Explaining speciation to a creationist

[Collecemall]

I'm having a "discussion" with a creationist who insists that evolution says that something like a dog being born from a cat would prove evolution. I've tried to explain not only would that disprove evolution but that one species never gives birth to anything but the same species it is. But that a decendant 1000 generations later can be different from the original parent lineage with changes being incremental over time. I.E. evolution is about populations and not individuals. Is there a simple illustration of this somewhere that I can direct him to. I suspect he's a poe or a troll but I'm going to waste a couple more posts before I give up on curing ignorance. My lack of clear communication is a detriment I'm sure but he's overly obtuse as well.

 

[DutchLiam84]

Ring species! Although that common creationist response "it's still a/an [organism]" will probably be his/her response.

 

[he_who_is_nobody]

Dodging Darwin: How Ken Ham's Ark is slowly embracing evolution illustrates exactly what you are asking for. Honestly, I feel this failure is not wholly due to your lack of communication skills or the creationist's obtuse actions, but just the basic inability of humans to grasp the time scales used when talking about evolutionary history and deep time.

 

[Dragan Glas]

Greetings,

Ring species! Although that common creationist response "it's still a/an [organism]" will probably be his/her response.

As far as I know, Liam, it appears that there are no ring species.

However, there are the twelve days of evolution - the rest of the series can be found by searching for "12 days of evolution" on WEIT.

Kindest regards,

James

 

[Collecemall]

Thanks for the replies. I can't feed the troll any longer. I've asked the same question four times and the answer is always to quote something I said followed by you think xyz that I obviously didn't say without ever answering my question. The typical bastardization of a quote and deflection.

 

[DutchLiam84]

Greetings,

As far as I know, Liam, it appears that there are no ring species.

However, there are the twelve days of evolution - the rest of the series can be found by searching for "12 days of evolution" on WEIT.

Kindest regards,

James

Thank you for the link, will read it asap.

 

[Visaki]

Show him this

Show More Hide

{TEXT}

and tell him it invalidates his point utterly.

 

[Collecemall]

The youtube page I was on ended up blocking him. Or at least that's what I was told. He was reduced to copy pasta in vast amounts along with calling me a moron for not being willing to wade through the vomit. This was a "logical fallacy". Or something.

 

[Laurens]

The youtube page I was on ended up blocking him. Or at least that's what I was told. He was reduced to copy pasta in vast amounts along with calling me a moron for not being willing to wade through the vomit. This was a "logical fallacy". Or something.

Creationists themselves are never worth the effort.

Maybe a bit more of an open minded creationist might see what you posted and change their minds. But its generally a waste of time trying to convince the people you're liable to debate about it with.

 

[leroy]

The youtube page I was on ended up blocking him. Or at least that's what I was told. He was reduced to copy pasta in vast amounts along with calling me a moron for not being willing to wade through the vomit. This was a "logical fallacy". Or something.

Creationists themselves are never worth the effort.

Maybe a bit more of an open minded creationist might see what you posted and change their minds. But its generally a waste of time trying to convince the people you're liable to debate about it with.

Creationists don´t deny speciation, I mean, you might find a random youtuber who denies speciation but main creationist sites promote the fact that speciation is possible

 

[Laurens]

Creationists themselves are never worth the effort.

Maybe a bit more of an open minded creationist might see what you posted and change their minds. But its generally a waste of time trying to convince the people you're liable to debate about it with.

Creationists don´t deny speciation, I mean, you might find a random youtuber who denies speciation but main creationist sites promote the fact that speciation is possible

So they accept that evolution happens? So why are we arguing with them?

They say it happens and doesn't happen at the same time. What utter gobshite.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

 

[leroy]

So they accept that evolution happens? So why are we arguing with them?

They say it happens and doesn't happen at the same time. What utter gobshite.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

Well, all it means is that you don´t understand the creationist model , so how do you know that creationists are wrong.?


For decades creationists have been arguing that organisms can change and adapt, and that these process can lead to speciation. If you what to call this “evolution” feel free to do so, and in that case creations would also accept “evolution”

 

[WarK]

Well, all it means is that you don´t understand the creationist model , so how do you know that creationists are wrong.?


For decades creationists have been arguing that organisms can change and adapt, and that these process can lead to speciation. If you what to call this “evolution” feel free to do so, and in that case creations would also accept “evolution”

I thought creationist model was a god or gods saying "abracadabra" :lol:

 

[Laurens]

So they accept that evolution happens? So why are we arguing with them?

They say it happens and doesn't happen at the same time. What utter gobshite.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

Well, all it means is that you don´t understand the creationist model , so how do you know that creationists are wrong.?


For decades creationists have been arguing that organisms can change and adapt, and that these process can lead to speciation. If you what to call this “evolution” feel free to do so, and in that case creations would also accept “evolution”

Speciation over time is all you need for evolution...

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

 

[leroy]

Speciation over time is all you need for evolution...
Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

The problem is the leap of faith that you are making……speciation occurs therefore “worms” evolved in to humans

 

[Steelmage99]

Speciation over time is all you need for evolution...
Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

The problem is the leap of faith that you are making……speciation occurs therefore “worms” evolved in to humans

You got that backwards. Speciation is a consequence of evolution.

We know changes in the genetic makeup of groups of biological organisms (aka evolution) happens.

Speciation is the answer to the question, "What happens when the differences between the genetic makeup of two groups become so significant that they can no longer interbreed?".

 

[Laurens]

You got that backwards. Speciation is a consequence of evolution.

We know changes in the genetic makeup of groups of biological organisms (aka evolution) happens.

Speciation is the answer to the question, "What happens when the differences between the genetic makeup of two groups become so significant that they can no longer interbreed?".

I probably should have been clearer. What I meant was if you accept that speciation occurs then you should have no problem with evolution

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

 

[leroy]

We know changes in the genetic makeup of groups of biological organisms (aka evolution) happens.

Sure, if you want to define evolution as “change in the genetic makeup” then all creationists would agree with evolution.

 

[Laurens]

We know changes in the genetic makeup of groups of biological organisms (aka evolution) happens.

Sure, if you want to define evolution as “change in the genetic makeup” then all creationists would agree with evolution.

How old do you think the earth is?

If you accept that the earth is 4.5 billion years old then that process over time is all you need to arrive at the diversity of life we see today. With variation and selection plus time you get evolution. There is no magic ingredient that makes it impossible to happen.

If you believe that they earth is 6 to 10 thousand years old, how do you explain the diversity of species that we see? We have 3000 (or so) species of snake how would we get this from the 2 individuals from the ark? Ignoring the more complicated genetic problems we are looking at a rate of speciation of one speciation event every 2 years on average. This would require much faster and explosively diverse evolution than any legitimate scientist would ever propose. In denying the science, you propose that evolution happened at an insane rate in a short time.

 

[he_who_is_nobody]

So they accept that evolution happens? So why are we arguing with them?

They say it happens and doesn't happen at the same time. What utter gobshite.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

Well, all it means is that you don´t understand the creationist model , so how do you know that creationists are wrong.?

Please give us your Creation Model.

For decades creationists have been arguing that organisms can change and adapt, and that these process can lead to speciation. If you what to call this “evolution” feel free to do so, and in that case creations would also accept “evolution”

Well, after 100 years, the creationists are finally progressing foreword. I have been saying this for years; all modern creationists actually accept evolution, they simply want to call it something different like adaptation.