Posted on 07/13/2006 1:21:13 PM PDT by presidio9
Finches on the Galapagos Islands that inspired Charles Darwin to develop the concept of evolution are now helping confirm it — by evolving.
A medium sized species of Darwin's finch has evolved a smaller beak to take advantage of different seeds just two decades after the arrival of a larger rival for its original food source.
The altered beak size shows that species competing for food can undergo evolutionary change, said Peter Grant of Princeton University, lead author of the report appearing in Friday's issue of the journal Science.
Grant has been studying Darwin's finches for decades and previously recorded changes responding to a drought that altered what foods were available.
It's rare for scientists to be able to document changes in the appearance of an animal in response to competition. More often it is seen when something moves into a new habitat or the climate changes and it has to find new food or resources, explained Robert C. Fleischer, a geneticist at the Smithsonian's National Museum of Natural History and National Zoo.
This was certainly a documented case of microevolution, added Fleischer, who was not part of Grant's research.
Grant studied the finches on the Galapagos island Daphne, where the medium ground finch, Geospiza fortis, faced no competition for food, eating both small and large seeds.
In 1982 a breeding population of large ground finches, Geospiza magnirostris, arrived on the island and began competing for the large seeds of the Tribulus plants. G. magnirostris was able to break open and eat these seeds three times faster than G. fortis, depleting the supply of these seeds.
In 2003 and 2004 little rain fell, further reducing the food supply. The result was high mortality among G. fortis with larger beaks, leaving a breeding population of small-beaked G. fortis that could eat the seeds from smaller plants and didn't have to compete with the larger G. magnirostris for large seeds.
That's a form of evolution known as character displacement, where natural selection produces an evolutionary change in the next generation, Grant explained in a recorded statement made available by Science.
I thought Creationism was not supposed to be a scientific theory capable of falsification.
Cordially,
Of course, the problem is that we, as fallible humans, tend to have a great deal of trouble hearing and comprehending what is being said by God, both in the Bible and in the balance of His creation -- the first three chapters of Genesis being only a microcosm of this dilemma.
"I thought Creationism was not supposed to be a scientific theory capable of falsification."
Creationism (YEC especially) makes claims that can be tested. , like a young earth, or Noah's flood, or the fixity of species. Parts of creationism are not testable, like just saying that God created the universe (ala ID).
Like the answer, but it is not the only definition of species biologists use.<<
This is a consequence of species "boundaries" being indistinct. This is an expected result of evolution. That you do not like reality does not make it go away.<
If the boundaries are "indestinct", and multiple definitions are used...
Crappy definitions, crappy outcomes.
Things are not observed to be true, they can be consistant with a theory but not observed to be true. Sloppy thinking.<<
Please provide a specific reference, rather than vague assertions.<
You asserted a truth when only an observation existed.
Crappy logic.
QED
Doh.
DK
Dimensio's favorite 'play' word - deity.
Your posts answers you own questions as you travel the denial road; the road of the lost sheep. When you come to the end of the road, you will no longer deny; for IT IS WRITTEN.
Apart from all the background noise and rabbit trails that followed this statement, this is the key statement that proves my original point. Evolution has preconceived ideas about the bible. It doesn't have to state them within the text of the "theory" but the fact remains. You helped prove that point when you made the above statement.
You came to the conclusion that the Bible is wrong based on what evolution told you. Then you have manage to say that evolution says nothing about the bible.
Yet you've proven it to be true. Evolution requires inventing a new god. One that can't communicate. One that needed millions or billions of years to do a 6 day job. One that is untrustworthy in every use of the phrase and concept of "Word of God".
Ahura Mazda didit placemark
You might as well invent a new definition for Christian, as you've just done here, because you certainly have defined your own God. The one in the Bible is awesome, the one that can't communicate or be trusted stinks.
Lets see, I suppose a Christian is anyone that says he's a Christian irrespective of what he believes about the bible then. That seems to fit.
"You might as well invent a new definition for Christian, as you've just done here,"
No I didn't. It is you who wants to redefine anybody who doesn't believe your version as atheist. Your claim that evolution starts with the premise that there is no God is hilariously wrong.
Like I said, quit while you're WAY behind.
Is that an echo I hear?
She just hates those Christians that read the bible all the time and quote from it and apply it to their world view. Her god is way bigger than the bible too.
Non sequitur
If I accept the theory of evolution as the best current explanation for biological diversification, then I am not, and cannot be, a Christian?
That conclusion can't be made from that one piece of data. But if you know what the bible says about creation and about itself then it starts to make one ask more questions about your claim of faith.
Still spouting this statement but can't provide facts. And PLEASE do not reference a website. State in your own words which predictions the Toe predicted.
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.