TOE and the Reasons for Doubt

Define close family.

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

Please provide a source. The statement alone means nothing. We need to know the context and the actual statement.Also, the 2nd International Congress of Human Paleontology was in 1987.

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

I have a concern about any researcher that posts this on his university webpage.

quote:

---

I also have an ongoing interest in Christian apologetics, which sometimes overlaps my professional career. I am convinced that Christianity is not only true, but that it is perhaps the only way of viewing the world that allows you to have both meaning and rationality in life.

---

SourceAs you can see from his webpage he does not seem to have any peer reviewed research. He has PowerPoint presentations. If you can find any peer reviewed articles by him please present them.Also, maybe Moose can tell us a little more about him. He is just across the harbor from Moose at UW-Superior. I am from up that way too and know a couple people that just went through UWS so I might try to find out more that way too.

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

Peg, Peg, Peg,How many times have you been advised to confirm your sources. Do you know anything about talkorigins.org? It is not a creationist or ID website. It is an "evolutionist" website.

quote:

---

The primary reason for this archive's existence is to provide mainstream scientific responses to the many frequently asked questions (FAQs) that appear in the talk.origins newsgroup and the frequently rebutted assertions of those advocating intelligent design or other creationist pseudosciences

---

TalkOrigins Archive: Exploring the Creation/Evolution ControversyEdited by Theodoric, : tagsEdited by Theodoric, : No reason given.

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

The use of terms "correct" and "incorrect" and "backwards" show that you do not even have a basic understanding of the TOE. Those are terms that could only be used if there was a creator or a designer. You are using them to try to discredit a system that does not have a designer or a creator, therefore your whole premise is flawed.Try again. If I were you, I would first start with learning what the TOE truly is, Your worst source for that information would be creationist websites. As we have shown Peg time and time again, creationist websites lie. Lying isn't real christian is it.Edited by Theodoric, : spelling

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

It is not semantics. It is your understanding even the basics of the TOE. Required sequence? The antenna is what it is is. There was no requirement for it to get there. Who required it? It is just what it hbacme, nothing more nothing less. Backwards to what? What is backwards for the TOE? Edited by Theodoric, : No reason given.

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

Peg,
Really you should do some research before you post things you read on creationist websites. It seems the 'law of recurrent variation' is the latest weapon for creationists. It also seems to be very prevalent among the Jehovah's Witness.Here is the problem. There is no scientific law called this. It seems pretty presumptuous even unscientific for a scientist to unilaterally declare a law.Some background

quote:

---

It seems that the "law of recurrent variation" is not a genuine law of science at all! It traces back to Wolf-Ekkehard Lnnig, a geneticist at the prestigious Max Planck Institute for Plant Breeding in Germany. It appears that Lnnig was censored for using the official Max Planck Institute website to advance his personal belief in Intelligent Design. Given his Internet "crusade" for ID, it is not surprising that he authored a paper around 2002 claiming that natural selection cannot give rise to new species. Far from being supported by a scientific law, that view is rejected by the vast majority of biologists.

---

SourceHere are some examples of speciation from yoru new favorite website http://www.talkorigins.com.

quote:

---

1. New species have arisen in historical times. For example:

​

* A new species of mosquito, isolated in London's Underground, has speciated from Culex pipiens (Byrne and Nichols 1999; Nuttall 1998).

​

* Helacyton gartleri is the HeLa cell culture, which evolved from a human cervical carcinoma in 1951. The culture grows indefinitely and has become widespread (Van Valen and Maiorana 1991).

​

A similar event appears to have happened with dogs relatively recently. Sticker's sarcoma, or canine transmissible venereal tumor, is caused by an organism genetically independent from its hosts but derived from a wolf or dog tumor (Zimmer 2006; Murgia et al. 2006).

​

* Several new species of plants have arisen via polyploidy (when the chromosome count multiplies by two or more) (de Wet 1971). One example is Primula kewensis (Newton and Pellew 1929).

​

2. Incipient speciation, where two subspecies interbreed rarely or with only little success, is common. Here are just a few examples:

​

* Rhagoletis pomonella, the apple maggot fly, is undergoing sympatric speciation. Its native host in North America is Hawthorn (Crataegus spp.), but in the mid-1800s, a new population formed on introduced domestic apples (Malus pumila). The two races are kept partially isolated by natural selection (Filchak et al. 2000).
* The mosquito Anopheles gambiae shows incipient speciation between its populations in northwestern and southeastern Africa (Fanello et al. 2003; Lehmann et al. 2003).
* Silverside fish show incipient speciation between marine and estuarine populations (Beheregaray and Sunnucks 2001).

​

3. Ring species show the process of speciation in action. In ring species, the species is distributed more or less in a line, such as around the base of a mountain range. Each population is able to breed with its neighboring population, but the populations at the two ends are not able to interbreed. (In a true ring species, those two end populations are adjacent to each other, completing the ring.) Examples of ring species are

​

* the salamander Ensatina, with seven different subspecies on the west coast of the United States. They form a ring around California's central valley. At the south end, adjacent subspecies klauberi and eschscholtzi do not interbreed (Brown n.d.; Wake 1997).
* greenish warblers (Phylloscopus trochiloides), around the Himalayas. Their behavioral and genetic characteristics change gradually, starting from central Siberia, extending around the Himalayas, and back again, so two forms of the songbird coexist but do not interbreed in that part of their range (Irwin et al. 2001; Whitehouse 2001; Irwin et al. 2005).
* the deer mouse (Peromyces maniculatus), with over fifty subspecies in North America.
* many species of birds, including Parus major and P. minor, Halcyon chloris, Zosterops, Lalage, Pernis, the Larus argentatus group, and Phylloscopus trochiloides (Mayr 1942, 182-183).
* the American bee Hoplitis (Alcidamea) producta (Mayr 1963, 510).
* the subterranean mole rat, Spalax ehrenbergi (Nevo 1999).

​

4. Evidence of speciation occurs in the form of organisms that exist only in environments that did not exist a few hundreds or thousands of years ago. For example:
* In several Canadian lakes, which originated in the last 10,000 years following the last ice age, stickleback fish have diversified into separate species for shallow and deep water (Schilthuizen 2001, 146-151).
* Cichlids in Lake Malawi and Lake Victoria have diversified into hundreds of species. Parts of Lake Malawi which originated in the nineteenth century have species indigenous to those parts (Schilthuizen 2001, 166-176).
* A Mimulus species adapted for soils high in copper exists only on the tailings of a copper mine that did not exist before 1859 (Macnair 1989).

​

There is further evidence that speciation can be caused by infection with a symbiont. A Wolbachia bacterium infects and causes postmating reproductive isolation between the wasps Nasonia vitripennis and N. giraulti (Bordenstein and Werren 1997).

​

5. Some young-earth creationists claim that speciation is essential to explain Noah's ark. The ark was not roomy enough to carry and care for all species, so speciation is invoked to explain how the much fewer "kinds" aboard the ark became the diversity we see today. Also, some species have special needs that could not have been met during the flood (e.g., fish requiring fresh water). Creationists assume that they evolved from other, more tolerant organisms since the Flood. (Woodmorappe 1996)

---

SourceEdited by Theodoric, : Spelling

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

More info on the "law of recurrent variation"As of yet I can find no instance of this being published in a peer reviewed journal. Here is a great rebuttal to someone that claims that it has been published in scientific literature

quote:

---

LordBright wrote:I did some research on that "law of recurrent variation". In fact it is published in scientific literature and was obviously put to discussion (see L‘nnig 1995) . References:

​

quote:

---

+ L‘nnig, W.-E. (1995): "Mutationen: Das Gesetz der rekurrenten Variation." pp. 149-165. In: Streitfall Evolution. Hrsg.: J. Mey, R. Schmidt und S. Zibulla. Universitas. Wissenschaftliche Verlagsgesellschaft. Stuttgart

---

​

Not scientific literature, but a popular book. The Edition Universitas books are published by a publisher that does publish scientific works, but this particular series is aimed at collecting essays from the fringe, with additional material presenting the ortodox view. Right now on sale in this series are books where people from the "faith healing science community" face off with actual MDs and one with Homeopathy versus Pharmacology. The series is pretty much "teach both sides" in technical jargon. You can check out what points the fringe makes and why the ortodox view says it’s bullshit.

​

quote:

---

LordBright wrote:+ L‘nnig, W.-E.(2005): "Mutation breeding, evolution, and the law of recurrent variation." In: Recent Research Developments in Genetics and Breeding (G. Pandalai, Managing Editor), Vol. 2, 45-70

---

​

Another book.

​

quote:

---

LordBright wrote:+ L‘nnig, W.-E.(2006): "Mutations: The law of recurrent variation." In: Floriculture, Ornamental and Plant Biotechnology: Advances and Topical Issues, Vol. 1, 601-607. J.A. Teixeira da Silva (ed.), Global Science Books, London

---

​

And another book.
And none of these are cited, in peer reviewed articles (which is another valid way of getting in).

---

SourceWow. Amazing what you can find out when you actually do 10 minutes of research.Edited by Theodoric, : Added source info

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

Please bring this to an appropriate thread so that we can see your "evidence" for this assertion.It should be a fun discussion for both of us.

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

Or not.How would you determine what features we are to organize them by? Oh thats right there is Bariminists that are willing to make that determinationDo you think all the egg layers are closely connected?

---

Facts don\'t lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts