orogenicman
Darwin was a pastafarian
- Jul 24, 2013
- 8,546
- 834
- 175
- Thread starter
- #141
Well, I kept reading and I still didn't see any answers that you keep claiming you have. All I've seen is you telling me I don't understand evolution. Apparently you don't understand it either because you don't seem to be able to answer any of the questions I just asked. For example, I'm still waiting for you to show us how species evolve into other species. And this time, how about something other than "You just don't understand evolution"?I didn't. Read it again. I said you attack everyone who questions your assertions.
If that is what you take from this thread, then perhaps you are wasting your time. In which case, why are you here?
No it is not. Keep reading.
Notice how your claim uses the singular, not the plural. What part of "populations evolve" do you not understand? How it started is irrelevant to the FACT that life evolves. If you want to discover how life started, you need another theory because evolution, by definition, is only about the origin of species, not the origin of life.
No, the entire theory describes the diversity of life, not how it started or where or when it originated.
Yes that is my answer. No it is not a non-answer. It is THE answer. And I do know. Keep reading.
SJ said:Oh, so a monkey somewhere along the line popped out a human and viola, a new species is born? I know, I know, "evolution". So why can't you explain HOW "evolution" changes one species into another? I know that species evolve WITHIN their own species to a small extent to adapt to different environments, but you have yet to provide any evidence whatsoever that they evolve into different species.
Obviously, you don't know evolution. Because if you did, you would not have repeated this misrepresentation of evolutionary theory. Again, what part of "populations evolve, not individuals" do you not understand?
I can explain how species evolve. You didn't ask it before so I didn't tell you. Species evolve via natural selection.
Look at artificial selection of domestic animals by humans. The mechanism for changing those animals is there naturally, or we would not be able to breed these animals for our own purposes. That mechanism is their genomes. We select animals based on what we desire of them (i.e., gentle nature, speed, taste, etc.), and then breed only those specimens that have the desired characteristics. After repeated breeding, we end up with breeds that only have those characteristics. They breed true. And we've done this only after a relative few generations of selective breeding. Nature does this via natural selection (i.e., the gradual process by which biological traits become either more or less common in a population as a function of the effect of inherited traits on the differential reproductive success of organisms interacting with their environment) as well, but over a much longer period of time.
Then apparently you are having trouble with the English language. What part of the below did you not understand?
Look at artificial selection of domestic animals by humans. The mechanism for changing those animals is there naturally, or we would not be able to breed these animals for our own purposes. That mechanism is their genomes. We select animals based on what we desire of them (i.e., gentle nature, speed, taste, etc.), and then breed only those specimens that have the desired characteristics. After repeated breeding, we end up with breeds that only have those characteristics. They breed true. And we've done this only after a relative few generations of selective breeding. Nature does this via natural selection (i.e., the gradual process by which biological traits become either more or less common in a population as a function of the effect of inherited traits on the differential reproductive success of organisms interacting with their environment) as well, but over a much longer period of time.
Are the words too big? Do you need a dictionary? Perhaps what you really need is a class in basic biology.
But let me ask you a question. If not evolution, then what, in your opinion, better explains the diversity of life we see on this planet? And what evidence do you have to support this 'better' explanation?
Last edited: