Understanding through Discussion

Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 82 (9005 total)
61 online now:
AZPaul3, Coragyps, dwise1, JonF (4 members, 57 visitors)
Newest Member: kanthesh
Upcoming Birthdays: AdminPhat
Post Volume: Total: 881,071 Year: 12,819/23,288 Month: 544/1,527 Week: 223/207 Day: 45/39 Hour: 1/2

Announcements: Topic abandonment warning (read and/or suffer the consequences)

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Author Topic:   Even Younger Earth Creationism
Member (Idle past 278 days)
Posts: 3964
Joined: 07-01-2005

Message 59 of 76 (462220)
04-01-2008 3:54 PM
Reply to: Message 58 by teen4christ
04-01-2008 3:38 PM

Are you sure about this? The definition of evolution is the change in allele frequency. With the widespread of introduction of anti-biotics and how bacterial populations everywhere have reacted to them, I'd say that bacteria is a perfect demonstration of evolution.

Randman is sure that his definition of evolution has never been observed. Note how he lumps all of "bacteria" into a single "form."

Rand(straw?)man is yet another of the misguided Creationists who, despite everyone's best efforts to educate him, has never been able to understand that the Theory of Evolution does not and never has suggested that a microbe should give birth to a chihuahua, or that a snake should lay an egg that hatches a chicken.

Randman will say that "we have never seen a bacteria produce anything as offspring other than more bacteria," completely missing the point when it comes to actual changes in allele frequency in populations. Until e coli morphs into a hamster or we actually observe a change on a level higher than the species level ("kind" seems to be something similar to "family," I think), he'll dismiss any speciation or other observed confirmation of the predictions of evolution as "adaptation within kinds."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by teen4christ, posted 04-01-2008 3:38 PM teen4christ has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by randman, posted 04-01-2008 4:08 PM Rahvin has not yet responded

Member (Idle past 278 days)
Posts: 3964
Joined: 07-01-2005

Message 62 of 76 (462223)
04-01-2008 4:09 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by randman
04-01-2008 4:07 PM

By that definition, creationists are evolutionists.

That is the definition, randman.

It always has been.

Look it up sometime.

ev·o·lu·tion /ˌɛvəˈluʃən or, especially Brit., ˌivə-/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ev-uh-loo-shuhn or, especially Brit., ee-vuh-] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
1. any process of formation or growth; development: the evolution of a language; the evolution of the airplane.
2. a product of such development; something evolved: The exploration of space is the evolution of decades of research.
3. Biology. change in the gene pool of a population from generation to generation by such processes as mutation, natural selection, and genetic drift.
4. a process of gradual, peaceful, progressive change or development, as in social or economic structure or institutions.
5. a motion incomplete in itself, but combining with coordinated motions to produce a single action, as in a machine.
6. a pattern formed by or as if by a series of movements: the evolutions of a figure skater.
7. an evolving or giving off of gas, heat, etc.
8. Mathematics. the extraction of a root from a quantity. Compare involution (def. 8).
9. a movement or one of a series of movements of troops, ships, etc., as for disposition in order of battle or in line on parade.
10. any similar movement, esp. in close order drill.

Relevant portion in bold.

Please don't try to pretend you've never been told this, randman.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by randman, posted 04-01-2008 4:07 PM randman has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by randman, posted 04-01-2008 5:23 PM Rahvin has not yet responded

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:

Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020