Author Topic: Evolution right before your eyes.  (Read 411 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ThatZenoGuy

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1941
  • Darwins +94/-24
  • Residential Sexy Anthro Goddess
    • Spacebattles Account.
Evolution right before your eyes.
« on: September 12, 2016, 09:39:59 AM »
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=plVk4NVIUh8

Eleven days for bacteria to resist 1000 times lethal dose of antibiotics.

Amazing.
Rule 1: No pooftas. Rule 2: No maltreating the theists, IF, anyone is watching. Rule 3: No pooftas. Rule 4: I do not want to see anyone NOT drinking after light out. Rule 5: No pooftas. Rule 6: There is NO...rule 6.

Online jdawg70

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 4443
  • Darwins +980/-10
  • Ex-rosary squad
Re: Evolution right before your eyes.
« Reply #1 on: September 12, 2016, 09:51:44 AM »
k my mind is pretty well blown.
"When we landed on the moon, that was the point where god should have come up and said 'hello'. Because if you invent some creatures, put them on the blue one and they make it to the grey one, you f**king turn up and say 'well done'."

- Eddie Izzard

http://deepaksducttape.wordpress.com/

Offline ThatZenoGuy

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1941
  • Darwins +94/-24
  • Residential Sexy Anthro Goddess
    • Spacebattles Account.
Re: Evolution right before your eyes.
« Reply #2 on: September 12, 2016, 09:59:03 AM »
k my mind is pretty well blown.

It is quite amazing.

Of course, and pulling a strawman here, 'its microevolution! NOT MACRO!'
Rule 1: No pooftas. Rule 2: No maltreating the theists, IF, anyone is watching. Rule 3: No pooftas. Rule 4: I do not want to see anyone NOT drinking after light out. Rule 5: No pooftas. Rule 6: There is NO...rule 6.

Offline jaimehlers

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 8142
  • Darwins +1056/-26
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Evolution right before your eyes.
« Reply #3 on: September 12, 2016, 11:07:11 AM »
Evolution is evolution is evolution.  The 'micro' and 'macro' terms are little more than generalizations to make it easier for us to understand a phenomena, but they don't constrain it (except in our own minds, which don't make the slightest difference to the reality of the phenomena).
Nullus In Verba, aka "Take nobody's word for it!"  If you can't show it, then you don't know it.

Offline ThatZenoGuy

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1941
  • Darwins +94/-24
  • Residential Sexy Anthro Goddess
    • Spacebattles Account.
Re: Evolution right before your eyes.
« Reply #4 on: September 17, 2016, 11:57:43 AM »
Evolution is evolution is evolution.  The 'micro' and 'macro' terms are little more than generalizations to make it easier for us to understand a phenomena, but they don't constrain it (except in our own minds, which don't make the slightest difference to the reality of the phenomena).

*Smug wink*

Ahh, but a dog which only does micro-evolution forever will remain a dog! And certainly not change species!

Now what, atheist?

On the topic, Bacteria are some crazy fucking organisms.

Didn't we recently have one which evolved to eat plastics (Nylon?), which only occured thanks to evolution and that fact that humans invented Nylon.
Rule 1: No pooftas. Rule 2: No maltreating the theists, IF, anyone is watching. Rule 3: No pooftas. Rule 4: I do not want to see anyone NOT drinking after light out. Rule 5: No pooftas. Rule 6: There is NO...rule 6.

Online Add Homonym

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4254
  • Darwins +423/-5
  • Gender: Male
  • I can haz jeezusburgerâ„¢
Re: Evolution right before your eyes.
« Reply #5 on: September 18, 2016, 10:11:16 AM »
Definitely awesomed.
When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be bleedn obvious.

Offline Right Smarts

  • Freshman
  • *
  • Posts: 3
  • Darwins +0/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Evolution right before your eyes.
« Reply #6 on: February 16, 2017, 04:53:20 PM »
Denying the clear, scientifically-accepted distinction between microevolution and macroevolution is an unwitting admission to the lack of evidence for the latter.

One involves minor changes, typically cosmetic variation, and has been known about for thousands of years.

The other involves the development of entirely novel traits and bodyplans, and remains more superstition than science.

If you can't distinguish between the two, it doesn't prove they don't exist. It does, however, prove you have no business partaking in this debate.

Online jdawg70

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 4443
  • Darwins +980/-10
  • Ex-rosary squad
Re: Evolution right before your eyes.
« Reply #7 on: February 16, 2017, 05:06:13 PM »
Denying the clear, scientifically-accepted distinction between microevolution and macroevolution is an unwitting admission to the lack of evidence for the latter.
Welcome to the forum Right Smarts.

Could you supply the clear, scientifically-accepted distinction between microevolution and macroevolution?  I'm unfamiliar with it.
"When we landed on the moon, that was the point where god should have come up and said 'hello'. Because if you invent some creatures, put them on the blue one and they make it to the grey one, you f**king turn up and say 'well done'."

- Eddie Izzard

http://deepaksducttape.wordpress.com/

Offline jaimehlers

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 8142
  • Darwins +1056/-26
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Evolution right before your eyes.
« Reply #8 on: February 18, 2017, 01:55:23 AM »
Denying the clear, scientifically-accepted distinction between microevolution and macroevolution is an unwitting admission to the lack of evidence for the latter.
So...was this supposed to be aimed at me?  I'm guessing you think that my earlier statement about micro vs macro being generalizations to help make it easier for us to understand is a 'denial', then?  If so, what you fail to understand is that I wasn't denying the "clear, scientifically-accepted distinction" that you refer to.  I'm well aware that scientists distinguish between the two, but it isn't because they're two entirely different things as a lot of intelligent design advocates would argue.  The distinction between them is based on scale, nothing more - it's based on how we use them, not because there's some impassable barrier between them.

Quote from: Right Smarts
One involves minor changes, typically cosmetic variation, and has been known about for thousands of years.

The other involves the development of entirely novel traits and bodyplans, and remains more superstition than science.

If you can't distinguish between the two, it doesn't prove they don't exist. It does, however, prove you have no business partaking in this debate.
This is so badly wrong that your arguing it makes me wonder whether you have any business participating in this debate.

Microevolution is differentiation within a species (not just "minor changes" as you claim), while macroevolution is differentiation that transcends a species (not "the development of entirely novel traits and bodyplans").  As an example of macroevolution, let's take the differences between the various species which are grouped under the felidae family.  There are two sub-families, pantherinae[1] and felinae[2].

I don't know about you, but I certainly would not consider there to be any "entirely novel traits and bodyplans" within the pantherinae or felinae sub-families.  Indeed, the genera and species within the felidae family are overall quite similar.  Naturally, there are differences between them, but they are surprisingly minor, all things considered.  Indeed, if we used your definitions, we might naturally conclude that all the different species within the felidae family came about due to microevolution.

As the saying goes, the proof is in the pudding; the fact that there are less differences between the member species of the felidae family than between. say, a member of the felidae family and a member of the canidae family, is a very clear indication that evolution simply doesn't work by developing "entirely novel traits and bodyplans", but by making relatively small changes that add up over time, combined with barriers to reproduction that cause divergence.  The last common ancestor between felidae and canidae lived around 40 million years ago, for example, and it's clear when you compare them that despite their differences, they're still more similar to each other than they are to other members of the placentalia subclass, from which they diverged.

So while you are correct that "the development of entirely novel traits and bodyplans...remains more superstition than science", what you have as yet failed to recognize is that this has nothing to do with evolution in the first place, because evolution never worked that way to begin with.  Whether you're talking about microevolution or macroevolution, it has always worked through minor changes which add up over time, combined with divergences caused by reproductive barriers.
 1. tiger, lion, jaguar, leopard, and snow leopard
 2. all others
Nullus In Verba, aka "Take nobody's word for it!"  If you can't show it, then you don't know it.

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 14901
  • Darwins +1087/-36
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: Evolution right before your eyes.
« Reply #9 on: February 18, 2017, 09:55:45 AM »
Denying the clear, scientifically-accepted distinction between microevolution and macroevolution is an unwitting admission to the lack of evidence for the latter.

One involves minor changes, typically cosmetic variation, and has been known about for thousands of years.

The other involves the development of entirely novel traits and bodyplans, and remains more superstition than science.

If you can't distinguish between the two, it doesn't prove they don't exist. It does, however, prove you have no business partaking in this debate.

Do you think you could lay out an argument with facts instead of making it personal and insulting?  Your name calling is fairly sophisticated.  If you spent as much effort understanding evolution as you have at name-calling, you'd have a much stronger case. 


What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.