Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: puroresu
"There areobservable species boundaries."

Don't rely on your eyes - they'll lie to you far too often. Two animals that may look similar may be totally different species. Two animals that may look completely different may be the same species. Unless they're able to produce viable offspring, science generally considers them to be different species.
559 posted on 11/29/2004 2:28:52 PM PST by NJ_gent (Conservatism begins at home. Security begins at the border. Please, someone, secure our borders.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 550 | View Replies ]


To: NJ_gent
"There areobservable species boundaries."

Don't rely on your eyes - they'll lie to you far too often. Two animals that may look similar may be totally different species.

This isn't the eyes. This is actually the result of breeding experimentation for tens of centuries. There _are_ observable species boundaries.

Also, the lines between species isn't always clear. I think there are cases where breeding can still occur between genera. Classification isn't all its cracked up to be.

A progressive fossil record is the evidence, showing change through time. This is not equivalent with proof for evolution. Creationism allows for both (a) progressive creation, and (b) certain kinds of speciation. Both of which equate to change over time. However, thousands of years of breeder experimentation has shown that there are, indeed, limits to change.

Darwin's view on this was simply that nature both causes and allows more change than breeding. However, this is pretty much just conjecture.

591 posted on 11/29/2004 3:48:25 PM PST by johnnyb_61820
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 559 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson