Is it fair for us to assume that english was not your birth tongue?
You appear to be way, WAY out of your depth here. Your contentions are devoid of any research or logic and really do sound like a 15 year old’s refutations. I don’t mean to offend, but that’s the way I see it.
Note: Airplanes and bicycles do not produce offspring. I know it was used as an example of a progression of a “kind,” (to use a creationist term), but it wasn’t meant as a direct correlation.
You seem hung-up on the idea that human-led selective breeding is so-called “Intelligent Design” and therefore changes in allele frequencies through time do not happen naturally, as a result of undirected selective pressures. I’m sorry, one does not follow the other. Not even close.
Well, lets try again. Bicylces and airplanes do not need to have offspring in order to be an example of intelligent design. The chair you sit in or the floor you stand on are an outcome of intelligent design. These are basic concepts of intelligent design. Currently this portion of the concept of intelligent design receives wide agreement from the non ID community. They may not agree with the overall conclusion of ID but they do agree to this portion. My goal is not to support ID or refute it, it was only to point to the fact that the other person was using basic concepts of intelligent design and improperly applying them as an example to support his point. I too agree with you that he alludes to a progression of bicycle to airplane as an example. He never did articulate that was his intent but it did demonstrate that his use of intelligently design products strongly distracts from is argument. Human lead selective breed is intelligent design and is a widely held concept in the life science community. Humans I believe are intelligent and designed the breeding. Human selective breeding of dog is by definition intelligent design. Natural selection by definition does not involve intelligent design. Again, the other poster missed the point when he attempted to use intelligent design breeding to support his point of natural selection which does not involve intelligent design. I agree that the understanding of his mistake can be easily understood by a 15 year old with a little science background.It may help you understand it better if you repeat after me "natural seclection by definition is not intelligent design". You need to first understand the definition of natural selection before you can understand portions of ID.