Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evolution for Dummies and Christians
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 74 of 299 (246274)
09-25-2005 10:07 AM
Reply to: Message 73 by truthlover
09-25-2005 9:26 AM


A prime explanation..
Since the lunar month is just over 29 days, your week has different visible clues by over a day every month.
I don't know anything for real here but..... (hasn't stopped me before has it )
Notice that 29 is prime so there can't be a really good match to work with the lunar month. However, as you learned it is an important period of time.
It seems to me entirely possible that originally we weren't so tied to exactly a 7 day week after a 7 day week. I can imagine people's restarting a period of 4 seven day weeks with each lunar month thus keeping it mostly in sync.
This message has been edited by NosyNed, 09-25-2005 10:08 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by truthlover, posted 09-25-2005 9:26 AM truthlover has not replied

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 132 of 299 (247242)
09-29-2005 9:58 AM
Reply to: Message 131 by jar
09-29-2005 9:16 AM


What is transitional?
Would that not be an example of a transitional species?
I don't think so but, like so much, it depends on your definition of "transitional".
I think in the context we are using the word it means a species that has features diagnositic of two higher taxa. I'm not sure this is even applied at the genus level but certainly not at the species in common usage.
Perhaps we can call it little-t transitional but not big-T.
ABE:
Also note:
It isn't the degree of copper resistance that counts. If the new very copper resistant plant were totally interfertile with the other they would simply be variants within one species. The degree of interfertility is what counts.
E.O. Wilson "The Diversity of Life" writes:
"More serious conceptual problems are created by "semi-species," populations partially interbreed--not enough to constiture one big freely interbreeding gene pool, but enough to produce a good many hybrids under natural conditions."
"The genus Quercus (the oaks) is outstanding for the very poor developement of sterility barriers between its species. Oak species are interfertile in many combinations, and natural hybrids may be formed between pairs of species that are very different from one another both morphologically aand physiologicall." -- quoting Whittlemore and Schaal page 47
In this case there is no semispecies if the new species is totally non interbreeding. If it was partially so we would have semispecies.
This message has been edited by NosyNed, 09-29-2005 10:10 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 131 by jar, posted 09-29-2005 9:16 AM jar has not replied

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 163 of 299 (247820)
09-30-2005 8:10 PM
Reply to: Message 162 by crashfrog
09-30-2005 7:57 PM


background needed
Yup. Those degrees are pretty much going to be useless in regards to this subject.
Obviously the knowlege picked up in such a course of study would be of pretty much no use. But the ability to think things through and follow logical reasoning is far from useless. However, lots of knowlege and a problem with reasoning (Behe comes to mind) is a bigger problem than a short fall in knowlege.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 162 by crashfrog, posted 09-30-2005 7:57 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 170 by crashfrog, posted 09-30-2005 9:57 PM NosyNed has not replied

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 200 of 299 (266449)
12-07-2005 2:35 PM
Reply to: Message 198 by Carico
12-07-2005 2:20 PM


Some more help maybe?
Message 161
This idea is one thing you need to understand before you continue I think.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 198 by Carico, posted 12-07-2005 2:20 PM Carico has not replied

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 224 of 299 (266650)
12-07-2005 11:44 PM
Reply to: Message 219 by crashfrog
12-07-2005 11:35 PM


magic point
As I noted in the post I refered to in Message 161 in Message 200 there isn't likely to be any such "magic point".
Carico? It seems you didn't read that reference. If you don't read what information you are given and ask about it you will not make any progress here.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 219 by crashfrog, posted 12-07-2005 11:35 PM crashfrog has not replied

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 225 of 299 (266654)
12-07-2005 11:51 PM
Reply to: Message 213 by Carico
12-07-2005 11:21 PM


Learning by taking the time to read
Carico, Did you read the post I refered you to in Message 200?
You are taking the approach, still, that you know something about this and will catch people in major flaws. While individuals will make mistakes here what you are told is generally correct. When it sound crazy to you it is because you don't understand it.
If you keep up your current attitude you will either make no progress or find it much, much slower than it has to be.
Evolutionary theory is, at one level, simple. The details are horrifically complex. Try to get an overall understanding before you dive in too deep.
The other thing you need to get straight is that if you've been fed material by the likes of the Institute for Creation Research or Answers in Genesis or many others you have been lied to or at least deliberately mislead. You may not be ready to accept that as the case yet but it will make it easier if you take that as a bit of background and a working hypothosis for the moment. It might help clear the clutter out for you.
The other working idea to keep in mind is that you will not be deliberately mislead my most folks here.
I hope we aren't all jumping on too fast. It may be a lot but it may also help if we present the same information in different ways.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 213 by Carico, posted 12-07-2005 11:21 PM Carico has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 228 by Carico, posted 12-08-2005 12:03 AM NosyNed has replied

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 234 of 299 (266681)
12-08-2005 12:30 AM
Reply to: Message 228 by Carico
12-08-2005 12:03 AM


Learning not to waste time
I used to enjoy endless banter with visitors like you. Others still hav e some patience. I don't anymore.
You are wasting your time here. You will not convince anyone with silly tirades and you clearly have no intention of learning anything at all for yourself. I suggest you just pack up and carry on believing what you want to believe and maintaining, at all costs, your ingnorance.
As an example:
But since evolution contradicts that reality,
A number of people have tried hard to explain why you are saddled with a huge misconception here but you don't appear to have read a line of what have been posted. Not a good use of anyones time is it?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 228 by Carico, posted 12-08-2005 12:03 AM Carico has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 236 by FliesOnly, posted 12-08-2005 7:55 AM NosyNed has not replied

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 265 of 299 (266800)
12-08-2005 10:58 AM
Reply to: Message 242 by Yaro
12-08-2005 8:42 AM


Confusing words
Carico, again, no one is saying humans came from an ape.
To be fair, Yaro, we (as a group) have been using words hastily in ways that could easily appear both contradictory and are confusing.
"Ape" is not a technical term and is not well defined in this discussion. Carico has been told humans are apes, did not come from apes and did come from ape like creatures. All of which are true because the word "ape" is used in different ways. Certainly a receipe for confusion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 242 by Yaro, posted 12-08-2005 8:42 AM Yaro has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 266 by Yaro, posted 12-08-2005 11:07 AM NosyNed 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