(January 2, 2017 at 5:29 am)Huggy74 Wrote: Actually what constitutes a "species" is defined in the Bible as that which is able to produce fertile offspring, the scientific definition is the same: the thing is, the Bible said it first.
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/species
Quote:Biology. the major subdivision of a genus or subgenus, regarded as the basic category of biological classification, composed of related individuals that resemble one another, are able to breed among themselves, but are not able to breed with members of another species.*emphasis mine*
So basically your objection is with creationism vs abiogenesis, not with how a 'species' is defined.
Considering how my objection was with you using your own definition of evolution, and had nothing to do with species, I fail to see how what you said was germane at all.
Thump, quite rightly, pointed out that what you were describing was a physiological change based in consumed chemicals, not a heritable change at a genetic level. It's not evolution according to a scientific understanding of the term. You responded that you're using your own definition, which is merely convenient word games, not an actual point. That's all.
"YOU take the hard look in the mirror. You are everything that is wrong with this world. The only thing important to you, is you." - ronedee
Want to see more of my writing? Check out my (safe for work!) site, Unprotected Sects!
Want to see more of my writing? Check out my (safe for work!) site, Unprotected Sects!