Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Noah's Ark
custard
Inactive Member


Message 277 of 302 (271325)
12-21-2005 10:38 AM
Reply to: Message 276 by Yaro
12-21-2005 9:52 AM


Re: Perfect?
All of these species would have come about from a Squirrel like ancestor in only 3000 years.
Is that really so hard to believe?



This message has been edited by custard, 12-21-2005 10:39 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 276 by Yaro, posted 12-21-2005 9:52 AM Yaro has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 278 by Yaro, posted 12-21-2005 10:50 AM custard has replied
 Message 279 by Yaro, posted 12-21-2005 10:56 AM custard has replied

custard
Inactive Member


Message 280 of 302 (271353)
12-21-2005 11:07 AM
Reply to: Message 279 by Yaro
12-21-2005 10:56 AM


Re: Perfect?
Breeds and species are a very different distinction. The genetic variation between most dog breeds is no very much. A beaver and a squierrel however have very distinct lives, genetics, behaviors, and adaptations.
Don't get me started on the pseudo-science of 'species.'
But it would be interesting to see a chart of showing how genetically similar your four rodents are and how similar mine are if you were to replace the sheepdog and pug with a coyote and a fox.
It might be a stronger argument, at least for me, than pictures since morphology can be drastically different within a single species (although depending on your definition of species a St. Bernard and a chihuaha could be separate species).
Makes me understand where the 'kinds' argument is coming from.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 279 by Yaro, posted 12-21-2005 10:56 AM Yaro has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 282 by Yaro, posted 12-21-2005 11:13 AM custard has replied

custard
Inactive Member


Message 281 of 302 (271357)
12-21-2005 11:10 AM
Reply to: Message 278 by Yaro
12-21-2005 10:50 AM


Re: Perfect?
OMG! What the hell is that first picture? Seriously! That is one scary freakin dog. What happened to him?
Sam used to win this ugliest dog contest in San Francisco every year and he'd be on the SF Chronicle website.
Poor guy.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 278 by Yaro, posted 12-21-2005 10:50 AM Yaro has not replied

custard
Inactive Member


Message 283 of 302 (271376)
12-21-2005 11:33 AM
Reply to: Message 282 by Yaro
12-21-2005 11:13 AM


Re: Perfect?
It's a fuzzy line, but it's there.
Not really. At least not a line. Species definition criteria vary from scientist to scientist. The criteria used to determine distinct species by a botanist seem to be very different from those used by a zoologist or a entimologist.
Let me put it to you this way, the level of difference between a beaver and a squirrel, is huge. You can't present dog variety as a prior precedant.
That's what I'm asking: how huge? How 'huge' is the genetic difference between squirrel v. beaver and wolf v. pug?
So squirrels and beavers live in different environments and look different, so what? So do wolves and pugs. So do black bears and polar bears for that matter.
A black bear looks a lot more like a polar bear than a squirrel resembles a beaver, does that mean the genetic difference between black bears and polar bears is LESS than the squirrel v. beaver?
It might not be. But my point is that your argument 'feels' right, but surely there must be actual genetic evidence that would drive the point home. Otherwise, you are just arguing morphology - which falls into the 'kinds' trap.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 282 by Yaro, posted 12-21-2005 11:13 AM Yaro has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 284 by Yaro, posted 12-21-2005 11:55 AM custard has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024