The Biology Term For History

[esalla]

Compare Darwin’s actual writings with current knowledge.



8. Those with a working knowledge of biology will recognize the classifications, kingdom, phylum or division, class, order, family, genus and species. Kingdom is the largest grouping, having an array of organisms. For example, the animal kingdom. At the end of the list, with fewer and fewer organism, and fewer and fewer differences between them, one specific species, as, a human being, Homo sapiens.

According to Darwin, who was kind enough to draw it out as his ‘Tree of Life’…


Darwin drew of the Tree of Life, in his notebooks.

Not forgetting also, that: the `Tree of Life’ diagram in On The Origin of Species (1859) is the only diagram or picture in the whole book…(!)


Darwin’s `tree of life’ diagram from the Origin (1859) Ch 4, p 56
StoryAlity#139 – The Evolution of Darwin’s Tree of Life diagram


A very simple test of logic: if Darwin was correct, wouldn’t we find the simplest, least advanced organism at the bottom of any fossil site? The furthest from the top of the deposit????


Any question??? Any dispute of that statement?

Be careful here, Darwinists......you are about to meet your doom.



This is where you Darwinist’s are hoist by your own petards.

That’s all very melodramatic!!!

What do you need help understanding?

Be careful here, fundies. If, as you claim, the planet is only 6,000 years old, there shouldn’t be any fossil remains.

This is where fundies are wedged by their own undies.

What are the odds against the first cell forming by chance?

Well, what are the odds?

Before you start cruising the fundie christian websites, try thinking this through.

The calculation of odds that routinely appear on fundie websites assumes that the "first'' protein molecule formed by chance. If you had taken even 8th grade biochemistry (and I'm thinking those odds are slim), you would have learned that biochemistry is not chance, making the calculated odds meaningless. Biochemistry produces complex interactions of complex products, and the products themselves interact in complex ways. For one example, complex organic molecules are observed to form in the conditions that exist in space, and it is possible that they played a role in the formation of the first life.

As long as we're calculating odds, what are the odds against your gods forming by chance?

DNA is a far more complicated code than a computer operating system and codes have no ability to spontaneously generate. The odd thing is that God will be proven the moment we set foot on Mars and begin adapting crops to grow........................

 

[luchitociencia]

Historical reality: Evolution of the sapecies is a fallacy to which corrupt scientists have turned it into a famous fraud.

Conspiracy theories make everything so simple.

On the contrary. Species at the end of the day solely degenerate. Simple as that.

The whole evolution farce with it's greek/chinese mixing of words like "speciation", makes of the theory the most humorous of the several theoretical frauds in science.

Speciation... ha ha ha ha, hey, hear what I'm telling you, , go back to school and learn proper English... speciation... lol... who invented such a superfluous word? Who was that idiot, if you know?

Do you know why you have made your absurd theory so "complicated" to yourself?

I will tell you. First you can't understand it at all. Second, you don't want others to discover that is pure crap. Third, you invent from your imagination, steps for species which never happened. Fourth, you want to give the idea that "scientific" is synonymous of "complicated". And Fifth, your theory has never ever worked. The fact is that the whole species of the world, at this current moment are WEAKER than their ancestors. Period.

I'm a master, I can dance the Macarena on your silly evolution.

You better climb and ride in my train, because with your theory you are just crawling in mud.

That was quite a conspiracy theory drenched rant. Were you expecting anyone to take it seriously?

Hey, you, Infelice, I put you a fact that no one can deny> today species are weaker than their ancestors.

In 1998 I debunked evolution theory with this fact.

Until today no one can beat my discovery.

Plus, there are lots of very bad news for the entire species of the world, because at genetic level it has been discovered a sure degeneration in all species which is challenging the survival of the whole living creatures.

The theory of evolution is a scientific religion established to bring hope to atheists, telling them that biologically they will get better in the future and men will acquire powers like super heroes... ha ha ha ha what a bunch of bumps...

If you are an evolutionist, then you are not only an ignorant but also a loser. You better climb to my train, I have the sure science which won't disappoint you, it is full of pure evidence.

 

[Hollie]

Historical reality: Evolution of the sapecies is a fallacy to which corrupt scientists have turned it into a famous fraud.

Conspiracy theories make everything so simple.

On the contrary. Species at the end of the day solely degenerate. Simple as that.

The whole evolution farce with it's greek/chinese mixing of words like "speciation", makes of the theory the most humorous of the several theoretical frauds in science.

Speciation... ha ha ha ha, hey, hear what I'm telling you, , go back to school and learn proper English... speciation... lol... who invented such a superfluous word? Who was that idiot, if you know?

Do you know why you have made your absurd theory so "complicated" to yourself?

I will tell you. First you can't understand it at all. Second, you don't want others to discover that is pure crap. Third, you invent from your imagination, steps for species which never happened. Fourth, you want to give the idea that "scientific" is synonymous of "complicated". And Fifth, your theory has never ever worked. The fact is that the whole species of the world, at this current moment are WEAKER than their ancestors. Period.

I'm a master, I can dance the Macarena on your silly evolution.

You better climb and ride in my train, because with your theory you are just crawling in mud.

That was quite a conspiracy theory drenched rant. Were you expecting anyone to take it seriously?

Hey, you, Infelice, I put you a fact that no one can deny> today species are weaker than their ancestors.

In 1998 I debunked evolution theory with this fact.

Until today no one can beat my discovery.

Plus, there are lots of very bad news for the entire species of the world, because at genetic level it has been discovered a sure degeneration in all species which is challenging the survival of the whole living creatures.

The theory of evolution is a scientific religion established to bring hope to atheists, telling them that biologically they will get better in the future and men will acquire powers like super heroes... ha ha ha ha what a bunch of bumps...

If you are an evolutionist, then you are not only an ignorant but also a loser. You better climb to my train, I have the sure science which won't disappoint you, it is full of pure evidence.

That was really creepy.

 

[alang1216]

I only know several hundred scientists in my neighborhood and only the very liberal ones believe in evolution but will never explain it because they always say, "If I have to explain it, you're not smart enough to understand the explanation."
That is typical Liberal talk when it comes to any subject.

Do people tell you that a lot? Maybe it's because you seem to confuse science with politics?

 

[alang1216]

In what science is your degree?
Don't be shy.

I'm not shy, I'm just not convinced a piece of paper should carry more weight than my words. I know ivy league graduates that don't seem to know what they are talking about, at least outside their immediate field.

 

[alang1216]

I really have no clue what your point is. If it is that evolution by random chance is impossible, I agree. If you think that is how evolution operates, you are very much mistaken. I'm saying this now and I'm certain it is what I've said in the past.

evolution by random chance is impossible
I'm glad you agree with reality

If you think that is how evolution operates
That is how evolution "operates"

Maybe birds really did develop wings over 10 million years!

Thank you for confirming that you don't understand how evolution works. I could recommend some books on the subject.

And you understand how evolution works?
What advanced scientific degrees do you possess?

Just one.

Elaborate.
Everyone I've ever discussed this with tells that in order to understand evolution, one must have a background in way more than biology and chemistry,
Elaborate.

I don't recall you sharing your resume with us. Please bring me up to speed and I'll consider sharing mine.

 

[Indeependent]

In what science is your degree?
Don't be shy.

I'm not shy, I'm just not convinced a piece of paper should carry more weight than my words. I know ivy league graduates that don't seem to know what they are talking about, at least outside their immediate field.

I think you're too much of an ideologue to admit to being a high school science teacher.

 

[Indeependent]

I really have no clue what your point is. If it is that evolution by random chance is impossible, I agree. If you think that is how evolution operates, you are very much mistaken. I'm saying this now and I'm certain it is what I've said in the past.

evolution by random chance is impossible
I'm glad you agree with reality

If you think that is how evolution operates
That is how evolution "operates"

Maybe birds really did develop wings over 10 million years!

Thank you for confirming that you don't understand how evolution works. I could recommend some books on the subject.

And you understand how evolution works?
What advanced scientific degrees do you possess?

Just one.

Elaborate.
Everyone I've ever discussed this with tells that in order to understand evolution, one must have a background in way more than biology and chemistry,
Elaborate.

I don't recall you sharing your resume with us. Please bring me up to speed and I'll consider sharing mine.

I don't recall searching for any Link, regardless of how weak, and then claiming I have the intense credentials to truly understand the article to bolster my ideology.
I can argue that roaches are only found in homes in Queens and Brooklyn, or at least over 99%.

 

[alang1216]

Disappointing at best.

The question you have steadfastly refused to answer is where do new species come from? Seems like there are only a few options:

1. supernatural creation
2. evolution
3. aliens intervention
4. we're all in the Matrix

You obviously don't have an answer or you'd have shared it with us. Why you insist on cutting and pasting your ignorance is beyond me.

No one knows.

Darwin gave his view.....I proved it wrong.

You're not very bright, are you.

Interesting, you know how it didn't happen but not how it did happen. You disappoint me again.

Sooo.....if mutations don't fit Darwin.......what does?
Or, can we simply admit that at this time, no one can explain the vast array of life forms.

What does? Natural selection operating on the natural variation within a population. Not all my children are the same height as I am.

Change occurs….I hesitate to call it ‘evolution’ because the uninformed tend to consider that agreement with Darwin.

How does change occur?

Who says change occurs?
I, for one, will not be around a billion years from now to see a dog become a human.
I have, though, seen humans become dogs.

The fossil record.

Did Darwin, the guy you worship, provide the 'how it happened'???

Yes he did. That was in fact his supreme accomplishment and you may have heard of it: natural selection.

This is the third time I'm correcting the same error, you moron.

Breeders and farmers practiced 'natural selection' from time immemorial.

And never has the modification, the alteration, produced a new species.



Animal husbandry, farming domestication, is based on the sort of random modifications that Darwin was getting at. No one doubts it. It was practiced well before Darwin. But while these folks knew that these modifications are almost always harmful, and deadly, the changes are always within limit of the species.

Darwin said they accumulate until a new species is the result. This has never happened. And that’s where Darwinism deviates into a political view, and not a scientific one.


In 1997, evolutionary biologist Keith Stewart Thomson wrote: “A matter of unfinished business for biologists is the identification of evolution's smoking gun,” and “the smoking gun of evolution is speciation, not local adaptation and differentiation of populations.” Before Darwin, the consensus was that species can vary only within certain limits; indeed, centuries of artificial selection had seemingly demonstrated such limits experimentally.
“Darwin had to show that the limits could be broken,” wrote Thomson, “so do we.” Keith Stewart Thomson, “Natural Selection and Evolution’s Smoking Gun,” American Scientist 85 (1997): 516-518.



And….

“Breeders have been using artificial selection to produce descent with modification for centuries—within existing species. Natural selection has also been observed to do the same in the wild—but again, only within existing species.”
Jonathan Wells





Thus, anyone who claims that Darwinian Evolution is a ‘fact, proven,’ is proof of the government school political persuasion, and knows nothing of science.
Raise your paw.

You mean this is the 3rd time you reposted the same junk?

Ironically, yesterday I was listening to a podcast by a friend of my daughter. She is a science writer and she said there are species of microbes and insects that are found no where in nature except the homes of people. Seems evolution is happening whether you believe in it or not.

So, I’m looking for evidence to determine exactly when your cerebrum entered the dead zone, and based on my extensive experience watching CSI, I know that I should check for signs of insect activity: let’s call in the entomologist to pin down the exact moment of pupation!

Don't mess up his concentration...I want to know his scientific credentials other than clicking a Link.

Trust me, this is the internet. I certainly would never make up or pad my resume. Lucky for me, I don't need to.

How to Become an Evolutionary Biologist: Education and Career Roadmap

Prospective students who searched for <u> How to Become an Evolutionary Biologist: Education and Career Roadmap </u> found the articles, information, and resources on this page helpful.

study.com

Does this describe your skillset?

No, I couldn't afford the pay cut.

 

[Indeependent]

Disappointing at best.

The question you have steadfastly refused to answer is where do new species come from? Seems like there are only a few options:

1. supernatural creation
2. evolution
3. aliens intervention
4. we're all in the Matrix

You obviously don't have an answer or you'd have shared it with us. Why you insist on cutting and pasting your ignorance is beyond me.

No one knows.

Darwin gave his view.....I proved it wrong.

You're not very bright, are you.

Interesting, you know how it didn't happen but not how it did happen. You disappoint me again.

Sooo.....if mutations don't fit Darwin.......what does?
Or, can we simply admit that at this time, no one can explain the vast array of life forms.

What does? Natural selection operating on the natural variation within a population. Not all my children are the same height as I am.

Change occurs….I hesitate to call it ‘evolution’ because the uninformed tend to consider that agreement with Darwin.

How does change occur?

Who says change occurs?
I, for one, will not be around a billion years from now to see a dog become a human.
I have, though, seen humans become dogs.

The fossil record.

Did Darwin, the guy you worship, provide the 'how it happened'???

Yes he did. That was in fact his supreme accomplishment and you may have heard of it: natural selection.

This is the third time I'm correcting the same error, you moron.

Breeders and farmers practiced 'natural selection' from time immemorial.

And never has the modification, the alteration, produced a new species.



Animal husbandry, farming domestication, is based on the sort of random modifications that Darwin was getting at. No one doubts it. It was practiced well before Darwin. But while these folks knew that these modifications are almost always harmful, and deadly, the changes are always within limit of the species.

Darwin said they accumulate until a new species is the result. This has never happened. And that’s where Darwinism deviates into a political view, and not a scientific one.


In 1997, evolutionary biologist Keith Stewart Thomson wrote: “A matter of unfinished business for biologists is the identification of evolution's smoking gun,” and “the smoking gun of evolution is speciation, not local adaptation and differentiation of populations.” Before Darwin, the consensus was that species can vary only within certain limits; indeed, centuries of artificial selection had seemingly demonstrated such limits experimentally.
“Darwin had to show that the limits could be broken,” wrote Thomson, “so do we.” Keith Stewart Thomson, “Natural Selection and Evolution’s Smoking Gun,” American Scientist 85 (1997): 516-518.



And….

“Breeders have been using artificial selection to produce descent with modification for centuries—within existing species. Natural selection has also been observed to do the same in the wild—but again, only within existing species.”
Jonathan Wells





Thus, anyone who claims that Darwinian Evolution is a ‘fact, proven,’ is proof of the government school political persuasion, and knows nothing of science.
Raise your paw.

You mean this is the 3rd time you reposted the same junk?

Ironically, yesterday I was listening to a podcast by a friend of my daughter. She is a science writer and she said there are species of microbes and insects that are found no where in nature except the homes of people. Seems evolution is happening whether you believe in it or not.

So, I’m looking for evidence to determine exactly when your cerebrum entered the dead zone, and based on my extensive experience watching CSI, I know that I should check for signs of insect activity: let’s call in the entomologist to pin down the exact moment of pupation!

Don't mess up his concentration...I want to know his scientific credentials other than clicking a Link.

Trust me, this is the internet. I certainly would never make up or pad my resume. Lucky for me, I don't need to.

How to Become an Evolutionary Biologist: Education and Career Roadmap

Prospective students who searched for <u> How to Become an Evolutionary Biologist: Education and Career Roadmap </u> found the articles, information, and resources on this page helpful.

study.com

Does this describe your skillset?

No, I couldn't afford the pay cut.

I'm sure you're working on the next Manhattan Project.
Look, if you were that highly credentialed, it wouldn't have taken you well over a year of these discussions to finally find that article.

 

[alang1216]

In what science is your degree?
Don't be shy.

I'm not shy, I'm just not convinced a piece of paper should carry more weight than my words. I know ivy league graduates that don't seem to know what they are talking about, at least outside their immediate field.

I think you're too much of an ideologue to admit to being a high school science teacher.

If that were true I yell out it proudly. I think science is a noble profession and high school science teacher are an important part of the system.

 

[alang1216]

Disappointing at best.

The question you have steadfastly refused to answer is where do new species come from? Seems like there are only a few options:

1. supernatural creation
2. evolution
3. aliens intervention
4. we're all in the Matrix

You obviously don't have an answer or you'd have shared it with us. Why you insist on cutting and pasting your ignorance is beyond me.

No one knows.

Darwin gave his view.....I proved it wrong.

You're not very bright, are you.

Interesting, you know how it didn't happen but not how it did happen. You disappoint me again.

Sooo.....if mutations don't fit Darwin.......what does?
Or, can we simply admit that at this time, no one can explain the vast array of life forms.

What does? Natural selection operating on the natural variation within a population. Not all my children are the same height as I am.

Change occurs….I hesitate to call it ‘evolution’ because the uninformed tend to consider that agreement with Darwin.

How does change occur?

Who says change occurs?
I, for one, will not be around a billion years from now to see a dog become a human.
I have, though, seen humans become dogs.

The fossil record.

Did Darwin, the guy you worship, provide the 'how it happened'???

Yes he did. That was in fact his supreme accomplishment and you may have heard of it: natural selection.

This is the third time I'm correcting the same error, you moron.

Breeders and farmers practiced 'natural selection' from time immemorial.

And never has the modification, the alteration, produced a new species.



Animal husbandry, farming domestication, is based on the sort of random modifications that Darwin was getting at. No one doubts it. It was practiced well before Darwin. But while these folks knew that these modifications are almost always harmful, and deadly, the changes are always within limit of the species.

Darwin said they accumulate until a new species is the result. This has never happened. And that’s where Darwinism deviates into a political view, and not a scientific one.


In 1997, evolutionary biologist Keith Stewart Thomson wrote: “A matter of unfinished business for biologists is the identification of evolution's smoking gun,” and “the smoking gun of evolution is speciation, not local adaptation and differentiation of populations.” Before Darwin, the consensus was that species can vary only within certain limits; indeed, centuries of artificial selection had seemingly demonstrated such limits experimentally.
“Darwin had to show that the limits could be broken,” wrote Thomson, “so do we.” Keith Stewart Thomson, “Natural Selection and Evolution’s Smoking Gun,” American Scientist 85 (1997): 516-518.



And….

“Breeders have been using artificial selection to produce descent with modification for centuries—within existing species. Natural selection has also been observed to do the same in the wild—but again, only within existing species.”
Jonathan Wells





Thus, anyone who claims that Darwinian Evolution is a ‘fact, proven,’ is proof of the government school political persuasion, and knows nothing of science.
Raise your paw.

You mean this is the 3rd time you reposted the same junk?

Ironically, yesterday I was listening to a podcast by a friend of my daughter. She is a science writer and she said there are species of microbes and insects that are found no where in nature except the homes of people. Seems evolution is happening whether you believe in it or not.

So, I’m looking for evidence to determine exactly when your cerebrum entered the dead zone, and based on my extensive experience watching CSI, I know that I should check for signs of insect activity: let’s call in the entomologist to pin down the exact moment of pupation!

Don't mess up his concentration...I want to know his scientific credentials other than clicking a Link.

Trust me, this is the internet. I certainly would never make up or pad my resume. Lucky for me, I don't need to.

How to Become an Evolutionary Biologist: Education and Career Roadmap

Prospective students who searched for <u> How to Become an Evolutionary Biologist: Education and Career Roadmap </u> found the articles, information, and resources on this page helpful.

study.com

Does this describe your skillset?

No, I couldn't afford the pay cut.

I'm sure you're working on the next Manhattan Project.
Look, if you were that highly credentialed, it wouldn't have taken you well over a year of these discussions to finally find that article.

Find what article? Your How_to_Become_an_Evolutionary_Biologist_Education_and_Career_Roadmap?

 

[Indeependent]

In what science is your degree?
Don't be shy.

I'm not shy, I'm just not convinced a piece of paper should carry more weight than my words. I know ivy league graduates that don't seem to know what they are talking about, at least outside their immediate field.

I think you're too much of an ideologue to admit to being a high school science teacher.

If that were true I yell out it proudly. I think science is a noble profession and high school science teacher are an important part of the system.

I absolutely agree; my daughter went to private high school where the science teachers were Ivy League professionals paid specifically to come in at a convenient time of day to teach.
Her hours were hell to deal with.

 

[Indeependent]

Disappointing at best.

The question you have steadfastly refused to answer is where do new species come from? Seems like there are only a few options:

1. supernatural creation
2. evolution
3. aliens intervention
4. we're all in the Matrix

You obviously don't have an answer or you'd have shared it with us. Why you insist on cutting and pasting your ignorance is beyond me.

No one knows.

Darwin gave his view.....I proved it wrong.

You're not very bright, are you.

Interesting, you know how it didn't happen but not how it did happen. You disappoint me again.

Sooo.....if mutations don't fit Darwin.......what does?
Or, can we simply admit that at this time, no one can explain the vast array of life forms.

What does? Natural selection operating on the natural variation within a population. Not all my children are the same height as I am.

Change occurs….I hesitate to call it ‘evolution’ because the uninformed tend to consider that agreement with Darwin.

How does change occur?

Who says change occurs?
I, for one, will not be around a billion years from now to see a dog become a human.
I have, though, seen humans become dogs.

The fossil record.

Did Darwin, the guy you worship, provide the 'how it happened'???

Yes he did. That was in fact his supreme accomplishment and you may have heard of it: natural selection.

This is the third time I'm correcting the same error, you moron.

Breeders and farmers practiced 'natural selection' from time immemorial.

And never has the modification, the alteration, produced a new species.



Animal husbandry, farming domestication, is based on the sort of random modifications that Darwin was getting at. No one doubts it. It was practiced well before Darwin. But while these folks knew that these modifications are almost always harmful, and deadly, the changes are always within limit of the species.

Darwin said they accumulate until a new species is the result. This has never happened. And that’s where Darwinism deviates into a political view, and not a scientific one.


In 1997, evolutionary biologist Keith Stewart Thomson wrote: “A matter of unfinished business for biologists is the identification of evolution's smoking gun,” and “the smoking gun of evolution is speciation, not local adaptation and differentiation of populations.” Before Darwin, the consensus was that species can vary only within certain limits; indeed, centuries of artificial selection had seemingly demonstrated such limits experimentally.
“Darwin had to show that the limits could be broken,” wrote Thomson, “so do we.” Keith Stewart Thomson, “Natural Selection and Evolution’s Smoking Gun,” American Scientist 85 (1997): 516-518.



And….

“Breeders have been using artificial selection to produce descent with modification for centuries—within existing species. Natural selection has also been observed to do the same in the wild—but again, only within existing species.”
Jonathan Wells





Thus, anyone who claims that Darwinian Evolution is a ‘fact, proven,’ is proof of the government school political persuasion, and knows nothing of science.
Raise your paw.

You mean this is the 3rd time you reposted the same junk?

Ironically, yesterday I was listening to a podcast by a friend of my daughter. She is a science writer and she said there are species of microbes and insects that are found no where in nature except the homes of people. Seems evolution is happening whether you believe in it or not.

So, I’m looking for evidence to determine exactly when your cerebrum entered the dead zone, and based on my extensive experience watching CSI, I know that I should check for signs of insect activity: let’s call in the entomologist to pin down the exact moment of pupation!

Don't mess up his concentration...I want to know his scientific credentials other than clicking a Link.

Trust me, this is the internet. I certainly would never make up or pad my resume. Lucky for me, I don't need to.

How to Become an Evolutionary Biologist: Education and Career Roadmap

Prospective students who searched for <u> How to Become an Evolutionary Biologist: Education and Career Roadmap </u> found the articles, information, and resources on this page helpful.

study.com

Does this describe your skillset?

No, I couldn't afford the pay cut.

I'm sure you're working on the next Manhattan Project.
Look, if you were that highly credentialed, it wouldn't have taken you well over a year of these discussions to finally find that article.

Find what article? Your How_to_Become_an_Evolutionary_Biologist_Education_and_Career_Roadmap?

Your microbes article.

 

[alang1216]

I don't recall searching for any Link, regardless of how weak, and then claiming I have the intense credentials to truly understand the article to bolster my ideology.
I can argue that roaches are only found in homes in Queens and Brooklyn, or at least over 99%.

An excellent example, thanks. I'm not an Entomologist but life experience has shown me you are wrong and have obviously never been to the basement of a Manhattan tenement. I have and if you're taking a census of NYC roaches I suggest you start there.

 

[alang1216]

Disappointing at best.

The question you have steadfastly refused to answer is where do new species come from? Seems like there are only a few options:

1. supernatural creation
2. evolution
3. aliens intervention
4. we're all in the Matrix

You obviously don't have an answer or you'd have shared it with us. Why you insist on cutting and pasting your ignorance is beyond me.

No one knows.

Darwin gave his view.....I proved it wrong.

You're not very bright, are you.

Interesting, you know how it didn't happen but not how it did happen. You disappoint me again.

Sooo.....if mutations don't fit Darwin.......what does?
Or, can we simply admit that at this time, no one can explain the vast array of life forms.

What does? Natural selection operating on the natural variation within a population. Not all my children are the same height as I am.

Change occurs….I hesitate to call it ‘evolution’ because the uninformed tend to consider that agreement with Darwin.

How does change occur?

Who says change occurs?
I, for one, will not be around a billion years from now to see a dog become a human.
I have, though, seen humans become dogs.

The fossil record.

Did Darwin, the guy you worship, provide the 'how it happened'???

Yes he did. That was in fact his supreme accomplishment and you may have heard of it: natural selection.

This is the third time I'm correcting the same error, you moron.

Breeders and farmers practiced 'natural selection' from time immemorial.

And never has the modification, the alteration, produced a new species.



Animal husbandry, farming domestication, is based on the sort of random modifications that Darwin was getting at. No one doubts it. It was practiced well before Darwin. But while these folks knew that these modifications are almost always harmful, and deadly, the changes are always within limit of the species.

Darwin said they accumulate until a new species is the result. This has never happened. And that’s where Darwinism deviates into a political view, and not a scientific one.


In 1997, evolutionary biologist Keith Stewart Thomson wrote: “A matter of unfinished business for biologists is the identification of evolution's smoking gun,” and “the smoking gun of evolution is speciation, not local adaptation and differentiation of populations.” Before Darwin, the consensus was that species can vary only within certain limits; indeed, centuries of artificial selection had seemingly demonstrated such limits experimentally.
“Darwin had to show that the limits could be broken,” wrote Thomson, “so do we.” Keith Stewart Thomson, “Natural Selection and Evolution’s Smoking Gun,” American Scientist 85 (1997): 516-518.



And….

“Breeders have been using artificial selection to produce descent with modification for centuries—within existing species. Natural selection has also been observed to do the same in the wild—but again, only within existing species.”
Jonathan Wells





Thus, anyone who claims that Darwinian Evolution is a ‘fact, proven,’ is proof of the government school political persuasion, and knows nothing of science.
Raise your paw.

You mean this is the 3rd time you reposted the same junk?

Ironically, yesterday I was listening to a podcast by a friend of my daughter. She is a science writer and she said there are species of microbes and insects that are found no where in nature except the homes of people. Seems evolution is happening whether you believe in it or not.

So, I’m looking for evidence to determine exactly when your cerebrum entered the dead zone, and based on my extensive experience watching CSI, I know that I should check for signs of insect activity: let’s call in the entomologist to pin down the exact moment of pupation!

Don't mess up his concentration...I want to know his scientific credentials other than clicking a Link.

Trust me, this is the internet. I certainly would never make up or pad my resume. Lucky for me, I don't need to.

How to Become an Evolutionary Biologist: Education and Career Roadmap

Prospective students who searched for <u> How to Become an Evolutionary Biologist: Education and Career Roadmap </u> found the articles, information, and resources on this page helpful.

study.com

Does this describe your skillset?

No, I couldn't afford the pay cut.

I'm sure you're working on the next Manhattan Project.
Look, if you were that highly credentialed, it wouldn't have taken you well over a year of these discussions to finally find that article.

Find what article? Your How_to_Become_an_Evolutionary_Biologist_Education_and_Career_Roadmap?

Your microbes article.

You mean the podcast?

 

[Indeependent]

I don't recall searching for any Link, regardless of how weak, and then claiming I have the intense credentials to truly understand the article to bolster my ideology.
I can argue that roaches are only found in homes in Queens and Brooklyn, or at least over 99%.

An excellent example, thanks. I'm not an Entomologist but life experience has shown me you are wrong and have obviously never been to the basement of a Manhattan tenement. I have and if you're taking a census of NYC roaches I suggest you start there.

Roaches...NYC...obviously evolution.
After all, any evolved creature wants to live in NYC.

 

[Indeependent]

Disappointing at best.

The question you have steadfastly refused to answer is where do new species come from? Seems like there are only a few options:

1. supernatural creation
2. evolution
3. aliens intervention
4. we're all in the Matrix

You obviously don't have an answer or you'd have shared it with us. Why you insist on cutting and pasting your ignorance is beyond me.

No one knows.

Darwin gave his view.....I proved it wrong.

You're not very bright, are you.

Interesting, you know how it didn't happen but not how it did happen. You disappoint me again.

Sooo.....if mutations don't fit Darwin.......what does?
Or, can we simply admit that at this time, no one can explain the vast array of life forms.

What does? Natural selection operating on the natural variation within a population. Not all my children are the same height as I am.

Change occurs….I hesitate to call it ‘evolution’ because the uninformed tend to consider that agreement with Darwin.

How does change occur?

Who says change occurs?
I, for one, will not be around a billion years from now to see a dog become a human.
I have, though, seen humans become dogs.

The fossil record.

Did Darwin, the guy you worship, provide the 'how it happened'???

Yes he did. That was in fact his supreme accomplishment and you may have heard of it: natural selection.

This is the third time I'm correcting the same error, you moron.

Breeders and farmers practiced 'natural selection' from time immemorial.

And never has the modification, the alteration, produced a new species.



Animal husbandry, farming domestication, is based on the sort of random modifications that Darwin was getting at. No one doubts it. It was practiced well before Darwin. But while these folks knew that these modifications are almost always harmful, and deadly, the changes are always within limit of the species.

Darwin said they accumulate until a new species is the result. This has never happened. And that’s where Darwinism deviates into a political view, and not a scientific one.


In 1997, evolutionary biologist Keith Stewart Thomson wrote: “A matter of unfinished business for biologists is the identification of evolution's smoking gun,” and “the smoking gun of evolution is speciation, not local adaptation and differentiation of populations.” Before Darwin, the consensus was that species can vary only within certain limits; indeed, centuries of artificial selection had seemingly demonstrated such limits experimentally.
“Darwin had to show that the limits could be broken,” wrote Thomson, “so do we.” Keith Stewart Thomson, “Natural Selection and Evolution’s Smoking Gun,” American Scientist 85 (1997): 516-518.



And….

“Breeders have been using artificial selection to produce descent with modification for centuries—within existing species. Natural selection has also been observed to do the same in the wild—but again, only within existing species.”
Jonathan Wells





Thus, anyone who claims that Darwinian Evolution is a ‘fact, proven,’ is proof of the government school political persuasion, and knows nothing of science.
Raise your paw.

You mean this is the 3rd time you reposted the same junk?

Ironically, yesterday I was listening to a podcast by a friend of my daughter. She is a science writer and she said there are species of microbes and insects that are found no where in nature except the homes of people. Seems evolution is happening whether you believe in it or not.

So, I’m looking for evidence to determine exactly when your cerebrum entered the dead zone, and based on my extensive experience watching CSI, I know that I should check for signs of insect activity: let’s call in the entomologist to pin down the exact moment of pupation!

Don't mess up his concentration...I want to know his scientific credentials other than clicking a Link.

Trust me, this is the internet. I certainly would never make up or pad my resume. Lucky for me, I don't need to.

How to Become an Evolutionary Biologist: Education and Career Roadmap

Prospective students who searched for <u> How to Become an Evolutionary Biologist: Education and Career Roadmap </u> found the articles, information, and resources on this page helpful.

study.com

Does this describe your skillset?

No, I couldn't afford the pay cut.

I'm sure you're working on the next Manhattan Project.
Look, if you were that highly credentialed, it wouldn't have taken you well over a year of these discussions to finally find that article.

Find what article? Your How_to_Become_an_Evolutionary_Biologist_Education_and_Career_Roadmap?

Your microbes article.

You mean the podcast?

It wasn't a podcast.
You posted it and you can't remember!?

 

[alang1216]

Your microbes article.

This?
The Great Indoors: The Surprising Science of How Buildings Shape Our Behavior, Health, and Happiness Kindle Edition
by Emily Anthes

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07Y73DTNW/?tag=ff0d01-20

 

[alang1216]

After all, any evolved creature wants to live in NYC.

It's a great place to be from.