Replies

"Cross-breeding (which I've already explained is a bad example for this debate due to the 1st and 2nd species of Life) is an INSTANTANEOUS speciation event, which is precisely what Intelligent Design predicts. Cross-breed two species and the resultant mix is immediately a distinct new species. What you've failed to understand is that cross-breeding is insufficient to explain the origin of species. By definition, the very first two species of Life on this planet could NOT have been produced via cross-breeding, rendering any theory dependent upon said cross-breeding moot." -- Southack

Wow, have you ever missed the point. The reason successful cross breeding of geographically isolated species disproves ID has nothing to do with the viability of the offspring or whether or not a new species emerges. It is the respective genetic histories of the two species that is at issue. The ability to interbreed can only be the result of a shared ancestry between the two species. Your rantings about cross breeding the first and second species also indicate a deplorable lack of knowledge and comprehension. Don't you realize that you don't know what you are talking about?

The first life on this planet did not reproduce sexually. Sexual reproduction evolved later.

"Your rantings about cross breeding the first and second species also indicate a deplorable lack of knowledge and comprehension. Don't you realize that you don't know what you are talking about? The first life on this planet did not reproduce sexually. Sexual reproduction evolved later."

I said that cross-breeding could not possibly explain how the first and second species came into being. Do you dispute that fact?

"Wow, have you ever missed the point. The reason successful cross breeding of geographically isolated species disproves ID has nothing to do with the viability of the offspring or whether or not a new species emerges. It is the respective genetic histories of the two species that is at issue. The ability to interbreed can only be the result of a shared ancestry between the two species."

Nonsense! That's the same as saying that the ability of two computer programs to interface with each other can only be the result of a shared ancestry between them. It's a nonsensical claim that is bogus even at its face value.

There are lots of related species that can't interbreed (housecats and tigers, for instance) just as there are lots of software programs with shared histories that can't interface with each other. Drawing your conclusion from either example is ludicrous and disproves nothing, much less Intelligent Design.

Can non-related species be cross-bred via Intelligent Intervention (e.g., gene-splicing, cloning, et al)?

That's the (marginally) better question.