Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: BroJoeK

“The probability of generational modifications is nearly 100%.”

Sure, and we see this all the time. However, what we don’t see is those modifications “adding up” to create whole new classes of animals. We have never actually observed the genomes having the ability to be that flexible, no matter how many mutations pile up. We can induce a thousand mutations in a fruit fly, for example, and we have never observed the result to be anything other than a fruit fly.

We can look at the fossil record, and speculate that something like that happened to account for apparent changes we see, but that is mere speculation and not science, for it can’t be replicated.


47 posted on 08/01/2014 8:04:06 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies ]


To: Boogieman
Boogieman: "However, what we don’t see is those modifications 'adding up' to create whole new classes of animals.
We have never actually observed the genomes having the ability to be that flexible, no matter how many mutations pile up.
We can induce a thousand mutations in a fruit fly, for example, and we have never observed the result to be anything other than a fruit fly."

All of that is revealed in DNA analysis, where we see how closely, or distantly, individual humans are related -- and to other species, families & orders of creatures.
DNA analysis, for example shows how distantly elephants and elephant shrews relate.
Of course, you can chose to believe this has nothing to do with evolution -- your choice -- but then no other scientific explanation (aka hypothesis) has ever been proposed which explains the data so well.

Boogieman: "We can look at the fossil record, and speculate that something like that happened to account for apparent changes we see, but that is mere speculation and not science, for it can’t be replicated."

Of course it's science, just science you don't like & disagree with.
Evolution is more than a scientific hypothesis, it's a confirmed theory, confirmed by innumerable tests and predictions.
It's also supported by data from virtually every other branch of science -- from astronomy to geology and radiometric physics.

But your point about long-term evolution not being repeatable in a laboratory is worth noting, because that is what makes long-term evolution a theory instead of a confirmed observation = "fact".

Of course, short-term evolution is an observed, confirmed fact, but the logical extension of accumulated changes over millions of years has not been seen directly, and will remain a theory.

On the other hand, as I said, the effects of long term evolution can be seen, directly, in DNA.

54 posted on 08/01/2014 9:25:41 AM PDT by BroJoeK (a little historical perspective...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


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