However, in nature the deformed organism isn't likely going to survive and reproduce, and even if it did the deformity is likely to be developmental, not genetic. Even if you did raise it to adulthood in a controlled environment and the defects were genetic, vestigalism does not happen in the next generation. The time required would far outlast our lifespan, so we would never see the results. And yes, I know vestigalism is not a real word.
TerraForums Venus Flytrap, Nepenthes, Drosera and more talk
Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Where does everyone stand in regards to...
- Thread starter Amateur_Expert
- Start date
-
- Tags
- widely
- Status
[b said:Quote[/b] (TheAlphaWolf @ Jan. 02 2005,6:59)]well... that's mostly with plants that are very... frustrating... because different genera and I think even some families can hybridize. Every scientist I know agrees that if two populations cannot interbreed and have fertile offspring, they cannot possibly be the same species.[b said:
The hardest part for people to accept of course(even scientists have trouble with classifying species-so I don't consider that much evidence of evolution, it would be smart to make creation slightly elastic to adapt to change that is certain to occur) would be the first cell Fish-amphibian amphibian-reptile reptile-bird reptile-mammal and of course "ape"-human being.Not always. In the case of many killifish killifish keepers are wary of getting populations mixed up as sometimes the results will be sterile(often results in sterile males) or otherwise end up with problems. But they are classed under the same species.
Nope-not just fossils...just the idea/blotchy evidence.
Much easier just to act like an insect instead of procrastinating what we will become next
I had never even heard of killfish 
aldough that is interesting... but to me it just proves evolution. The killfish are like transitional organisms. I believe (don't take my word for it because I heard it from someone else... aldough I do trust him) There are also some gulls somewhere in some island that the populations next to each other can mate and have fertile offspring but populations far away can't...
aldough that is interesting... but to me it just proves evolution. The killfish are like transitional organisms. I believe (don't take my word for it because I heard it from someone else... aldough I do trust him) There are also some gulls somewhere in some island that the populations next to each other can mate and have fertile offspring but populations far away can't...
can you explain that? I'm not sure what you mean.[b said:
Procrastinating?[b said:
Blotchy evidence-as in large gaps in the fossil record(now explained by some kind of punctuated equilibrium in which case some species should have evolved into something totally new and different within the time of human history). Only reptile-bird seems to have an inbetween and IMHO after reading about it I think it is a bird-and not a bird-dinosaur...some birds had teeth later on too.
oh that. Well that's to be expected. The conditions for fossilization are so rare that trying to find specific fossils probably won't give you much results.[b said:
I really don't know much about individual fossils but I'm searching..
anyone want to read this and tell us if that's good enough?
LOL... you sure cured my hyperness
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html
ah... from reptile to mammal- http://www.gcssepm.org/special/cuffey_05.htm
another looooong thing to read- http://www.vuletic.com/hume/cefec/5.html#5.1
from amphibians to reptiles- Seymouria is one,
from reptiles to mammals- Probelesodon and Massetognathus
between fish and amphibians- Eusthenopteron
but there are more transitional fossils of horses and humans and from certain reptiles to others, etc...
another looooong thing to read- http://www.vuletic.com/hume/cefec/5.html#5.1
from amphibians to reptiles- Seymouria is one,
from reptiles to mammals- Probelesodon and Massetognathus
between fish and amphibians- Eusthenopteron
but there are more transitional fossils of horses and humans and from certain reptiles to others, etc...
Everybody take a break! Some of us were busy today and are trying to catch up.
Anyway it's no longer a debate between evolution and creation. It seems to have become a battle between evolution and some form of phylogenetic agnosticism. In case no one has ever used that phrase before, I hereby patent it and will make my fortune in licensing fees. Phylogenesis, by the way, is the origin of a species. Anyway, there's no point trying to prove something to an agnostic.
Evolution cannot be proved. Even if we observe the origin of a new species tomorrow and film it and dissect it and gene sequence it and do everything it might take to convince everybody speciation happened, it doesn't prove humans evolved from something else. I'm a geologist and am comfortable with inference being science, but some people can't accept something if they didn't see it happen or can't duplicate it in a lab. That kind of proof is possible in some sciences, but impossible in others.
To all sides in the debate - never try to teach a pig to sing, it only wastes your time and annoys the pig.
Anyway it's no longer a debate between evolution and creation. It seems to have become a battle between evolution and some form of phylogenetic agnosticism. In case no one has ever used that phrase before, I hereby patent it and will make my fortune in licensing fees. Phylogenesis, by the way, is the origin of a species. Anyway, there's no point trying to prove something to an agnostic.
Evolution cannot be proved. Even if we observe the origin of a new species tomorrow and film it and dissect it and gene sequence it and do everything it might take to convince everybody speciation happened, it doesn't prove humans evolved from something else. I'm a geologist and am comfortable with inference being science, but some people can't accept something if they didn't see it happen or can't duplicate it in a lab. That kind of proof is possible in some sciences, but impossible in others.
To all sides in the debate - never try to teach a pig to sing, it only wastes your time and annoys the pig.
Wesley
God must have an interesting sense of humor
Apparently someone did somethin right... I laughed more in the last two pages than I have in the other 40-some pages. You guys are entertaining. AW, stop with the links and keep rambling! I can't keep up!!!!!!!!!!! I've always heard the appendix in humans was virtually useless. I guess someone finally figured somethin out. Anyway, as hyper as I am, I gotta go to bed. Dagumit, school starts tomorrow for me. Oh and by the way, AE, I'm soooooo glad you actually have a picture for your ava/sig and it's a good one at that. LOL
Keeping it real,
~Wes~
Keeping it real,
~Wes~
It is VIRTUALLY useless but it does make some leukocytes (or something to do with the immune system...) which practically makes no difference. After all, people get their appendixes taken out all the time.[b said:
MWUAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!! it starts tuestay for me!!
As far as I know people think that the fully formed appendix (it used to be a lot longer and more developed) aided in the digestion of wood and plant stems.
*does a google search*
Hey, first on the list is our favorite site: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/vestiges/appendix.html
I didn't have time to read half of it but it looks like I remembered right.
*does a google search*
Hey, first on the list is our favorite site: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/vestiges/appendix.html
I didn't have time to read half of it but it looks like I remembered right.
jimscott
Tropical Fish Enthusiast
Hey, could ya slow down a bit!? Every time I turn around...
Was it Luis who said he wanted proof of God's existence first? I WAS where you were at! I can't give ya proof. Nobody can. Any evidence that can be provided - can also be rationalized away. I know... I DID that. Ultimately, it tool a "want to" attitude, a small step of / choice to have faith, that led me to ask Jesus into my heart as Lord and Savior. You will never get satisfiable proof. It's always a choice off the will.
There was a fellow by the name of Jodh McDowell who specifically went out of his way to disprove the Bible and in the process of reading it, looking for contradictions, he came to the realization that the Bible was / is the truth. And then he put his faith in Jesus. He also wrote a couple books: "Evidence That Demands A Verdict" and "More Evidence That Demands A Verdict". Neither can be proofs, but both point out a lot of overwhelming evidence, when taken as a whole, takes more faith to disbelieve than TO believe. He wrote about fulfilled prophecies, literary criticisms, and archaelogy. I don't know if he coined the phrase or echoed it: "Jesus is either a liar, lunatic, or Lord".
I would challenge you all to read the Bible, from cover to cover, and ask the very God that you don't believe or are not sure about, to show you the truth. Then make your decision.
Was it Luis who said he wanted proof of God's existence first? I WAS where you were at! I can't give ya proof. Nobody can. Any evidence that can be provided - can also be rationalized away. I know... I DID that. Ultimately, it tool a "want to" attitude, a small step of / choice to have faith, that led me to ask Jesus into my heart as Lord and Savior. You will never get satisfiable proof. It's always a choice off the will.
There was a fellow by the name of Jodh McDowell who specifically went out of his way to disprove the Bible and in the process of reading it, looking for contradictions, he came to the realization that the Bible was / is the truth. And then he put his faith in Jesus. He also wrote a couple books: "Evidence That Demands A Verdict" and "More Evidence That Demands A Verdict". Neither can be proofs, but both point out a lot of overwhelming evidence, when taken as a whole, takes more faith to disbelieve than TO believe. He wrote about fulfilled prophecies, literary criticisms, and archaelogy. I don't know if he coined the phrase or echoed it: "Jesus is either a liar, lunatic, or Lord".
I would challenge you all to read the Bible, from cover to cover, and ask the very God that you don't believe or are not sure about, to show you the truth. Then make your decision.
- Status
