Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,888 Year: 4,145/9,624 Month: 1,016/974 Week: 343/286 Day: 64/40 Hour: 0/5


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   nested heirarchies as evidence against darwinian evolution
pumaz
Junior Member (Idle past 5913 days)
Posts: 4
Joined: 02-16-2008


Message 243 of 248 (456240)
02-16-2008 2:11 PM


Here is the bottom line...
Evolution is the scaffold or template for taxonimic classification. When organisms are classified it is done with the assuption that all organisms arose from one ancient ancestor. Therefore, as the physiological distinctions between organisms become greater they will also be older. The question could be "why haven't we seen a new Kingdom emerge?" and the answer would be the same. All life on earth has come from the phyla that previously existed, because that is the why we decided to classify organisms. The earth will never see a "new phylm" because all species have descended and will continue to descend with the pylogenetic differences we have already defined.

Replies to this message:
 Message 244 by RAZD, posted 02-16-2008 3:34 PM pumaz has replied

  
pumaz
Junior Member (Idle past 5913 days)
Posts: 4
Joined: 02-16-2008


Message 245 of 248 (456267)
02-16-2008 6:45 PM
Reply to: Message 244 by RAZD
02-16-2008 3:34 PM


His groupings were based upon shared physical characteristics. Only his groupings for animals remain to this day, and the groupings themselves have been significantly changed since Linnaeus' conception, as have the principles behind them. Nevertheless, Linnaeus is credited with establishing the idea of a hierarchical structure of classification which is based upon observable characteristics.
I am aware of the history of classifcation. However, I was referring to modern taxonomy which as the passage you provided demonstrates is vastly different than that which was originally developed by Linnaeus. Mordern classification efforts are entirely based on the ToE, inevitably creating, as I was attempting to convey, a nested heirarchy. I guess the point I was trying to make was that the original posters arguement was moot because taxonomic classification as we known it today is premised upon ToE.
PS Thanks fro the warm welcome.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 244 by RAZD, posted 02-16-2008 3:34 PM RAZD has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 246 by Blue Jay, posted 02-18-2008 3:46 PM pumaz has not replied
 Message 248 by AZPaul3, posted 02-18-2008 4:53 PM pumaz 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