Toxic Toads Evolving Super-Fast

Discovery.com (not Discovery Institute) ^ | 15 February 2006 | Larry O'Hanlon

[PatrickHenry]

"But it's still a toad."
</creationism mode>

[HiTech RedNeck]

ayup, they're toads

[PatrickHenry]

Evolution Ping The List-O-Links

A conservative, pro-evolution science list, now with over 350 names. See the list's explanation, then FReepmail to be added or dropped. To assist beginners: But it's "just a theory", Evo-Troll's Toolkit, and How to argue against a scientific theory.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[PzLdr]

"Hiya, Kids! Hiya!Hiya!"

[zeeba neighba]

Well goollleee! When it becomes a kangaroo, let us know.

[blueminnesota]

Grrrraaaarrr!

[Bigg Red]

Saw the title and thought this was about the Democratic Party.

[PatrickHenry]

This thing ended up in the "chat" forum pretty quick.

[Slings and Arrows]

Lament for Toad

[fortunecookie]

"It doesn't mean that we have no problem (with climate change) or that all species will be viable," said Skelly. But there is evidence that many species might be more able to adapt than previously believed.

Wait - does he mean that any supposed 'global warming' isn't really a factor at all, that species can survive and adapt and even improve? Hmmm... I think the real alarm is that the toads are spreading at a faster rate, not so much their preoccupation with global warming, but rather how to quell these toxic toads.

[isthisnickcool]

(inset pic of Susan Estridge here)

[Vaquero]

I'd call 'em chuzzwuzzers I would.

[Shalom Israel]

Actually, the more interesting question is whether there's been a genetic change at all. Recall the amazon tree frogs being born legless due to environmental factors; it seems worth exploring whether some environmental factor is contributing to increased leg length in this case.

[GLDNGUN]

Well goollleee! When it becomes a kangaroo, let us know.

Or discovers that FLIGHT is faster than hopping and sprouts feathered wings.

[zeeba neighba]

lol. I think the most toads have figured out in order to survive, is to hide in mud. If pursued by enemy combatants, even Rambo-Rocky Balboa can think this up.

[TheCrusader]

"Fat, toxic toads---evolved longer legs than those behind the front lines, report biologists. The alarming discovery---raises the possibility that under the right conditions, animal evolution can happen in just decades, not eons."

The Darwinists just never stop with the nonsense do they? We've already been taken down this primrose path by Darwin himself. He observed that the beaks of the Galapagos Island finches grew in the area of tenths of a milimeter as a result of draught. This, he claimed, was proof of 'natural selection' and 'evolution'. It was ballyhood around Darwinist circles as great evidence of 'evolution' for a century. Trouble for Darwinists is, that it has been discovered that the beaks return to normal size as soon as the drought is over, meaning it is merely a built-in adaption process, not 'evolution'.

Then there was the peppered moth 'evolution' evidence. The 'scientists' showed photos of moths that had seemingly changed colors to adapt to the environmental pollution caused by the industrial revolution, (soot, etc). The Darwinists declared the moths rapidly changed colors to avoid being seen and eaten, (hence 'natural selection'). Problem this time for the Darwinists was that the moths were faked, and they were glued to the trees by 'scientists'.

Then of course there was the earlier nonsense about the human fetus having "fish gills" and a "tailbone", which turned out to be the ear canal and the spine, (which developed before the legs did).

Need I mention the facts about Piltdown Man,

or "Archaeoraptor", (named "Piltdown Bird' because a donosaur's tail was glued to the bird)?

[narby]

Need I mention the facts about Piltdown Man,

Oh, OK. I guess that means that evolution is false.

[Need I mention the facts about the evangelist Jim Jones]

Oh, OK. I guess that means that faith in God is false.

"Archaeoraptor", (named "Piltdown Bird' because a donosaur's tail was glued to the bird)?

Oh, OK. I guess that means the evolution is false.

[Marjoe, the fake evangelist named after "Mary and Joseph" and wrote the tell all book about the revival preaching "business".]

Oh, OK. I guess that means that faith in God is false.

We could continue this for awhile.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"He observed that the beaks of the Galapagos Island finches grew in the area of tenths of a milimeter as a result of draught. This, he claimed, was proof of 'natural selection' and 'evolution'."

No, he said it was evidence, not proof.

"The 'scientists' showed photos of moths that had seemingly changed colors to adapt to the environmental pollution caused by the industrial revolution, (soot, etc)."

No, they didn;t say this. They said that there were two different color variations, a light and a dark colored moth. The dark colored variety increased in numbers when the bark was darker, and light variety increased in number when it was lighter. This is a demonstration of natural selection.


"The Darwinists declared the moths rapidly changed colors to avoid being seen and eaten, (hence 'natural selection')."

You are completely misinformed. They said no such thing.

" Problem this time for the Darwinists was that the moths were faked, and they were glued to the trees by 'scientists'."

No, the studies were real. In one photo, two moths were shown together, a dark one and a light colored one. They were glued to the tree to get a good picture, as the only point in this particular photo was to show the two color strains. The rest of the photos were of single moths that were not glued to the trees and were found in the wild as they were. Please, read up a little before you say such foolish things.

"Then of course there was the earlier nonsense about the human fetus having "fish gills" and a "tailbone", which turned out to be the ear canal and the spine, (which developed before the legs did)."

Early human embryos DO have features that in fish turn into gills. And we DO have a tail-bone.

" Need I mention the facts about Piltdown Man,"

True, since it was a hoax uncovered by evolutionists.

" or "Archaeoraptor", (named "Piltdown Bird' because a donosaur's tail was glued to the bird)?"

This was NEVER accepted by science and was faked not by scientists but by fossil sellers in China.

[PatrickHenry]

Creationists want to talk about fraud?

Intentionally and falsely trying to pass off Pandas as a science book is a far bigger and far more outrageous fraud, and will do more to destroy the ID charlatans at the Discovery Institute, than a whole army of Piltdown Men.

As Plaintiffs meticulously and effectively presented to the Court, Pandas went through many drafts, several of which were completed prior to and some after the Supreme Court's decision in Edwards [Edwards v. Aguillard], which held that the Constitution forbids teaching creationism as science. By comparing the pre and post Edwards drafts of Pandas, three astonishing points emerge:

(1) the definition for creation science in early drafts is identical to the definition of ID;

(2) cognates of the word creation (creationism and creationist), which appeared approximately 150 times were deliberately and systematically replaced with the phrase ID; and

(3) the changes occurred shortly after the Supreme Court held that creation science is religious and cannot be taught in public school science classes in Edwards.

This word substitution is telling, significant, and reveals that a purposeful change of words was effected without any corresponding change in content, which directly refutes FTE's [FTE = the Foundation for Thought and Ethics, the publisher of Pandas] argument that by merely disregarding the words "creation" and "creationism," FTE expressly rejected creationism in Pandas. In early pre-Edwards drafts of Pandas, the term "creation" was defined as "various forms of life that began abruptly through an intelligent agency with their distinctive features intact -- fish with fins and scales, birds with feathers, beaks, and wings, etc," the very same way in which ID is defined in the subsequent published versions.

Source: Kitzmiller et al. v Dover Area School District et al..

From now on -- thanks to the geniuses at DI, the discredited fools on the Dover school board, and their dedicated lawyers -- when the creationists raise the phony issue of Piltdown Man, or Nebraska Man, or Peppered Moths, or Haeckel's Embryos, none of which amounts to anything anyway, the rational side of the argument has been given the all-time slam-dunk response -- Pandas!