolution with this Mickey Mouse BS? Srsly?
So you have nothing. Your first link "none of the three systems currently include non-cellular life" so going back to the first life all came from one and are genetically related.

Your second link is a topix link. Please show you have more sense than that Dudly Do-right.

“Evolution is Variation”

Since: Nov 13

Dublin, Ireland

#25 Nov 10, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Demonstrating that you don't have the slightest clue about comparative anatomy.
You think size of the skull and body parts have nothing to due with speciation? You my little friend are one of a kind cluelessness.

“Evolution is Variation”

Since: Nov 13

Dublin, Ireland

#26 Nov 10, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
By your name I am assuming you know a lot about math.

Why don't you lend your mathematical skills to solving these few problems.
1. P versus NP problem
2. Hodge conjecture
3. Riemann hypothesis
4. Yang–Mills existence and mass gap
5. Navier–Stokes existence and smoothness
6. Birch and Swinnerton-Dyer conjecture

Many if not all have a cash reward of a $1,000,000
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#27 Nov 10, 2013
Thats a knee slapper wrote:
So you have nothing. Your first link "none of the three systems currently include non-cellular life" so going back to the first life all came from one and are genetically related.
Your post here does not address mine. My post showed your complete lack of understanding of biology, and why complaining that "bacteria are still bacteria" is uh, well, pretty stupid.(shrug)

Second, you are now ranting about abiogenesis. The theory of evolution does not rely on abiogenesis. For the same reason why the theory of gravity does not have to explain the origin of mass. All evolution needs is for life to be here. Life IS here. Life evolves. Facts. In order to demonstrate otherwise you need to demonstrate that life is in fact NOT here.

Good luck.
Thats a knee slapper wrote:
Your second link is a topix link. Please show you have more sense than that Dudly Do-right.
Yes, in fact it's a linky to your very first post. And you made a couple of doozy's in there too. The most major one being your rants about the mean old atheists, and conflating atheism with evolutionary biology. Ergo your position is Goddidit with magic.

Hence evidence is UTTERLY irrelevant to your position.

You can stop pretending that you have the slightest interest in science now.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#28 Nov 10, 2013
Thats a knee slapper wrote:
<quoted text>
You think size of the skull and body parts have nothing to due with speciation? You my little friend are one of a kind cluelessness.
No, I don't think the size of the skull and body parts have anything to do with speciation. That's why we DON'T call kids (who not only have smaller skeletons, body parts, AND in different proportions) different species.

“Evolution is Variation”

Since: Nov 13

Dublin, Ireland

#29 Nov 10, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I don't think the size of the skull and body parts have anything to do with speciation. That's why we DON'T call kids (who not only have smaller skeletons, body parts, AND in different proportions) different species.
There is a name for that difference between adults and kids. We call that "age".

“Evolution is Variation”

Since: Nov 13

Dublin, Ireland

#30 Nov 10, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Your post here does not address mine. My post showed your complete lack of understanding of biology, and why complaining that "bacteria are still bacteria" is uh, well, pretty stupid.(shrug)
Second, you are now ranting about abiogenesis. The theory of evolution does not rely on abiogenesis. For the same reason why the theory of gravity does not have to explain the origin of mass. All evolution needs is for life to be here. Life IS here. Life evolves. Facts. In order to demonstrate otherwise you need to demonstrate that life is in fact NOT here.
Good luck.
<quoted text>
Yes, in fact it's a linky to your very first post. And you made a couple of doozy's in there too. The most major one being your rants about the mean old atheists, and conflating atheism with evolutionary biology. Ergo your position is Goddidit with magic.
Hence evidence is UTTERLY irrelevant to your position.
You can stop pretending that you have the slightest interest in science now.
What have you or any evolutionists seen bacteria evolve into?

Run along now Dudley Do-Right. When we need something stupid to be said we will be sure and call you.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#31 Nov 10, 2013
Thats a knee slapper wrote:
<quoted text>
What have you or any evolutionists seen bacteria evolve into?
Run along now Dudley Do-Right. When we need something stupid to be said we will be sure and call you.
You are not too bright are you?

Bacteria are a bigger and more diverse group than all vertebrates. Observing bacteria evolve into other bacteria is on the same order of evolution as seeing other apes evolve into man.

Poor little man. You don't understand what you are trying to argue against. You don't understand how science is done.

“Dinosaurs survived the flood!”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Jesus probably rode dinosaurs!

#32 Nov 10, 2013
It does sound familiar and seems staged. It appears there have been a rash of recently registered anti-evolutionists popping up since May. They all seem to have a few things in common too.

“Evolution is Variation”

Since: Nov 13

Dublin, Ireland

#33 Nov 10, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
You are not too bright are you?
Bacteria are a bigger and more diverse group than all vertebrates. Observing bacteria evolve into other bacteria is on the same order of evolution as seeing other apes evolve into man.
Poor little man. You don't understand what you are trying to argue against. You don't understand how science is done.
You still fail. Name one species, bacteria or "apes evolving into man" as you say, that has been observed, ie an existing species evolving into a completely new species. Name just one. One is not asking too much is it?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#34 Nov 10, 2013
Thats a knee slapper wrote:
<quoted text>
You still fail. Name one species, bacteria or "apes evolving into man" as you say, that has been observed, ie an existing species evolving into a completely new species. Name just one. One is not asking too much is it?
How do I fail? Here is an example of observed bacterial evolution:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14094-b...

And there are other ways to observe evolution. We can observe long time evolution in the fossil record.

Unfortunately you have no idea what you are arguing against so you bring up failed claims.

“Maccullochella macquariensis”

Since: May 08

Melbourne, Australia

#35 Nov 10, 2013
Thats a knee slapper wrote:
<quoted text>
You still fail. Name one species, bacteria or "apes evolving into man" as you say, that has been observed, ie an existing species evolving into a completely new species. Name just one. One is not asking too much is it?
But that's not how evolution works. Species don't evolve into "completely new species" they evolve by small steps into new species that are a lot like the previous ones, indeed to start with they are almost completely the same as the previous species, which often themselves may well continue to exist. However, given sufficient time they sometimes do evolve into amazingly different species, but always within the nested hierarchy (no doubt another concept alien to your limited understanding) in most cases at a rate so slow as to be imperceptible to us humans. Nevertheless, there are examples where is has been observed in shorter time frames and for which you have been provided links to relevant information which no doubt you will continue to ignore. Well that's your loss. Meh...

“Evolution is Variation”

Since: Nov 13

Dublin, Ireland

#36 Nov 10, 2013
What we all agree on is all mutations change the DNA sequence in some form of way.

Gene mutations can be generally categorized into two types: point mutations and base-pair insertions or deletions.

subcategorized under point mutations are;
1. Silent Mutation
2. Missense Mutation
3. Nonsense Mutation

Only in one of those the change may not have much effect on the protein, "MAY" be beneficial to protein function, or may be dangerous. Though again most are harmful.

Base-pair insertions or deletions are always harmful and dangerous because it alters the template from which amino acids are read.

Genetic Disorders:
According to the National Human Genome Institute, most all disease have some sort of genetic factor. These disorders can be caused by a mutation in a single gene, multiple gene mutations, combined gene mutation and environmental factors, or by chromosome mutation or damage. Gene mutations have been identified as the cause of most disorders including sickle cell anemia, cystic fibrosis, Tay-Sachs disease, Huntington disease, hemophilia, cancers. and the list goes on and on.

We can see and continue to see what mutations do.

“Evolution is Variation”

Since: Nov 13

Dublin, Ireland

#37 Nov 10, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
How do I fail? Here is an example of observed bacterial evolution:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14094-b...
And there are other ways to observe evolution. We can observe long time evolution in the fossil record.
Unfortunately you have no idea what you are arguing against so you bring up failed claims.
Oh dear poor little man. A variation is not speciation. Please learn the difference before you post such garbage.

“Evolution is Variation”

Since: Nov 13

Dublin, Ireland

#38 Nov 10, 2013
Bluenose wrote:
<quoted text>
But that's not how evolution works. Species don't evolve into "completely new species" they evolve by small steps into new species that are a lot like the previous ones, indeed to start with they are almost completely the same as the previous species, which often themselves may well continue to exist. However, given sufficient time they sometimes do evolve into amazingly different species, but always within the nested hierarchy (no doubt another concept alien to your limited understanding) in most cases at a rate so slow as to be imperceptible to us humans. Nevertheless, there are examples where is has been observed in shorter time frames and for which you have been provided links to relevant information which no doubt you will continue to ignore. Well that's your loss. Meh...
Oh yes. The "time" card played again. Just show one existing species evolving to a different species. Just one is all I ask. Is one too much for you to show?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#39 Nov 10, 2013
Thats a knee slapper wrote:
What we all agree on is all mutations change the DNA sequence in some form of way.
Gene mutations can be generally categorized into two types: point mutations and base-pair insertions or deletions.
subcategorized under point mutations are;
1. Silent Mutation
2. Missense Mutation
3. Nonsense Mutation
Only in one of those the change may not have much effect on the protein, "MAY" be beneficial to protein function, or may be dangerous. Though again most are harmful.
Base-pair insertions or deletions are always harmful and dangerous because it alters the template from which amino acids are read.
Genetic Disorders:
According to the National Human Genome Institute, most all disease have some sort of genetic factor. These disorders can be caused by a mutation in a single gene, multiple gene mutations, combined gene mutation and environmental factors, or by chromosome mutation or damage. Gene mutations have been identified as the cause of most disorders including sickle cell anemia, cystic fibrosis, Tay-Sachs disease, Huntington disease, hemophilia, cancers. and the list goes on and on.
We can see and continue to see what mutations do.
No. Simply wrong.

Most mutations are benign. Which is luck for you since you have about 150 of them.

A few are harmful. They are not really a problem since they quickly disappear from the genome.

A very few are beneficial and eventually they spread throughout the genome of a species.

You don't seem to understand any part of evolution. For example as already pointed out to you there is not such thing as a "whole different species". The change is very gradual. We can observe it in nature. Check out the concept of "Ring Species".

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#40 Nov 10, 2013
Thats a knee slapper wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh dear poor little man. A variation is not speciation. Please learn the difference before you post such garbage.
That was not a variation.

Too bad you did not read or at the very least understand that article.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#41 Nov 10, 2013
Thats a knee slapper wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh yes. The "time" card played again. Just show one existing species evolving to a different species. Just one is all I ask. Is one too much for you to show?
You have a false concept of "species" again. Species are not fixed. They are always changing. There is no absolute border.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Evolution Debate Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 15 min Blitzking 201,475
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 46 min Chimney1 40,685
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 52 min Into The Night 16,180
The conscious God or the inanimate nature 1 hr DanFromSmithville 35
can anyone explain to me why humans are the onl... (Mar '08) 1 hr Reno Hoock 218
Scientists create vast 3-D map of universe, val... 9 hr One way or another 17
News Book aims to prove existence of God (Nov '09) 17 hr ChristineM 96
More from around the web