7 Animals that are Evolving Right Before Our Eyes

[Autumnlicious]

The internetz --- serious business.

[Statler Waldorf]

If it was really the case then he'd at least be able to demonstrate a very BASIC understanding of what evolution is. He seems to think that a fish can just miraculously develop into a cow in no time at all. Highest achieving student? Kiss my ass.

This is funny; you proved right here that you lack a BASIC understanding of Evolutionary Biology when you assert that the word Evolution can mean only one thing and one thing alone. It means several things, and that's why you are committing the fallacy of equivocation when you keep changing its meaning half way through the discussion. Minor changes in gene frequency and expression do not logically prove common descent in any way, not to mention to assert they do is a classic logic misstep as I have already demonstrated. You can believe in common descent, but this article provides no evidence supporting it. I already have my own faith, so I don’t need yours.

---

If it was really the case then he'd at least be able to demonstrate a very BASIC understanding of what evolution is. He seems to think that a fish can just miraculously develop into a cow in no time at all. Highest achieving student? Kiss my ass.

Should we demand to see his university degree, like the tea party did with obamas birth certificate?

Both of my degrees are hanging on the wall of my music room in my home, but that is getting off topic now isn't it?

[Napoléon]

If it was really the case then he'd at least be able to demonstrate a very BASIC understanding of what evolution is. He seems to think that a fish can just miraculously develop into a cow in no time at all. Highest achieving student? Kiss my ass.

This is funny; you proved right here that you lack a BASIC understanding of Evolutionary Biology when you assert that the word Evolution can mean only one thing and one thing alone. It means several things, and that's why you are committing the fallacy of equivocation when you keep changing its meaning half way through the discussion. Minor changes in gene frequency and expression do not logically prove common descent in any way, not to mention to assert they do is a classic logic misstep as I have already demonstrated. You can believe in common descent, but this article provides no evidence supporting it. I already have my own faith, so I don’t need yours.

Wow, thanks for putting words where I didn't post any! You've just proven you're blind as well as dumb! You said I assert that the word evolution can mean one thing and one thing only? Where did I say that? There may be many aspects to evolution but the general concept isn't too frickin hard to grasp. As I said you are yet to demonstrate you're a highly achieving student in the field of evolution as you say you are, so I was merely ridiculing the claim until you show some proof of it. So far you seem to be talking out your ass so I see no logical reasoning to suggest that you happen to know what you're talking about, especially if seen as you're so enlightened in the topic you disagree with it yet THOUSANDS of scientist who do truly know about evolution think it is the best explanation possible and it is widely regarded as FACTUAL scientifically.
Basically what makes your understanding of evolution so poles apart to the vast majority of scientists who have devoted their lives to the subject?

Should we demand to see his university degree, like the tea party did with obamas birth certificate?

Both of my degrees are hanging on the wall of my music room in my home, but that is getting off topic now isn't it?

It's not getting off topic if you're stating things as fact by arguing from authority which is what you were basically doing. You were trying to give your argument more weight because you are an apparent 'expert' in evolutionary theory (or at least you seem to think you are).

[Statler Waldorf]

---

Wow, thanks for putting words where I didn't post any! You've just proven you're blind as well as dumb! You said I assert that the word evolution can mean one thing and one thing only? Where did I say that? There may be many aspects to evolution but the general concept isn't too frickin hard to grasp. As I said you are yet to demonstrate you're a highly achieving student in the field of evolution as you say you are, so I was merely ridiculing the claim until you show some proof of it. So far you seem to be talking out your ass so I see no logical reasoning to suggest that you happen to know what you're talking about, especially if seen as you're so enlightened in the topic you disagree with it yet THOUSANDS of scientist who do truly know about evolution think it is the best explanation possible and it is widely regarded as FACTUAL scientifically.
Basically what makes your understanding of evolution so poles apart to the vast majority of scientists who have devoted their lives to the subject?

---

You didn’t ever say it, but your post implied it. When you pointed at small changes in gene frequency and expression that are actually moving downhill from an information perspective and claimed that somehow added merit to common descent which requires uphill changes it gives me an inkling that you really don’t know how these things work. Even if you could point to natural selection increasing information in the genetic code of the organism it was acting on it still would not validate common descent because the logical structure of the argument is fallacious as I already pointed out earlier.
You should also know that science is not based on majority or consensus, so appealing to it means nothing. I actually found out when I was doing some post graduate work with a couple of my biology professors that many of them are not nearly as confident in the theory when they are just having a casual conversation. A person is just not allowed to question the theory anymore which of course is never a good thing.

I think this quote says it all,

“In China we can criticize Darwin but not the government. In America you can criticize the government, but not Darwin.”
- Jun-Yuan Chen Research Professor Nanjing Institute of Geology and Paleontology

---

Should we demand to see his university degree, like the tea party did with obamas birth certificate?

Both of my degrees are hanging on the wall of my music room in my home, but that is getting off topic now isn't it?

It's not getting off topic if you're stating things as fact by arguing from authority which is what you were basically doing. You were trying to give your argument more weight because you are an apparent 'expert' in evolutionary theory (or at least you seem to think you are).

---

I never even made an appeal to authority, much less a fallacious one. Someone said I was un-educated in the field of evolutionary biology, so I demonstrated that I had actually received more education in that field than probably any other besides Ecology.