R
Rau
Guest
Is this true?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Do you believe in evolution?
- Thread starter BlueKumul
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
N
Noose001
Guest
The term ‘exchange of genetic material’ in species’ definition gives it clear boundaries.Where did you get this idea? Did you know that some argue Neanderthal man is just a subspecies. The definition of “species” is not as cut and dried as you might think. When asexual reproduction is involved, the usual definition (capacity to interbreed) fails. Then there are hybrids.
Most commonly we think of speciation occurring when populations become physically separated in different environments. The ordinary processes of mutation and natural selection see the pool of animals (and genes) in an environment shift. Speciation is about how the separated pools of animals compare over long time periods, not the incremental differences between mum/dad and the kids.
Are these boundaries observable? Yes. Failure to interbreed even between so called close cousins.
Most asexual organisms also have clear boundaries because they are characterized by their phenotype and it is still true to the species definition, they can not exchange genetic material with other species to produce offspring.
Not true.Most commonly we think of speciation occurring when populations become physically separated in different environments.
N
Noose001
Guest
Yes it is.Is this true?
R
Rau
Guest
I think we disagree on too many basics.
R
rossum
Guest
Siddhartha Gautama, the historical Buddha, no longer exists. Neither apparently does your spell checker.Budha doesn’t exist, only beings that exist exercise authority and power. Destruction is well within exercise of dominion. Humans do that every day with regard to harmful microbes.
Other Buddhas have existed in the past. The Maitreya Buddha will exist in the future. Other Buddhas exist elsewhere in the universe.
You presumably have no reply to the number of people, innocents included, who the Abrahamic God killed. You also apparently have no answer to the question of the number of people the Buddha killed.
R
rossum
Guest
The answer to the question of whether or not the historical Buddha exists now that he has undergone his final death will get you into some very abstruse Buddhist metaphysics. It is one of the unanswered questions in the Malunkyovada sutta and Buddhist philosophers have been trying to answer it ever since.Is this true?
O
o_mlly
Guest
… currently existing in a randomly changing environment."The filter is fixed: “Have more fertile offspring than average for the population …
W
whatistrue
Guest
Yeah, that’s not how science works. Do you really believe that God can be pinned down and measured by humans? I don’t. The theory as it is can only speak to what it can see and measure. God cannot be seen (directly) or measured. Don’t try to put God in a bottle.If God was necessary to the process, but evolution explains the process without God, then evolution is false.
N
Noose001
Guest
Good to know that but i guess this is a nice bed time story or does he have anything to do with reality?Siddhartha Gautama, the historical Buddha, no longer exists. Neither apparently does your spell checker.
Other Buddhas have existed in the past. The Maitreya Buddha will exist in the future. Other Buddhas exist elsewhere in the universe.
Both Innocent and guilty die, they must die. What kind of reply are you expecting?You presumably have no reply to the number of people, innocents included, who the Abrahamic God killed.
It is a bed time story, he doesn’t exist, he will not exist therefore has no bearing on who dies or lives.You also apparently have no answer to the question of the number of people the Buddha killed.
Last edited:
W
whatistrue
Guest
Then you are ignoring or misunderstanding the actual science. Muting now to preserve my equanimity.For me, evolution does not work - on scientific grounds.
B
Bill_B_NY
Guest
How many did he create?Now tell me how many people the Buddha killed.
Making this statement you:The Abrahamic God has a great deal of blood on His hands, some of it innocent – all those babies and unborn.
- Affirm the historical accuracy of the Old Testament - and thus must accept the same for the New which has more historical support
- Acknowledge the power of God over life, nature, death and mankind
- Require an equal evaluation of what God has done for humanity
- Require some sort of weighing in balance of the Final Judgement that we all face before God. How does all of this blood on His hands, weigh against the good (which you must equally acknowledge) He has done?
What rights does God have over his creation?
Last edited:
D
Dan123
Guest
meanwhile in Taxonomy and other proven sciences, a species is clearly identifiable with very clear boundaries never to be crossed.
Loading…
en.wikipedia.org
“The concept of a species is a concession to our linguistic habits and neurological mechanisms” Haldane (1956)
“No term is more difficult to define than “species,” and on no point are zoologists more divided than as to what should be understood by this word.” Nicholson
“The species problem is the long-standing failure of biologists to agree on how we should identify species and how we should define the word ‘species’.” Hey (2001).
So there aren’t any populations of the same species separated by geographical boundaries?Your proposal can only work with artificial selection.
Last edited:
D
Dan123
Guest
Are you conceding we could create new species using artificial selection by creating two populations that can’t physically interbreed?Your proposal can only work with artificial selection.
N
Noose001
Guest
It is a problem to Evolutionists only. The problem is not with definition or description of species, the problem is with Evolution.“The concept of a species is a concession to our linguistic habits and neurological mechanisms” Haldane (1956)
“No term is more difficult to define than “species,” and on no point are zoologists more divided than as to what should be understood by this word.” Nicholson
“The species problem is the long-standing failure of biologists to agree on how we should identify species and how we should define the word ‘species’.” Hey (2001).
Of course there are but my earlier post was addressing physiological boundaries (Big dog, small dog, in the same environment but not able to mate)So there aren’t any populations of the same species separated by geographical boundaries?
Last edited:
N
Noose001
Guest
We can genetically engineer aliens, we can even bring back the Mammoth but is it acceptable?Are you conceding we could create new species using artificial selection by creating two populations that can’t physically interbreed?
R
rossum
Guest
The changing environment impacts the current value of the average for the population. Natural Selection merely looks at whether the current average value is exceed or not.… currently existing in a randomly changing environment."
R
rossum
Guest
One. His son Rahula.How many did he create?
Your failure to answer the question I asked is telling. You are implicitly telling us, correctly, that the Buddha did not kill anyone.
No. I accept the Bible as the authoritative description of the Christian God. The Tanakh/Old Testament is the authoritative description of the Jewish G-d. In the same way I accept the Qur’an as the authoritative description of Allah.Making this statement you:
Unless you want to cherry pick some incidents - adhere to those and irrationally dismiss the rest, you have to deal with the whole entity. The fullness of God - His powers, His rights.
- Affirm the historical accuracy of the Old Testament - and thus must accept the same for the New which has more historical support
- Acknowledge the power of God over life, nature, death and mankind
- Require an equal evaluation of what God has done for humanity
- Require some sort of weighing in balance of the Final Judgement that we all face before God. How does all of this blood on His hands, weigh against the good (which you must equally acknowledge) He has done?
Actions have results. God’s actions will have results in future. If He misuses His claimed rights then He will see the results.What rights does God have over his creation?
Again, I do not wish to worship a God who kills unborn babies and orders unborn babies to be killed (Numbers 31:17). Even the Argentine Junta were better than that; they waited for a pregnant woman to give birth before killing her.
N
Noose001
Guest
The verse you quoted doesn’t say what you are saying maybe you need to review some things instead of copy pasting from dubious websites.Again, I do not wish to worship a God who kills unborn babies and orders unborn babies to be killed (Numbers 31:17). Even the Argentine Junta were better than that; they waited for a pregnant woman to give birth before killing her.
Last edited:
T
twf
Guest
Pope Benedict did not take issue with evolution, nor the idea of common descent
D
Dan123
Guest
Not talking about cloning or genetic engineering. I’m asking if we take two populations of the same species and selectively breed them for very different traits for thousands and thousand of generations, would they eventually be different species? Especially if such traits meant they physically couldn’t breed.We can genetically engineer aliens, we can even bring back the Mammoth but is it acceptable?
What definition of species are you using?It is a problem to Evolutionists only. The problem is not with definition or description of species, the problem is with Evolution.
If two groups of the same species are geographically isolated from each other could they be subjected to different environment pressures?Of course there are but my earlier post was addressing physiological boundaries (Big dog, small dog, in the same environment but not able to mate)
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.