Explaining speciation to a creationist

[leroy]

Many experiments have been done in support of germ theory, we can prove with a high degree of certainty that there is a correlation between microorganisms and disease, we can prove that a glass of water fool of microorganisms is more likely to cause a disease that a glass of water without microorganisms.

How is it that bacteria develop resistance to antibiotics?

Why do we now have so called super bugs that are resistant to all known forms of antibiotics?

I'll give you a clue: it begins with the letter E

Once upon a time, there was a world where a minority of bacteria where immune to antibiotics, (even before these antibiotics where invented)

After antibiotics where invented, none resistant bacteria where more likely to die, than those who were resistant.

After few generations, resistant bacteria become dominant in the bacteria population…..

You might call this “evolution” if you what, but accepting this fact doesn´t imply that humans evolved from “simple” bacteria-like organisms.

 

[WarK]

I said that you need more than just “excess skin” in order to evolve a flying mammal…….and you mocked at me.
I simply showed the image of the dog with excess skin to show that I correct……..flight requires more than just “excess skin”

What more than excess skin is required? What more does a bat have that a dog doesn't?

 

[DutchLiam84]

I said that you need more than just “excess skin” in order to evolve a flying mammal…….and you mocked at me.
I simply showed the image of the dog with excess skin to show that I correct……..flight requires more than just “excess skin”

And everybody on this forum understood what I meant, except for you. And no, I will not explain this to you because I think you don't have the capacity to be able to understand it. Not meant as an insult, just an observation based on countless evidence, mr. Shift-the-goalposts!

 

[leroy]

Almost all proteins contain aromatic amino acids. Your first "step" doesn't even require anything to happen, it is already the case that proteins of all sorts display varying levels and qualities of photosensitivity. .

Interesting, know all you have to do is prove that “normal proteins” that don´t have photosensitive properties can evolve in to photosensitive proteins as a consequence of random mutations and natural selection or genetic drift. (depending if you are a neutralist or a selectionists)

 

[he_who_is_nobody]

Oh look, the reverse psychology I used worked. Creationists are so predictable.

I am not DutchLiam84. He was arguing that a dog could evolve into a flying animal. You do realize that there is more than one other person on this forum that you are conversing with. I mean, if you took more than 10 minutes to read and respond to our posts, you might be able to realize that we are not all the same[/ quote]

I said that you need more than just “excess skin” in order to evolve a flying mammal…….and you mocked at me.
I simply showed the image of the dog with excess skin to show that I correct……..flight requires more than just “excess skin”

:facepalm:

he_who_is_nobody[/url]"]
:facepalm:

Dandan Leroy, I am not DutchLiam84. He was arguing that a dog could evolve into a flying animal. You do realize that there is more than one other person on this forum that you are conversing with. I mean, if you took more than 10 minutes to read and respond to our posts, you might be able to realize that we are not all the same.

I am simply asking you what is the "new feature" found in a bat's wing that is not in your arm? This is a totally separate issue to whether a dog can evolve into a flying creature. You keep claiming that in order for a creature to fly, they need a "new feature." I am simply asking what that feature is for bats.
Well, this is not Las Vegas, can you demonstrate that the squirrel (and snake) have more than just excess skin? Furthermore, could you show that that "more" is an "new feature?" Beyond that, it is funny that you confused me for DutchLiam84, because during your conversation with him:
Thus, you already believe there is a pathway for getting a dog into the trees and jumping around like a squirrel. Furthermore, you demonstrated a mutation for excess skin within dogs already, thus a gliding dog is not out of the question under the right selective conditions. Now all we need is for you to tell us what this "new feature" is in a bat's wing that is not already in a dog's arm and we will be getting somewhere. However, it seems as if you have defeated your own argument with your own examples with minimal prodding.

Tis just amazing how much you had to ignore from my last post.

AronRa[/url]"]Do you have problems with reading comprehension? That's the nice thing about talking to you, [dandan leroy]. I don't have to say anything new; I can just copy-and-paste what I already told you. Because you have the curious habit of asking questions after they've already been answered.

:lol:

Interesting, know all you have to do is prove that “normal proteins” that don´t have photosensitive properties can evolve in to photosensitive proteins as a consequence of random mutations and natural selection or genetic drift. (depending if you are a neutralist or a selectionists)

Such a wonderful example of a goalpost shift.

 

[leroy]

I said that you need more than just “excess skin” in order to evolve a flying mammal…….and you mocked at me.
I simply showed the image of the dog with excess skin to show that I correct……..flight requires more than just “excess skin”

And everybody on this forum understood what I meant, except for you. And no, I will not explain this to you because I think you don't have the capacity to be able to understand it. Not meant as an insult, just an observation based on countless evidence, mr. Shift-the-goalposts!

Translation, I still can explain how flight could have evolved, but I will try to look smart and treat Leroy with condescends because I am unable to admit that my excess skin explanation was stupid.

 

[leroy]

I said that you need more than just “excess skin” in order to evolve a flying mammal…….and you mocked at me.
I simply showed the image of the dog with excess skin to show that I correct……..flight requires more than just “excess skin”

What more than excess skin is required? What more does a bat have that a dog doesn't?

Do you honestly and sincerely believe that all you need for flight is excess skin? Please answer with an unambiguous yes or no.

 

[he_who_is_nobody]

What more than excess skin is required? What more does a bat have that a dog doesn't?

Do you honestly and sincerely believe that all you need for flight is excess skin? Please answer with an unambiguous yes or no.

[Emphasis added.]

Oh, the irony with you is just rich. How can you demand WarK answer a question when you refuse to answer the two he asked first? You do realize that a conversation is a two way street. If you want answers, try giving answers to questions first.

 

[DutchLiam84]

Translation, I still can explain how flight could have evolved, but I will try to look smart and treat Leroy with condescends because I am unable to admit that my excess skin explanation was stupid.

You're such a child.

 

[leroy]

Oh, the irony with you is just rich. How can you demand WarK answer a question when you refuse to answer the two he asked first? You do realize that a conversation is a two way street. If you want answers, try giving answers to questions first.

Because my answer depends on his answer….

 

[WarK]

Oh, the irony with you is just rich. How can you demand WarK answer a question when you refuse to answer the two he asked first? You do realize that a conversation is a two way street. If you want answers, try giving answers to questions first.

Because my answer depends on his answer….

No it doesn't. Whether I think excess skin is the only thing you need for flying is irrelevant to you answering my question.

I said that you need more than just “excess skin” in order to evolve a flying mammal…….and you mocked at me.
I simply showed the image of the dog with excess skin to show that I correct……..flight requires more than just “excess skin”

What more than excess skin is required? What more does a bat have that a dog doesn't?

Look! A squirrel!


[centre]
By Angie spuc at the English language Wikipedia, Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0[/centre]

 

[SpecialFrog]

I don't know. Do you accept that these mechanisms can lead to irreducibly complex features?.

Please define “irreducibly complex” I bet we have a different understanding on what these term means.

A single system which is composed of several interacting parts that contribute to the basic function, and where the removal of any one of the parts causes the system to effectively cease functioning.

That paper is a historical survey. I acknowledge that rather than "imaginary" I should have said "historical". I will point out that no one has cared how Darwin framed the theory of evolution since the 1940s when the modern synthesis was developed (as I have repeatedly explained).

The fact is that some evolutionists are selectionists (darwinists) and others are neutralist, the first ones think that natural selection plays a major role the other one believe that neutral mutations are the driving force of evolutionary change.

If this were the 1980s you might have a valid point. In this decade, you do not.

Read this summary of the current state of the theory of evolution. Nearly-neutral theory has won and most of our genes are not the result of selection but nobody pretends that selection doesn't play a significant role.

I particularly suggest you read the table where the author reproduces a table from Eugene Koonin’s "The Logic of Chance" that shows the current view on a lot of classical Darwinian notions.

And please stop sending me random links that don´t even attempt to answer to my challenge,

You expressed the need for a model of the development of the eye to fit within a certain timeframe and I sent you a link to a paper that explicitly modelled how long the eye took to evolve. In what sense is that a random link?

lets focus on the first step, ¿how did normal cells evolved photosensitive proteins? The reason why I would say that it is an insuperable barrier is because even a small benefit in the correct direction would require multiple mutations and genetic changes,

If you understand the theory of evolution, why does a feature that requires multiple mutations to develop pose a barrier in any way? You claimed to have read the link about the E. Coli paper where direct experiment showed a beneficial mutation was the result of a chain of three mutations, the first two of which were most likely nearly-neutral. So what is the problem?

Many experiments have been done in support of germ theory, we can prove with a high degree of certainty that there is a correlation between microorganisms and disease, we can prove that a glass of water fool of microorganisms is more likely to cause a disease that a glass of water without microorganisms.

So would you agree that you accept germ theory because we have a significant body of experimental and observational data that is expected if germ theory is true and not expected if a competing theory is true?

(thanks for HWIN for pointing out the funny end)

 

[he_who_is_nobody]

So would you agree that you accept germ theory because we have a significant body of experimental and observational data that is expected if germ theory is true and not expected if a competing theory is true?
So would you agree that germ theory is most likely to be true because the evidence that we have (from experimentation and observation) is highly likely if the

I doubt that is how you wanted that post to end.

 

[SpecialFrog]

So would you agree that you accept germ theory because we have a significant body of experimental and observational data that is expected if germ theory is true and not expected if a competing theory is true?
So would you agree that germ theory is most likely to be true because the evidence that we have (from experimentation and observation) is highly likely if the

I doubt that is how you wanted that post to end.

Thanks. I paused to make sure the quoting was correct and forgot to finish.

 

[Dragan Glas]

Greetings,

London Underground's Unique Mosquito

Kindest regards,

James