Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,916 Year: 4,173/9,624 Month: 1,044/974 Week: 3/368 Day: 3/11 Hour: 2/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Can Domestic Selection cause Macroevolution?
Wepwawet
Member (Idle past 6139 days)
Posts: 85
From: Texas
Joined: 04-05-2006


Message 61 of 157 (301345)
04-05-2006 7:51 PM


This is my first time; be gentle.
Hi folks, new poster here although I've been lurking for a while.
If we limit this topic to animals I don't think we can reasonably expect to see speciation within the 15,000 or so years which have passed since we started domesticating animals. The art and eventual science of animal husbandry which allows us to breed for or against specific traits has been around for considerably less time.
Most domestic animals have a life expectancy of from 10-20 years (considerably less for animals bred specifically for meat which is a much more recent practice than other uses). And we have long recognized the advantages of bringing in new blood to strengthen stock lines(including the addition of wild members of the species). Both factors which should reduce expectations of seeing speciation within domestic animals.
I believe the case has been made that we have seen speciation within domesticated plants. I just wonder if that's sufficient for the critics.
On a side note to Faith who thinks meanings change too fast, I'd like to remind you that we're communicating in a living language that grows and changes as we do. We can't expect words to hold the same meaning forever unless we want to invent words as fast as we change. How much good would it do me to tell you that while macroevolution has never been observed, grizification has?
As a party to this conversation you are just as responsible as the writer for understanding the meaning and context of the writer. Since this is a science forum you should also realize that the scientific definition for any particular word is usually more appropriate than the common definition.
If I look up the word in a dictionary I can immediately see that the word can be used in many ways:
quote:
spe·cies ( P ) Pronunciation Key (spshz, -sz)
n. pl. species
1.Biology.
A fundamental category of taxonomic classification, ranking below a genus or subgenus and consisting of related organisms capable of interbreeding. See table at taxonomy.
An organism belonging to such a category, represented in binomial nomenclature by an uncapitalized Latin adjective or noun following a capitalized genus name, as in Ananas comosus, the pineapple, and Equus caballus, the horse.
2.Logic. A class of individuals or objects grouped by virtue of their common attributes and assigned a common name; a division subordinate to a genus.
3.
A kind, variety, or type: “No species of performing artist is as self-critical as a dancer” (Susan Sontag).
The human race; humankind.
4.Roman Catholic Church.
The outward appearance or form of the Eucharistic elements that is retained after their consecration.
Either of the consecrated elements of the Eucharist.
5.Obsolete.
An outward form or appearance.
Specie.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Middle English, logical classification, from Latin specis, a seeing, kind, form. See spek- in Indo-European Roots.]
If I look a little harder (okay it's really on the same page) I can find medical dictionaries to help me understand how a scientist might use the word:
quote:
spe·cies (spshz, -sz)
n. pl. species
A fundamental category of taxonomic classification, ranking below a genus or subgenus and consisting of related organisms capable of interbreeding.
An organism belonging to such a category, represented in binomial nomenclature by an uncapitalized Latin adjective or noun following a capitalized genus name, as in the bacterium Escherichia coli.
A class of pharmaceutical preparations consisting of a mixture of dried plants in sufficiently fine division to be used in making boiled extracts or infusions.
A specific type of atomic nucleus, atom, ion, or molecule.
Source: The American Heritage® Stedman's Medical Dictionary
Copyright © 2002, 2001, 1995 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Main Entry: spe·cies
Pronunciation: 'spE-(")shEz, -(")sEz
Function: noun
Inflected Form: plural species
1 a : a category of biological classification ranking immediately below the genus or subgenus, comprising related organisms or populations potentially capable of interbreeding, and being designated by a binomial that consists of the name of the genus followed by a Latin or latinized uncapitalized noun or adjective agreeing grammatically with the genus name b : an individual or kind belonging to a biological species
2 : a particular kind of atomic nucleus, atom, molecule, or ion
Source: Merriam-Webster's Medical Dictionary, © 2002 Merriam-Webster, Inc.
Source: Species Definition & Meaning | Dictionary.com
Just as long as the writer used the word with a meaning similar to one of the above definitions (and not a definition from say the 1930 edition), a reasonable reader can be expected to understand exactly what the writer means. Playing word games looks like an attempt to dodge the underlying issue.

When science and the Bible differ, science has obviously misinterpreted its data.
- Henry Morris, Head of Institute for Creation Research

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024