According to science, how does a new species develop?

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Now, the fossil record, the age of the earth, age of the earliest life, etc. is a THEORY when you claimed it was fact

Again, it can be both a scientific theory, and a fact. Pay attention!

 

[james bond]

Now, the fossil record, the age of the earth, age of the earliest life, etc. is a THEORY when you claimed it was fact

Again, it can be both a scientific theory, and a fact. Pay attention!

I have and it's bullsh*t.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Now, the fossil record, the age of the earth, age of the earliest life, etc. is a THEORY when you claimed it was fact

Again, it can be both a scientific theory, and a fact. Pay attention!

I have and it's bullsh*t.

Given the overwhelming g umber if iflse thongs ythongs you have said about it...no, you clean haven't. You would getauhhed iutof a jjgh school science class. You have a not a shred of evidence or published science to support any of your embarrassing bullshit.

 

[james bond]

Now, the fossil record, the age of the earth, age of the earliest life, etc. is a THEORY when you claimed it was fact

Again, it can be both a scientific theory, and a fact. Pay attention!

I have and it's bullsh*t.

Given the overwhelming g umber if iflse thongs ythongs you have said about it...no, you clean haven't. You would getauhhed iutof a jjgh school science class. You have a not a shred of evidence or published science to support any of your embarrassing bullshit.

Can you speak English?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Now, the fossil record, the age of the earth, age of the earliest life, etc. is a THEORY when you claimed it was fact

Again, it can be both a scientific theory, and a fact. Pay attention!

I have and it's bullsh*t.

Given the overwhelming g umber if iflse thongs ythongs you have said about it...no, you clean haven't. You would getauhhed iutof a jjgh school science class. You have a not a shred of evidence or published science to support any of your embarrassing bullshit.

Can you speak English?

Yes, thank you. I apologize if I 9ffended your delicate sensibiyies by not checking the typos. Let's review:

You have not a shred of empirical evidence or published science to support any if you're embarrassing nonsense, nor is anyone on the planet producing any. You would get laughed out of any high school science class. No, you have not paid attention, as is clear from the many false things you have said. You make basic errors that a child would not make, regarding this topic. Enjoy dancing and prancing in your little internet safe spot, freak.

 

[james bond]

Now, the fossil record, the age of the earth, age of the earliest life, etc. is a THEORY when you claimed it was fact

Again, it can be both a scientific theory, and a fact. Pay attention!

I have and it's bullsh*t.

Given the overwhelming g umber if iflse thongs ythongs you have said about it...no, you clean haven't. You would getauhhed iutof a jjgh school science class. You have a not a shred of evidence or published science to support any of your embarrassing bullshit.

Can you speak English?

Yes, thank you. I apologize if I 9ffended your delicate sensibiyies by not checking the typos. Let's review:

You have not a shred of empirical evidence or published science to support any if you're embarrassing nonsense, nor is anyone on the planet producing any. You would get laughed out of any high school science class. No, you have not paid attention, as is clear from the many false things you have said. You make basic errors that a child would not make, regarding this topic. Enjoy dancing and prancing in your little internet safe spot, freak.

I have the evidence and have presented it throughout such as only life begats life. It explained the chicken came before the egg and science with the help of a supercomputer showed that the shell was made of a protein which only the hen's ovaries can produce. That backs what the Bible said in that God created adult animals. Neil Degrasse Tyson argued there a proto-chicken that laid the first chicken egg but the supercomputer didn't even bother checking that stupid remark.

 

[sealybobo]

LOL you just can't stand up for what you believe in- can you?

First of all you need to explain what theory 'creation science' is- in the same terms that evolution science is.

Then you would provide this evidence that fits the theory of Christian Science.

So go for it- and remember- arguing again about something about evolution- is not a fact about Creation.

Facts that support your theory.

Go.

The FLOOD supports the theory of Creation and is the only rational reason there are so many fossils discovered at all.

Okay- explain how.

If you are talking about the Biblical flood- then according to the Bible it covered the entire earth- including Mount Everest- by 15 cubits! Show me the science that would provide for that much water earth.

When did the Flood take place? Again according to Biblical scholars the Bible indicates it happened less than 6,000 years ago- how were fossils of dinosaurs created in less than 6,000 years?

Finally- presuming that there was a Biblical flood that killed all terrestrial life on earth except what was on the Ark (again per the Bible)- how were the species re-distributed around the Earth? According to the Bible all of the animals in the Ark were released at Mt. Ararat. So how did kangaroos end up in Australia- and not in India? How did Galpagos tortoises end up in the Galapagos- and nowhere else? How did elephant birds end up on Madagascar?

Evolution doesn't explain dinosaur fossils, geology does. But dinosaur fossils support the theory of evolution- as does the dispersal of animals around the globe.

The fairy tales of the Bible don't.

First, evos and you did not explain how the earth has so much water? Water is one of the fine tuning parameters. The reason why earth has so much water is that it had oceans of water underneath. Thus, when Noah's flood happened, it came up from the deep. There were rocks which came up and formed mountain ranges we have today. The Grand Canyon was formed from a local flood. Furthermore, it rained for 40 days and 40 nights. There was a canopy of water above the earth and that rained down. This is catastrophism. Otherwise, there is no logical explanation for the earth having so much water. Moreover, some outer space disturbance occurred and human longevity changed. Life was cut short to around 120 years. Most of the discoveries that scientists made about prehistoric man are from post flood. I think sealybobo mentioned Titan as the other planet on our solar system with water on its surface. How's that coming along?

You don't think comets of ice could have supplied the earth with water?

P.S. Did you ever answer our question? What came first adult human or baby humans?

Where's the evidence for comets strikes and it providing water?

Adult Adam and Eve. All creatures created by God were adult except Baby Jesus.

Where’s the evidence?

 

[LittleNipper]

Now, the fossil record, the age of the earth, age of the earliest life, etc. is a THEORY when you claimed it was fact

Again, it can be both a scientific theory, and a fact. Pay attention!

And Creation can be a scientific study and fact. Reciprocate!

 

[LittleNipper]

The FLOOD supports the theory of Creation and is the only rational reason there are so many fossils discovered at all.

Okay- explain how.

If you are talking about the Biblical flood- then according to the Bible it covered the entire earth- including Mount Everest- by 15 cubits! Show me the science that would provide for that much water earth.

When did the Flood take place? Again according to Biblical scholars the Bible indicates it happened less than 6,000 years ago- how were fossils of dinosaurs created in less than 6,000 years?

Finally- presuming that there was a Biblical flood that killed all terrestrial life on earth except what was on the Ark (again per the Bible)- how were the species re-distributed around the Earth? According to the Bible all of the animals in the Ark were released at Mt. Ararat. So how did kangaroos end up in Australia- and not in India? How did Galpagos tortoises end up in the Galapagos- and nowhere else? How did elephant birds end up on Madagascar?

Evolution doesn't explain dinosaur fossils, geology does. But dinosaur fossils support the theory of evolution- as does the dispersal of animals around the globe.

The fairy tales of the Bible don't.

First, evos and you did not explain how the earth has so much water? Water is one of the fine tuning parameters. The reason why earth has so much water is that it had oceans of water underneath. Thus, when Noah's flood happened, it came up from the deep. There were rocks which came up and formed mountain ranges we have today. The Grand Canyon was formed from a local flood. Furthermore, it rained for 40 days and 40 nights. There was a canopy of water above the earth and that rained down. This is catastrophism. Otherwise, there is no logical explanation for the earth having so much water. Moreover, some outer space disturbance occurred and human longevity changed. Life was cut short to around 120 years. Most of the discoveries that scientists made about prehistoric man are from post flood. I think sealybobo mentioned Titan as the other planet on our solar system with water on its surface. How's that coming along?

You don't think comets of ice could have supplied the earth with water?

P.S. Did you ever answer our question? What came first adult human or baby humans?

Where's the evidence for comets strikes and it providing water?

Adult Adam and Eve. All creatures created by God were adult except Baby Jesus.

Where’s the evidence?

Chickens can lay eggs. Eggs never lay chickens.

 

[sealybobo]

Okay- explain how.

If you are talking about the Biblical flood- then according to the Bible it covered the entire earth- including Mount Everest- by 15 cubits! Show me the science that would provide for that much water earth.

When did the Flood take place? Again according to Biblical scholars the Bible indicates it happened less than 6,000 years ago- how were fossils of dinosaurs created in less than 6,000 years?

Finally- presuming that there was a Biblical flood that killed all terrestrial life on earth except what was on the Ark (again per the Bible)- how were the species re-distributed around the Earth? According to the Bible all of the animals in the Ark were released at Mt. Ararat. So how did kangaroos end up in Australia- and not in India? How did Galpagos tortoises end up in the Galapagos- and nowhere else? How did elephant birds end up on Madagascar?

Evolution doesn't explain dinosaur fossils, geology does. But dinosaur fossils support the theory of evolution- as does the dispersal of animals around the globe.

The fairy tales of the Bible don't.

First, evos and you did not explain how the earth has so much water? Water is one of the fine tuning parameters. The reason why earth has so much water is that it had oceans of water underneath. Thus, when Noah's flood happened, it came up from the deep. There were rocks which came up and formed mountain ranges we have today. The Grand Canyon was formed from a local flood. Furthermore, it rained for 40 days and 40 nights. There was a canopy of water above the earth and that rained down. This is catastrophism. Otherwise, there is no logical explanation for the earth having so much water. Moreover, some outer space disturbance occurred and human longevity changed. Life was cut short to around 120 years. Most of the discoveries that scientists made about prehistoric man are from post flood. I think sealybobo mentioned Titan as the other planet on our solar system with water on its surface. How's that coming along?

You don't think comets of ice could have supplied the earth with water?

P.S. Did you ever answer our question? What came first adult human or baby humans?

Where's the evidence for comets strikes and it providing water?

Adult Adam and Eve. All creatures created by God were adult except Baby Jesus.

Where’s the evidence?

Chickens can lay eggs. Eggs never lay chickens.

So either evolution is real or you believe god poofed fully grown chicken into existence.

So you can’t believe the poof hypothesis and say you are a scientist unless you have cognitive dissonance

 

[Syriusly]

Clearly that is not just wrong, but embarrassingly stupid, in light of all the evidence.

What evidence are you speaking of ---- the creation of life in a test tube, or the development of a new species from one already existing (say fruit flies into some new species that is not a fruit fly). Don't worry, I will not try to embarass you, just show me something scientifically real and not conjecture.

I have posted this same article now 9 times in this thread.

Great article.

Evolution: Watching Speciation Occur | Observations
Critics of evolution often fall back on the maxim that no one has ever seen one species split into two. While that's clearly a straw man, because most speciation takes far longer than our lifespan to occur, it's also not true. We have seen species split, and we continue to see species diverging every day.

For example, there were the two new species of American goatsbeards (or salsifies, genus Tragopogon) that sprung into existence in the past century. In the early 1900s, three species of these wildflowers - the western salsify (T. dubius), the meadow salsify (T. pratensis), and the oyster plant (T. porrifolius) - were introduced to the United States from Europe. As their populations expanded, the species interacted, often producing sterile hybrids. But by the 1950s, scientists realized that there were two new variations of goatsbeard growing. While they looked like hybrids, they weren't sterile. They were perfectly capable of reproducing with their own kind but not with any of the original three species - the classic definition of a new species.

Your argument for goatsbeards was debunked as polyploidy in post #402 on page 21..

No- you just made that claim in post #402.

Nothing was ever debunked.

• They are not sterile
• They reproduce with their own kind
• Cannot reproduce with any of their ancestral species.

AKA a species.

Polyploidy can form a new species in plants and they can reproduce. It's common in the plant kingdom. I can't help it if you do not know what it is.

So great- we are in agreement that the Christianist claims that no new species have been observed are total bunk.

 

[Syriusly]

Black folks who came from Africa and lived generations in Scandinavia became blonde.

Which do you think is more likely? Aramaic people who migrated to Africa and became darker skinned. Also, Aramaic people migrated to Scandinavia to become lighter skinned.

There is the migration pattern from Pangaea, but also from Gondwanaland that connected to Pangaea.

"Biogeographers now recognize that as continents collide, their species can mingle, and when the continents separate, they take their new species with them. Africa, South America, Australia, and New Zealand, for example, were all once joined into a supercontinent called Gondwanaland. The continents split off one by one, first Africa, then New Zealand, and then finally Australia and South America. The evolutionary tree of some groups of species — such as tiny insects known as midges — show the same pattern. South American and Australian midges, for example, are more closely related to one another than they are to New Zealand species, and the midges of all three land masses are more closely related to one another than they are to African species. In other words, an insect that may live only a few weeks can tell biogeographers about the wanderings of continents tens of millions of years ago."

Biogeography: Wallace and Wegener

I love how you cite articles that discuss how the earth is millions of years old- in support of your claim that the earth is only 6,000 years old.

Still waiting for the fascinating story of how virtually every marsupial ended up in Australia- how all the kangaroos and koala's made their way from Mt. Ararat to Australia before the continents started their mad dash away from each other 4,400 years ago.

Your serious belief in evolution has jaded you. None of us have seen a black African become a white person in population studies even through hybridization. Michael Jackson doesn't count. However, Aramaens can get become white skinned with blond hair and blue eyes.

I have no idea why you responded my post about Koalas with 'black Africans'

Again-
Still waiting for the fascinating story of how virtually every marsupial ended up in Australia- how all the kangaroos and koala's made their way from Mt. Ararat to Australia before the continents started their mad dash away from each other 4,400 years ago.

I already explained in post #587. You said evolution explained it, but didn't explain how. It means that you don't know how..

Nope- post #587 doesn't even mention kangaroos or koala's.

Let us recap:
a) you claim the earth is 6,000 years old and every species alive today was on Noah's Ark during a flood that covered Mt. Everest 4,400 years ago- and at that time 4,400 years ago all of Earth was one super continent.
b) To support this claim you have cited two geologists- both of whom are specific that the earth is millions of years old- and plate tectonics- and again both of your cited geologists talk of plate tectonics in terms of millions of years.
c) Mt. Ararat theoretically is somewhere in the fertile crescent- say between Turkey and Iraq.
d) How did koala's and kangaroos get from Mt. Ararat to what is now Australia- but nowhere else? How did virtually every marsupial end up in Australia- and nowhere else?
e) When did Australia separate from the rest of Asia?
- 4,000 years ago?
- 3,000 years ago?
- 2,000 years ago?

 

[Syriusly]

Black folks who came from Africa and lived generations in Scandinavia became blonde.

Which do you think is more likely? Aramaic people who migrated to Africa and became darker skinned. Also, Aramaic people migrated to Scandinavia to become lighter skinned.

There is the migration pattern from Pangaea, but also from Gondwanaland that connected to Pangaea.

"Biogeographers now recognize that as continents collide, their species can mingle, and when the continents separate, they take their new species with them. Africa, South America, Australia, and New Zealand, for example, were all once joined into a supercontinent called Gondwanaland. The continents split off one by one, first Africa, then New Zealand, and then finally Australia and South America. The evolutionary tree of some groups of species — such as tiny insects known as midges — show the same pattern. South American and Australian midges, for example, are more closely related to one another than they are to New Zealand species, and the midges of all three land masses are more closely related to one another than they are to African species. In other words, an insect that may live only a few weeks can tell biogeographers about the wanderings of continents tens of millions of years ago."

Biogeography: Wallace and Wegener

I love how you cite articles that discuss how the earth is millions of years old- in support of your claim that the earth is only 6,000 years old.

Still waiting for the fascinating story of how virtually every marsupial ended up in Australia- how all the kangaroos and koala's made their way from Mt. Ararat to Australia before the continents started their mad dash away from each other 4,400 years ago.

Your serious belief in evolution has jaded you. None of us have seen a black African become a white person in population studies even through hybridization. Michael Jackson doesn't count. However, Aramaens can get become white skinned with blond hair and blue eyes.

I have no idea why you responded my post about Koalas with 'black Africans'

Again-
Still waiting for the fascinating story of how virtually every marsupial ended up in Australia- how all the kangaroos and koala's made their way from Mt. Ararat to Australia before the continents started their mad dash away from each other 4,400 years ago.

I already explained in post #587. You said evolution explained it, but didn't explain how. It means that you don't know how.

Here is what I said and thus asked you a question.

The Wallace line explains it and the kangaroos and koalas weren't like they are today on Noah's ark. Now, please explain how Africas became white Scandinavians with blond hair and blue eyes.

Migration and evolution.
Scandinavians are Scandinavians because of human migration.
Skin color, hair color and eye colors are all the results of different actions but all the result of evolution. Even the contribution of Neanderthal DNA possibly affecting skin, hair and eye color is itself a matter of evolution- since the only reason why Humans and Neanderthals could interbred successfully is because we both evolved from a common species.

It will come to a surprise to the Christianists out there but Jesus probably was not blond and blue eyed. But was Adam?

Human Skin Color Variation
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/10/new-gene-variants-reveal-evolution-human-skin-color.
Find out How Skin Color Evolved

The most current theory- and we are learning more about skin color, hair color and eye color all the time- is that humans when we left Africa were all dark skinned- but through evolution- humans with lighter skin reproduced more outside of Africa- and became lighter skinned. Then through migration there were populations that moved to areas with greater sun exposure and evolved dark skin again. Why did different skin colors provide competitive advantages? One intriguing theory is reproduction and the effects of vitamin D.

 

[Syriusly]

Again, it can be both a scientific theory, and a fact. Pay attention!

I have and it's bullsh*t.

Given the overwhelming g umber if iflse thongs ythongs you have said about it...no, you clean haven't. You would getauhhed iutof a jjgh school science class. You have a not a shred of evidence or published science to support any of your embarrassing bullshit.

Can you speak English?

Yes, thank you. I apologize if I 9ffended your delicate sensibiyies by not checking the typos. Let's review:

You have not a shred of empirical evidence or published science to support any if you're embarrassing nonsense, nor is anyone on the planet producing any. You would get laughed out of any high school science class. No, you have not paid attention, as is clear from the many false things you have said. You make basic errors that a child would not make, regarding this topic. Enjoy dancing and prancing in your little internet safe spot, freak.

That backs what the Bible said in that God created adult animals. Neil Degrasse Tyson argued there a proto-chicken that laid the first chicken egg but the supercomputer didn't even bother checking that stupid remark.

Because computers only check what it is asked to do.

Of course a bird laid the first chicken egg- it just wasn't a modern chicken. It was either slightly different or dramatically different depending on the level of change.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Again, it can be both a scientific theory, and a fact. Pay attention!

I have and it's bullsh*t.

Given the overwhelming g umber if iflse thongs ythongs you have said about it...no, you clean haven't. You would getauhhed iutof a jjgh school science class. You have a not a shred of evidence or published science to support any of your embarrassing bullshit.

Can you speak English?

Yes, thank you. I apologize if I 9ffended your delicate sensibiyies by not checking the typos. Let's review:

You have not a shred of empirical evidence or published science to support any if you're embarrassing nonsense, nor is anyone on the planet producing any. You would get laughed out of any high school science class. No, you have not paid attention, as is clear from the many false things you have said. You make basic errors that a child would not make, regarding this topic. Enjoy dancing and prancing in your little internet safe spot, freak.

I have the evidence and have presented it throughout such as only life begats life. It explained the chicken came before the egg and science with the help of a supercomputer showed that the shell was made of a protein which only the hen's ovaries can produce. That backs what the Bible said in that God created adult animals. Neil Degrasse Tyson argued there a proto-chicken that laid the first chicken egg but the supercomputer didn't even bother checking that stupid remark.

You have not a shred of evidence. Your laughably terrible argument amounts only to, "things I have not seen with my eyes cannot be true". As any educated, rational person knows, the fact that this is stupid is why we invented the scientific method.

Sorry , you are presenting no actual challenge to the theory if evolution, which is an established fact. You know nothing about evolution, or about how science works.

 

[Syriusly]

Now, the fossil record, the age of the earth, age of the earliest life, etc. is a THEORY when you claimed it was fact

Again, it can be both a scientific theory, and a fact. Pay attention!

And Creation can be a scientific study and fact. Reciprocate!

Creation could be a scientific theory- except there is no science to back up the story of the Bible.

Why are Christians so coy about calling it Creation- rather than the story of the Bible?

 

[sealybobo]

What evidence are you speaking of ---- the creation of life in a test tube, or the development of a new species from one already existing (say fruit flies into some new species that is not a fruit fly). Don't worry, I will not try to embarass you, just show me something scientifically real and not conjecture.

I have posted this same article now 9 times in this thread.

Great article.

Evolution: Watching Speciation Occur | Observations
Critics of evolution often fall back on the maxim that no one has ever seen one species split into two. While that's clearly a straw man, because most speciation takes far longer than our lifespan to occur, it's also not true. We have seen species split, and we continue to see species diverging every day.

For example, there were the two new species of American goatsbeards (or salsifies, genus Tragopogon) that sprung into existence in the past century. In the early 1900s, three species of these wildflowers - the western salsify (T. dubius), the meadow salsify (T. pratensis), and the oyster plant (T. porrifolius) - were introduced to the United States from Europe. As their populations expanded, the species interacted, often producing sterile hybrids. But by the 1950s, scientists realized that there were two new variations of goatsbeard growing. While they looked like hybrids, they weren't sterile. They were perfectly capable of reproducing with their own kind but not with any of the original three species - the classic definition of a new species.

Your argument for goatsbeards was debunked as polyploidy in post #402 on page 21..

No- you just made that claim in post #402.

Nothing was ever debunked.

• They are not sterile
• They reproduce with their own kind
• Cannot reproduce with any of their ancestral species.

AKA a species.

Polyploidy can form a new species in plants and they can reproduce. It's common in the plant kingdom. I can't help it if you do not know what it is.

So great- we are in agreement that the Christianist claims that no new species have been observed are total bunk.

What they want to see is a fish turn into a mammal or a reptile turn into a mammal.

 

[sealybobo]

Well?

I get the general idea that certain "mutations" have to occur with one organism to change their species, but what about mating?

Even though evolution is taking place all around us, for many species the process operates so slowly that it is not observable except over thousands or hundreds of thousands of years -- much too long to witness in a human lifetime. There are cases in quickly reproducing life forms like bacteria and fruit flies, however, where evolution can be seen happening in a matter of weeks for the bacteria and many months for the flies. In these cases the relatively large number of generations in a given period of time is key, since evolutionary change occurs incrementally from one generation to the next. All else being equal, the more generations you have, the more quickly evolution happens.

 

[sealybobo]

Because for many species, humans included, evolution happens over the course of many thousands of years, it is rare to observe the process in a human lifetime. Usually only laboratory scientists studying quickly reproducing life forms, like single-celled creatures and some invertebrates, have the opportunity to see evolutionary change happen before their eyes. All of us can and do experience the indirect effects of evolution nearly every day, however. One of the more important evolutionary concerns facing humans today is the emergence of antibiotic-resistant microbes. A battle against bacteria that we have been winning with medicine for the last 50 years or so is now an even race, according to some scientists -- because of the rapid rate of bacterial evolution. Similarly, the use of pesticides in agriculture has driven the evolution of resistant insects that require more or harsher chemicals to be killed. Scientists studying Galapagos finches have seen evolutionary changes in beak size and shape in just a few years. Major evolutionary transformations take much, much longer.

 

[james bond]

First, evos and you did not explain how the earth has so much water? Water is one of the fine tuning parameters. The reason why earth has so much water is that it had oceans of water underneath. Thus, when Noah's flood happened, it came up from the deep. There were rocks which came up and formed mountain ranges we have today. The Grand Canyon was formed from a local flood. Furthermore, it rained for 40 days and 40 nights. There was a canopy of water above the earth and that rained down. This is catastrophism. Otherwise, there is no logical explanation for the earth having so much water. Moreover, some outer space disturbance occurred and human longevity changed. Life was cut short to around 120 years. Most of the discoveries that scientists made about prehistoric man are from post flood. I think sealybobo mentioned Titan as the other planet on our solar system with water on its surface. How's that coming along?

You don't think comets of ice could have supplied the earth with water?

P.S. Did you ever answer our question? What came first adult human or baby humans?

Where's the evidence for comets strikes and it providing water?

Adult Adam and Eve. All creatures created by God were adult except Baby Jesus.

Where’s the evidence?

Chickens can lay eggs. Eggs never lay chickens.

So either evolution is real or you believe god poofed fully grown chicken into existence.

So you can’t believe the poof hypothesis and say you are a scientist unless you have cognitive dissonance

The poof hypothesis by invisible particles, according to atheist scientists, is for multiverses and universes. Yet, it can't work for earth, humans, chickens, oak trees, etc. However, there are no poof proto-chickens as Neil Tyson Bill Nye are dumb AF.