Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is perfect possible?
LDSdude
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 9 (180479)
01-25-2005 3:26 PM


May I ask if there is a universal species that could supposedly "evolve"? Is there a perfect form that once reached would be impossible to advance from? The Turtle is an example of a species that has not changed for millions of years. Exactly identicle turtles are found in the fossil record all the way back to the early Jurrasic. Why have they not "evolved," then? Are they so perfectly adapted to their surroundings that they will never advance? Are they better adapted to their surroundings than we are to ours? In the future, well turtles be the dominant species? Will we eventually "evolve" into turtles?

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by AdminNosy, posted 01-25-2005 3:35 PM LDSdude has replied

AdminNosy
Administrator
Posts: 4754
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Joined: 11-11-2003


Message 2 of 9 (180487)
01-25-2005 3:35 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by LDSdude
01-25-2005 3:26 PM


Some work required
Since you have a rather poor history in the few posts you have made so far I'm going to ask that you work harder on your opening post before having others waste time with you.
You say that "identical turtles" are found. Please give your source for this and the specific species of turtles involved.
The rest of your statments show such a total lack of understanding to evolutionary theory and fact that I ask you to do some research and thinking before you carry on.
Please give your own answers to each of the questions first so that we can see you are willing to put some effort in. It will also make it clearer where you are in your understanding before others jump in.
Please describe what you think a "universal species" would be like. You might be refering to the last common ancestor but I'm not sure.
Please describe you understanding of what "advance" would mean and how we would recognize it. (hint: there is no "advance" in the theory)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by LDSdude, posted 01-25-2005 3:26 PM LDSdude has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by LDSdude, posted 01-25-2005 7:59 PM AdminNosy has replied

LDSdude
Inactive Member


Message 3 of 9 (180595)
01-25-2005 7:59 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by AdminNosy
01-25-2005 3:35 PM


Re: Some work required
Okay pops.
Here's one source: http://www.kiawahturtles.com/cowgill/evolution
There are a few others.
When I say, "identicle", clearly I don't mean exact DNA replication,
but the species has mantained same body structure for millinia.
Also, you're right! I don't know nearly as much about the theory as you POST-EAT-SLEEP-POST-EAT-SLEEP-POST-..... people. That's why I ask questions. I also ask questions to see if you guys can come up with a plausable answer. Thus far, I have had few.
When you say, answer your own questions, it defeats the whole purpose. And besides, as I mentioned above, I ask questions both to learn, and to see if they are answerable.
A universal species. My question was if there is such a thing possible according to evolution. In other words, is there a peak of evolution where a species can only get so adapted? Is there a limit to how far a species could "evolve"?
Advance-Adapt-Evolve-Leap Forward-Become the next link-become better than before-so on... Does that answer your question?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by AdminNosy, posted 01-25-2005 3:35 PM AdminNosy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by AdminNosy, posted 01-25-2005 8:25 PM LDSdude has not replied

AdminNosy
Administrator
Posts: 4754
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Joined: 11-11-2003


Message 4 of 9 (180600)
01-25-2005 8:25 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by LDSdude
01-25-2005 7:59 PM


Re: Some work required
The link doesn't work.
Please update your opening post to make it clearer what you are saying. Since you now say they are not identical. You now appear to be saying the same species. Please clarify in great detail.
When you say, answer your own questions, it defeats the whole purpose. And besides, as I mentioned above, I ask questions both to learn, and to see if they are answerable.
Then what is the purpose? I explained to you why it would be useful for you to give what you think the answers are. It is apparent from your words that you know so little you should do some simple research on just what evolution is.
I will, perhaps, release this thread but only after you've done enough work to justify others writing an ABC text book of evolutionary thoery to you since that is what you are asking.
Advance-Adapt-Evolve-Leap Forward-Become the next link-become better than before-so on... Does that answer your question?
No it simple repeats (in more words) what you said before. How do you recognize "better"? What is "forward"? These are all just another way of saying advance.
I am asking you to think about this because it is part of your extreme lack of understanding.
A universal species. My question was if there is such a thing possible according to evolution. In other words, is there a peak of evolution where a species can only get so adapted? Is there a limit to how far a species could "evolve"?
The real answers to this have been recently given in another thread discussing limits to evolution and artificial selection.
However, you are asking the question incorrectly. You don't want to know about a single species but all descendant species.
This question will be answered in great detail when this thread is release.
This message has been edited by AdminNosy, 01-25-2005 20:35 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by LDSdude, posted 01-25-2005 7:59 PM LDSdude has not replied

LDSdude
Inactive Member


Message 5 of 9 (180909)
01-26-2005 5:33 PM


okay.....
The Link doesn't work? So then is this topic stuck here? Oh, well, if there's another topic that discusses it forget about then. Wait, are you talking about the "is evolution going backwards" topic?
By the way, I'm not asking for a rundown on evolution. And on the whole, "what does advance mean?" thing, here's my personal description (at least in terms of evolution). People are more "advanced" than apes. You say nature made us that way. I say God did. Either way, we are in control of them and they are NOT in control of us. This is because of the greater ability of our brains to take in facts and calculate informed decisions. Because we have abilities that give us clear advantages over apes, we are more "advanced". If you claim to know the theory of evolution, you MUST know what I'm talking about. So there it is in plain english for those who do not have the gift of discernment.
I never said there is one universal species, I simply asked a retoracle question directed to evolutionists. Maybe retoracle is the wrong word for it. I asked a question that I believed would stump those to whom it was directed to.
Don't bother putting this thread up, it is clear that the administration of this "Creation vs. Evolution" website is somewhat more leaneant towards the later of those two terms. I'll just post in another forum.

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by AdminNosy, posted 01-26-2005 6:44 PM LDSdude has replied

AdminNosy
Administrator
Posts: 4754
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Joined: 11-11-2003


Message 6 of 9 (180934)
01-26-2005 6:44 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by LDSdude
01-26-2005 5:33 PM


Turned over to any interested admin.
Don't bother putting this thread up, it is clear that the administration of this "Creation vs. Evolution" website is somewhat more leaneant towards the later of those two terms. I'll just post in another forum.
Too bad I was just preparing to promote the topic.
I will never do that when this kind of remark is made.
In fact, we are far tougher on the "evos" as they are expected to be able to discuss and debate in a coherent fashion and know what it means to have done their homework.
I'll leave this open for another admin to take over.
PS -- the link does work in IE but not in my browser is all. Sorry about that.
This message has been edited by AdminNosy, 01-26-2005 18:44 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by LDSdude, posted 01-26-2005 5:33 PM LDSdude has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by LDSdude, posted 02-16-2005 5:19 PM AdminNosy has replied

LDSdude
Inactive Member


Message 7 of 9 (185955)
02-16-2005 5:19 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by AdminNosy
01-26-2005 6:44 PM


Re: Turned over to any interested admin.
I was just looking back on my posts in this subject, and although I still DON'T want this topic opened(it's now out of date and the questions already exist elsewhere), I felt I should probably apolagize for any insulting comments I made. Hope you can forgive me.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by AdminNosy, posted 01-26-2005 6:44 PM AdminNosy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by LDSdude, posted 02-17-2005 7:56 PM LDSdude has not replied
 Message 9 by AdminNosy, posted 02-18-2005 12:29 AM LDSdude has not replied

LDSdude
Inactive Member


Message 8 of 9 (186381)
02-17-2005 7:56 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by LDSdude
02-16-2005 5:19 PM


Re: Turned over to any interested admin.
d
This message has been edited by LDSdude, 02-17-2005 19:57 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by LDSdude, posted 02-16-2005 5:19 PM LDSdude has not replied

AdminNosy
Administrator
Posts: 4754
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Joined: 11-11-2003


Message 9 of 9 (186436)
02-18-2005 12:29 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by LDSdude
02-16-2005 5:19 PM


Apology accepted
Thank you for that. It isn't something done all that often.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by LDSdude, posted 02-16-2005 5:19 PM LDSdude has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024