Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 61 (9210 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: The Rutificador chile
Post Volume: Total: 919,496 Year: 6,753/9,624 Month: 93/238 Week: 10/83 Day: 1/9 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   What would a transitional fossil look like?
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1699 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 76 of 403 (850483)
04-08-2019 11:47 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by RAZD
04-07-2019 2:32 PM


Re: still more comic relief
If anagenesis was all that occurred, then all life would be one species,
No, since YECs believe there are many separate Kinds each with its own genome, and it's only within each Kind that the kind of variation occurs that I'm talking about.
...readily sharing DNA via horizontal transfer (asexual) and interbreeding (sexual) and various combinations. This is not the case, however, because there is a second process that results in multiple species and increases the diversity of life.
It is not the case because there are separate Kinds each of which possesses its own genome for its own characteristics.
(3) The process of divergent speciation, or cladogenesis, involves the division of a parent population into two or more reproductively isolated daughter populations, which then are free to (micro) evolve independently of each other.
Yes, this occurs with each Kind. It's a form of selection which promotes new populations with new phenotypes.
(4) The Theory of Evolution (ToE), stated in simple terms, is that the process of anagenesis, and the process of cladogenesis, are sufficient to explain the diversity of life as we know it, from the fossil record, from the genetic record, from the historic record, and from everyday record of the life we observe in the world all around us.
To explain what we see all around us all that is needed is the separately created Kinds each varying according to the programming of the DNA that defines itself and only itself.
As I understand Lenski's experiment, despite far more generations than are needed to test the reality of the ToE all he ever got was variations on more of the same.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by RAZD, posted 04-07-2019 2:32 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by ringo, posted 04-09-2019 12:05 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 80 by RAZD, posted 04-09-2019 12:29 PM Faith has replied
 Message 82 by Taq, posted 04-09-2019 4:50 PM Faith has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17919
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 6.7


Message 77 of 403 (850484)
04-09-2019 12:11 AM
Reply to: Message 75 by Faith
04-08-2019 11:29 PM


Re: It's all simple variation built into a species
quote:
No that is not what happened. I indulged the term for the sake of communication, or really, because of the usual misguided pressure to use establishment terms, until it was clear that it confused things instead. I always knew that what is called speciation is just an evo conceit
Needless to say there was no hint of that until afterwards. Indeed, your first reaction was not to explain that you didn’t really mean “speciation” but to indulge in your usual habit of making false accusations.
And let us note that you still have not given any reason to think that speciation is not speciation.
quote:
As for what other creationists believe, it's always very disappointing to find out how much they accept of what they shouldn't accept. Right now dredge accepts an enormous list of evo tenets. Confusing and sad when creationists do that, and unfortunately all of us have different views on these things. Very frustrating.
Creationists have good reason to accept speciation - especially the Young Earthers who need it because Noah’s Ark is too small to hold all the animals they need to put on there. Even you still hold to their idea oif Kinds instead of insisting that all species are separate Kinds as you must do to reject speciation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Faith, posted 04-08-2019 11:29 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 85 by Faith, posted 04-10-2019 2:27 PM PaulK has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9581
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 6.5


(1)
Message 78 of 403 (850488)
04-09-2019 4:27 AM
Reply to: Message 75 by Faith
04-08-2019 11:29 PM


Re: It's all simple variation built into a species
Faith writes:
As for what other creationists believe, it's always very disappointing to find out how much they accept of what they shouldn't accept. Right now dredge accepts an enormous list of evo tenets. Confusing and sad when creationists do that, and unfortunately all of us have different views on these things. Very frustrating.
It's only possible for creationists to believe all these different things because none of you start with the evidence. If you start with a belief - as you all do - you can never establish whether that belief is true or not. All religionists do what you do, pick and choose the facts you like and deny all those that don't fit.
So of course you all believe different things about the facts - ignorantly ignoring the actual science consensus. Meanwhile science trundles along only concerning itself with what *all* the evidence actually is.
Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona
"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Faith, posted 04-08-2019 11:29 PM Faith has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 667 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 79 of 403 (850496)
04-09-2019 12:05 PM
Reply to: Message 76 by Faith
04-08-2019 11:47 PM


Re: still more comic relief
Faith writes:
No, since YECs believe there are many separate Kinds each with its own genome, and it's only within each Kind that the kind of variation occurs that I'm talking about.
You still haven't explained how that is even possible, since every DNA molecule is made of the same building blocks, regardless of species. You're claiming that it's impossible to edit "Hello" into "Goodbye", which is ridiculous.

And our geese will blot out the sun.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by Faith, posted 04-08-2019 11:47 PM Faith has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1660 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 80 of 403 (850497)
04-09-2019 12:29 PM
Reply to: Message 76 by Faith
04-08-2019 11:47 PM


combined response
to Message 70
The amount of variation possible in any given genome of a given species is very large as long as there is still a lot of genetic variability available (usually meaning heterozygosity at a great number of gene loci). The differences will never ever be of a sort that is not clearly within the parameters defined by that genome, producing interesting variations on the species and nothing outside the species. New combinations of traits, even quite dramatically new and different, is what happens when a small part of a population gets isolated from the rest, otherwise known as selection. The differences from the parent population can be dramatic as the new population gets homogenized by breeding in isolation, all the result of built-in variations on the traits of that species and nothing else.
Of course but this is not speciation, just standard variation. the parent population can be equally split or there can be any number of smaller parts of it that can split off and whatever new gene frequencies exist in each will " (micro) evolve independently of each other. " I've discussed these phenomena over and over on many threads here. I often imagine a large wild population of cattle, small numbers of individuals get isolated and domesticated over time, each new group developing its own typical character from selection, isolation and inbreeding. That is how all the different cattle breeds must have developed. In Africa there are millions of wild wildebeests, divided into a couple of different subpopulations that must have developed by isolation of the subpopulation at some point. That overall population has not been split by domestication but it might develop a similar range of different breeds if it were.
I've also used ring species as examples many time to show the large range of differences that can develop through mere separation and isolation of small numbers off the parent population. Such divergences are built into the genome of the species.
This is your pet concept to cram reality into your faith, faith. You have no evidence to support it. This has been argued to death imho. What you are doing is a shell game with terminology to fool yourself.
Unfortunately, for you, the evidence shows speciation happening and the development of new traits from mutations.
Again you are using scientific terminology to mean something different from what biological scientists mean. For instance not all members of the cat family are one species.
Message 76
No, since YECs believe there are many separate Kinds each with its own genome, and it's only within each Kind that the kind of variation occurs that I'm talking about.
It is not the case because there are separate Kinds each of which possesses its own genome for its own characteristics.
Yes, this occurs with each Kind. It's a form of selection which promotes new populations with new phenotypes.
To explain what we see all around us all that is needed is the separately created Kinds each varying according to the programming of the DNA that defines itself and only itself.
Again, unfortunately for you, the evidence shows ancestry beyond normally classified "kinds" ... common ancestors for the canines (dogs) and felines (cats). In fact there is no point in the fossil record where you can find a distinct beginning point for what couod be called a "kind" ... and this is your bigger problem than whether or not speciation occurs. Not one creationist in over 150 years has identified a starting fossil for a "kind" that I am aware of.
As I understand Lenski's experiment, despite far more generations than are needed to test the reality of the ToE all he ever got was variations on more of the same.
What you got was a new feature, a new ability, that did not exist before in the genetic material of the parent population, and which occurred as a result of two mutations to the genome. That was the issue.
Enjoy
Edited by RAZD, : .

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by Faith, posted 04-08-2019 11:47 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by Faith, posted 04-10-2019 2:24 PM RAZD has replied
 Message 87 by Faith, posted 04-10-2019 2:30 PM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1660 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 81 of 403 (850498)
04-09-2019 12:31 PM
Reply to: Message 70 by Faith
04-08-2019 3:54 PM


Re: It's all simple variation built into a species
see Message 80
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by Faith, posted 04-08-2019 3:54 PM Faith has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10299
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 7.1


Message 82 of 403 (850512)
04-09-2019 4:50 PM
Reply to: Message 76 by Faith
04-08-2019 11:47 PM


Re: still more comic relief
Faith writes:
It is not the case because there are separate Kinds each of which possesses its own genome for its own characteristics.
This would mean that every person is a new Kind because everyone is born with mutations, a new genome that has never existed before.
We can sequence the genomes of parents and their offspring, and we can detect the mutations. At this point, you are simply arguing against reality.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by Faith, posted 04-08-2019 11:47 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by Faith, posted 04-09-2019 8:58 PM Taq has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1699 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 83 of 403 (850514)
04-09-2019 8:58 PM
Reply to: Message 82 by Taq
04-09-2019 4:50 PM


Re: still more comic relief
Oh don't be silly. Each Species has its own genome and in many cases the species can be recognized just from the genome. I was told this a few years ago on a thread where I brought up such questions. IIRC you were even on that thread.
Each individual of course has a variation of it because of the variations that occur from generation to generation but it's still a genome for whatever, a human being for instance.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by Taq, posted 04-09-2019 4:50 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by Taq, posted 04-10-2019 4:03 PM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1699 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 84 of 403 (850558)
04-10-2019 2:24 PM
Reply to: Message 80 by RAZD
04-09-2019 12:29 PM


Re: combined response
My faith does not dictate how I think about these things, that's just a convenient way for you to dismiss anything I say.
New features that occur within the genome of the creature are just variations on what is already there, not truly new. Not new in any sense that could justify the claims of the ToE with its species-to-species assumptions. Nothing has ever demonstrated any such thing. You get only varfiations within the genome of any creature but if they meet some questionable standard of newness you call them evolution in the ToE sense. Just the usual semantics that keep the ToE alive in your mind although if the actual facts were recognized it would be shown to be dead.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by RAZD, posted 04-09-2019 12:29 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by PaulK, posted 04-10-2019 2:29 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 91 by Tanypteryx, posted 04-10-2019 2:50 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 94 by RAZD, posted 04-11-2019 8:31 AM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1699 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 85 of 403 (850559)
04-10-2019 2:27 PM
Reply to: Message 77 by PaulK
04-09-2019 12:11 AM


Re: It's all simple variation built into a species
Sorry I think you just got it wrong.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by PaulK, posted 04-09-2019 12:11 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 88 by PaulK, posted 04-10-2019 2:31 PM Faith has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17919
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 6.7


Message 86 of 403 (850560)
04-10-2019 2:29 PM
Reply to: Message 84 by Faith
04-10-2019 2:24 PM


Re: combined response
quote:
New features that occur within the genome of the creature are just variations on what is already there, not truly new.
By which you mean that the phenotypic changes are typically small. But small phenotypic changes add up to larger changes. As I have explained.
quote:
Not new in any sense that could justify the claims of the ToE with its species-to-species assumption
But species to species transitions do not generally involve anything “new” in your sense. Can you think of even one example of a proposed species-species transition which does ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by Faith, posted 04-10-2019 2:24 PM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1699 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 87 of 403 (850562)
04-10-2019 2:30 PM
Reply to: Message 80 by RAZD
04-09-2019 12:29 PM


Re: combined response
Unfortunately, for you, the evidence shows speciation happening and the development of new traits from mutations.
Not really. All that happens is that new combinations of existing alleles produce new phenotypes. If the new reproductively isolated population is small enough the new combinations may be very rare, giving the impression of newness to evos who just have to believe that's what it is.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by RAZD, posted 04-09-2019 12:29 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 95 by RAZD, posted 04-11-2019 8:33 AM Faith has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17919
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 6.7


Message 88 of 403 (850563)
04-10-2019 2:31 PM
Reply to: Message 85 by Faith
04-10-2019 2:27 PM


Re: It's all simple variation built into a species
quote:
Sorry I think you just got it wrong.
Given that you still seem to be using the Creationist kind concept which assumes speciation it seems that I’m not wrong at all.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by Faith, posted 04-10-2019 2:27 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by Faith, posted 04-10-2019 2:34 PM PaulK has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1699 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 89 of 403 (850565)
04-10-2019 2:34 PM
Reply to: Message 88 by PaulK
04-10-2019 2:31 PM


Re: It's all simple variation built into a species
The concept of Kind does not assume speciation and I can't even grasp where you would get such an idea. All variation occurs within the Kind, even when a particular variation turns out to be unable to breed with the parent population, that's a complete rejection of the idea of speciation. Speciation is a bogus definition evos believe in, not creationists.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by PaulK, posted 04-10-2019 2:31 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by PaulK, posted 04-10-2019 2:46 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 107 by dwise1, posted 04-12-2019 3:56 AM Faith has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17919
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 6.7


Message 90 of 403 (850570)
04-10-2019 2:46 PM
Reply to: Message 89 by Faith
04-10-2019 2:34 PM


Re: It's all simple variation built into a species
quote:
The concept of Kind does not assume speciation and I can't even grasp where you would get such an idea.
Of course it does. The whole point of proposing Kinds is to say that groups of modern species are descended from a single species which was on Noah’s Ark. That is how they reduce the number of species that had to be there. The term was only invented because YECs needed a name for groups of evolutionarily related species.
quote:
All variation occurs within the Kind, even when a particular variation turns out to be unable to breed with the parent population, that's a complete rejection of the idea of speciation.
Sounds much more like acceptance to me. Where is the rejection ?
quote:
Speciation is a bogus definition evos believe in, not creationists.
But you refuse to really reject it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by Faith, posted 04-10-2019 2:34 PM Faith 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