Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 63 (9024 total)
41 online now:
PaulK (1 member, 40 visitors)
Newest Member: Ryan Merkle
Post Volume: Total: 882,921 Year: 567/14,102 Month: 567/294 Week: 54/269 Day: 0/14 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   What mutations are needed for a particular trait (e.g. wings) to arise?
kuresu
Member (Idle past 1267 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 70 of 111 (346295)
09-03-2006 8:44 PM
Reply to: Message 55 by nator
08-31-2006 8:47 PM


Re: Finite possibilities - not infinite..
not cool. way not cool.

I've got blue eyes! And damn it, I'm not gonna let some gov't freaks kill me for it!

(all in jest--but seriously--I'm not letting any one kill me)


All a man's knowledge comes from his experiences

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by nator, posted 08-31-2006 8:47 PM nator has not yet responded

  
kuresu
Member (Idle past 1267 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 87 of 111 (347390)
09-07-2006 9:37 PM
Reply to: Message 84 by skepticfaith
09-07-2006 9:24 PM


Re: And the mutations observed?
typical. creationist website that has the gall to say science vs evolution, and then mischaracterize evolution.

Think about what you just read about the pairs of ribs in each horse (or so called horse Eohippus) If the evolution of the horse is true than why the inconsistent number of ribs in each horse; shouldn't the modern horse have more or at least as many as Philohippus? Why does Merychippus have fewer ribs than Eohippus?

Think about what you just read about the toes on each horse. The more modern horse has no more toes; it has a hoof. I thought in evolution you gained faculties not loose them. I guess then in evolution you have to loose something to gain something?

the first one--what the hell? You know--it's equally valid to ask why doesn't the modern horse have less ribs. it's not a major change--adding a rib or taking one away.

second one--two falseities. the hoof--that's a single toe. and in evolution, you can either lose or gain something, but not lose something to gain something. It can happen, sure, but it's not the case every single time. otherwise, how can changes add up over time to lead to speciation? hmm, me smells a strawman being put up. remember, an argument based on strawmen or incredulity are not valid--and that's what's happening here.


All a man's knowledge comes from his experiences

This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by skepticfaith, posted 09-07-2006 9:24 PM skepticfaith has not yet responded

  
kuresu
Member (Idle past 1267 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 89 of 111 (347393)
09-07-2006 9:42 PM
Reply to: Message 85 by skepticfaith
09-07-2006 9:30 PM


Re: Ha ha.
umm, how does revised timescales affect the theory of evolution?

hint--it doesn't. the fact that there were larger mammals (think cat sized) in the cretaceous period doesn't invalidate "natural selection plus mutation".

all it does is effect the history of evolution. and funny thing--that recent discovery--those large mammals don't have any modern day representatives. check out the thread Undermining long held paradigms

its a non-issue. no moving goal posts--they are what they have been--"natural selection plus mutation"


All a man's knowledge comes from his experiences

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by skepticfaith, posted 09-07-2006 9:30 PM skepticfaith 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 © 2021