Evolution, religion, and ignorance.

[John V]

I'm not even asserting that it's literally happened at this point, just ascertaining that you're on board with the idea that genetic and physiological details play a part in determining species classifications.

Sure, although you'd have more to go on if there were certain predetermined levels of change necessary to proclaim a new species. You'd also want to determine what the result is if genetic and physiological factors conflict with the BSC.

Now, as it happens, if you accept that then there are certain things I would point you to, but I have a horrible suspicion that, say, if I show you fruit flies demonstrating this under laboratory conditions you'll object on the grounds that they didn't become dragonflies, or something like that.

Possibly. As noted, "play a part in" is pretty nebulous. You seem to be trying to get me to agree to something that leaves you with a mile of wiggle room. Is that science?

I grant that it's something of a fuzzy line, but given the point of the passage you're responding to I felt safe in going general. Like, I'm sure I don't need to point out how different dogs are from raccoons, or anything like that.

You need to do something. As I noted in a previous post, you might measure the different species of dogs for different characteristics, then take the greatest variance for each characteristic and say that two specimens must exhibit greater variance than that in order to be considered different species. It's not perfect, but it's something objective.

I'm not even sure what "existing variation potential" means. It seems like another offshoot of whatever mechanism you think exists that prevents the crossing of species lines, to me. Any variation is evolution, and I'd like to know how you demonstrate and quantify that this is due to some nebulous "potential."

I should have said genetic diversity.
Genetic diversity, the level of biodiversity, refers to the total number of genetic characteristics in the genetic makeup of a species. It is distinguished from genetic variability, which describes the tendency of genetic characteristics to vary.

Genetic diversity serves as a way for populations to adapt to changing environments. With more variation, it is more likely that some individuals in a population will possess variations of alleles that are suited for the environment. Those individuals are more likely to survive to produce offspring bearing that allele. The population will continue for more generations because of the success of these individuals.

The lizards adapted to a new environment. We don't know if these adaptations were due to new mutations, as you propose, or from existing genetic diversity. Considering the number of changes and the speed of change, genetic diversity seems like a more likely explanation.

However, predictions are often made based on prior gathered evidence in science.

Yes, I've already noted that inference can be good for making testable predictions, and proposed a test on the lizards.

---

That is ironic coming from one who relies on zero evidence for the existence of his god.

I'm not saying you're ignorant if you don't accept my god.

The proof for evolution is there for you to understand. You simply wish to dismiss it because it conflicts with your nonsensical faith.

At first I was a Christian evolutionist. I had been taught evolution in school and accepted it. It didn't bother me. One day I got into it with a friend who was a creationist and he asked for evidence. I didn't have any. I looked and was dissatisfied with what I found.