Skip to comments.
Changing One Gene Launches New Fly Species
Science Daily ^
| 08 December 2003
| Staff
Posted on 12/09/2003 7:47:21 AM PST by PatrickHenry
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 261-270 next last
Speciation observed. Another gap vanishes. Everybody be nice.
To: *crevo_list; VadeRetro; jennyp; Junior; longshadow; RadioAstronomer; Scully; LogicWings; ...
PING. [This ping list is for the evolution side of evolution threads, and sometimes for other science topics. FReepmail me to be added or dropped.]
2
posted on
12/09/2003 7:48:13 AM PST
by
PatrickHenry
(Felix, qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas.)
To: PatrickHenry
DAMN. What else will they come up with these days?
To: PatrickHenry
that's all we need. a bunch taxpayer funded scientiists creating more bugs to infest the worl. YEESH!
4
posted on
12/09/2003 7:51:44 AM PST
by
camle
(no fool like a damned fool)
To: PatrickHenry
Evolution theory is credible after all! I knew it.
To: PatrickHenry
Way cool! :-)
To: PatrickHenry
But it didn't turn into a fish!
;)
To: PatrickHenry
Just what the world needs -- another fly.
As an agnostic on macro-evolution (lizards changing into bunny rabbits) I'm not too impressed. However, as one who recognizes the existence of small changes (one type of fly becoming another type of fly), it was a well-done experiment. Kudos to the experimenters.
I'm a scientist who believes that God created the universe. If He chose to use evolution then that's fine by me. I know the Who and Why behind the universe but agree that it takes science to discover the How. Evolution neither proves nor disproves the existence of God, and vice versa.
To: <1/1,000,000th%
But it didn't turn into a fish! Other responses which are anticipated from the denial crowd:
- It's a designed experiment. That proves ID!
- It's a lie!
- It hasn't speciated yet!
- Blasphemy!
- They're interpreting it through their naturalistic worldview.
- How dare you use the screen name "Patrick Henry"?
- Yeah, but "get your own dirt!"
9
posted on
12/09/2003 8:04:51 AM PST
by
PatrickHenry
(Felix, qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas.)
To: PatrickHenry
Seeing as how this was done deliberately by direct intelligent intervention, wouldn't it be more supportive of intelligent design than evolution?
10
posted on
12/09/2003 8:05:50 AM PST
by
templar
To: DallasMike
Right. I should have included "It's not macro evolution!" to my list.
11
posted on
12/09/2003 8:07:16 AM PST
by
PatrickHenry
(Felix, qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas.)
To: PatrickHenry
Pretty interesting -- there is more variation between different Aricans? North Africa has Arabs, Berbers, Moors.
West Africa has Bantu tribes, East has Somali, Ethiopian while the Nubians are different. South aFrica has the Bushen and there are Pygmies int he West.
12
posted on
12/09/2003 8:12:18 AM PST
by
Cronos
(W2004)
To: PatrickHenry; AAABEST; Ace2U; Alamo-Girl; Alas; alfons; amom; AndreaZingg; Anonymous2; ...
Rights, farms, environment ping.
Let me know if you wish to be added or removed from this list.
I don't get offended if you want to be removed.
13
posted on
12/09/2003 8:17:24 AM PST
by
farmfriend
( Isaiah 55:10,11)
To: PatrickHenry
Speciation observed. Another gap vanishes. Everybody be nice. Techniclly, I dont think this is true. From the text:
...the two groups of flies are not only fit for different environments but may also be on their way to sexual isolation, a crucial divide in the emergence of a new species.
This proved that a small genetic change (somehow occurring, either by direct intervenion or perhaps by random mutation) will change the characteristics within a species. As far as I can tell, they may still interbreed. Even the scientists hedge by saying they have seen the first step in the proces of speciation only. Progress indeed. But for it to lead somewhere, they need to prove that eventually they can create different species altogether (i.e. unable to interbreed).
To: farmfriend
BTTT!!!!!!
15
posted on
12/09/2003 8:20:03 AM PST
by
E.G.C.
To: templar
"..more supportive of intelligent design than evolution?" Exactly right! Well said.
I don't remember Darwin mentioning a gene splicing machine in his theory.
16
posted on
12/09/2003 8:26:37 AM PST
by
laotzu
To: camle
Playing god is what they are doing.
17
posted on
12/09/2003 8:43:03 AM PST
by
Independentamerican
(Independent Freshman at the University of MD)
To: PatrickHenry
Im kinda bummed you ran out of banality before you hit the tradition Top Ten quota
To: PatrickHenry
Glad I didn't miss this one in all the hubbub elsewhere. One for the bookmarks!
To: <1/1,000,000th%
A fish is a dish is a Gish, if that's what you wish.
20
posted on
12/09/2003 8:55:38 AM PST
by
js1138
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 261-270 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson