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:   Trueorigins critique of Macroevolution
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 5032 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 10 of 11 (15537)
08-16-2002 1:46 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by John
07-28-2002 12:40 PM


I guess it would remand on what "novel" one was reading. I thought a few mobths ago that I was on to the organismis that could reliably, with all the appartus of population genetics work toward a solution of this problem but alas it was not to be because one of the three species taxonomically I was looking at was an import from Europe and thus if the arguement had to make it's way all the way through biogeography, where, i was trying to take the expt it could fail to convince perhaps at a crucial point. A well desgined expt if crucial will ALwyays give some needed result. In this case I could not guarentte this so I have abandoned this taxa for a while.
The material needed were:
1)The very landscape that was in dispute between Wright and 30s evolutionists which could or could not be read back to Scopes trial--acquired the streams around Cornell with BOTH aquatic and terrestrial creatures that if evolution was true had to have made this transition in an earlier age than the collection localites generally I made in New jersey etc.
2) Some work on the biochemisty of the traits involved-- there was a yellow pigment that both terrestrial forms contained and seemed to be a term that interpretation of Wright's physiological genetics got hung down on. There were two metabolic pathways being described in the literature so that a genetic DIFFERENCE could in fact be the casue of any difference in the genetic systems.
3)The morphology of the whole larger group was described as "horizontal" and yet it could have been suggested that the one terrestrial form that got furtherest onto land was an adaptation to the moon's orbit and not the earth's so as to be able to differentiate the variance.
4)The trait geometry variability could be spilt into three and not two classes including a perimieter formation, ornamentation and quantitiatve deviations from the extrudable internal bio-change across the generations.
5)Observations of sexual behavior that was at least prima facie indicative of the catastohpe potentially invovled (as if the sperm whent actually THROUGH the females mouth kinematically)
6)Local differences in form from one part of the stream to antother.
I was going to breed these things but one at least was European so I stopped. But if one could find all these things in another kind then it would be possible to continue to acutally answer this question.
All of this it seems to me needs to occur before the "logic" of the situtation can begin to materialize.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by John, posted 07-28-2002 12:40 PM John 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