Forum: Darwnist Ideology

quote:

---

Once again you forget that in Darwinism when talking about extinction, you have to have a comparitive unit of selection which does not go extinct. You can't actually focus on the extinction itself within a Darwinist framework of reference. Extinction is evolution because the genes are forever lost? Is that the study of nonexistant evolution? You are not making sense.

---

What kind of drivel is this, Syamsu? Of course a species can't evolve if they all die off. Is this supposed to falsify the ToE? The fact that scientists can say that a species did not have enough time to evolve to changing conditions speaks to their knowledge of natural selection, not the lack thereof. Extinction opens up new opportunities for other species, now that a niche is either gone or other species could not adapt to the changing conditions. Actually, the fact that scientists can say, with authority, that the species did not have time to adapt speaks AGAINST the hypermutation and hyperspeciation put forth by kind and ark supporters. Extinction actually speaks against some forms of creationism, but is well understood within evolutionary theory.

quote:

---

About 100 percent of organims that live and have ever lived aren't and won't be ancestors in any way to any new species, even assuming evolution theory is true. Of course the 100 percent is rounded of, but it's a very small number. You can look at a planet and confidently say the law of gravity applies to that planet, you can look at an organism and confidently say the theory of evolution doesn't apply to that organism, or the theory of origin of species through natural selection doesn't apply.

---

Natural selection shaped that organism before it went extinct, so up until the point the species went extinct natural selection did apply. Do you agree with this or not? How about an analogy, since you brought up gravity. If we launch a satellite and it escapes the pull of earth's gravity, can we say that earth's gravity never applied to that satellite? Of course not. Yes, there are dead ends in the tree of life, but that is missing the point of how we came to those dead ends.Could you please outline in what areas our understanding of extinction is underdeveloped. Could you give specific examples where we were surprised that extinction occurred, and were unable to explain it? I can't tell if you are saying that our inability to describe extinction is a refutation of the theory of evolution as a whole. Is this what you are getting at?