Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9161 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,581 Year: 2,838/9,624 Month: 683/1,588 Week: 89/229 Day: 61/28 Hour: 0/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   WTF is wrong with people
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1434 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 31 of 457 (707579)
09-28-2013 3:55 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by Coyote
09-28-2013 2:39 PM


Re: so much for smarts
And your little comment about "an article of faith" is nothing more than projection. Scientists don't need faith--we have evidence. It is those who lack evidence who must rely on faith.
SO funny. That IS your Statement of Faith right there, just another recitation of the Evolutionist Creed. Evolution is NOT supported by the actual evidence, only by the fantasy evidence that exists in your minds.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Coyote, posted 09-28-2013 2:39 PM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by Coyote, posted 09-28-2013 4:03 PM Faith has replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2096 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


(3)
Message 32 of 457 (707580)
09-28-2013 4:03 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by Faith
09-28-2013 3:55 PM


Re: so much for smarts
And your little comment about "an article of faith" is nothing more than projection. Scientists don't need faith--we have evidence. It is those who lack evidence who must rely on faith.
SO funny. That IS your Statement of Faith right there, just another recitation of the Evolutionist Creed. Evolution is NOT supported by the actual evidence, only by the fantasy evidence that exists in your minds.
I have seen and studied the evidence. I did half my Ph.D. work in the fields of fossil man and human osteology.
Deny all you want, but you don't know the evidence. You haven't studied hundreds of casts of the important finds, nor have you had to study many hundred technical papers in preparation for a rigorous qualifying exam.
Rather you uncritically swallow the lies spread by the creationist websites.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by Faith, posted 09-28-2013 3:55 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by Faith, posted 09-28-2013 4:14 PM Coyote has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1434 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 33 of 457 (707581)
09-28-2013 4:14 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by Coyote
09-28-2013 4:03 PM


Re: so much for smarts
I don't read the Creationist websites. I think all this through for myself. Sorry that all that experience you have with various facts has been twisted in YOUR mind by what YOU have been taught. You seem to be unaware of the interpretive scheme you have been educated in that colors how you think about data.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by Coyote, posted 09-28-2013 4:03 PM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by Coyote, posted 09-28-2013 4:32 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 43 by ringo, posted 09-29-2013 5:51 PM Faith has replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2096 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


(1)
Message 34 of 457 (707582)
09-28-2013 4:32 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by Faith
09-28-2013 4:14 PM


Re: so much for smarts
You seem to be unaware of the interpretive scheme you have been educated in that colors how you think about data.
Correct. I have been taught to examine data critically, not just swallow it whole. If things don't fit, a scientist digs in and finds out why.
Creationists, on the other hand, just follow along dogma and deny, ignore, misrepresent, or obfuscate evidence they don't like. The last thing they'll do is follow all the evidence.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by Faith, posted 09-28-2013 4:14 PM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1434 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 35 of 457 (707591)
09-28-2013 7:13 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by frako
09-28-2013 3:51 PM


Re: so much for smarts
Ok wrap your head around this you admitt we can get new breeds. Say a small dog. I take the small dog breed and breed them to be hairless. We get a new breed small hairless dog. I breed the hairless small dog breed further so they have no tails or verry small ones. I breed the hairless small dog with no tail further to get one with giant fangs. I breed the small hairless tailles giant fang dog further to get a breed with a fused back. I breed the small hairless tailles, giant fang, fused spine dog further to get one with a short snout, i breed the small hairless, tailles, giant fang, fused spine, short snout dog further to get short fromt legs, i breed the short hairless, tailles giant fang, fused spine, short snout, short front leg dog further with one with long legs at the back, i breed the short, hairless, tailles, giant fang, fused spine, short snout, short front large back leg dog further ......
This is all fantasy, frako, because you don't know if you can get any of this from the given genetic material, and you are ignoring the very real possibility of running into the problem of genetic depletion which plagues all breeding programs that aren't careful to keep the level of diversity up, which compromises how far they can go toward a particular trait but that's reality for you. It is also what fuels conservation programs in the wild, as natural selection may isolate a group with such depleted genetic diversity it threatens the creature's survival.
You may or may not be able to get a hairless breed by starting from the small dog you have in mind. And if you can you may not have enough genetic diversity left in the genome to get the small tailed version of the small hairless breed you next have in mind, and so on from there. You can only work with what you actually have, you can't invent the possibilities out of your own imagination, but that's all you are doing here; you are just making all this up, which is what evolutionists do of course, but it aint science.
In natural selection sometimes the selective pressure is not as strong as in other times so the population seems to peak. But these pressures constantly change what was once a huge advantage over other species can be a hindernece like a large size when food is scarce. Or perfect sabre teeth when your pray is extinct ....
What you are failing to grasp here, as all you guys do who think that your imagination is sufficient to define actual reality, is that natural selection REDUCES the genetic diversity in the new population it creates. It must do so in order to create the new phenotype. All forms of selection, meaning any way a new population is created by a small portion of numbers from a previous population, which is how ALL new breeds develop, REDUCES the genetic possibilities in the new population. You do not have an endless series of possible new variations for this reason. Eventually you run out of genetic possibilities, and that is what happens IN REALITY with both domestic breeding programs and selection in the wild.
This simple fact of genetics is what spells doom for the very possibility of macroevolution. May your IQ points some day come to recognize this fact.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by frako, posted 09-28-2013 3:51 PM frako has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by frako, posted 09-28-2013 7:59 PM Faith has replied

  
frako
Member (Idle past 296 days)
Posts: 2932
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010


Message 36 of 457 (707592)
09-28-2013 7:19 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by Faith
09-28-2013 3:32 PM


Re: so much for smarts
Hey, faith healing does NOT deny germ theory, nor is prayer a denial of it. Try learning something for a change. I don't believe in that kind of total trust in faith healing, but I nevertheless don't accuse them of denying simple facts like germ theory. Trust in God to heal, i.e. faith healing expects God to override germ theory, it does not deny germ theory. Also prayer ASKS God to override germ theory, it does not deny it. You are lying about what we believe.
Yea not getting your kid to a doctor and instead praying for the illness to go away is not denial of germ theory. Because im sure the parents praying for their children knew that the actual cause was germs reaking havoc on their childs body that could be cured with a few antibiotic pills but instead they chose the better option of asking a magic sky daddy above the dome that covers the earth to make them stop. Clearly a very sane decision nothing wrong with it.
(at least when i read such stories i thought they where just morons who dont know what germ theory really is and believe illness is caused by daemons)
I just wonder why douring the space race you dint just pray the astronauts to the moon. No need for rockets when god could have just override the theory of gravity and spacial location it would have been much cheaper.
And its not just faith healing its stuff like when the last pope told the most STD infected continent of the world that condoms are EVIL.
Look techincally i would have no problem with creationists if they followed jeasuses teachings and prayed at home and not get involved in the affairs of sane rational people. But you are negating the only real tool we have to make this world a better place.
Hmm desieses transmitted by sex well we cant stop them from having sex i know lets give them condoms.
Religious fanatic: THEY ARE EVIL FROM THE DEVIL DONT USE THEM OR YOU WILL GO TO HELLLL!!!!!
Hmm stem cell reacherch has loads of potential from letting people walk again, to new organs basicly a revolution in medicine
Religious fanatic: THEYR KILLING BABIES THOSE GODLES SCIENTISTS ITS THE DEVILS WORK IF YOU SUPPORT IT YOU WIL GO TO HELLL!!!
Or old theories basicly fact like evolution we have 150 years of testing, gathering data, every new piece of information that comes along confirms it
Religius fanatic: MY BOOK SAYS GOD MADE THE ANIMALS THEY DINT EVOLVE YOU WONT TEACH THAT SATANIC TEORY TO MY CHILDREN YOU ARE GOING TO HELL!!
Its fucking insane like there are 2 kinds of people in this world the ones that live in reality and the ones who live in an imaginary world.
Look if you asked 100 plubers if you need to change the pipes in your home and 99 said yes you probably would right.
If you asked 100 doctors and 99 told you need an operation you would get one right.
Why is it when you ask 100 scientists in the field of evolution and 99.99 tell you its true. You run back to get the plumbers opinion on the subject.
Look im sorry you might believe the earth is 6000 years old because your book says so. But in reality its not we have numerous different dating techniques that run on different principles and different clocks that all agree that its not.
You might think all animals where created in their cournet form but im sorry your book is wrong again we have 150 years of data that says they evolved Museums are funcking running out of storage space there are so many fossils. The science of genetics a compleatly different field agreas with evolution ....
You might think that that couring leprosy is easy if you have 2 birds handy
Leviticus 14:1-57 ESV / 41 helpful votes
The Lord spoke to Moses, saying, “This shall be the law of the leprous person for the day of his cleansing. He shall be brought to the priest, and the priest shall go out of the camp, and the priest shall look. Then, if the case of leprous disease is healed in the leprous person, the priest shall command them to take for him who is to be cleansed two live clean birds and cedarwood and scarlet yarn and hyssop. And the priest shall command them to kill one of the birds in an earthenware vessel over fresh water. ...
(everything in the bile is true, because god wrote the bible it says so right in the bible then it folows that everything in the bible is true because god ... right)
But its not you need Leprostatic agetns discovered by the very same scientific method that discovered the reason for the diversity of life Evolution.
P.s Leprosy evolved too you need the newerd drugs the old ones dont work any more.

Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand
Click if you dare!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Faith, posted 09-28-2013 3:32 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by Faith, posted 09-28-2013 7:29 PM frako has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1434 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 37 of 457 (707593)
09-28-2013 7:29 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by frako
09-28-2013 7:19 PM


Re: so much for smarts
I hope that eventually you will give up your aggressive misrepresentations out of your incredible depths of ignorance about what people believe, and especially your nonsense about what REALITY is, but meanwhile there is no point in answering such ignorant rants.
In any case I'd like you to give some thought to my Message 35 which I was apparently writing as you were spewing out this crazy post. It would be nice if you'd learn to subject your above average IQ points to some sort of honest assessment of other people's opinions.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by frako, posted 09-28-2013 7:19 PM frako has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by frako, posted 09-28-2013 8:18 PM Faith has not replied

  
frako
Member (Idle past 296 days)
Posts: 2932
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010


Message 38 of 457 (707595)
09-28-2013 7:59 PM
Reply to: Message 35 by Faith
09-28-2013 7:13 PM


Re: so much for smarts
This is all fantasy, frako, because you don't know if you can get any of this from the given genetic material, and you are ignoring the very real possibility of running into the problem of genetic depletion which plagues all breeding programs that aren't careful to keep the level of diversity up, which compromises how far they can go toward a particular trait but that's reality for you. It is also what fuels conservation programs in the wild, as natural selection may isolate a group with such depleted genetic diversity it threatens the creature's survival.
You mean like Lions right their bottleneck gave the males really bad sperm many tailed many headed ... Real bad for procreation Yea all 35 000 of them. They are doing fine some are still fighting to put them on the endangered species list but as long as humans dont hunt them there is no problem.
Its all about pressures in nature the dog i was going to breed would have no chance of surviving in the wild and of course i would need a stable population but in an enviorment where those traits are considered good it would have no problem.
The thing is you say there are mutations, or varriations or changes in the genetic code but cant fathom how i could get something new from a changing genetic code????
You may or may not be able to get a hairless breed by starting from the small dog you have in mind. And if you can you may not have enough genetic diversity left in the genome to get the small tailed version of the small hairless breed you next have in mind, and so on from there. You can only work with what you actually have, you can't invent the possibilities out of your own imagination, but that's all you are doing here; you are just making all this up, which is what evolutionists do of course, but it aint science.
Ok say the bottom code is our dog you said the code can change or mutate. To get the dog i need i need a code that says C D E F G A B
gen 1 A B C D E F G
Gen 2 ABCDEFF USELESS dont let them breed
GEN 3 ABCDEFB Has a trait i need these suckers breed from now on
Gen 4 BBCDEFB USELESS dont let them breed
Gen 5 CBCDEFB Fantastic these sucers get to breed
It might take a while since the Mutation is RANDOM but the selection is NOT RANDOM. Neither is selection random in nature those that make more babies then the rest win.
What you are failing to grasp here, as all you guys do who think that your imagination is sufficient to define actual reality, is that natural selection REDUCES the genetic diversity in the new population it creates. It must do so in order to create the new phenotype. All forms of selection, meaning any way a new population is created by a small portion of numbers from a previous population, which is how ALL new breeds develop, REDUCES the genetic possibilities in the new population. You do not have an endless series of possible new variations for this reason. Eventually you run out of genetic possibilities, and that is what happens IN REALITY with both domestic breeding programs and selection in the wild.
I have about half of any cratures DNA to play with by just changing the coding JUNK DNA, and then there are also additions and deletions, cromosome fusions, retroviral "injections".... I dont run out of dna to code stuff so i dont run out of possibilities I have endles possibilities.
As for the lack of genetic diversity yes that can be a problem we found out when our beloved banana disappeared and got replaced by this shit that calls it self a banana. Why because they where all clones as they are now: They cant reproduce bcause they are seedless.
But with time there comes genetic diversity within a new species because that is what evolution does is tinker with the knobs adds knobs removes knobs... You can place a close family of mice on an island come back 300 years and find 8 different species of mice living there. Or you let loos a few Anolis lizards on 14 different islands whitout any lizards there before and watch them evolve in just 16 years.
Or like the lions sure right now they are having problems to conceive because they have really bad sperm but that is gonna fix itself via natural selection. As long as humans dont start hunting them again.
This simple fact of genetics is what spells doom for the very possibility of macroevolution. May your IQ points some day come to recognize this fact.
The simple fact of genetics is the last nail in the coffin for creationism.

Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand
Click if you dare!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Faith, posted 09-28-2013 7:13 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by Faith, posted 09-28-2013 9:44 PM frako has replied

  
frako
Member (Idle past 296 days)
Posts: 2932
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010


Message 39 of 457 (707596)
09-28-2013 8:18 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by Faith
09-28-2013 7:29 PM


Re: so much for smarts
I hope that eventually you will give up your aggressive misrepresentations out of your incredible depths of ignorance about what people believe, and especially your nonsense about what REALITY is, but meanwhile there is no point in answering such ignorant rants.
Ok sure why dont you tell me what you specificly believe i admit i dint ask you specificly what you believe first because there are as many versions of creationism as there are creationists.
From dinosaur nostrils catching fire
To moon
bukake
Crockoduck deniers
Banana proof of godists
no life in peanutbutter means god
Kent hovind
Laminin a symbol of jesus on a crossers

...
...
...
So plees do tell me what you specificly, believe.

Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand
Click if you dare!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Faith, posted 09-28-2013 7:29 PM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1434 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 40 of 457 (707599)
09-28-2013 9:44 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by frako
09-28-2013 7:59 PM


Re: so much for smarts
Posts like yours show only too clearly that there is nothing serious about the debate at EvC.
I'd only repeat that the nail is in evolution's coffin and I demonstrated how that is so. You on the other hand just assert and rant as usual without thinking about what I actually said. Selection FREDUCES the genetic diversity to produce the new trait or traits and it cannot happen any other way; if every time you get a new breed you also get reduced genetic diversity, which you do, and if you keep refining that breed, you are eventually going to get to the point where no further variation, i.e. evolution, is possible at all for that line of variation. This absolutely contradicts the pie in the sky theorizing of evolutionists that asserts that you can develop endless new breeds and eventually even get a new Species all down that same track. Pure fantasy.
Then if you try to increase the diversity you'll simply put a stop to the breeding process which is putting a stop to evolution another way. ANYTHING that increases genetic diversity will INTERFERE with the breed you want to develop. If you want new variations or breeds, i.e. evolution, you HAVE to have reduced genetic diversity and that eventually spells doom to evolution down that particular track. If on the other hand you want to increase your genetic diversity to avoid getting to that end point then you CANNOT PRESERVE YOUR BREED. You can't have it both ways.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by frako, posted 09-28-2013 7:59 PM frako has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by frako, posted 09-29-2013 5:15 PM Faith has replied

  
frako
Member (Idle past 296 days)
Posts: 2932
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010


Message 41 of 457 (707627)
09-29-2013 5:15 PM
Reply to: Message 40 by Faith
09-28-2013 9:44 PM


Re: so much for smarts
Then if you try to increase the diversity you'll simply put a stop to the breeding process which is putting a stop to evolution another way. ANYTHING that increases genetic diversity will INTERFERE with the breed you want to develop.
Yea because when you get a new breed like say a German sheppard no matter how many generations of that dog you make they will always be genetical cousins because "micorevolution" stops when you get a new breed. If i just keep the same presures selcting for color size and furryines everyithing elese can change making them geneticly diverse sure some might have green eyes, or bad bones or good bones, or are smart or doumb but that is what makes genetic diversity I can apply NEW pressures to get rid of undesirable traits reducing the diversity again or just let natural selection take its course with much weaker pressures on the other stuff while only sselecting myself for the fur color size.
If you want new variations or breeds, i.e. evolution, you HAVE to have reduced genetic diversity and that eventually spells doom to evolution down that particular track.
Yea if a wirus comes along that attacs them while their population is low sure they get whipped out because of the lack of genetic diversity, But once they breed and breed every generation having minor changes their genetic diversity grows. The diversity that is selected for if the pressures havent changed stay, but there are loads of other possible mutations that are neutral that are not selected or or against that can increase diversity.
If on the other hand you want to increase your genetic diversity to avoid getting to that end point then you CANNOT PRESERVE YOUR BREED. You can't have it both ways.
So i cant place a few say 5 pairs lizards on an island and watch them evolve in to a different SPECIES (unable to breed with their ancestor species), because they will never be enough geneticly diverse to EVOLVE
OMG a mirracle happened
Omg a noter MIRACLE god is grate isnt he
Leapin' Evolution Is Found in Lizards - The New York Times
And omg another miracle Feroe hous mice here is a detailed study of this miracle Isnt god grate for making new spoecies as we know "macroevolution" or speciation NEVER CAN HAPPEN
http://www.setur.fo/...the_charismatic_Faroe_house_mouse.pdf

Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand
Click if you dare!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by Faith, posted 09-28-2013 9:44 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by Faith, posted 09-29-2013 5:50 PM frako has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1434 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 42 of 457 (707634)
09-29-2013 5:50 PM
Reply to: Message 41 by frako
09-29-2013 5:15 PM


Re: so much for smarts
If you try to increase the diversity you'll simply put a stop to the breeding process which is putting a stop to evolution another way. ANYTHING that increases genetic diversity will INTERFERE with the breed you want to develop.
Yea because when you get a new breed like say a German sheppard no matter how many generations of that dog you make they will always be genetical cousins because "micorevolution" stops when you get a new breed.
Huh? I have no idea what you mean here. As long as you keep the genetic base consistent and isolated from other genetic input you can always get more of the same breed. What's your point?
If i just keep the same presures selcting for color size and furryines everyithing elese can change making them geneticly diverse sure some might have green eyes, or bad bones or good bones, or are smart or doumb but that is what makes genetic diversity I can apply NEW pressures to get rid of undesirable traits reducing the diversity again or just let natural selection take its course with much weaker pressures on the other stuff while only sselecting myself for the fur color size.
Again, this is incoherent to me and I have to ask what on earth you are trying to say. But again I'll take a stab at it:
Again, as long as you have sufficient genetic diversity you can continue to modify your breed "to get rid of undesirable traits" for instance, while maintaining your basic gene pool for the breed, and dogs are a Species with an enormous pool of genetic diversity so you have quite a bit of leeway with them. Try it with cats or chickens perhaps, see how much room you have for further variation after you've established your breed.
If you want new variations or breeds, i.e. evolution, you HAVE to have reduced genetic diversity and that eventually spells doom to evolution down that particular track.
Yea if a wirus comes along that attacs them while their population is low sure they get whipped out because of the lack of genetic diversity, But once they breed and breed every generation having minor changes their genetic diversity grows.
This is the evo fantasy right here. It is simply not the case. If you breed them down many generations still getting minor changes you are running out their genetic diversity in those changes, and reducing the breed's genetic potentials with each new variation of the breed that you choose to isolate and preserve. Genetic diversity decreases with every generation, it does not increase if you are continuing to select traits.
The only way you can increase genetic diversity is by introducing other animals into the breed, thus changing the traits of the breed. That's what I meant about how you MUST interfere with the breed if you increase its genetic diversity. You change the breed, it is no longer what you were breeding, it is now something else. If you want to preserve your breed you can only do so by continuing to breed "true" to its particular gene pool by keeping it isolated from other kinds of genetic input, and that means you have a very limited genetic diversity you are working from. In a species with less overall diversity than dogs by refining your breed you will soon reach such a condition of depleted genetic diversity that you cannot get any new variations, which spells the end of evolution for that line of variation.
The diversity that is selected for if the pressures havent changed stay, but there are loads of other possible mutations that are neutral that are not selected or or against that can increase diversity.
Again, IF you increase diversity you threaten to blur or destroy the traits of the breed you have worked to establish, which as I said is one way evolution reaches an end point. Breeders know all this from experience. Sometimes they have to introduce new genes from outside their breed just to preserve the health of the breed which has become compromised by genetic depletion, but they have to choose the alien breed very carefully to minimize the risk of blurring or destroying the traits they most want to preserve. The old method of simply choosing your trait and breeding for it and keeping it isolated from all other animals reliably develops striking breeds but at great cost to their health from genetic depletion.
If on the other hand you want to increase your genetic diversity to avoid getting to that end point then you CANNOT PRESERVE YOUR BREED. You can't have it both ways.
So i cant place a few say 5 pairs lizards on an island and watch them evolve in to a different SPECIES (unable to breed with their ancestor species), because they will never be enough geneticly diverse to EVOLVE
This is a common way breeds are developed in the wild, by geographic isolation, nothing special about the situation, quite standard and I've discussed it many times before. To develop a new variety or breed all you need is reproductive isolation of a portion of the earlier population. This can be brought about by many different means, including natural selection as well as geographic isolation, and of course the concerted efforts in domestic breeding to keep the breed from mating with other breeds.
What is going on in your example is defined by evolutionism as speciation but that's a misnomer. Losing the ability to breed with the former population is an artificial classification. All you have is the usual playing out of the inbuilt genetic diversity in the new population, the particular set of alleles those ten brought onto the island, which mix by inbreeding over many generations to form the peculiarities of the new breed; otherwise known as microevolution. Now you've got a new variety of lizard that is genetically changed enough from the former population after generations of inbreeding among themselves to prevent breeding with it. It's artificial to call this a new "species." Not with dogs, which for some reason retain their ability to breed with all other breeds no matter how different, but with some domestic animals this same situation can occur with extensive inbreeding.
Why don't you spend just a LITTLE time familiarizing yourself with the arguments of your opponents instead of continually misrepresenting them? It might advance the debate, which otherwise goes on stupidly repeating itself.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by frako, posted 09-29-2013 5:15 PM frako has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 402 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(2)
Message 43 of 457 (707635)
09-29-2013 5:51 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by Faith
09-28-2013 4:14 PM


Re: so much for smarts
Faith writes:
I think all this through for myself.
Just on the off-chance that you were ever wrong about something, how would you know?
When I'm wrong the people on "my side" don't hesitate to tell me so. (It's a good thing I'm not paranoid.) If you don't consider anybody else's ideas but your own, how do you avoid confirmation bias?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by Faith, posted 09-28-2013 4:14 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by Faith, posted 09-29-2013 5:52 PM ringo has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1434 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 44 of 457 (707636)
09-29-2013 5:52 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by ringo
09-29-2013 5:51 PM


Re: so much for smarts
I stick to the stuff I DO know, it's a pretty limited array. If you'll notice, I've repeated myself countless times here to deaf ears. One does get good at spelling out one's limited beliefs after much repetition. It would be nice, however, if somebody on the other side would just think it through for a change instead of just regurgitating the usual stuff.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by ringo, posted 09-29-2013 5:51 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by ringo, posted 09-29-2013 5:54 PM Faith has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 402 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(1)
Message 45 of 457 (707637)
09-29-2013 5:54 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by Faith
09-29-2013 5:52 PM


Re: so much for smarts
Faith writes:
I stick to the stuff I DO know, it's a pretty limited array.
What you know is much more limited than you think.
How do you know what your own limits are?
Edited by ringo, : Fixed quote.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by Faith, posted 09-29-2013 5:52 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by Faith, posted 09-29-2013 5:55 PM ringo has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024