adaptive changes

[gallo]

MerlinsByte sent me this in a PM. Lord only knows why he just didn't post it in the open. Anyway, he told me to post it.

Quote by: MerlinsByte I suspect I am wasting my time but here goes, If you still want to play games (after reading this) I will continue to help you.

OK. That's great. What I need help with is where you get this weird stuff that you post. However, it would really be helpful if you would support at least one of your assertions with a source that presents actual evidence. Can you help?

Quote by: MerlinsByte Quote by: gallo "(what does)frame work of a species" mean? What is phylum jumping? I don't understand your reference to "Darwin god biology." Yeah right…Ok to humor you here are the translations that only you seem to have a problem with…

I'm the only one? How did you establish that? Maybe there are others who just don't comment on your silly remarks any more because you don't seem able to give rational responses. Could that be it?

Quote by: MerlinsByte evolution in the frame work of a species means adaptive changes and remain in the same species. Like a well known moth that adapts to a environment and becomes darker spotted or whatever, this is a example of adaptive change within a species (or in frame work of a species) a frame in this case represents boundaries not frame around a Rembrandt.

Well, I've never heard that before. So does this "frame work" prevent evolution from separating one species into two species? I mean, is it some kind of barrier beyond which evolution can't go? Is it like Prometheus was saying, evolution can only go so far? Is that what you are talking about? What determines how far?

Quote by: MerlinsByte Phylum jumping This term would mean changing from one phylum to another by the method of evolution that we all know and love. And If I must clarify the word phylum it means...one of the primary divisions of the animal kingdom,

Wouldn't it be better if you actually learned what you were talking about before you spoke? A phylum is a taxonomic division of all life. Even potatoes belong to a phylum. All living things are divided into kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus, species. That taxonomic system is still used but the new system of cladistics has arisen as computers have developed. Cladistic analysis has caused major revisions in the old system of Linnean taxonomy. For example, years ago there were two kingdoms. Biologists now recognize 5 kingdoms (prokaryotes, protists, fungi, plants, and animals) with in two domains, the eukarya and the prokarya. The system is in flux right now. At any rate, each of the kingdoms, whether animal or not, is divided into phyla.

Humans are classified as domain eukaryote, kingdom anamalia, phylum chordata, subphylum vertebrata, class mammalia, order primata, family hominidae, genus Homo and species sapiens.

Now I've never heard of some method of evolution by which an organism can jump from one phylum to another. Can you give me an example of when or where it happened? What evidence is there? If you can, you will certainly falsify most of modern evolutionary theory. You say we all know the method of evolution, but I can assure you that I know nothing about it.

Quote by: MerlinsByte "Darwin God biology," this one is a difficult one maybe I should have phrased it diff.

Perhaps.

Quote by: MerlinsByte that is the Paradigm, and bible, of mainstream science which would include its changes. This farce is called evolution of the species by natural selection. Oh it has been altered so much that the befuddled Darwin himself would not recognize it.

Actually, I'm quite sure that Darwin would recognize the current theory of natural selection. It has changed some since Darwin's day, and Darwin was the first to begin changing it, but it is still pretty much as Darwin laid it out. And Darwin isn't considered a god, he got enough stuff wrong, and his theories aren't thought of as scripture. In fact, one can be a quite competent evolutionary biologist without ever having read anything that Darwin wrote. Darwin's works are interesting today for historical reasons. There is too much more recent literature that has amended, revised, and added to Darwin's theories. Especially the modern synthesis from the 1930s and 1940s that joined Mendelian genetics with Darwinian evolution.

Do you actually know what natural selection is? Alfred Russel Wallace, a Christian and naturalist and later, spiritualist, also discovered the process of natural selection. Another of Darwin's contemporaries, when he first read the theory, said, "How stupid not to have seen that." When one understands Darwin's reasoning (observed many times in nature) then natural selection becomes intuitively obvious.

I wonder. Do you actually know what natural selection is? You talked about it when you mentioned the color change in the peppered moths. You recognized that it had happened and yet you reject it. How strange.

Would you like to learn?

Quote by: MerlinsByte I gotta go for now the its cool enuf to mow I will attempt to pacify you later tonight, and complete this redundant unnecessary waste of finger power, it doesn’t take brain power to clarify the obvious.

Yes. That's true. So it makes me wonder why you go out of your way to post nonsense and to ignore simple explanations. The problem is that little of what you post is obvious, mostly because it is so wrong that it is beyond comprehension.

Quote by: MerlinsByte God bless you Gallo, I know that you are angry but this kind of thing will only make it worse not resolve it.

Funny. You're the one who was shouting in a previous post. You and Prometheus were calling names and insulting. Even here you are insulting. I'm not angry at all. What do you have against learning? Wouldn't it be better to learn at least the basics of what you claim to oppose? If you don't know what it is, how do you know that you oppose it?

[Chalk]

OK is this a 'hey everybody, look at me, I can pick apart other people's arguments!' thread or is there an actual debate buried within this, and if so.. what?

[gallo]

Quote by: Chalk OK is this a 'hey everybody, look at me, I can pick apart other people's arguments!' thread or is there an actual debate buried within this, and if so.. what?

Feel free to refrain from participation. The debate is about the nature of biological evolution through natural selection. At least that's what I think Merlin is driving at.

[gallo]

I'm wondering why MerlinBytes sent me this PM, told me to post it if I wanted, and then fails to respond. I mean, what sort of non-thinking individual would make an argument about phylum jumping? It just doesn't make sense.

[Prometheus]

Quote by: Chalk OK is this a 'hey everybody, look at me, I can pick apart other people's arguments!' thread or is there an actual debate buried within this, and if so.. what?

I't a debate if anyone is willing to argue with gallo's assertions. But Gallo's corrections of MB's ignorance (and I don't say that in a condesending way) is basically factually accurate. Any scientist would have said the same. There isn't a lot to discuss here past the old tired arguments against evolution... and I don't feel like starting that cluster f**k again.

[gallo]

Just to bump this up because Merlin doesn't seem to be able to answer my questions. No wonder. There are no rational answers.

First there is the "frame work of a species" thing. He doesn't explain what it is and doesn't seem to be able to answer any questions about it. I have another question too. What about adaptive changes that cause speciation? You know, changes that aren't in the "frame work of the species."

Then there's the "phylum jumping" thing where he shows his ignorance by giving an incorrect definition of phylum. And it seems that Merlin is trying to build up a straw man in the first place - and then he stumbles so badly that he can't even knock down his own straw man. There is no such thing as phylum jumping in evolutionary biology. In fact, if an organism changed from one phylum to another, it would falsify most of evolutionary biology.

Finally, he makes some remarks about Darwin and the theory of natural selection. I hope you all noticed that I asked Merlin to tell us about natural selection, what is it, how does it work? He dosn't seem to be able to answer. Again, he seems to oppose something and he doesn't even know what it is.

[Starboy]

gallo, looks like you have stubled onto a case of a creationist that is being willfully ignorant. There are plenty more examples from where that came from.

Starboy