Giants

quote:

---

How can you evaluate his understanding when your own understanding is so obviously limited?

---

I dont think my understanding is "limited". As I dont think yours is.------------------
"I believe in christianity as I believe the sun has risen, not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else."-C.S. Lewisholla at me for any reason at: messenjahjr@yahoo.com

I wasn't just talking about adaptation. (Which is part of evolution.) I was talking about speciation - the process by which new species arise. That is evolution, right? What? Sure it has. Here's some 50 or so recorded instances of new species evolving both in the lab and in the wild: Observed Instances of SpeciationSo, we've observed adaptation. We've observed it giving rise to new species. We observe fossil evidence that new species arose in the past. What more do you need?[This message has been edited by crashfrog, 08-19-2003]

I browsed through it (long article).

quote:

---

We've observed it giving rise to new species.

---

I dont see any indication of that, maybe pointing it out would be nice. I read on adaptation, not evolution.

quote:

---

We observe fossil evidence that new species arose in the past.

---

Can you please back up your statements with the fossil evidence?------------------
"I believe in christianity as I believe the sun has risen, not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else."-C.S. Lewisholla at me for any reason at: messenjahjr@yahoo.com

Also speciation isnt evolution.------------------
"I believe in christianity as I believe the sun has risen, not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else."-C.S. Lewisholla at me for any reason at: messenjahjr@yahoo.com

adaptation is evolution or part of it

Check this for my views: Missing Link | Answers in Genesis ------------------
"I believe in christianity as I believe the sun has risen, not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else."-C.S. Lewisholla at me for any reason at: messenjahjr@yahoo.com

Missing Link | Answers in Genesis That shows how speciation defies evolution in ways.------------------
"I believe in christianity as I believe the sun has risen, not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else."-C.S. Lewisholla at me for any reason at: messenjahjr@yahoo.com

quote:

---

adaptation is evolution or part of it

---

Yeah I know, it is part of the evolutionary theory.------------------
"I believe in christianity as I believe the sun has risen, not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else."-C.S. Lewisholla at me for any reason at: messenjahjr@yahoo.com

"If we start with the Word of the One who knows all, the evidence of today’s world makes a great deal of sense. Creatures were to reproduce ‘after their kind’, so mice come from mice, lizards from lizards, daisies from daisies. Evolution has never occurred, nor does it occur today. But organisms have a wonderful ‘built-in’ genetic capacity for rapid change in response to environmental pressures—most easily observed today in isolated island environments."That sums it up for me. Back to Giants here before this topic gets closed lol.------------------
"I believe in christianity as I believe the sun has risen, not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else."-C.S. Lewisholla at me for any reason at: messenjahjr@yahoo.com

quote:

---

Noah did not have with him pairs of dingoes, wolves and coyotes, for example, but a pair of creatures which were ancestral to all these species, and probably to a number of other present-day species representative of the 'dog kind'

---

This is evolution. He has some wild Ideas....

They adapted from their kinds, no evolution there. Thats adaptation not evolution.------------------
"I believe in christianity as I believe the sun has risen, not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else."-C.S. Lewisholla at me for any reason at: messenjahjr@yahoo.com

Put the Bible out of your head for alittle while. Now try to see things without it. See things without Religion. Stop looking for things to get around Evolution to make your Bible correct and look just at Evolution. As has been said the Bible has no Facts to back it up so We regard it as just stories. Without proof you can't say they are real or not. I can't see how you can. Stop listening to Mom and other family who a christens and do some extra research Beyond Creation sites

Well, we've observed a lot of new species being made. No, speciation. New species that are different than the parent species. Am I going to have to explain every little thing to you? Are you even going to read the papers I present to you?Ok, how about this, a flowering plant that adapted to be resistant to copper toxins and can no longer breed with it's parent population (i.e. is a new species):

quote:

---

Speciation as a Result of Selection for Tolerance to a Toxin: Yellow Monkey Flower (Mimulus guttatus) At reasonably low concentrations, copper is toxic to many plant species. Several plants have been seen to develop a tolerance to this metal (Macnair 1981). Macnair and Christie (1983) used this to examine the genetic basis of a postmating isolating mechanism in yellow monkey flower. When they crossed plants from the copper tolerant "Copperopolis" population with plants from the nontolerant "Cerig" population, they found that many of the hybrids were inviable. During early growth, just after the four leaf stage, the leaves of many of the hybrids turned yellow and became necrotic. Death followed this. This was seen only in hybrids between the two populations. Through mapping studies, the authors were able to show that the copper tolerance gene and the gene responsible for hybrid inviability were either the same gene or were very tightly linked. These results suggest that reproductive isolation may require changes in only a small number of genes.

---

Or this, where a kind of single-celled algae became a colonial organism (a kind of stepping-stone to multi-cellular life):

quote:

---

Coloniality in Chlorella vulgaris Boraas (1983) reported the induction of multicellularity in a strain of Chlorella pyrenoidosa (since reclassified as C. vulgaris) by predation. He was growing the unicellular green alga in the first stage of a two stage continuous culture system as for food for a flagellate predator, Ochromonas sp., that was growing in the second stage. Due to the failure of a pump, flagellates washed back into the first stage. Within five days a colonial form of the Chlorella appeared. It rapidly came to dominate the culture. The colony size ranged from 4 cells to 32 cells. Eventually it stabilized at 8 cells. This colonial form has persisted in culture for about a decade. The new form has been keyed out using a number of algal taxonomic keys. They key out now as being in the genus Coelosphaerium, which is in a different family from Chlorella.

---

Or even fruit flies exposed to different environments for so long that they could no longer mate with other populations and thus, became a new species:

quote:

---

Sexual Isolation as a Byproduct of Adaptation to Environmental Conditions in Drosophila melanogaster Kilias, et al. (1980) exposed D. melanogaster populations to different temperature and humidity regimes for several years. They performed mating tests to check for reproductive isolation. They found some sterility in crosses among populations raised under different conditions. They also showed some positive assortative mating. These things were not observed in populations which were separated but raised under the same conditions. They concluded that sexual isolation was produced as a byproduct of selection.

---

This was all in that article. New species, with new abilities, that can't interbreed with the old populations. Speciation. It's as clear as can be. That new species arose in the past? Ok, consider grasses. No grasses appear in the fossil record in strata deeper than this geological era. Since the geologic record is largely a record of time, that means that grasses evolved after the dinosaurs. That would be fossil evidence of a new species. A whole new taxa, in fact.

These are the emails she has sent me so far, the owner of the site in case you dont know:"Iam going to send you information as i find it.
To start:
Several human skulls with horns protruding from them were discovered in a burial mound at Sayre, Bradford County, Pennsylvania, in the 1880's. With the exception of the bony projections located about two inches above the eyebrows, the men whom these skeletons belonged to were anatomically normal, though at seven feet tall they were giants. It was estimated that the bodies had been buried around A.D. 1200. The find was made by a reputable group of antiquarians, including the Pennsylvania state historian and dignitary of the Presbyterian Church (Dr. G.P. Donehoo) and two professors, A.B. Skinner, of the American Investigating Museum, and W.K.Morehead, of Phillips Academy, Andover, Massachusetts. The bones were sent to the American Investigating Museum in Philadelphia, where like so many finds that question anthropology, they were stolen and never seen again"and this to tell me shes searching still:"If I remember right, I had problems finding the name before, when I originally did the article.
I am announcing in BUFO Report for any information on this.
In the meantime, Iam still searching.
Mary"------------------
"I believe in christianity as I believe the sun has risen, not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else."-C.S. Lewisholla at me for any reason at: messenjahjr@yahoo.com[This message has been edited by messenjaH, 08-19-2003]

I'm sorry, what are "kinds"? That's not a taxonomic category that I'm familiar with. What prevents one "kind" of population from giving rise to another "kind"?