Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   What would a transitional fossil look like?
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5930
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.8


(1)
Message 106 of 403 (850677)
04-12-2019 3:33 AM
Reply to: Message 93 by Faith
04-10-2019 8:01 PM


Re: still more comic relief
None of those mutations is new in the sense that they violate the basic programming of the genome of the species. And many of them are genetic diseases and even more of them don't change anything anyway. Which if they did would only be a change within the coding of the gene they affect. I suspect huge numbers of them are the cause of all the junk DNA in any given genome. That is, they kill the genetic stuff, they do nothing whatever to further it. You cannot get a new species from such changes even in millions of years. Most likely they'd just kill the organism in a lot less time than that.
Wow! What a mass of verbal garbage! You really have absolutely no clue how anything works, do you?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 93 by Faith, posted 04-10-2019 8:01 PM Faith has not replied

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5930
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.8


(4)
Message 107 of 403 (850678)
04-12-2019 3:56 AM
Reply to: Message 89 by Faith
04-10-2019 2:34 PM


Re: It's all simple variation built into a species
The concept of Kind does not assume speciation and I can't even grasp where you would get such an idea. All variation occurs within the Kind, even when a particular variation turns out to be unable to breed with the parent population, that's a complete rejection of the idea of speciation.
Uh, what? If it's the same species, then it can interbreed. If it's another species that's still related closely enough, then you can create hybrids. But when they are no longer able to interbreed in any way, then they are separate species, regardless of your denial of reality.
So then in your own special personal reality, just what marks separate species as being separate species? Dogs and butterflies cannot interbreed, so are they separate species? Precisely why? According to the definition you present (ie, inability to breed doesn't make any difference), we cannot determine that they are different species.
Your own example was the felid "basic created kind", which encompasses two different genera (plural of genus), panthera and felis. Within felis, you have many possible hybrids, and within panthera you have many possible hybrids, but between panthera and felis you have next to no hybrids -- there was one hybrid that crossed the line to the surprise of scientists.
Your argument is that the felid "basic created kind" is just one single species. So you actually believe that your housecat is the same species as that tiger in the zoo? And you still want us to take you seriously? You may be that stupendously stupid, but we are not.
There is a problem in biology in how to define species, which is exactly what we would expect with evolution. But your attempts to further blur that definition just veers off into the weeds.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by Faith, posted 04-10-2019 2:34 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 111 by Faith, posted 04-12-2019 1:11 PM dwise1 has not replied

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1706 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


(3)
Message 108 of 403 (850684)
04-12-2019 10:17 AM
Reply to: Message 105 by Faith
04-11-2019 9:30 PM


Re: Thought Experiment for Faith
I also like the example of the trilobites. According to the usual idea they span many hundreds of millions of years in the fossil record and yet they all have basically the same body structure.
Kind of like how humans and chimps have 'basically the same body structure'?
All the changes are superficial, not much of a record for the ToE which should produce far more dramatic changes if species-to-species evolution were actually true.
Why should not all members of the Class Trilobita look like trilobites?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by Faith, posted 04-11-2019 9:30 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 109 by Faith, posted 04-12-2019 12:36 PM edge has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 109 of 403 (850692)
04-12-2019 12:36 PM
Reply to: Message 108 by edge
04-12-2019 10:17 AM


Re: Thought Experiment for Faith
Kind of like how humans and chimps have 'basically the same body structure'?
But they don't. The differences are much greater than those between cats and dogs: I described the differences that define their respective genomes. The chimp's extra long muscular arms, muscular torso and short legs with hand-like feet, plus skull shape etc etc etc, amount to greater differences in body structure than those between cats and dogs.
All the changes are superficial, not much of a record for the ToE which should produce far more dramatic changes if species-to-species evolution were actually true.
Why should not all members of the Class Trilobita look like trilobites?
It's just that there's a lot less time in the fossil record between the very different body structures of the reptiles and the mammals than between the very similar trilobite groups. A LOT less. Hundreds and hundreds of millions of years less. Of course the trilobites didn't HAVE to evolve that much I suppose, but it strikes me as a bit odd that there should be such huge differences between the reptiles and the mammals in so much less time while the trilobites remain trilobites for so much longer. I mean the ToE would lead me to expect more changes in the trilobites over such a long span of time. However I've also mused that to get the mammalian ear from the reptilian ear is impossible anyway.
Just a pondering.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by edge, posted 04-12-2019 10:17 AM edge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 112 by PaulK, posted 04-12-2019 1:17 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 114 by edge, posted 04-12-2019 1:44 PM Faith has replied
 Message 121 by Meddle, posted 04-13-2019 10:55 AM Faith has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.7


(1)
Message 110 of 403 (850693)
04-12-2019 1:09 PM
Reply to: Message 105 by Faith
04-11-2019 9:30 PM


Re: Thought Experiment for Faith
Faith writes:
Of course if you were able to change the human genome into an exact copy of a chimp genome of course you would get a chimp.
That contradicts your argument. You claimed that no amount of mutations could ever result in anything that is not human. Obviously, this can happen.
The thing is you seem to think that a mere accumulation of random mutations could change one species into another. I see no reason why you would get anything but a variation on the species, simply some new characteristics of what is clearly a chimp for instance.
You just spelled it out. If those mutations happened in the human genome then you would get a chimp.
It also seems to me that each species' genome must have some sequences that define the most fundamental characteristics of the creature and that for some reason those don't change.
Of the genetic differences that separate humans and chimps, which are you saying could not be produced by known mechanisms of mutation?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by Faith, posted 04-11-2019 9:30 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 113 by Faith, posted 04-12-2019 1:22 PM Taq has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 111 of 403 (850694)
04-12-2019 1:11 PM
Reply to: Message 107 by dwise1
04-12-2019 3:56 AM


Re: It's all simple variation built into a species
If it's the same species, then it can interbreed.
Only according to the bogus idea of "speciation" where there may be enough genetic changes to make interbreeding impossible between populations that are otherwise clearly the same species. Yes we have different definitions of these things. You think it's possible to get a new species altogether, I think that can't happen.
just what marks separate species as being separate species?
I argue for sameness of body structure as I just did above. I also argue that the "processes of evolution" only describe changes within a given species, from its built-in genetic possibilities, beyond which further change is impossible, which can be appreciated when you get dramatically new phenotypes in a reproductively isolated subpopulation based on many fixed loci, which is a condition that makes further variation much less possible, but for the ToE to be true you need more variation not less. This simply functionally defines the limits of a given species' genome rather than defining the species more directly.
I don't use your criteria to define species as you see. Body structure and other basic shared characteristics make panthera and felis the same species. Yes I also believe the housecat and the tiger and all other cats that can be defined by their obvious "catness" are all the same species. Flexible bodies, stalking with head down, long tails, purring when content, lots of things define the species as containing all cats, Yup.
Yes defining species is difficult for evos. It's also just plain difficult for some creatures. In the end it should be characteristics of the genome itself that do the defining. Meanwhile I do what I can with observations of body structure and behavioral similarities.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by dwise1, posted 04-12-2019 3:56 AM dwise1 has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 112 of 403 (850695)
04-12-2019 1:17 PM
Reply to: Message 109 by Faith
04-12-2019 12:36 PM


Re: Thought Experiment for Faith
quote:
But they don't. The differences are much greater than those between cats and dogs: I described the differences that define their respective genomes. The chimp's extra long muscular arms, muscular torso and short legs with hand-like feet, plus skull shape etc etc etc, amount to greater differences in body structure than those between cats and dogs.
Don’t forget that there are multiple species between humans and their common ancestor with the chimps. And is the difference between the arms of a chimpanzee and a human really that much greater than the difference between a dachshund’s legs and thoseof a cheetah ?
quote:
It's just that there's a lot less time in the fossil record between the very different body structures of the reptiles and the mammals than between the very similar trilobite groups. A LOT less. Hundreds and hundreds of millions of years less.
Really ? Aside from the usual refusal to admit the variety of trilobites they were only around for 300 million years while it took about 150 million years to get from the first synapsids to the first eutherian mammals.
quote:
However I've also mused that to get the mammalian ear from the reptilian ear is impossible anyway.
The evidence shows that it is possible. We have the intermediates.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by Faith, posted 04-12-2019 12:36 PM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 113 of 403 (850696)
04-12-2019 1:22 PM
Reply to: Message 110 by Taq
04-12-2019 1:09 PM


Re: Thought Experiment for Faith
That contradicts your argument. You claimed that no amount of mutations could ever result in anything that is not human. Obviously, this can happen.
No, I don't think any amount of mutations could bring about such a change, I was only saying that IF you could change the human genome into the chimp genome you'd get a chimp. I don't think it possible by any amount of mutations or anything else. I think the number of mutations you believe could bring about such a coherent new genome would far sooner destroy the genome than get anything coherent out of it at all. I do believe that junk DNA is a record of destruction of genes by mutations.
I don't think you could ever get a different species from any number of mutations in any given genome because I think the genome defines the basic structure of a species in such a way that it can't ever make anything other than the species it makes. All you can ever get from mutations over long periods of time is either total destruction of the genome and the creature starting with all kinds of diseases and deformities, or in the case of useful mutations, which we know are very rare, all you'd ever get are changes in the superficial characteristics that are defined by given gene sequences, different textures and colors etc, no structural changes except of course different sizes and that sort of change such as we see in cats and dogs.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by Taq, posted 04-12-2019 1:09 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 202 by Taq, posted 04-15-2019 4:28 PM Faith has replied

  
edge
Member (Idle past 1706 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 114 of 403 (850698)
04-12-2019 1:44 PM
Reply to: Message 109 by Faith
04-12-2019 12:36 PM


Re: Thought Experiment for Faith
It's just that there's a lot less time in the fossil record between the very different body structures of the reptiles and the mammals than between the very similar trilobite groups. A LOT less. Hundreds and hundreds of millions of years less. Of course the trilobites didn't HAVE to evolve that much I suppose, but it strikes me as a bit odd that there should be such huge differences between the reptiles and the mammals in so much less time while the trilobites remain trilobites for so much longer. I mean the ToE would lead me to expect more changes in the trilobites over such a long span of time. However I've also mused that to get the mammalian ear from the reptilian ear is impossible anyway.
Just a pondering.
Your opinions are noted.
Nevertheless, in my opinion, trilobites show a large amount of morphological variability within their Class. I would not expect to see them evolving into cats.
Feel free to ponder away! And when you've figured out how fast evolution should occur, I hope you will publish.
But they don't. The differences are much greater than those between cats and dogs: I described the differences that define their respective genomes. The chimp's extra long muscular arms, muscular torso and short legs with hand-like feet, plus skull shape etc etc etc, amount to greater differences in body structure than those between cats and dogs.
Yes, in your opinion. If you were a cat, you might have a different opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by Faith, posted 04-12-2019 12:36 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 115 by Faith, posted 04-12-2019 3:31 PM edge has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 115 of 403 (850701)
04-12-2019 3:31 PM
Reply to: Message 114 by edge
04-12-2019 1:44 PM


Re: Thought Experiment for Faith
Nevertheless, in my opinion, trilobites show a large amount of morphological variability within their Class.
Of course I think otherwise, that they retain their body structure. They all retain the general oval shape and the three lobes. That's the main morphology or basic body structure it seems to me. The variations are in how the "limbs" are arranged (Can't remember the term). In some variations the shape seems to be obscured but it's possible to show that it remains nevertheless.
I suspect that most cats would agree with me by the way.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by edge, posted 04-12-2019 1:44 PM edge has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 116 by Tangle, posted 04-12-2019 4:17 PM Faith has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


(3)
Message 116 of 403 (850704)
04-12-2019 4:17 PM
Reply to: Message 115 by Faith
04-12-2019 3:31 PM


Re: Thought Experiment for Faith
Faith writes:
Of course I think otherwise,
Of course you do. Despite never having studied one or had the training necessary to understand what you're looking at even if you had. You haven't the slightest idea of how ignorant you are.
Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona
"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by Faith, posted 04-12-2019 3:31 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 117 by Tanypteryx, posted 04-12-2019 4:25 PM Tangle has not replied
 Message 118 by Faith, posted 04-12-2019 6:38 PM Tangle has replied

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 4344
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.9


(2)
Message 117 of 403 (850705)
04-12-2019 4:25 PM
Reply to: Message 116 by Tangle
04-12-2019 4:17 PM


Re: Thought Experiment for Faith
You haven't the slightest idea of how ignorant you are.
Dunning-Kruger effect.

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python
One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie
If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy
The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq

This message is a reply to:
 Message 116 by Tangle, posted 04-12-2019 4:17 PM Tangle has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 118 of 403 (850708)
04-12-2019 6:38 PM
Reply to: Message 116 by Tangle
04-12-2019 4:17 PM


Re: Thought Experiment for Faith
Ad hominems really add nothing to the discussion. Your job is to explain how I'm wrong and give what you think is the correct answer. In this particular case I was answering according to my observation of the form of trilobites in the various illustrations so I'm not just theorizing. I've also given descriptions of the body structure of chimpanzees and cats and dogs to make my point about those creatures. I'm counting on you all to be able to form pictures in your heads, but if necessary maybe I can dig up the relevant charts.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 116 by Tangle, posted 04-12-2019 4:17 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 119 by RAZD, posted 04-13-2019 2:37 AM Faith has replied
 Message 120 by Tangle, posted 04-13-2019 3:36 AM Faith has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(3)
Message 119 of 403 (850712)
04-13-2019 2:37 AM
Reply to: Message 118 by Faith
04-12-2019 6:38 PM


Comparisons by Faith, the fun continues
... I've also given descriptions of the body structure of chimpanzees and cats and dogs to make my point about those creatures. ...
The hilarious thing is that there is more skeletal variation within dogs than between cats and dogs. The skull of a Bulldog and a Whippet are more different than the skulls of chimp and human. The legs of a Great Dane and a Dachshund are more different than the legs of chimp and human.
You know next to nothing about this subject. One problem is that you think you know more than scientists that study the subjects you choose to natter on about, so you don't study the science to learn the facts: you make stuff up ... Hysterical.
The bigger problem is that these differences have nothing to do with whether or not speciation can or cannot occur. So it's a silly argument.
Speciation occurs when there is reproductive isolation and a mechanism that maintains the isolation when opportunity to commingle occurs. Pretending it isn't speciation just so you can keep nattering on about your pet concepts is self deceit. Claiming it isn't speciation is not your role:
you
do not
get
to
redefine
scientific
terms
You only get to use them, and then only when you use them correctly.
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by Faith, posted 04-12-2019 6:38 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 123 by Faith, posted 04-13-2019 12:37 PM RAZD has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


(2)
Message 120 of 403 (850714)
04-13-2019 3:36 AM
Reply to: Message 118 by Faith
04-12-2019 6:38 PM


Re: Thought Experiment for Faith
Faith writes:
Ad hominems really add nothing to the discussion. Your job is to explain how I'm wrong and give what you think is the correct answer. In this particular case I was answering according to my observation of the form of trilobites in the various illustrations so I'm not just theorizing. I've also given descriptions of the body structure of chimpanzees and cats and dogs to make my point about those creatures. I'm counting on you all to be able to form pictures in your heads, but if necessary maybe I can dig up the relevant charts.
There are hundreds of scientists that have spent their entire lives researching trilobites; describing them, dating them, categorising them building on previous work and creating their evolutionary record. You come along and without reading a single scientific paper, without any scientific education or training, without touching a single fossil and without the first understanding of the subject, tell us that they're all wrong.
You attempt this massive feat of hubris in all fields of scientific study from palaeontology, geology, micro-biology, genetics, radiometric dating and astronomy. All without the first clue of any of them and all without publishing a single scientific paper yourself.
You're simply deluded on every level and there's no point attempting to discuss these things rationally with you. All we can hope to do is learn about your illness by observing your behaviour.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona
"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by Faith, posted 04-12-2019 6:38 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 124 by Faith, posted 04-13-2019 12:45 PM Tangle has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024