The code that is DNA

[The Architect Of Fate]

I’m not quite sure what the objection to the fruit is. Were you expecting a fruit fly to give birth to a horse? Are you telling me that’s your understanding of evolution by natural selection?

But if we came from monkeys why are there still monkeys?

Yup that's the level of stupid were dealing with

[no one]

It appears the Valks has checkmated the atheists. That settles it, tomorrow I'm joining the Mormons and going on a missionary to spread the joyous, miraculous word.

[The Valkyrie]

But if we came from monkeys why are there still monkeys?

Yup that's the level of stupid were dealing with

It’s the level of intellectual discourse I’ve come to expect from creationists.

[The Architect Of Fate]

Yup that's the level of stupid were dealing with

It’s the level of intellectual discourse I’ve come to expect from creationists.

Thing i love the most is they never change the arguments.You encounter one you have pretty much seen them all .

[John 6IX Breezy]

And, what’s the point of having a frank discussion with someone about a particular subject when that person won’t be forthcoming about their position on that subject? Do you believe god created life on earth, John? Do you believe that “macro evolution” is possible? If you’re confident in your position on something then you should have no reason to keep it secret, right?

The issue isn't that I'm not forthcoming, but that the discussions I'm having aren't the ones you want me to have. I think there are issues with species and speciation, for example, that are interesting and worth discussing. I'm currently at my computer with two textbooks on the philosophy of biology, reading up on it. Its a topic I'm interested in so whenever someone comments on species I respond with the information I'm learning. Why? Because explaining it to someone else helps me process and retain that information better. That's it lol. I don't care if you're atheist. I don't care why you are. I don't care if macroevolution is true or not. I don't care about creationism. I was interested in phylogeny last week. I'm currently interested in species this week.

[The Grand Nudger]

What issues, exactly.  Speciation has been directly observed.

[John 6IX Breezy]

What issues, exactly.  Speciation has been directly observed.

The issues begin with the definition of a species; there isn't a good one. If you take the biological species concept, and use reproductive isolation to define the boundaries, you now have several problems (apart from the ones I've mentioned to you before, such as failure to account for asexual reproduction, hybridization, etc.). The major one is that speciation can only be applied at a time, not across time. What that means is that if a species evolves gradually without splitting, there is no longer a discernable boundary that allows us to know when a species has evolved into another. 

For example, another user posted a Dawkins excerpt in which he writes "If you walked up the line like an inspecting general - past Homo erectus, Homo habilis, perhaps Australopithecus afarensis - and down again the other side, you would nowhere find any sharp discontinuity." That's a issue, because without discontinuity of reproduction what you call Homo erectus, Homo habilis, and Australopithecus afarensis is completely arbitrary. There's no such thing as those species, because each generation would be able to mate with the one before, down to the present day.

[Abaddon_ire]

It doesn't' matter how much Creationists huff and puff the fact of  Evolution is not coming down.Meanwhile Creationism has been reduced to a flailing tourist attraction .And in 15 years the best ID been able to do is get James Tour to lie for Jesus and write some pop books  and a few blogs no one in academia  cares about .

Do you stand by that?

Well, sure. The majority of even christians think Ken Ham's ark project is a joke.. the holey babble is quite clearly wrong at every step. It can't even agree with itself. Furthermore, it is an immoral, scurrilous and evil tome. Also a stupid god. That lies.We know "god" lies because it says so in the magic book you failed to read.  But somehow, you have "faith" that it reveals the true nature of some "god". If true, your god favours slavery, abortion, genocide, mysogyny, human sacrifice, incest, rape, punishment of rape victims, and on and on. 

But somehow, you are unable to demonstrate the reality of this imaginary being from your magic book.

Why is that?

[The Grand Nudger]

Yes, each successive representative in a line could likely mate with the previous one. This has already been addressed...repeatedly...and is not an objection to speciation, or the definition of species. It's unclear where the line would be with regards to some members of our lineage, but we can say with complete certainty that we would not be able to breed with australopithicus anymore than we can breed with chimpanzees.

Do you have an objection to speciation, an event that we have observed in the lab and the field...or not?

[The Architect Of Fate]

What issues, exactly.  Speciation has been directly observed.

His response is empty waffle