Reply to recent unbiased sites/publications to read about creationism vs. evolution

Forum Index » Religion

Reply to "recent unbiased sites/publications to read about creationism vs. evolution"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]OP, this may help:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experimental_evolution[/quote]
[b]This article only mentions traits within a species. No mention of mutation from one species to an entirely different one.[/b]

The interesting thing about the Biblical account, is that each species reproduced "according to its kind," mean start with a dog, get another dog. So what's interesting is that this "according to its kind" reproduction is actually repeatable, observable, testable, reproducible; in other words, "science."[/quote]

OP, please see what I wrote above.  What you are looking for is not evolution.  No scientist ever said that if you breed dogs together, they will one day mutate spontaneously into a cat.[/quote]
And you're simplifying what I wrote. What I [i]am[/i] saying is that you'll always get a dog. [/quote]

I believe you just wrote above that the Wikipedia article did not mention spontaneously mutating from one species to another.  Well, it wouldn't, BECAUSE THAT IS NOT WHAT EVOLUTION IS.  Please read what several pp's have written about what evolution is, that you seem to be ignoring.

And yes, if you start with a dog, you'll end with a dog.  But trace that dog's ancestry back via DNA, and you will find it had a common ancestor with other, similar animals, such as a wolf.  That common ancestor did not mutate suddenly and become a dog.  But many generations ago, common ancestors did undergo mutations that changed their genotypes in such a way that eventually their phenotype so changed as well, and a new species came about.  The forerunner then most likely died out as this new species was better equipped to survive.  Do you think that the dachshunds of today are identical to the dogs kept by the pharaohs?

The ancestors of dogs lived before Old Testament times, btw. [/quote]
Aren't you avoiding the main point? You're talking bout dogs looking different thousands of years ago, but still being dogs, or related to wolfs and such and "similar animals." But the basic premise of evolution is that everything branched out from one single-celled organism, and there isn't anything observable that even remotely supports this viewpoint. You post doesn't go too far to explain that. And "common ancestors under(went) mutations that changed their genotypes in such a way that eventually their phenotype so changed as well, and a new species came about" is speculation. No one can show that happening. You all are oversimplifying what I'm saying -- that a dog had babies and out came a cat! -- but your basic point is that at some point, you have a new species. And I'm saying this is not an observable, testable, repeatable hypothesis.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics