User Tag List

Informational! Informational!:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Page 3 of 22 FirstFirst 123456713 ... LastLast
Results 17 to 24 of 176

Thread: Venus-flytrap

  1. #17

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    1,265
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    How did the VFT "learn to adjust" Travis? You have an interesting point of view, I want to hear it! [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif[/img]

  2. #18

    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    1,866
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote (SnowyFalcon @ July 18 2003,06:49)
    How did the VFT "learn to adjust" Travis? You have an interesting point of view, I want to hear it! [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif[/img][/QUOTE]
    I do? lol Thank You! [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif[/img]

    It is more evolving over time (evolution) to meet the changing enviroment. Due to the lack of nutrients in the soil vft's (sundews, neps, sarrs, yada, yada) developed methods of catching insects for added source (an aid not requirment to live). I believe in the "Theroy of Evolution" and Nature always wins too [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif[/img] . I also believe capslock and Seminole's point of view.

    Thanks for taking interest,
    Travis [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/alien.gif[/img]
    \"Some cause happiness wherever they go; others, whenever they go.\"
    -- Oscar Wilde

    http://www.nasarracenia.org/

  3. #19
    Capslock's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Posts
    3,088
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    First off, I love all my pft friends, and know that this sort of debate can get charged. If it looks like it's going to start, I'll quietly bow out, as it's not worth losing friends over.

    A few things to consider: We can all agree that mutations occur. We see it all over our own plant collections. Even if one mutation in a thousand confers a benefit to the plant, it will increase it's survival rate, and eventually become a standard feature of the species. All the negative mutations result in a lower survival rate, and eventually die out. Repeat this process over several hundred million years and you have evolution.

    Next, speciation is defined by most scientists this: when the fertile progeny of a species can no longer mate with the parent, a new species is born. This has been observed both in nature and in the lab. Often when a group of a species becomes, say, physically isolated from the rest of a group, their driving environmental factors change and often a new species is the result. Speciation is not necessarily a large or particularly noticable evolutionary step at all, it's just the one that prevents interbreeding and sets the two species off on different paths.

    Finally, there is no difference between micro- and macro-evolution, and most scientists don't even use the terms. You will never see a lizzard become a bird, or an ant become an elephant. Large-scale changes occur over hundreds of thousands or millions of years. If you grant that micro-evolution exists and can be observed, you've just unwittingly acknowledged "macro" evolution, which is the same thing over a MUCH longer time frame.

    And lastly for snowyfalcon, my Christian friends who've spoken on the matter (which includes my parents, btw) read Genesis as an allegorical account rather than literal. The meaning is the same, it's simply the hand of God that's put it all (evolution) into motion. This is a fairly mainstream Christian viewpoint, though not shared by everyone, obviously.

    For anyone's interest, here are some links:

    Observed speciation

    Transitional forms

    Talk.origins home page
    This is a great site for all things evolution.

    Respectfully,
    Capslock
    Malo Periculosam Libertatem Quam Quietum Servitium

    My photos are copyright-free and public domain

  4. #20

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    1,265
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I have similar inclinations, Capslock. I don't want to start a argument, just discuss the pros and cons of our beliefs.

    First off, in replying to your first statement about one good mutation over 100 years, happening again and again to make evolution. If you take the smallest cell in the human body and then you look at the flagellum. At the base of the flagellum is basically a rotary engine, with somewhere around 13 major pieces. How could something this complex have evolved. If it took millions of years for this to develop, then the flagellum wouldn't have worked for all that time. A stationary cell could not find food, and therefore would die. This mutation would not work out into evolution. The only way this could work out is if there was a Divine Intellect who put all the pieces together at the start of Creation.

    In replying to your second topic about speciation. Both a Chihuahua (sp?) and a Great Dane are dogs. Can they mate? No, of course not. Is the Chihuahua a different species? No.

    The third topic deals with micro-evolution. Whether the moths are light brown or dark brown, they are still moths. Take Charles Darwin's study on the finches for example. That was a study of micro-evolution. Same species, varied beak sizes and shapes. When he got back to England he decided to apply his theory of micro-evolution to a larger scale. He says in his book, Origin of the Species, that if one thing can be found that cannot be explained by small incremental jumps, then his whole theory of evolution would fall apart.

    The next point was on the book of Genesis. You said that the book of Genesis was allegorical. How did you make that determination? You cannot pick and choose what parts of the Bible that you believe and what parts you choose to make into a myth. Either the whole thing is the Word Of God or it is a allegorical myth. If the first, then Creationism is true. If the second, then Christ is a allegorical character and really has no saving power to take your sins away from you. [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif[/img]

    The links are very informative. But here is a few things of what they said.

    Quote
    Note that fossils separated by more than about a hundred thousand years cannot show anything about how a species arose. Think about it: there could have been a smooth transition, or the species could have appeared suddenly, but either way, if there aren't enough fossils, we can't tell which way it happened. [/QUOTE]

    Really? We can't tell which way it happened because there is not enough proof for evolution? The next thing.

    Quote
    Why don't paleontologists bother to popularize the detailed lineages and species-to-species transitions? Because it is thought to be unnecessary detail[/QUOTE]

    Unnecessary detail huh? It is unnecessary to prove evolution with species to species transitions? This would be the only proof possible for evolution, yet this site is deeming it unneccesary.

    I hope I'm not stepping on anybodies toes here. I feel strongly about my opinions and love to talk to others about them.

    Respectfully,

    SF

  5. #21

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    1,265
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Travis,

    I must refer you to Seminoles post as he brought this out quite well.



    Quote

    1. a nutrient deficiency in the soil had to be recognized.
    2. the ability for insects to provide the lacking nutrients had to have been understood.
    3. the fact that insects could be captured and digested to gain these missing nutrients needed to be realized.
    4. a trapping mechanism that can swiftly and efficiently grab and hold,then digest and adsorb insects needed to be designed.
    5. the trapping mechanism having the ability to discriminate between worthwhile insects and those not worth capturing /holding for digestion and also between nonliving foreign objects needed to be designed.[/QUOTE]


    If each of these things took a million years each. There would be no benefit to the plant for 5 million years. This messes up the theory of evolution because for 5 million years there was no benefit to the plant, so there was no reason for it to survive longer than any of the other plants. Also I think that God created nature to be the servant of man and he in turn was to care for it.

  6. #22

    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    1,866
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I don't know, I have a hard time believing one day a vft popped up with traps? [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif[/img] Also, they may not of been around for millions of years maybe the past thousand or hundreds of years. When did we discover the venus flytrap? [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif[/img] I still agree with Seminoles point of view, too. [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif[/img]

    Travis

    add on:
    Everyday, every plant, every animal, and any other life form is evolving to meet a changing world.
    \"Some cause happiness wherever they go; others, whenever they go.\"
    -- Oscar Wilde

    http://www.nasarracenia.org/

  7. #23

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    1,265
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'm not saying the VFT just popped up. I'm saying that God created it on the third day with all the other plants of the field. Not by magic, but by His power.


    Edit:
    I have a hard time believing that something as intricate and beautiful as the VFT was created by chance!

  8. #24

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    North Central Ohio
    Posts
    394
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote
    Everyday, every plant, every animal, and any other life form is evolving to meet a changing world[/QUOTE]

    Travis-

    I believe what you are referring to in this statement is adaptation rather than evolution. I think this is true. An example of this is a tiger that has been forced to the north from its habitat will grow a thicker fur coat to survive the colder temperatures. Or a sarr. native to florida which usually grows in strong sun, high temps. and high humidity, will grow in a northern state will weaker sun, cooler temps. and low humidity. The tiger and pitcher plant are able to survive because God gave them the ability to adapt to different conditions of the environment. While the two are slightly different than they were in their native habitat, they have not started to evolve into a new species.

    Just my opinion. [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif[/img]

    -buckeye

    Page 3 of 22 FirstFirst 123456713 ... LastLast

    Similar Threads

    1. venus flytrap
      By angeljr8282 in forum General Discussions
      Replies: 3
      Last Post: 12-09-2008, 09:55 AM
    2. Venus flytrap first-aid out-the-box
      By Botanicadenta in forum Venus Flytrap (Dionaea ) Care Information & Tips
      Replies: 3
      Last Post: 08-30-2008, 08:17 AM
    3. Venus Flytrap Help
      By silverwhite in forum Venus Flytrap (Dionaea ) Care Information & Tips
      Replies: 8
      Last Post: 02-19-2007, 01:20 PM
    4. Venus flytrap
      By horticulturist in forum Venus Flytrap (Dionaea ) Care Information & Tips
      Replies: 16
      Last Post: 02-26-2004, 04:06 PM
    5. Venus flytrap
      By horticulturist in forum Identify That Plant!
      Replies: 10
      Last Post: 02-24-2004, 10:42 AM

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •