According to science, how does a new species develop?

[sealybobo]

how did a single cell critter, give birth to a multicellular and why would that creature give birth to something that would eat it?

Cells don't give birth, they divide. One would think the simplest idea for "the first time" is that a cell divided ,as did another, and their progenies got together and functioned together.

if a Mule is sterile, how are we led to believe that mutations can lead to another species that can reprodue?

Traveling backward back in time, each species ability to produce viable offspring with an ancestor of its line decreases, as a general rule. Should you travel back in time 10,000 years, you would probably do fine to have a baby with an "ancient human".. 100,000 years? Again, kids might usually live. 1 million years? Probably not so much.

While this is a general rule, you should get the idea.

hey, do you sharpen axes so other people can split hairs?


why would a cell divide into predator and prey?

We are all predators and prey. It’s called a food chain

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Well?

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

It happened long long ago when life was young. Life turned into all the life you see now but don’t expect any new species unless you have a billion years to wait and see

Ah yes, the unobserved theory.

I'll just take in on faith.

Authoritarian Irrationalism, the Creed of the 20th Century

Most observations are faith-based, believing that certain facts are relevant and jumping to conclusions based on those extraneous factors.

For example, the fact that those who survived the World Trade Center atrocity could not be called "the fittest," so why should we believe that Darwinian change is an improvement?

 

[Votto]

Well?

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

It happened long long ago when life was young. Life turned into all the life you see now but don’t expect any new species unless you have a billion years to wait and see

Ah yes, the unobserved theory.

I'll just take in on faith.

Authoritarian Irrationalism, the Creed of the 20th Century

Most observations are faith-based, believing that certain facts are relevant and jumping to conclusions based on those extraneous factors.

It was not long ago that we believed that maggots spontaneously generated from rotting meat.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Well?

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

It happened long long ago when life was young. Life turned into all the life you see now but don’t expect any new species unless you have a billion years to wait and see

Ah yes, the unobserved theory.

I'll just take in on faith.

Authoritarian Irrationalism, the Creed of the 20th Century

Most observations are faith-based, believing that certain facts are relevant and jumping to conclusions based on those extraneous factors.

It was not long ago that we believed that maggots spontaneously generated from rotting meat.

Pay Them to Study, or They Won't Be Worth Anything

The intelligence of know-it-all bookworms has not improved. They seem to be smarter only because their equally inadequate predecessors were exposed by outcomes.

 

[sealybobo]

Well?

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

It happened long long ago when life was young. Life turned into all the life you see now but don’t expect any new species unless you have a billion years to wait and see

Ah yes, the unobserved theory.

I'll just take in on faith.

Authoritarian Irrationalism, the Creed of the 20th Century

Most observations are faith-based, believing that certain facts are relevant and jumping to conclusions based on those extraneous factors.

It was not long ago that we believed that maggots spontaneously generated from rotting meat.

Pay Them to Study, or They Won't Be Worth Anything

The intelligence of know-it-all bookworms has not improved. They seem to be smarter only because their equally inadequate predecessors were exposed by outcomes.

In order to discuss this you’re going to have to stop denying the science.

And the for profit community won’t do the science because there’s no money in r&d. That’s business flaw

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

how did a single cell critter, give birth to a multicellular and why would that creature give birth to something that would eat it?

Cells don't give birth, they divide. One would think the simplest idea for "the first time" is that a cell divided ,as did another, and their progenies got together and functioned together.

if a Mule is sterile, how are we led to believe that mutations can lead to another species that can reprodue?

Traveling backward back in time, each species ability to produce viable offspring with an ancestor of its line decreases, as a general rule. Should you travel back in time 10,000 years, you would probably do fine to have a baby with an "ancient human".. 100,000 years? Again, kids might usually live. 1 million years? Probably not so much.

While this is a general rule, you should get the idea.

hey, do you sharpen axes so other people can split hairs?


why would a cell divide into predator and prey?

Your question is nonsensical, sorry. Is it a joke? Is there a punchline?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

For example, the fact that those who survived the World Trade Center atrocity could not be called "the fittest," so why should we believe that Darwinian change is an improvement?

Who said natural selection always improved anything? It merely changes things.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The intelligence of know-it-all bookworms has not improved

...said the denier on his quantum mechanical machine, with his message being sent via fiber optics reliant on electromagnetic theory and satellites reliant on relativity theory...

 

[Votto]

It happened long long ago when life was young. Life turned into all the life you see now but don’t expect any new species unless you have a billion years to wait and see

Ah yes, the unobserved theory.

I'll just take in on faith.

Authoritarian Irrationalism, the Creed of the 20th Century

Most observations are faith-based, believing that certain facts are relevant and jumping to conclusions based on those extraneous factors.

It was not long ago that we believed that maggots spontaneously generated from rotting meat.

Pay Them to Study, or They Won't Be Worth Anything

The intelligence of know-it-all bookworms has not improved. They seem to be smarter only because their equally inadequate predecessors were exposed by outcomes.

In order to discuss this you’re going to have to stop denying the science.

And the for profit community won’t do the science because there’s no money in r&d. That’s business flaw

What science is being denied?

 

[sealybobo]

Ah yes, the unobserved theory.

I'll just take in on faith.

Authoritarian Irrationalism, the Creed of the 20th Century

Most observations are faith-based, believing that certain facts are relevant and jumping to conclusions based on those extraneous factors.

It was not long ago that we believed that maggots spontaneously generated from rotting meat.

Pay Them to Study, or They Won't Be Worth Anything

The intelligence of know-it-all bookworms has not improved. They seem to be smarter only because their equally inadequate predecessors were exposed by outcomes.

In order to discuss this you’re going to have to stop denying the science.

And the for profit community won’t do the science because there’s no money in r&d. That’s business flaw

What science is being denied?

That's hard to say. Whatever science contradicts your religion I suppose.

Basic facts like when a group of individuals is separated from the rest of their species for a long time, the individuals can evolve different traits. The longer the group is isolated from the rest of the species, the more likely it will evolve into a new species.

The theory of evolution says that species change over time. Did you ever wonder how new species evolve? Natural selection seems to explain how variations can lead to changes in a species. Geographic isolation seems to be one of the main ways this happens. This geographic separation from others of their species seems to be what made different species evolve on the Galapagos Islands. The six-hundred-mile separation of the islands from the mainland may have led to those animals evolving into new species. After many changes evolve in a group of animals, individuals of that group can no longer mate with the rest of the species that remain unchanged. That is the definition of species: individuals that are able to breed among themselves but are not able to breed with other species.

2 When a group of individuals is separated from the rest of their species for a long time, the individuals can evolve different traits. The longer the group is isolated from the rest of the species, the more likely it will evolve into a new species. One example of this has been seen in fish species in the lakes of Switzerland, Great Britain, and Scandinavia. Almost every lake has different forms, believed to have evolved from one species.

 

[james bond]

It boils down to sex and the pairing of genetic information. Sexually reproducing organisms and their offspring have their genetic information or chromosomes in pairs, and the offspring inherit half from the mother, half from the father. So there are two genes at a given position coding for a particular characteristic. An organism can be heterozygous at a given locus, meaning it carries different alleles of this gene. For example, one allele can code for blue eyes, while the other one can code for brown eyes; or one can code for the A blood type and the other for the B type. Sometimes two alleles have a combined effect, while at other times only one allele is dominant and has effect on the organism, while the other is recessive and does not. These sexual pairings allow for faster diversification of species and does not depend on mutation. Mutation is considered a process to remove defective organisms since species were more perfect at one time and the mutation process made the organisms less sturdy. It's evolution in reverse. One evidence for rapid evolution and not of mutation is the antibiotic and pesticide resistance of bacteria and insects and pests. Changes to species is rapid and is based on genetics, environment and epigentics not mutation.

 

[Two Thumbs]

how did a single cell critter, give birth to a multicellular and why would that creature give birth to something that would eat it?

Cells don't give birth, they divide. One would think the simplest idea for "the first time" is that a cell divided ,as did another, and their progenies got together and functioned together.

if a Mule is sterile, how are we led to believe that mutations can lead to another species that can reprodue?

Traveling backward back in time, each species ability to produce viable offspring with an ancestor of its line decreases, as a general rule. Should you travel back in time 10,000 years, you would probably do fine to have a baby with an "ancient human".. 100,000 years? Again, kids might usually live. 1 million years? Probably not so much.

While this is a general rule, you should get the idea.

hey, do you sharpen axes so other people can split hairs?


why would a cell divide into predator and prey?

We are all predators and prey. It’s called a food chain

why did something that only ate rock split into something that would eat it?

 

[Two Thumbs]

how did a single cell critter, give birth to a multicellular and why would that creature give birth to something that would eat it?

Cells don't give birth, they divide. One would think the simplest idea for "the first time" is that a cell divided ,as did another, and their progenies got together and functioned together.

if a Mule is sterile, how are we led to believe that mutations can lead to another species that can reprodue?

Traveling backward back in time, each species ability to produce viable offspring with an ancestor of its line decreases, as a general rule. Should you travel back in time 10,000 years, you would probably do fine to have a baby with an "ancient human".. 100,000 years? Again, kids might usually live. 1 million years? Probably not so much.

While this is a general rule, you should get the idea.

hey, do you sharpen axes so other people can split hairs?


why would a cell divide into predator and prey?

Your question is nonsensical, sorry. Is it a joke? Is there a punchline?

that moment when you realize you are in a humor thread and lack a sense of humor.

 

[Votto]

Authoritarian Irrationalism, the Creed of the 20th Century

Most observations are faith-based, believing that certain facts are relevant and jumping to conclusions based on those extraneous factors.

It was not long ago that we believed that maggots spontaneously generated from rotting meat.

Pay Them to Study, or They Won't Be Worth Anything

The intelligence of know-it-all bookworms has not improved. They seem to be smarter only because their equally inadequate predecessors were exposed by outcomes.

In order to discuss this you’re going to have to stop denying the science.

And the for profit community won’t do the science because there’s no money in r&d. That’s business flaw

What science is being denied?

That's hard to say. Whatever science contradicts your religion I suppose.

Basic facts like when a group of individuals is separated from the rest of their species for a long time, the individuals can evolve different traits. The longer the group is isolated from the rest of the species, the more likely it will evolve into a new species.

The theory of evolution says that species change over time. Did you ever wonder how new species evolve? Natural selection seems to explain how variations can lead to changes in a species. Geographic isolation seems to be one of the main ways this happens. This geographic separation from others of their species seems to be what made different species evolve on the Galapagos Islands. The six-hundred-mile separation of the islands from the mainland may have led to those animals evolving into new species. After many changes evolve in a group of animals, individuals of that group can no longer mate with the rest of the species that remain unchanged. That is the definition of species: individuals that are able to breed among themselves but are not able to breed with other species.

2 When a group of individuals is separated from the rest of their species for a long time, the individuals can evolve different traits. The longer the group is isolated from the rest of the species, the more likely it will evolve into a new species. One example of this has been seen in fish species in the lakes of Switzerland, Great Britain, and Scandinavia. Almost every lake has different forms, believed to have evolved from one species.

Everyone wonders how new species come about, much like everyone wonders how the first cell formed or where matter comes from.

The bottom line, however, is that It is all pure speculation based upon the best educated guess.

None of this has been observed nor duplicated yet it does not give you pause in accepting it as 100% truth.

Very odd in science because good science demands the scientific method of testing and observation.

 

[EGR one]

Well?

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

Mutations occur all of the time. Most are benign and do nothing. Every now and then the mutation kills the critter, and even more rarely the mutation does nothing until some outside event comes along that makes that mutation important. The other critters vying for that particular niche die out because they lack that particular mutation, while the mutated critter takes over the niche. That is how evolution works.

Why would a viable critter die out just because a new model developed?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

how did a single cell critter, give birth to a multicellular and why would that creature give birth to something that would eat it?

I think your terminology may be confusing you. In any case...

How and why single cell organisms evolved into multicellular life

LOL

What a joke

The odds of the little molecules randomly bumping together to form a single cell are mathematically impossible. A simple single cell contains 2,000 separate proteins. The odds of 2,000 proteins, which are themselves complex, forming a functioning cell is a number with 5,700 zeros to 1.

Impossible. Didn't happen

The video goes on to say that single cells banded together to avoid predators, don't laugh, and one day they decided to stick together forming a multi celled badass

Wow

 

[sealybobo]

how did a single cell critter, give birth to a multicellular and why would that creature give birth to something that would eat it?

Cells don't give birth, they divide. One would think the simplest idea for "the first time" is that a cell divided ,as did another, and their progenies got together and functioned together.

if a Mule is sterile, how are we led to believe that mutations can lead to another species that can reprodue?

Traveling backward back in time, each species ability to produce viable offspring with an ancestor of its line decreases, as a general rule. Should you travel back in time 10,000 years, you would probably do fine to have a baby with an "ancient human".. 100,000 years? Again, kids might usually live. 1 million years? Probably not so much.

While this is a general rule, you should get the idea.

hey, do you sharpen axes so other people can split hairs?


why would a cell divide into predator and prey?

We are all predators and prey. It’s called a food chain

why did something that only ate rock split into something that would eat it?

Clay and clingy mold dna and micro organisms that like those rocks were cooked up in stars that exploded billions of years ago.

Or god did it. Which explanation seems more likely to you?

 

[sealybobo]

It was not long ago that we believed that maggots spontaneously generated from rotting meat.

Pay Them to Study, or They Won't Be Worth Anything

The intelligence of know-it-all bookworms has not improved. They seem to be smarter only because their equally inadequate predecessors were exposed by outcomes.

In order to discuss this you’re going to have to stop denying the science.

And the for profit community won’t do the science because there’s no money in r&d. That’s business flaw

What science is being denied?

That's hard to say. Whatever science contradicts your religion I suppose.

Basic facts like when a group of individuals is separated from the rest of their species for a long time, the individuals can evolve different traits. The longer the group is isolated from the rest of the species, the more likely it will evolve into a new species.

The theory of evolution says that species change over time. Did you ever wonder how new species evolve? Natural selection seems to explain how variations can lead to changes in a species. Geographic isolation seems to be one of the main ways this happens. This geographic separation from others of their species seems to be what made different species evolve on the Galapagos Islands. The six-hundred-mile separation of the islands from the mainland may have led to those animals evolving into new species. After many changes evolve in a group of animals, individuals of that group can no longer mate with the rest of the species that remain unchanged. That is the definition of species: individuals that are able to breed among themselves but are not able to breed with other species.

2 When a group of individuals is separated from the rest of their species for a long time, the individuals can evolve different traits. The longer the group is isolated from the rest of the species, the more likely it will evolve into a new species. One example of this has been seen in fish species in the lakes of Switzerland, Great Britain, and Scandinavia. Almost every lake has different forms, believed to have evolved from one species.

Everyone wonders how new species come about, much like everyone wonders how the first cell formed or where matter comes from.

The bottom line, however, is that It is all pure speculation based upon the best educated guess.

None of this has been observed nor duplicated yet it does not give you pause in accepting it as 100% truth.

Very odd in science because good science demands the scientific method of testing and observation.

I don’t accept it as 100%. But I’ve seen enough science to conclude my hypothesis. And it has been duplicated in a lab. Now wait 2 million years to see what happens. You just proved you don’t really understand the science because you can’t replicate something that takes millions of years although we’ve done a hell of a job with dogs

Your side tells us all the facts are in your holy books. Do you buy that?

 

[harmonica]

if you don't believe in evolution, then you must believe 2 humans just ''appeared'' like Star Trek energizing......much more unbelievable than evolution
what's more believable/chance of happening:
a single cell evolving/''appearing'' or millions of single cells arranged into a complicated being just ''appearing''? ''Energize''

 

[sealybobo]

if you don't believe in evolution, then you must believe 2 humans just ''appeared'' like Star Trek energizing......much more unbelievable than evolution
View attachment 183169

All living things magically appeared.

Forget the fact that 99% of every species have gone extinct. Those were god mistakes.