Replies

The first problem is to define "species". As an entomologist, we have LONG discussions over the concept of "What is a species?". In the past, species differentiation was accomplished by studying the physical and behavioral traits of an organism and and classifying them based upon those traits. Species get "raised" (to a species level) and "lowered" (lumped into a same species) all of the time. With new DNA testing and verification, this may change in the future. Now, "observing" this specieation is as likely as "watching fossils form". It takes too long and our short little lives and tiny brains can't concieve the length of time involved. However, if one looks to the NE of the USA, there is an entire group of butterflies that are extremely similar - but are considered separate species. Each is totally geographically isolated by high mountains - which they cannot fly over. So, yes, if you want to be honest with yourself, take a look at the genus Oensis which are found in Vermont, NH. You will see similar - but different species that formed as the glaciers receded and the butterflies settled into thier respective mountain valleys. Each valley has a slightly different ecosystem. And, each butterfly has evolved sympatrically within that system.

As for "life is always found where there was life before". I have no problem with the possibility that a "seed" of life came here on a meterite. Or, even that another species visited and either purposefully, or accidentally left "life" behind.

But, evolution exists. Look at the people around you. Look at photographs from the 1800's. We've changed - so has the world around us.

As an aquarist, I know whereof you speak. Do you know what a pain you guys are to me? I cringe every time the notebook of some Victorian wanderer gets discovered. And you guys are forever reorganizing families and tossing and reviving old genera. All very useful and necessary, I know, but sometimes it feels like you're all running a book-selling scam.

Now, "observing" this specieation is as likely as "watching fossils form". It takes too long and our short little lives and tiny brains can't concieve the length of time involved. However, if one looks to the NE of the USA, there is an entire group of butterflies that are extremely similar - but are considered separate species. Each is totally geographically isolated by high mountains - which they cannot fly over. So, yes, if you want to be honest with yourself, take a look at the genus Oensis which are found in Vermont, NH. You will see similar - but different species that formed as the glaciers receded and the butterflies settled into thier respective mountain valleys. Each valley has a slightly different ecosystem. And, each butterfly has evolved sympatrically within that system.

I've stipulated the difficulties of direct observation of evolutionary speciation several times on this thread. But the difficulties don't really matter, my point is that we don't know exactly how species evolve. I'm persuaded that the fossil record indicates that evolution has occured, but I don't see where it informs us as to the "How?" of it all.

Yeah, I like a good Zontar Appleseed story too, but they really beg the question... Life started somewhere. How?

But, evolution exists. Look at the people around you. Look at photographs from the 1800's. We've changed - so has the world around us.

I'm no evolution denier, but I'm a stickler for precise language and thinking. My beef is with the presumption that random causes are the neutral ground. This is not an appeal for supernatural explanations at every turn (though I believe in God), it just seems to me that biology is still at a Newtonian state, and that there are principles of evolution that are as elusive and unseen to us now as Relativity and Quantum Mechanics were to Physicists only100 years ago.