Speciation in real time - Evolution in the News

[Chuichupachichi]

Understand what Evolutionary Theory is truly postulating

All normal individuals fail to survive, while a few reproductive defects do survive. Furthermore, that while a environmentally threatened species is numerically abundant, it struggles against extinction. However, a species achieves its greatest degree of survivability & overcomes the threat of extinction, due to having been numerically reduced to a handful of reproductive defects

Evolution theory says wildlife conservationists are stupid

[empidonaxdvg]

@Chuichupachichi Sorry, but you are dead wrong.

1) "All normal individuals fail to survive, while a few reproductive defects do survive." -- Not even close. I'd encourage you to google "stabilizing selection", wherein individuals with average traits have the highest fitness. And by reproductive defects I assume you mean individuals with mutations that their parents did not have, which hardly constitutes a "reproductive defect" (even you have mutations that your parents do not have).

[Chuichupachichi]

@empidonaxdvg

Evolution postulates that only particular mutants will survive. Thus, all normal individuals will die

{by reproductive defects I assume you mean individuals with mutations}

Mutations are reproductive defects...thats a fact of Biology. During reproduction, a process is executed, in which, cells are copied. On rare occasions, a dysfunction occurs during the execution of that process & a cell is incorrectly reproduced. Its a inaccurate copy...a reproductive defect

[lapmarty]

@Chuichupachichi your understanding of evolution is at best basic, a bit like a 6 years old child can conceived it,

you assume a mutation is a defect, wich it isnt necesseraly,

the mutation of the melamine production gene, was a advantage for the population that migrated north, because there was less barrier to sunlight, they absorbed more vitamin d, so they pass this gene on,

this mutation would be a DEFect if youd lived in a dessert,

[Chuichupachichi]

@empidonaxdvg

Also, Evolutionists insist that they are biologically composed 100% of millions of retained, accumulated, reproductive defects

Your mind operates in precisely the same manner as do those of other Evolutionists. You have predetermined the ends, according to your desires. After that, its easy for the deceivers to come along & present what merely appears to be evidence. Then the predeterminers are happy to perceive it as true evidence because it conforms to their desire

[Chuichupachichi]

@empidonaxdvg

Evolutionists operate from a prejudicial position. The fact is that the data from science, when pertinent to origins, is contrary to Evolutionary theory. Even a simple analysis of language reveals the truth. The word "evolution", by definition, describes a incrementally generative progressive process that entails greater order, complexity or functionality. By definition, the word "Entropy" describes a degenerative process in the direction of greater disorder

[Chuichupachichi]

@empidonaxdvg

Atheists picked one helluva natural law, to which, to be diametrically opposed. Good luck with that battle. Nothing has ever won against Entropy... the consummate killer that kills even non-living things

[empidonaxdvg]

2) "Furthermore, that while a environmentally threatened species is numerically abundant, it struggles against extinction....." -- I'm honestly not even sure what you are trying to say. A numerically abundant species can indeed be at risk for extinction if its current habitat is threatened by current or future changes (climate change is a great example). However, your claim that a species overcomes this threat by having a reduced population size is blatantly incoherent.

[empidonaxdvg]

3) cont...only it can't if A) there is no genetic variation for the trait in question, B) morphological, physiological, etc. constraints on the species in question prevent selection from 'achieving' the necessary optimum for the given trait, C) current changes that threaten a species are occurring too fast for selection to keep up etc.

I encourage you and the other misinformed individuals to read either "Why Evolution is True" by Jerry Coyne or "The Greatest Show on Earth" by Richard Dawkins.

[Chuichupachichi]

Don't be ineffectively poor thinkers. Don't allow this pseudo science to fool you. The fact is, that the validity of "speciation" is completely dependent upon a standardized definition of the word "species". However, no such standardized definition currently exists. Its that simple. This video's misleading information is invalidated. End of story

Research "the species problem"...learn & understand why "the species problem" causes the explanation of "speciation" to not be proof of evolution

[lapmarty]

@Chuichupachichi the only objection you bring him is religious in nature i guess,?

[RespectMyHate]

Everybody talks about speciation right? But what about kingdomation, or phylumation, or classation, or orderation, or familyation, or genusation see what I mean? If these aren't obsereved then evolution falls apart.

[MrMZaccone]

@darkfur35 Evolution is an observed and observable fact.

[XVIagent]

@MrMZaccone Sure, microevolution is observable. But where is your evidence of bears turning into whales and cattle into dolphins!? LOL

[MrMZaccone]

@XVIagent First, there is no such evidence and no such claim made by modern evolution. Evidence for "macroevolution" (and only creationists make such a distinction) exists in the fossil record. Without even getting into the fossil record, let me just ask you this. What mechanism do you propose that would prevent speciation, given your admission that microevoltuion occurs?

[XVIagent]

@MrMZaccone Microevolution is speciation in action. So why would I present a mechanism against it? Point is, one kind of animal or life form hasn’t, doesn’t and cannot change into another kind. Systematics is not always clear on where the boundaries occur and the taxa can be quite arbitrary assigned in this regard. As for the fossil record, it is poignant evidence of a catastrophic event/mass mortality that took place as a result of a global flood. That’s all.

[MrMZaccone]

@XVIagent Speciation has been observed many times. Global flood? Nonsense.

[satanisthetruegod666]

@XVIagent

You asked for "bears turning into whales" and "Cattle turning into dolphins."

something you should understand: dolphins and whales are descended from the same basal ancestor that first moved from land to water. also, this shows that you expect one modern creature to turn into another modern creature, that is not evolution, that is transformation which would DISPROVE evolution.

Also, if fossils are evidence for a global flood why do they line up perfectly to prove evolution?

[XVIagent]

@satanisthetruegod666 I know, wise guy (Homo sapiens), my comment was a bit tongue-in-cheek. Obviously, I meant ancestral "bears" and ancestral "cattle". But have a look at watch?v=8cn0kf8mhS4 and tell me any sane person believes that! The fossil record is another debate which I won’t have time to get into...

[satanisthetruegod666]

@XVIagent Ok, i watched that video, and while it didn't happen in one generation, and there were more species than that involved that is the basics of how it happened. (granted bare bones basics but basics nonetheless) And we only accept that whales came from land animals because that is what the evidence says.

And if you don't have time to get into it why did you bring it up?

[XVIagent]

@satanisthetruegod666 I didn’t bring up the fossil record. MrMZaccone did. I know the whale evolution shown in the Te Papa clip (watch?v=8cn0kf8mhS4) stretches over millions of years. But did you notice the evolving creature ate only once during its “multi-generational” life? Funny as! Departing from evolutionary tales (tails), don’t ever forget that Jesus loves you very much. “Seek good, not evil, that you may live. Then the LORD God Almighty will be with you...” (Amos 5:14)

[satanisthetruegod666]

@XVIagent looking back i see that now, sorry, however, you would do well to remember that evolution is one of the best supported and understood theories in science, it's better understood than gravity.

Also: Luke 14:26 If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.

also look up matthew 5:17-18, i don't have room to post them.

[rollon2010]

@XVIagent Point your critics to the Cambrian Explosion and see how they squirm!

[alachabre]

@MrMZaccone You're incorrect about the term "Macroevolution" being a Creationist invention. See, for instance:

watch?v=zkTvj7vpb6s

[wensdazechyld]

@XVIagent Wow. Get your head out your arse and do some research why don't you. Atavism in Whales would be a good place to start.