where was the transition within fossil record?? [Stalled: randman]

Sarcasm aside, do you look exactly like your parents? Do you know of any child that does? Has human stature remained constant throughout recorded history? Why are new olympic records set (even if by a "very small degree")?Enjoy.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

​

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

Please explain where evolution says this happens?

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

​

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

I an afraid that david's ignorance (lack of knowledge about evolution) is vaster than that.We need him to get into defining what he thinks evolution says in order to understand where he is coming from.

What do you mean by evolution between species?Do you mean apes and humans breeding and forming a new species? Evolution does not say this anywhere.Or do you mean the gradual transition of one species through time, population isolation and genetic drift that differentiates the populations and ends up with sufficient differences that the two populations no longer interbreed? This has been observed, so this concept is validated.We see evidence of this in process with varieties within species, and especially with ring species where you have a number of varieties forming a ring around some obstacle and the species that meet on the far side consider the other varieties different species and do not mate with them even though there are hybreds all around the other side of the ring. We see this with horses and zebras and donkeys having sterile offspring when bred in captivity. We see this with the races of man showing marked visual differences that lead to reproductive isolation tendencies.Darwin predicted it from the information that he had observed and studied. It was more than an assumption, it was a hypothesis based on evidence.The "hard evidence" of a common ancestor for apes and humans is multiple sourced:We have genetic evidence of not just 96% identical genomes, but the errors in the benes in the same places show that there was a common ancestor around 6-7 million years ago.We have fossil evidence of humans back in time to much more ape-like beings that were still bipedal and toolmakers, the transition showing more in the human lineage due to greater evolution having taken place in humans (likely driven by sexual selection for creativity) than in apes in general and chimpanzees in particular.We have geographical evidence from where the fossils have been found that show that they were living in the same area of africa 6-7 million years ago, before humans spread over the world.And we have behavioral similarities between humans and chimps (and also bonobos - also called pygmy chimps, although they are a different species - who are gay, bisexual, group sex loving hedonists who generally have sex before every meal according to some reports). The news report of the female chimp rescuing the child that fell into the zoo display and taking him to the entrance where the keepers enter the yard.The evidence of evolution "between ape and man" is that man is an ape, just one with a massive ego.Enjoy.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

​

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

Do you deny that each individual within the group is different from each other individual within the group? (Even "Identical Twins" have slight differences that allow their close friends and family to tell them apart.)Do you deny that speciation has occured, where one group has split into two groups that no longer interchange genetic material?Do you deny that the ring species the greenish warble interbreeds around the ring but not between the varieties at the northern overlap? Do you deny that the ring species above is physical evidence of a very clear spectrum of life that diverges until two components no longer interbreed?Call it what you like: it is your denial that is the real question, not the evidence.Enjoy.{changed subtitle to focus on the question}This message has been edited by RAZD, 10*23*2005 05:13 PM

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

​

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

ah the randman ad hominem. ROFLOL. Too bad I noticed that you did NOT answer the question asked. Denial is like that. The logical basis of that statement is just stunning, randman, stunning in it's total lack of being a real answer to the qestions asked. Thanks for another chuckle. Or in other words, what you cannot deny you must seek to minimize as much as possible.Let me put it this way:(1) You did not deny that there is variation between individuals within a population of any species such that each individual is different: variation is readily observable.(This, of course, is the basis for the operation of selection on evolving populations, for if there was no variation between individuals then either all would survive or all would perish)(2) You did not deny that speciation has in fact occured.(This has, of course been observed in several instances so denial would be foolish eh?)(3) You did not deny that the ring species actually shows the process of completely gradual gradation from one form of a species to another form to another form to another form ... until the end forms do not interbreed.(4) You did not deny that this is, in fact, an example of just the spectrum of life that you previously called "incredible nonsense!"But at the end you claim (repeat): Let me repeat -- do you deny:
(1) that variation between individuals exists within the populations of species?
(2) that speciation has been observed?
(3) that the greenish warblers show the gradation between forms that interbreed until a point is reached where two forms do not interbreed?
(4)that the greenish warblers show a very clear spectrum of life that diverges until two components no longer interbreed?Now let me add one more to the list:(5) that the variation shown by the greenish warblers in space is no different than the variation shown by other species in time: two populations diverging until a point is reached where two forms do not interbreed?The evidence is there, it is that simple, do you deny it?(ps - so much for my "profound ignorance of ToE" - LOL){edited to correct spelling "to populations'}This message has been edited by RAZD, 10*23*2005 06:37 PM

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

​

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

Let it all out randman. Hate the messenger all you want. Misrepresent what I say if it makes you feel better. You'll excuse me while I turn the other cheek.Now, answer the questions from Message 223: Is it really that hard to just answer the questions?Enjoy.{abe}btw - these are really just "yes" or "no" questions, so it is really really simple to answer them eh?{/abe}This message has been edited by RAZD, 10*23*2005 08:11 PM

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

​

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

Now, by your own standard, answer the questions from Message 223: Is it really that hard to just answer these simple yes or no questions?

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

​

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

Now, by your own standard, answer the questions from Message 223: Is it really that hard to just answer these simple yes or no questions?Or do you just keep reverting to the same broken record posts?Enjoy.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

​

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

Prove it. Or withdraw this claim for the fallacy it is and then answer the questions.Enjoy.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

​

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

Amazingly, an ad hominem is still not an answer, just another in a long string of logical fallacies.Simple yes or no answers are all that are required to address these simple concepts: Now, by your own standard, answer the questions from Message 223: Is it really that hard to just answer these simple yes or no questions?Enjoy.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

​

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.