Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: BMCDA
From the article:

The distribution of this species is from British Columbia in Canada, through Washington, Oregon, California and into Baja California of Mexico. Presently, seven subspecies are recognized,

They are not even species and you call this macro-evolution? Please!

1,039 posted on 03/20/2002 7:03:50 PM PST by gore3000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 818 | View Replies ]


To: gore3000
From that page:
In fact, by analyzing electrophoritic separations of selected enzymes and studying DNA patterns, the two subspecies klauberi and eschscholtzi are different species by every definition. (Wake, Yanev and Brown, 1986) This poses a very interesting problem. Should the species Ensatina eschscholtzi be split into two or more species, or be considered a single species? If the species is to be split, where does one draw the line?
Also posted earlier by VadeRetro in #819

But where would you draw the line? Why are they the same species if they can't interbreed? Or is there also another definition of species? Why can't the two populations that "close the ring" not interbreed?
So many questions...

1,081 posted on 03/21/2002 6:13:04 AM PST by BMCDA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1039 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


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