Global Warming Fuels Speedy Evolution

Discovery Channel ^ | Feb. 22, 2006 | Larry O'Hanlon

[andysandmikesmom]

Wish you werent taking months long break from the Crevo threads...I have always enjoyed your posts...you will be missed...but we will all be here when you return..I do understand what you are saying tho...

[From many - one.]

It is becoming ever more clear that your entire body of knowledge about evolution consists of the word and your opposition.

Both the longer legged frog feature and the earlier birthing squirrel feature are classic evolutionary changes.

Oh, yes, as are taller human sub populations.

[taxesareforever]

In case you forgot, it was you who asked my what I thought evolution was.

[Dimensio]

In case you forgot, it was you who asked my what I thought evolution was.

I did not forget. I don't see how that relates to your apparent misunderstanding of the meaning of "theory" as it relates to science ( and also how it relates to "fact").

[taxesareforever]

And that is NOT evolution. A classic case of different characteristics. Nothing else. Is a mulatto an evolutionary change or a change of characteristics?

[taxesareforever]

You don't like my answer so you change the issue. Go figure.

[Dimensio]

You don't like my answer so you change the issue.

I never claimed to dislike your answer. In fact, I agreed that your answer was an accurate representation of what evolution is. I do not see how I attempted to change the issue.

[csense]

The post you linked to wasn't even addressed to you. Maybe it was an error on your part. That said, I'm curious. Show me where PhilipFreneau said to you, and I quote, "it is permissable for Christians to lie to non-believers."

[taxesareforever]

You asked me what I thought was evolution. This is what I wrote. In the life sciences, evolution is a change in the traits of living organisms over generations, including the emergence of new species. You agreed with this definition. Now, since we agree on what is considered evolution I stand by my premise that there are no new species. I asked for evidence of a new species and you mentioned long legged frogs. I maintain that this is a change of characteristics and is not evidence of a new species. Change does not denote new species. In biology, a species is, loosely speaking, a group of related organisms that share a more or less distinctive form and are capable of interbreeding.

[quantim]

I am taking a break from CREVO threads for a little while.

Heard that.  I have the same issue on the pro-cancerhead-addict-personal-rights-threads.  Some call it smoking.  Got in Mod trouble once; then I realized that I had stooped below reasonableness when trying to deal with drug addicts with a self-imposed dead sentence (smokers, and FReepers to boot).  I still read the threads, but do not comment.  It's OK not to reduce yourself to their level.  I'll betcha' the majority of the cancerheads here are anti-abortion, go figure.

[Dimensio]

PhilipFreneau specifically said "But be mindful that even Christians lie during war-time to protect, say, tactical secrecy (Churchhill made a timeless statement on the use of deception to protect secrecy during war-time)." when defending his implict suggestion (and I say that it was his implicit suggestion because he did not deny it when the implications of his statement were directly stated to him) that the US Government was effectively lying in the Treaty of Tripoli, however this specific defense is unusual because the united states was not at war with anyone in Barbary at the time of the drafting or signing of the treaty, nor does the claim that PhilipFreneau suggests is a lie seem to be of any strategic importance. I can only conclude from PhilipFreneau's statements regarding the treaty that he believes it permissable for Christians to lie whenever it suits them, and merely added the "in times of war" to create a more palatable qualifier.

Do you believe that I was hasty in my judgement? If so, could you explain then why PhilipFreneau suggests that it is acceptable that the US government effectively lied in the wording of a treaty?

[Dimensio]

You asked me what I thought was evolution. This is what I wrote. In the life sciences, evolution is a change in the traits of living organisms over generations, including the emergence of new species. You agreed with this definition.

Correct.

Now, since we agree on what is considered evolution I stand by my premise that there are no new species.

This is incorrect, as there are numerous documented cases of speciation. Moreover, this appears to be a non-sequitur as you did not state that evolution requires that speciation occur, and in fact it does not.

I asked for evidence of a new species and you mentioned long legged frogs.

I did not see where anyone suggested that longer-legged frogs themselves constituted an entirely new species. Moreover, I do not see where you asked for evidence of a new species in any of your postings. Your first use of the word "species" (or, rather, the text string "speci", as I also considered the word "speciation" in my search) in this discussion was in post #59, where you used it as part of explaining what you believed evolution is. In no part of your post #59 did you ask for any examples of a new species. If I have overlooked any posting in this discussion where you did make such a request, please reference it and I will apologize for my error.

I maintain that this is a change of characteristics and is not evidence of a new species.

Except that no one has suggested that this itself is evidence of a new species. Speciation is not the entirety of evolution; evolution can occur within a species without actually changing the species itself.

Change does not denote new species.

And no one is suggesting that it does.

In biology, a species is, loosely speaking, a group of related organisms that share a more or less distinctive form and are capable of interbreeding.

Correct, however I still fail to understand your objection. While such events have been documented amongst other populations of organisms, no one is claiming that such an event has occured here, nor is anyone suggesting that speciation has occured regardless.

[csense]

I can only conclude from PhilipFreneau's statements regarding the treaty that he believes it permissable for Christians to lie whenever it suits them, and merely added the "in times of war" to create a more palatable qualifier.

But that's not what you said in an earlier post, is it.

You said this: "I've been told by at least one creationist here that it is permissable for Christians to lie to non-believers.

Now, either that is true, or it is not

Which is it?

[Dimensio]

Now, either that is true, or it is not

It was the inference that I drew from his posting. Again, if you believe that I am mistaken in drawing such an inference, I invite you to explain my error in judgement in light of PhilipFreneau's suggestion that the US government was lying in the Treaty of Tripoli and his further claim that such a lie was justified.

[taxesareforever]

Evolution is all about one species evolving into something completely different. For you to say that speication leads to evolution is skirting the issue. There is no proof that any species has speciated to complete evolution. So why is evolution even an issue. We both agree in speciation but I do not believe the issue goes beyond that.

[Dimensio]

Evolution is all about one species evolving into something completely different.

This is not true. Evolution is merely alelle frequency change over time. While this change can result in and has resulted in a change in species, there is no requirement that speciation occur before it can be stated that evolution has occured.

For you to say that speication leads to evolution is skirting the issue.

I am not making any such statement. The opposite is true: evolution leads -- sometimes -- to speciation.

There is no proof that any species has speciated to complete evolution. Apparently you are unaware of the existence of observed instances of speciation. There are, in fact, a number of examples on the subject.

The melatonin that I have taken is having an effect, so I will have to return to this discussion tomorrow.

[taxesareforever]

While this change can result in and has resulted in a change in species

Now I'll ask. What species changed into another species?

[csense]

It was the inference that I drew from his posting.

Then, are you agreeing that it is not a true statement.

[csense]

Here, I'll make it easy for you. Did he, or did he not, per your claim, tell you that it is permissable for Christians to lie to non-believers."

[csense]

Yet, I defy you to find a single Evo post that contains either a purposeful logical fallacy or flat out lie.

...There's your evidence