explaining common ancestry

Do you agree that new species come into being all the time? Do you agree that these new species haven't mated with another species to create themselves.Here is proof that one species turns into another without breeding with it., 5.3.5 is a good example of flies becoming reproductively isolated so that they can no longer interbreed (thus becoming new species). At all times the flies mated with their own species. How does a member of one species breed with a member of another species (in order to acquire/pass on genes) when the definition of species which you yourself have put forward states that mating between two species is impossible. I would like to see some of the tons of proof you have if I may.This message has been edited by Modulous, Thu, 22-December-2005 05:14 PM

You may be surprised to learn that I applaud every time you post this kind of nonsense: Minds as closed as yours with mouths as big as yours do the theory of evolution more good than you can imagine.Keep up the good work, Ms. Carico!I'm sure you are working your way up to another suspension soon, or a ban, just like trolls at other boards: hate-mongers usually stay true to form and sooner or later get kicked out even by the most tolerant communities.Please answer the question about dog breeds, Carico. Since all the current dog breeds were developed by human dog fanciers, how was a St. Bernard ever born to a non-St. Bernard?Thank you again for your continued promotion of the theory of evolution. Have a nice day.

---

Save lives! Click here!
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC!

You have a fundamental misunderstanding of how mainstream evolution is understood to work. While there are a wide variety of evolutionary mechanisms, creating new species through cross-breeding is not a significant one for animals. Most new species are thought to arise through a gradual process that Darwin described as descent with modification combined with natural selection.Sticking with animals as the focus of the discussion, a species is a population of animals capable of interbreeding. The gene pool of the population includes a vast amount of diversity. What defines the population as a species is the gene profile, or more accurately, the allele profile, where an allele is one variety of a gene, such as eye color where there is a blue allele, a brown allele and so forth (the actual factors governing eye color are complex, so this example of alleles is oversimplified to the point of being wrong, but I use it because it provides a good illustration of what an allele is). The frequency of each type of allele in the population defines the species.The gene pool serves as a huge genetic library that the population can draw upon in times of environmental stress. When conditions are not ideal, natural selection will choose those individuals most suited for the new conditions, and over the course of time the allele profile for the population will change, and so will the internal and external morphology of the species, as well as its behavior. Mutations also play a role because they create new alleles not previously available to the species that the population can draw upon as it evolves to best take advantage of the new conditions. Reproduction is a key component of evolution. Darwin called evolution descent with modification, and there can be no descent without reproduction. No one here is insinuating or implying that reproduction is a waste of time. It is necessary in order for evolution to occur. And no one believes animals magically turn into other species. In the main, speciation occurs through a gradual process of descent with modification filtered by natural selection. It is the facts gathered by Darwin that enabled him to develop the theory of evolution, and all the scientists that came after him have uncovered mountains and mountains of more facts that confirm and enhance the theory. Mendel discovered the discrete nature of heredity, and in the 1920's the population geneticists discovered that genetics and Darwinian evolution were mutually supportive theories, combining them into what is known today as the modern synthesis.The Creationist perception that there is a lack of facts supporting evolution is due to the impossibility of observing speciation in the higher animals. We can observe speciation in the lab in bacteria and fruit flies and so forth, and there are a small number of observed speciations in the wild, but by and large change in the higher animals occurs at far to slow a pace for us to notice.So much of the evidence for evolution comes from other sources, such as cladistics, the fossil record and genetic analysis. We can discuss this and other evidence if you are interested.--Percy

So you are claiming that one species can turn into another species without being able to breed with that species. Please prove that this occurs. You are therefore claiming that birds can turn into dogs, cats can turn into wolves, etc. without being able to mate with each other. Is that correct? If so, when and where have you observed one species turning into another species without the 2 species being able to interbreed? And I'm not talking about one's imagination. I'm talking about actual proof that this happens in reality. And if you have concrete evidence that one species can turn into another species without the 2 interbreeding, then again, why do animals need to mate in order to pass their genes along to their offspring? Why don't they simply turn into other species all by themselves? And remember that apes and humans are not the same species because they cannot interbreed. So we're talking about simply chaning from one species to another without being able to interbreed. Thank you.

Why are you continuing to be so willfully ignorant? You have been told that Apes are not a species. Apes are a whole group of species that include humans as well as others like gorillas, bonobos and chimpanzees.YOU are an Ape.Before we go any further it would be a good idea to get this settled.

You are an animal.

​

You are an Ape.

​

Is that understood?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I think you first have to realize that it would make no sense to claim that the only way to get another species is to breed with that species. Were this the case then the species would have to already exist in order to breed with it, but if it already existed then there would be no need to breed with it in order to produce it.Another part of this that makes no sense is that breeding different species together produces a hybrid, not one of the original species. Breeding a horse and a zebra produces a zorse, but not a horse and not a zebra. Breeding a lion and a tiger produces a liger, but not a lion and not a tiger.So the reason no one believes that one species can turn into another species by breeding with it is because it makes no sense in the couple different ways that I've described. No, birds cannot turn into dogs and cats cannot turn into wolves. That sounds more like magic than science. Evolutionary theory holds that species change gradually over time in response to environmental pressure through the processes of descent with modification (offspring are never identical to parents) and natural selection (organisms with traits ill-suited to the environment will not get a chance to reproduce and so will not pass their genes on to their offspring). This goes back to what I wrote earlier about populations. A species evolves as a population of organisms, not as individuals. The allele profile of the population gradually changes over time in response to environmental changes. If it changes sufficiently then the descendent population will be a different species than the original population of many generations before. They *do* change into new species without interbreeding with other species. That's what everyone has been telling you.--PercyThis message has been edited by Percy, 12-22-2005 05:21 PM

This is not what evolution claims. This is a charicature of evolution or an example of extreme ignorance of what evolution claims.Evolution claims that small changes occur in populations, that these changes accumulate over time, that with enough time the changes are such that a different species develops, whether in a linear progression from a previous one or as a side branch to it or both (two species develop from a single common ancestor species). We are apes. It is that simple. There is no lie involved.Your problem is an idee fix that is wrong -- your preconcieved of what is involved is not correct, and is based on ignorance. This is profound ignorance in operation. Species don't interbreed to cause new species, this is NOT the mechanism by whichy evolution occurs. This is a false image based on ignorance. Not by a single mutation, but by an accumulation of mutations. This is what a speciation "event" entails, it is a process spread in time where a population of organisms undergoes slow change and reaches a point where they are no longer the same as the original species. Each individual is able to breed with its extant population, however that population is also undergoing the same changes in the gene pool cause by the accumulated mutations that are passed on to each successive generation. Absolutely false. Evolution is NOT a pin the gene on the cutout doll game. Genes change by mutation. They do not become the genes of other orgainism, but changes from the current ones. Thus you can have new genes that develop new species -- with no need for a single other species to be involved in any way. You need to lose this concept of chimera gene mixing, as it is just plain wrong and ignores what evolution teaches. What I see is that you have been corrected on this false and ignorant position several times but have yet to show any impression of learning the truth of the matter. As such I expect this response and any other to be a waste of time until you learn something of the truth.Try reading a book based on the real science of evolution, and when you get to the part where one species breeds with another to create a new species you can stop. Then you can quote that section here.Take your time. Until you learn the facts, this is a waste of your time.

---

Join the effort to unravel {AIDS\HIV} with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

​

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

Again, more lies. If we're apes, then why can't we breed with apes? The statements on this forum are not only false, they're ridiculous. Do you really think that logical people buy this nonsense? If so, then you're only fooling yourself and those who do not understand what a species is. Darwin has got some people so confused they can't even define basic words! They think animals can turn into humans on their own, they don't know what a species is, and they don't even know the difference between animals and humans!But that's what brainwashing does. The brainwasher convinces people that he is omniscient, so the people he brainwashes think everything he says is right, even to the point of absurdity! Most of us have been fed the lie of evolution since we were school children so people think that scientists can't possibly be wrong. Well, sorry, but scientists are coming out by the droves finally chaning their minds about evolution. It will again be interesting to see if people follow the scientists or stick with the theory of evolution. But usually what happens is that when scientists themselves change their thoeries, it is only then that the people who follow them will look at the possibility that they could be wrong. And only then can the obvious inconsistencies in their theories be seen by them.Again, you can call an ape a humn or a human an ape, but that still doesn't make it possible for apes to breed with humans. Therefore, we cannot possibly be descendants of ancestors with whom we are not capable of breeding. That again, is an elementary principle of biology that cannot be altered. So instead of worshiping a person like Darwin, you really need to begin to think for yourself and observe reality to see the difference between truth and fiction.

Ape is not a species. There are many different species in the apes. We can't interbreed with other extant modern species of apes because of genetic/physiological incompatibilities.TTFN,WK

We have told you a thousand times that 'apes' is not a species.Every Toyota is a car. Not every car is a Toyota.
Every human is an ape. Not every ape is a human.Your question "If we're apes, then why can't we breed with apes?" is like asking "If my Toyota is a car, then why doesn't it come from a car factory?". It does come from a car factory, as long as you mean the Toyota car factory. Likewise, we can breed with apes, as long as they are human apes.Try to fathom this, it is essential for any meaningful discussion about humans and apes. Finally something we agree on!This message has been edited by Parasomnium, 23-Dec-2005 02:19 PM

---

Humans can breed with ALL humans. Therefore, humans are all the same species. But again, going back to the elementary, humans cannot breed with apes. So we are NOT the same species. Why is that so HARD for you to understand? Because unless you understand that, you will not be able to see the difference between truth and fiction. This is BASIC to understanding how offspring are produced. Again, the truth can only be found in reality, NOT in the imagination.

No one is lying to you. You just have the wrong idea of what an ape is.The formal genus/species name for human beings is Homo sapiens. This means we're of the genus Homo and the species H. sapiens. Homo sapiens are members of the Hominidae family, which is a member of the Hominoidea superfamily, which is apes. A more complete classification looks like this: From this table you can see that apes are a broad classification known as a superfamily, and that chimpanzees, gorillas, orangutans and humans are all members of this superfamily. In other words, humans are a type of ape. If you don't like being called an ape then use the more technical superfamily name, Hominoidea. This has been a consistent claim of creationists for the past 50 years or so. If scientists had truly been deserting evolution in droves for so long a period of time then there should be few scientists left by now who still accept evolution. Since this is not the case you might want to cast a more skeptical eye at the source of your information.--Percy

Carico, you may be aware that biologists use a heirarchical classification system for organisms. For instance, within the group, "insects," (class Insecta), we have a smaller group called "beetles" (order Coleoptera). Within that group we have smaller divisions (families, genera, species, etc.). Right? So, for example, a southern pine beetle (genus Dendroctonus, species frontalis) is in the bark beetle subfamily (Scolytinae) of the weevil family (Curculionidae) which is a type of beetle (order Coleoptera) and an insect (class Insecta) and an arthropod (phylum Arthopoda) which is a type of animal (kingdom Animalia).An "ape" is not a species. Apes are a superfamily of animals (superfamily Hominoidea), which includes many species, such as gibbons, siamangs, gorillas, chimps, and orangutans. The "great apes" are in the family Hominidae, and according to biologists, humans are placed within this family, along with chimps, gorillas, and orangutans.So, you confuse the issue terribly when you argue that "apes and humans are not the same species." I hope that this explanation will help you communicate more productively.Edit: whoops, Percy beat me to it.This message has been edited by Belfry, 12-23-2005 10:13 AM

Sorry, but it's easy to see what an ape is, even to kindergartners but not to evolutionists apparently. But you can go to a jungle and to the zoo to see what it is since you have no idea what it is. But again,I'll try to explain it to you. An ape is a wild animal who grunts groans, eats, sleeps and mates. A human being eats, sleeps, talks, walks on 2 legs, thinks, builds skyscrapers, contemplates spirituality and rules over the animals. And if you still can't see the differences between them, then why did scientitists give the name "homonid" to an ape if a human is an ape?And regardless again, of whether or not you believe that a human is an ape, you still AVOID the fact that humans cannot bree with apes. therefore it is impossible for a human to be the descendant of an ape unless you're suggesting that a species turns into another on its own. So it's completely irrelevant what you call a human being. it still cannot breed with an ape. Once you understand that, you'll be closer to discerning betwee truth and fiction and not until.Just look all over the internet to see how many scientists are seeing the absurdity of the theory of evolution. Again, it took scientists almost a century to see that bleeding a person does not cure him, nor does brain size determine the intelligence of a person which the science of phrnology, so rampant in the 19th century advocated.And our generation is no different. Each generation thinks it has the truth until the next generation when they find out it wasn't the truth. Again, when scientists agree with the bible they will always be right. When they disagree with it they will always be wrong. But it seems that it will take thousands of generations of scientists changing their minds for people to understand that.This message has been edited by Carico, 12-23-2005 11:19 AM

Not only complete ignorance, bur also a complete lack of wanting to learn anything. It is ahrd to debate anyone when they refuse to accept FACTS.I think this thread should be shut down. It has been explained to Carico dozens of times and he still refuses to acknowledge anything near reality.