|Jerry Don Bauer
Joined: Nov. 2012
[quote=blipey,Dec. 05 2012,10:41][/quote]
|Jerry, you have stated that individuals speciate. This means that you believe there are instances when a daughter cannot interbreed with her direct ancestors (st least according to your definition of speciate). Otherwise, what do you mean by individuals speciate?|
Once again.....individuals are just the sub-units that comprise a population....People: you are so mixed up on this that HERE is one reason people laugh at you and reject the whole ball of wax.
You PhDs participating in this thread need to grasp it so you will stop teaching illogical clap trap in your class rooms and calling it science:
Populations CANNOT speciate unless the individuals within it ALSO speciate. The population is made up of those individuals.....You can't EVEN HAVE a population without individuals as a group to constitute the population.
Darwinist: Look, I have a group of nickles.
Guy with common sense: Oh really, I don't see any nickles at all.
Darwinist: Oh. I don't have any individual nickles, just an entire group of them....
The whole world scratches their heads trying to figure out why insanity doesn't apply here...
So, common sense ought to tell you that if a population changes, so must the individuals within it because that's what a population IS.
|Really, address the color question. Is there a reason you keep ignoring it?|
Of course I'm ignoring it because it is not analogous to speciation to any extent.
You're attempting to use a scenario where there is no clear boundary of change to represent a situation where there most certainly is one. It's another attempt to twist logic........