Creation vs Evolution

[Duke of Gloucester]

It´s evolution baby!.....case closed....

As unscientific a statement as any made by a creationist. In science, the case is never closed.

[Ronin]

As unscientific a statement as any made by a creationist. In science, the case is never closed.

fine....show up with another explanation with some evidence behind it and I´ll look at it.

some old book that we don´t even know when, why, and who wrote is not what i´d call "proof" of anything.

[Duke of Gloucester]

Once again we have the distinction between adaptation and evolution. I ask again, what is the mechanism for adaptation? If you do not agree that selective breeding is the cause, what is your proposal? This is a straightforward question.

Well I go along with Darwin and say it is the "survival of the fittest". Btw selective breeding is not the answer because that is artificial selection. Natural selection says that, especially in difficult times, those orgamisms of a population best adapted to survive do so, reproduce and pass those advantageous traits to their offspring. Add in the possibility of the introduction of random traits which can also be passed on and we can see how organisms remain adapted to a changing environment (or not and become extinct). Where I disagree with you is when you say that because we see this process, evolution must be true.

As I said before, there is no evidence of one species changing into another (unless Rory provides me with some) but Darwin's theory does provide a plausible explanation of how that might happen. It is not just plausible, it is elegant and powerful, since if it is accepted, organisms must be adapted to their environment and traits must be useful, so in studying an organism you ask of every trait "what is this for?" "how does it help this orgamism reproduce?"

This is why I don't like Ronin's "case closed" statement. It's not that I think that the Theory of Evolution is wrong; I like it, and it is the best explanation we have at present, but in science, the jury is always popping in and out and revising its verdict as new evidence is discovered. It's one of the things that makes science interesting.

some old book that we don´t even know when, why, and who wrote is not what i´d call "proof" of anything.
Today 20:58

It is not appropriate to talk about "proof" when discussing evolution, only the balance of probabilities. Any creationist with intellectual rigour would have to accept the weight of scientific evidence is against the bible account of creation (strictly speaking against either of the bible's two acounts of creation), but they are still free to believe it if they wish. Personally, I don't think the bible is a science text-book.

[Lemur]

Well I go along with Darwin and say it is the "survival of the fittest".

Actually, Darwin never said that; the phrase came from Herbert Spencer.

You are quite right, however, in that "natural selection" is a much more correct description of the process than "selective breeding." Mea culpa.

All I am attempting to establish is whether or not selective breeding is the mechanism we observe when "adaptation" occurs in microbiology. If it is not, what is the mechanism. You're getting a lot of mileage by arguing about whether or not this "proves" evolution, a step I have deliberately not taken.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I'll just jump in here, I'm not an evelutionary biolagist but this occurs to me. The basic genes contained in all animals are the same. The same gene governs your arm and a fly's wing. That surely is compelling evidence of a common ancestor.

Now, take a snake for example. The snake has the genes to create legs but it's genome switches the gene off on every vertebrae and they all register a chest cavety with ribs instead but should the switch be flicked back on the snake could have ten legs.

Look at Coyotes and Wolves, virtually the same genetically, they must have a common ancestor, if evolution is true, they look different but genetically the difference is close to nill. So maybe in looking at the record you need to fuzz the definition of species to see the crossover.