DARWIN'S MACROEVOLUTION: Why Unscientific?

[Alter2Ego]

ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE:

DEFINITION OF MICRO-EVOLUTION:
"Evolutionary change below the species level; change in the genetic makeup of a population from generation to generation." (SOURCE: Biology, 7th ed. Neil A. Campbell & Jane B. Reece)


DEFINITION OF MACRO-EVOLUTION:
"Evolutionary changes that happen over very long periods of time. This usually refers to the development of large new branches of life, such as vertebrates or mammals." (SOURCE: Evolution: The History of Life on Earth, Russ Hodge)


DEFINITION OF SPECIES:
Loosely speaking, a species is a related group of organisms that share a more or less distinctive form and are capable of interbreeding. As defined by Ernst Mayr, species are:

"groups of actually or potentially interbreeding natural populations which are reproductively isolated from other such groups."
http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Species


ORGANIC/BIOLOGICAL EVOLUTION is the theory that the first living organism developed from nonliving matter. Then, as it reproduced, it is said to have changed into different kinds of living things, producing ultimately all the different forms of life that have ever existed on earth, including humans. And all of this is believed to have been accomplished without intelligent direction or supernatural intervention. (Sources: (1) LIFE--How Did It Get Here? By Evolution or by Creation? pages10-11; (2) Encyclopedia Britannica, page 1018)

DARWIN'S THEORY IN 1859:
"Therefore I should infer from analogy that probably all the organic beings which have ever lived on this earth have descended from some one primordial form, into which life was first breathed." (Origin of Species, p. 484)


EVOLUTION THEORY IN 2012:
"The commonly accepted scientific theory about how life has changed since it originated has three major aspects.

"1. The common descent of all organisms from (more or less) a single ancestor.

"2. The origin of novel traits in a lineage

"3. The mechanisms that cause some traits to persist while others perish"

http://www.knowledgerush.com/kr/encyclopedia/Evolution/



DISCUSSION QUESTIONS:
1. Just like Charles Darwin, the modern-day evolution scientific community asserts that every single animal that has ever existed came from one common ancestor aka came from a single animal (macro-evolution). Is there evidence proving that humans or animals evolved from completely different beings than what they presently are?

2. Fossils are the bones of long-dead animals. Do fossils exist that show evolutionary transition of one type of animal to an entirely different type of animal (eg. a whale evolving into a bear)--which is an example of macro-evolution?

3. When people in the pro-evolution scientific community speak about animals evolving into "new species," are they referring to one family of animal evolving into an entirely different family of animal (eg. a squirrel evolving into a bat or a dinosaur evolving into a bird)--which are examples of macro-evolution? Or are they referring to variations of the exact same type of animal (eg. Doberman dog, Bull dog, Rottweiler dog)--which is an example of micro-evolution?

[Loading Please Wait]

You're wrong.

[NoMoreFaith]

1.Yes

2. Whale evolving into a fucking bear? LOL. Thats not how it works.

3. Evolution does not talk about a currently known animal changing into another known animal.
Squirrels have their own evolutionary tree, Bats a totally different one, diverged at a very early stage of mammal evolution.

Is this the forum spam version of gish gallop?

[Jackalope]

3. When people in the pro-evolution scientific community speak about animals evolving into "new species," are they referring to one family of animal evolving into an entirely different family of animal (eg. a squirrel evolving into a bat or a dinosaur evolving into a bird)--which are examples of macro-evolution?

Those are not examples of evolution of any sort. They're creationist pipe dreams. Like the crocoduck, useful only to serve as examples of how disingenuous, incredulous and/or deceptive creationists are.

As a hypothetical example, the transition from sea mammal (a whale-like creature) into land mammal is not a single transition, but a series of many smaller transitions over a very long period of time.

If you're actually interested in learning, and not just trolling or hit-and-run posting bullshit, get yourself a 100 college-level textbook on evolutionary biology. Based on your other thread(s), you might want to pick up something on chemistry and cosmology while you're at it.

[NoMoreFaith]

Awww, but I wanted Whalobears!

[mediamogul]

[Aegrus]

That demotivational is funny. What's sad is that many fundies are probably stupid enough to think "Damn, they actually found it" upon seeing the photoshop.

[Phil]

That demotivational is funny. What's sad is that many fundies are probably stupid enough to think "Damn, they actually found it" upon seeing the photoshop.

Well...



The Duckodile has been found.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatosuchus

[Alter2Ego]

3. When people in the pro-evolution scientific community speak about animals evolving into "new species," are they referring to one family of animal evolving into an entirely different family of animal (eg. a squirrel evolving into a bat or a dinosaur evolving into a bird)--which are examples of macro-evolution?

Those are not examples of evolution of any sort. They're creationist pipe dreams. Like the crocoduck, useful only to serve as examples of how disingenuous, incredulous and/or deceptive creationists are.

ALTER2EGO -to- CTHULHU DREAMING:
No, those aren't creationist statements. Charles Darwin said evidence would be found in the fossils showing a whale on its way to a bear and a squirrel on its way to a bat. I'm glad you at least acknowledge the idiocy of his theory and that you're so embarrassed that you're now blaming it on creationists. Here's the weblink to a source that quoted Darwin saying it. When you get to the website, scroll down to paragraph 8.

http://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulte...olve/print

As a hypothetical example, the transition from sea mammal (a whale-like creature) into land mammal is not a single transition, but a series of many smaller transitions over a very long period of time.

ALTER2EGO -to- CTHULHU DREAMING:
Where's the evidence to prove any of what you're speculating? Present it on the forum for all to see.

If you're actually interested in learning, and not just trolling or hit-and-run posting bullshit, get yourself a 100 college-level textbook on evolutionary biology. Based on your other thread(s), you might want to pick up something on chemistry and cosmology while you're at it.

ALTER2EGO -to- CTHULHU DREAMING:
In case you haven't noticed, I cited two school textbooks in my opening post.

[Alter2Ego]

1.Yes

ALTER2EGO -to- NO MORE FAITH:
In response to my question: "Is there evidence proving that humans or animals evolved from completely different beings than what they presently are?" you replied "Yes." What evidence are you referring to?

2. Whale evolving into a fucking bear? LOL. Thats not how it works.

ALTER2EGO -to- NO MORE FAITH:
That's how it's supposed to work in macroevolution. The problem is that there's no evidence that macroevolution ever happened in the fossils record.

3. Evolution does not talk about a currently known animal changing into another known animal.
Squirrels have their own evolutionary tree, Bats a totally different one, diverged at a very early stage of mammal evolution.

ALTER2EGO -to- NO MORE FAITH:
If you go back and look at my OP towards the bottom, you will see that the definition given by Charles Darwin and modern-day scientists for evolution is that all living creatures evolved from a "common ancestor." I even provided the website where this was said.