Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: CottShop
"Are you suggesting that new subspecies = new KINDS?"

No.

"Oh yes, I know, I know, you’ll complain “What is KINDS exactly"

That's not complaining, unless you want to define your words then intelligent conversation is impossible. Using words that have no meaning is called babbling.

"evolution can’t produce one single evidentiary example showing a KIND moving beyond it’s own KIND"

You're babbling. Define your words or you make no sense. You might as well say one garphalsnap never becomes a different garphalsnap.

"We’re all well aware that speciation happens and that species can vary greatly"

Since you appear to accept all the basic mechanics of evolution, then you need to propose a process that stops evolution from crossing he genus barrier.

Otherwise it's like saying you can put one foot in front of the other and walk down the street, but it impossibles to cross town. What stops it?
257 posted on 07/14/2007 10:14:35 PM PDT by ndt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 255 | View Replies ]


To: ndt

[[That’s not complaining, unless you want to define your words then intelligent conversation is impossible. Using words that have no meaning is called babbling.]]

You know full well what KINDS are- you simply dissagree that they are ligit, but you fully accept your own problem riddled phylogentic system of classifications while calling the Baraminological system mean and nasty names- Buit alas, playing symantics is a fun way of avoiding the fact that no species KIND has ever evolved beyond it’s own KIND, now right?

[[Since you appear to accept all the basic mechanics of evolution, then you need to propose a process that stops evolution from crossing he genus barrier.]]

Biology

[[Otherwise it’s like saying you can put one foot in front of the other and walk down the street, but it impossibles to cross town. What stops it?]]

The mean ole cop who doesn’t let anyone cross to the other side He’s the biological Law...man

All the steps are inplace for microevolution, but non for macroevolution. The steps for macroevolution would be systems that didn’t have species specific caps on just how far their systems could be perverted without cokmpletely breaking down, and it would need steps inplace to ensure that forced intrusions of non species specific instructions from other dissimiliar species through lateral gene transference would cause it to self destruct and burn out. Seriously, mutations are not the vehicle for evolution- lateral gene transference is the one hope for evolution ,but I msut caution, lateral gene transference has it’;s own set of impossible hurdles to cross.


261 posted on 07/14/2007 10:30:11 PM PDT by CottShop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 257 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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