Joined: July 2006
|Quote (Southstar @ Dec. 12 2011,05:32)|
|Quote (Henry J @ Dec. 11 2011,20:18)|
Okay the conversation has reached a point, where a few people have asked:
Give us the smoking gun, show us an example of evolution that:
1) Envolves a new spieces that can no longer reproduce with the parent spiecies.
2) In which the new spieces has novel DNA
3) In which the mutation cannot in any way be classed as epigenetics.
|A classic example of ring species is the Larus gulls' circumpolar species "ring". The range of these gulls forms a ring around the North Pole, which is not normally transited by individual gulls.|
The Herring Gull L. argentatus, which lives primarily in Great Britain and Ireland, can hybridize with the American Herring Gull L. smithsonianus, (living in North America), which can also hybridize with the Vega or East Siberian Herring Gull L. vegae, the western subspecies of which, Birula's Gull L. vegae birulai, can hybridize with Heuglin's gull L. heuglini, which in turn can hybridize with the Siberian Lesser Black-backed Gull L. fuscus. All four of these live across the north of Siberia.
2) How can they not hybridize and have the same DNA? I can't show that they have novel DNA, but if they are fully sequenced....
3) Can't see that's the case here at all and as such it'll likely be unpersuasive. But it's the best I can do on my coffee break!
Or in any case give us an example of evolution that cannot have "other" alternative explanations. These are simple people asking this question
There are a million alternative explanations for anything I've linked to here. Perhaps invisible pink unicorns are editing DNA in real time towards a goal only they know. Or perhaps the designer is manipulating atoms at the quantum level making "random" mutations.
It's rather about what explanations make sense given the observed data and making predictions that can be tested.
Or perhaps HIV is a good example. It has evolved considerably and there is strong evidence for that.
|Evolutionary biologists can help uncover clues to new ways to treat or vaccinate against HIV. These clues emerge from the evolutionary origins of the virus, how human populations have evolved under pressure from other deadly pathogens, and how the virus evolves resistance to the drugs we’ve designed. Controlling the disease may be a matter of controlling the evolution of this constantly adapting virus.|
So either evolution allows HIV to stay ahead of our efforts to treat it or the designer is helping it directly. It has to be one or the other, make them choose.
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand