Evolution Types

Just a short video to explain there is confusion among debaters of evolution/creationism.

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• Creation
• God
• Evolution
• Theory
• Confusion

[logicalmind4]

Also, define kind. I want a specific definition, as specific as a definition of species. Furthermore, what you call organic evolution, which I presume refers to abiogenesis, has been demonstrated to be able to occur by purely natural means. Indeed, sutherland successfully demonstrated how self-replicating RNA could assemble from non-living precursor materials.

[ericinnit1]

@logicalmind4

Kind is generally family of animal. Look up baraminology. Animals who can mate and have offspring together are of the same kind.

Nobody has demonstrated how abiogenesis can happen. All experiments have failed, or used the wrong conditions and elements.

[logicalmind4]

Right, let me address concern about evolution first. We have observed so called "macro-evolution." It has given rise to new species of finches and culex molestus, which can no longer bread with it's close relative, colex pipiens. We've also forced it upon countless bacteria and other lower organisms. Even if we hadn't observed this, the fact that we are so closely related to other primates on a varying degree, (to the point which we even have the full DNA to grow tail) and the fact that....cont

[ericinnit1]

@logicalmind4

Speciation is micro evolution. There are different species within animal kinds (families).

Macro evolution has never been observed.

The fossil record is not complete. Where are the millions of transitional fossils in the Precambrian and Cambrian layers?

[logicalmind4]

@ericinnit1

It's amazing that we have a fossil record as complete as we do. Fossils are very difficult to create, but, the most important bit is, that it simply supports the overwhelming genetic evidence and observed evolutionary process to establish that the process itself occurs and has occurred. Now, we have an exceptionally complete primate fossil record concerning our own evolution that we find it difficult to come up with classifications for all the discovered species. Then the......cont

[ericinnit1]

@logicalmind4

Yes it is amazing how we have so many fossils. They were all made at the same time during the global flood. But it's not a complete "fossil record" in evolutionary terms. Nobody knows what bats evolved from for example. What did dinosaurs evolve from? Scientists say there are no direct ancestors for ANY species of dinosaurs. Scientists don't agree on what whales evolved from either. The record is NOT "exceptionally complete" at all!

[Atriviality]

Yeah. Kent had a tendency to do that. You get used to it.

[Thothsglyphs]

Also, I have told you on your very own channel what you are feeding to the people. A person by the name of Extant Dodo makes videos about Kent Hovind. I suggest that you check it out.

[logicalmind4]

cont....assemble. Recently, there has now been an experiment that successfully demonstrated how a full self replicating RNA molecule can assemble. Even if that last experiment hadn't happened, abiogenesis would still be a completely valid and more supported than creationism. We know that abiogenesis is completely possible, we're just at the stage of working out exactly how it happened.

[logicalmind4]

@ericinnit1

You've essentially defined species there. Does the offspring have to be fertile? Because if it does, then you have exactly defined species. Are horses and donkeys the same kind for example?

No, there have been many experiments that followed from the first main successful one, the miller-urey experiment. It demonstrated that organic material can arise from non organic precursor material. There have been many subsequent experiments demonstrating exactly how different DNA bases.cont

[logicalmind4]

cont...fact that a mass of fossils appear in chronological order with increasing complexity as time progresses is predicted by and supports evolution. the fact that over extended periods of time, a sufficiently complete fossil record may not be available to determine how something evolved is irrelevant since the claim being made is that it did evolve, in whatever manner.

[logicalmind4]

@ericinnit1

No, I'm pretty sure most people define micro evolution as variation within a species. Macro evolution, as I have come across the term, is speciation. In any case, we know that species evolve, we have an extraordinarily complete fossil record of recent human evolution, and any other evolutionary progression we speculate on, we only make the claim that they evolved, not that we necessarily know exactly what they gradually evolved into, but it is compelling evidence of the process.

[logicalmind4]

Regarding abiogenesis, it has been successfully demonstrated that life can come from non life by purely natural means. To add to this, Sutherland successfully demonstrated and created RNA from precursor non-living materials in an environment replicant to that of early earth (as it is best estimated to be).