Evolution Must Happen, it is logical

Generally not something we like to have done (other than duplicates).However, thanks, it will stop our overly enthusiatic members from answering here.They are, of course, good questions but I know how deep that rabbit hole is. There will be other good questions for up to the 300 post limit.

Sure thing.If I'm really all that curious, I can just go start my own threads about those questions.

I think the main problem with this argument is going to be the same as that for transistional fossils. No matter how detailed the genetic lineage spectrum you end up with is, they are always going to claim that there are 'missing links' which make the data irrelevant.Even if you had 100's of species with only 0.5% genetic difference, however that was measured, between each adjacent one, you would still have a hard time convincing a 'true believer'.TTFN,WK

I think that point 2 might have some problems as well. The problem is not so much in what you say, as in the way it can be interpreted.The whole issue of what constitutes a 'completely novel' sequence is a problematic one. Certainly a frame shift could produce a protein which was effectively completely novel, but the underlying sequence would only have undergone a very minor change. Similarly some mutations are more liable to occur and some regions are more prone to mutation, so even when mutations occur they need not be completely novel for that population.Perhaps distinguishing between a mutation which gives rise to a novel function would be more useful than talking in terms of novel sequences?TTFN,WK

quote:

---

Even if you had 100's of species with only 0.5% genetic difference, however that was measured, between each adjacent one, you would still have a hard time convincing a 'true believer'.

---

I think we all know that nothing will convince the "true believer" until they want to listen. I have even heard of creationists, once they have to face up to the fossil evidence, who proclaim that demons create fossils that look transitional. And I don't think we need to talk about the link between demons and gastro-intestinal emmissions . . . Anyway, you get my drift.Instead of focusing on the gradations between each fossil or extant species, I think it might be better to talk about the hierarchial structure of taxonomy. On another forum (username "Aaron-ra" at Christian Forums) had a great idea. He is walking people through the nested hierarchies of life, using humans as the guide.When one walks through these criteria of how life is organized, and how nested hierarchies are a real phenomena, it makes it hard to deny that evolution is not on to something. This covers some of the same ground that Ned is trying to cover, but it starts from the other end of the question. Instead of "Evolution must happen" it becomes "Common Ancestory had to have happened".Best of all, there are no gaps in nested hierarchies, no transitionals to find, no questionable fossils. All of the evidence for nested hiearchies is alive today, but fossil species don't hurt either.However, as well all know, common ancestory does not make evolution true. But, it does take us one step away from creationism.

Would it be reasonable to say that if micro-evolution happens, then macro-evolution must also happen? Is there some logical reason why evolution would have to stop at the micro level?

I hope you will; now I'm insatiably curious what your questions were.

quote:

---

Would it be reasonable to say that if micro-evolution happens, then macro-evolution must also happen? Is there some logical reason why evolution would have to stop at the micro level?

---

The scientific definition of macroevolution is speciation, or the creation of two gene pools from one gene pool. Evolution, as a process, does not absolutely require this to happen. However, given the characteristics of genetics and the environment, it is bound to happen. Also, we have observed this process happening in nature. Once there are two separate gene pools, there is nothing preventing these two species from acquiring completely different characteristics over time.Earth's environment makes speciation a necessary step in evolution. There are numerous niches that life can occupy, and these niches are so different that a single species would not be able to fill all of them. Therefore, speciation allows part of the population to specialize itself to one niche while another part of the population specializes itself to another niche. This process continues and continues until all of the niches are filled. Once a species is completely specialized to a particular niche, as long as that niche exists that species will not change much. In fact, natural selection will actually prevent the species from changing.So I guess the answer to your question is yes. The acquisition of mutations will tend to give some members of the population an edge in certain niches that are currently open. This first initial push will separate these individuals and their offspring from the rest of the population until there are two separate gene pools. This process then repeats itself. All of these separate gene pools will build up mutations that are specific to that gene pool, so the different species will tend to look quite different after a long period of time has passed.

Darwin is Dead Jesus is Alive. Who do you trust your life with? There is adaptation yes.
Evolution. I don't believe so. But can it even be proven? There are Three Basic concepts of
Evolution. I Evolution (chance), II Progressive Evolution, III Theistic Evolution. IF all three
believe in evolution--Why does each group "conclusively" PROVE the tother two are
impossible? And How about the evolution of man. There is still no proof of it being true, but it is still being taught.Heidlberg Man: Built form a jaw bone that was conceded by many to be quite human.Nebraska Man: Scientifically built up from one tooth and later found to be the tooth of a extinct
pig.Piltdown Man: The jawbone turned out to belong to a modern ape.Peking Man: 500,000 years old. All evidence has disapeared.Neaderthal Man: At the Int'l Congress of Zoology (1958) Dr. A. J. E. Cave said that his examination of the famous Neanderthal skeleton found in France over 50 years ago is that of a old man who suffered from arthritis.Cre-Magnon Man: One to the earliest ans best established fossils is at least equal in physique and brain capasity to modern man...so what is the difference?Mondern Man: The genius who thinks we came from apes."Professing themselves to be wise they became fools." Romans 1:22Evolutionists tested by te Potassium-Argon Method, Strata in which Leakey's Nutcracker Man
was found and reported to be 1 3/4 Million years old. - But when they tested other material in the same strata by Carbon-14, it showed 10,000 yrs old. Which is right?- Dr. Whitelaw, a professor
in nuclear engineering, claims it to be less than 7,000 yrs. old.A Living mollusk was tested by carbon-14 and found to be dead for 3,000 yrs.Dr. Melvin Cook said that if oil in the earth was as old as geologists claim (80,000,000 years)it's
pressure would have disipated long before this--the present pressure of oil indicates not over
10,000 yrs.We've been taught that it took millions of years to produce oil. This is a fact--scientists working
in a lab, produced a barrel of oil from one ton of garbage in only twenty minutes!We know that the electrons of the atom whirl around the nucleus billions of times millionth of a
second. Also that the nucleus of the atom consists of particles called neutrons and protons.- The
neutrons have no electrical charge and are therefore neutral--But-- The protons have positive
charges. one law of electricity is that--LIKE CHARGES REPEL EACH OTHER! Being that all
of the protons on the nulceus are positivley charged - they should repel each other and scatter into space. What holds them together?Christ the creator was before all things, and by him all things hold together Col 1:17-It also says that, All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. John 1:3

If you want answers refer to this site Discover Online: Everything Designed Has a Designer
after reading all the keys on this site try convincing me that evolution happendThis message has been edited by G.I: Jane, 01-14-2005 11:24 AM

If you post this again you will have your posting privileges restricted to Boot Camp. I'll be back in about 3 hours to check on this.

Hi G.I: Jane,I see AdminNosy is already trying to catch your attention. Please don't post the exact same message multiple times to multiple threads. EvC Forum is for discussion and will entertain any and all viewpoints as long as the Forum Guidelines are followed. Repeatedly posting the same message regardless of context violates rules 2 and 4:

2. Debate in good faith by addressing rebuttals through the introduction of additional evidence or by enlarging upon the argument. Do not merely keep repeating the same points without further elaboration.

​

4. Make your points by providing supporting evidence and/or argument. Avoid bare assertions. Because it is often not possible to tell which points will prove controversial, it is acceptable to wait until a point is challenged before supporting it.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

I apologise for my misconduct. I had forgotten the regulations and simply got carried away by this rather intriguing site. I futher apologise if I came off being rude and attacking like, I simply wanted to state a few points. I am sorry.

There was no such user name there. Has that person been kicked out, or is there some other way to find him?

Hey truthlover, you lurking rapscallion you. Nice to here from ya.It is Aron-Ra, sorry for the mix up.You can find the thread here. Aron-Ra does a great job but then the thread exploded and went off topic at about mssg #82. He got to phylum chrodata and then all hell broke loose, literally.Nice to here from ya big fella, hope things are going well.