Finally some big public guy is questioning:

1. Why, if Evolution is only a Theory, are scientists that don't support it
drummed out of the scientific community
2. Where, if Evolution actually works, has a species actually been seen to
evolve into another species.

And so on.

Charles the Curmudgeon

<n5hsr@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Va6dnVu27rCs_5zVnZ2dnUVZ_hOdnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
> Finally some big public guy is questioning:
>
> 1. Why, if Evolution is only a Theory, are scientists that don't support
> it drummed out of the scientific community
> 2. Where, if Evolution actually works, has a species actually been seen
> to evolve into another species.
>

The closest is a species of bird that is still a bird, but is unique to the
South Pacific islands where it is found. I don't recall the particulars, but
there is a bird that has evolved -- still a bird though -- to another
species of bird.

Not a strong argument for Darwinism, but it's out there ...

Jeff Strickland wrote:
>
> <n5hsr@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:Va6dnVu27rCs_5zVnZ2dnUVZ_hOdnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>> Finally some big public guy is questioning:
>>
>> 1. Why, if Evolution is only a Theory, are scientists that don't
>> support it drummed out of the scientific community
>> 2. Where, if Evolution actually works, has a species actually been
>> seen to evolve into another species.
>>
>
> The closest is a species of bird that is still a bird, but is unique to
> the South Pacific islands where it is found. I don't recall the
> particulars, but there is a bird that has evolved -- still a bird though
> -- to another species of bird.
>
> Not a strong argument for Darwinism, but it's out there ...

Actually, there are many instances where members of one species evolved
into another species. Darwin visited the Galapagos Islands. He found
that all of finches on the islands were similar, but clearly evolved
from one species of finches.

Darwin was a brilliant scientist who was famous for discovering how
earthworms are able to improve soil quality, figured out how coral reefs
are built, wrote a best seller about his voyage on the Beagle, in
addition to his ground-breaking work on evolution.

Some good sources that explain evolution include
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/ and
http://www.nap.edu/html/creationism/evidence.html.

Books by S.J. Gould and Darwin are also good sources.

Jeff

On 2008-04-12 18:44:59 -0700, Jeff <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> said:

> Jeff Strickland wrote:
>>
>> <n5hsr@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:Va6dnVu27rCs_5zVnZ2dnUVZ_hOdnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>>> Finally some big public guy is questioning:
>>>
>>> 1. Why, if Evolution is only a Theory, are scientists that don't
>>> support it drummed out of the scientific community
>>> 2. Where, if Evolution actually works, has a species actually been
>>> seen to evolve into another species.
>>>
>>
>> The closest is a species of bird that is still a bird, but is unique to
>> the South Pacific islands where it is found. I don't recall the
>> particulars, but there is a bird that has evolved -- still a bird
>> though -- to another species of bird.
>>
>> Not a strong argument for Darwinism, but it's out there ...
>
> Actually, there are many instances where members of one species evolved
> into another species. Darwin visited the Galapagos Islands. He found
> that all of finches on the islands were similar, but clearly evolved
> from one species of finches.

If the finches are all genetically compatible enough to inter-breed,
that would be classified as mutation, not evolution. This would be
analogous to man-made intervention to bring about new breeds of dogs or
cats.

Though a Great Dane would never breed with a toy poodle, it's possible
to artificially inseminate the poodle with Dane sperm. Obviously, if
the puppies were to become too large in utero, this would be a problem.
Nevertheless, all domestic dogs are genetically similar enough to
breed.



--
Never argue with an idiot. They'll just drag you down to their level
and beat you with experience!

"Jeff" <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:vAdMj.1392$nT1.254@trndny09...
> Jeff Strickland wrote:
>>
>> <n5hsr@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:Va6dnVu27rCs_5zVnZ2dnUVZ_hOdnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>>> Finally some big public guy is questioning:
>>>
>>> 1. Why, if Evolution is only a Theory, are scientists that don't
>>> support it drummed out of the scientific community
>>> 2. Where, if Evolution actually works, has a species actually been seen
>>> to evolve into another species.
>>>
>>
>> The closest is a species of bird that is still a bird, but is unique to
>> the South Pacific islands where it is found. I don't recall the
>> particulars, but there is a bird that has evolved -- still a bird
>> though -- to another species of bird.
>>
>> Not a strong argument for Darwinism, but it's out there ...
>
> Actually, there are many instances where members of one species evolved
> into another species. Darwin visited the Galapagos Islands. He found that
> all of finches on the islands were similar, but clearly evolved from one
> species of finches.
>

That's the example I was thinking of.

The finches are still birds, different birds to be sure but birds just the
same.

Nobody in their right mind would dispute that a bird might turn into a
different bird, the argument against evolution is that it demands that
monkeys become humans. Humans are a separate and distinct species that
itself has evolved over the millennia to be taller, heavier, and live
longer, but humans are not an evolutionary offshoot of monkeys. Or apes,
which are not monkeys either.

witfal wrote:
> On 2008-04-12 18:44:59 -0700, Jeff <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> said:
>
>> Jeff Strickland wrote:
>>>
>>> <n5hsr@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>> news:Va6dnVu27rCs_5zVnZ2dnUVZ_hOdnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>>>> Finally some big public guy is questioning:
>>>>
>>>> 1. Why, if Evolution is only a Theory, are scientists that don't
>>>> support it drummed out of the scientific community
>>>> 2. Where, if Evolution actually works, has a species actually been
>>>> seen to evolve into another species.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The closest is a species of bird that is still a bird, but is unique
>>> to the South Pacific islands where it is found. I don't recall the
>>> particulars, but there is a bird that has evolved -- still a bird
>>> though -- to another species of bird.
>>>
>>> Not a strong argument for Darwinism, but it's out there ...
>>
>> Actually, there are many instances where members of one species
>> evolved into another species. Darwin visited the Galapagos Islands. He
>> found that all of finches on the islands were similar, but clearly
>> evolved from one species of finches.
>
> If the finches are all genetically compatible enough to inter-breed,
> that would be classified as mutation, not evolution. This would be
> analogous to man-made intervention to bring about new breeds of dogs or
> cats.

Keyword: If. They don't interbreed. They are different species.

> Though a Great Dane would never breed with a toy poodle, it's possible
> to artificially inseminate the poodle with Dane sperm. Obviously, if
> the puppies were to become too large in utero, this would be a problem.
> Nevertheless, all domestic dogs are genetically similar enough to br

So what? Darwin's finches are different species.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin's_finches

I also noticed that you deleted the web pages I recommended without
indicating that fact, which is intellectually dishonest. You would do
well to read and understand them.

Jeff

"witfal" <nospam@all4.me> wrote in message
news:ftrorg$eob$1@news.albasani.net...
> On 2008-04-12 18:44:59 -0700, Jeff <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> said:
>
>> Jeff Strickland wrote:
>>>
>>> <n5hsr@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>> news:Va6dnVu27rCs_5zVnZ2dnUVZ_hOdnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>>>> Finally some big public guy is questioning:
>>>>
>>>> 1. Why, if Evolution is only a Theory, are scientists that don't
>>>> support it drummed out of the scientific community
>>>> 2. Where, if Evolution actually works, has a species actually been
>>>> seen to evolve into another species.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The closest is a species of bird that is still a bird, but is unique to
>>> the South Pacific islands where it is found. I don't recall the
>>> particulars, but there is a bird that has evolved -- still a bird
>>> though -- to another species of bird.
>>>
>>> Not a strong argument for Darwinism, but it's out there ...
>>
>> Actually, there are many instances where members of one species evolved
>> into another species. Darwin visited the Galapagos Islands. He found that
>> all of finches on the islands were similar, but clearly evolved from one
>> species of finches.
>
> If the finches are all genetically compatible enough to inter-breed, that
> would be classified as mutation, not evolution. This would be analogous
> to man-made intervention to bring about new breeds of dogs or cats.
>

That's not entirely true. People that know this sort of thing -- not me by a
long shot -- call the finches in the Galapos an evolutionary change, not a
mutation. Bottom line, a bird is still a bird and a person is still a
person.



> Though a Great Dane would never breed with a toy poodle, it's possible to
> artificially inseminate the poodle with Dane sperm. Obviously, if the
> puppies were to become too large in utero, this would be a problem.
> Nevertheless, all domestic dogs are genetically similar enough to breed.
>
>

This is a better example of mutation than the birds on the Galapos Islands.

Jeff Strickland wrote:
>
> "Jeff" <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:vAdMj.1392$nT1.254@trndny09...
>> Jeff Strickland wrote:
>>>
>>> <n5hsr@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>> news:Va6dnVu27rCs_5zVnZ2dnUVZ_hOdnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>>>> Finally some big public guy is questioning:
>>>>
>>>> 1. Why, if Evolution is only a Theory, are scientists that don't
>>>> support it drummed out of the scientific community
>>>> 2. Where, if Evolution actually works, has a species actually been
>>>> seen to evolve into another species.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The closest is a species of bird that is still a bird, but is unique
>>> to the South Pacific islands where it is found. I don't recall the
>>> particulars, but there is a bird that has evolved -- still a bird
>>> though -- to another species of bird.
>>>
>>> Not a strong argument for Darwinism, but it's out there ...
>>
>> Actually, there are many instances where members of one species
>> evolved into another species. Darwin visited the Galapagos Islands. He
>> found that all of finches on the islands were similar, but clearly
>> evolved from one species of finches.
>>
>
> That's the example I was thinking of.
>
> The finches are still birds, different birds to be sure but birds just
> the same.
>
> Nobody in their right mind would dispute that a bird might turn into a
> different bird, the argument against evolution is that it demands that
> monkeys become humans. Humans are a separate and distinct species that
> itself has evolved over the millennia to be taller, heavier, and live
> longer, but humans are not an evolutionary offshoot of monkeys. Or apes,
> which are not monkeys either.

Actually, humans have evolved from monkeys. Our closest living relatives
include chimps and bonodos.

(The similarity's between humans and chimps can be seen here:
http://www.bushorchimp.com/)

There is a great deal of fossil evidence that shows intermediate species
between the common ancestors of humans, chimps and bonodos and present
day humans, as well as other species of human that died out.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_evolution has information and links
about this.

In addition, the American Museum of Natural History has a great exhibit
on this: http://amnh.org/exhibitions/permanen...igins/?src=e_h

Jeff

Jeff wrote:
> Jeff Strickland wrote:
>>
>> "Jeff" <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:vAdMj.1392$nT1.254@trndny09...
>>> Jeff Strickland wrote:
>>>>
>>>> <n5hsr@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:Va6dnVu27rCs_5zVnZ2dnUVZ_hOdnZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>>>>> Finally some big public guy is questioning:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. Why, if Evolution is only a Theory, are scientists that don't
>>>>> support it drummed out of the scientific community
>>>>> 2. Where, if Evolution actually works, has a species actually been
>>>>> seen to evolve into another species.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The closest is a species of bird that is still a bird, but is unique
>>>> to the South Pacific islands where it is found. I don't recall the
>>>> particulars, but there is a bird that has evolved -- still a bird
>>>> though -- to another species of bird.
>>>>
>>>> Not a strong argument for Darwinism, but it's out there ...
>>>
>>> Actually, there are many instances where members of one species
>>> evolved into another species. Darwin visited the Galapagos Islands.
>>> He found that all of finches on the islands were similar, but clearly
>>> evolved from one species of finches.
>>>
>>
>> That's the example I was thinking of.
>>
>> The finches are still birds, different birds to be sure but birds just
>> the same.
>>
>> Nobody in their right mind would dispute that a bird might turn into a
>> different bird, the argument against evolution is that it demands that
>> monkeys become humans. Humans are a separate and distinct species that
>> itself has evolved over the millennia to be taller, heavier, and live
>> longer, but humans are not an evolutionary offshoot of monkeys. Or
>> apes, which are not monkeys either.
>
> Actually, humans have evolved from monkeys. Our closest living relatives
> include chimps and bonodos.
>
> (The similarity's between humans and chimps can be seen here:
> http://www.bushorchimp.com/)
>
> There is a great deal of fossil evidence that shows intermediate species
> between the common ancestors of humans, chimps and bonodos and present
> day humans, as well as other species of human that died out.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_evolution has information and links
> about this.
>
> In addition, the American Museum of Natural History has a great exhibit
> on this: http://amnh.org/exhibitions/permanen...igins/?src=e_h
>
> Jeff

I should also add that all of the DNA evidence from the sequences of DNA
of different species and individuals within a species (like different
groups of humans) is consistent with Darwin's theory of evolution and
what we have gathered about human evolution from the fossil record.

Jeff

Jeff

On 2008-04-12 18:57:45 -0700, Jeff <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> said:
>> If the finches are all genetically compatible enough to inter-breed,
>> that would be classified as mutation, not evolution. This would be
>> analogous to man-made intervention to bring about new breeds of dogs or
>> cats.
>
> Keyword: If. They don't interbreed. They are different species.

But are they genetically compatible enough TO breed should their
instincts allow it? Humans and chimps, both hominids, are different
species. Now some humans (I can think of at least three here) might
want to try it, but offspring would be impossible naturally.

>> Though a Great Dane would never breed with a toy poodle, it's possible
>> to artificially inseminate the poodle with Dane sperm. Obviously, if
>> the puppies were to become too large in utero, this would be a problem.
>> Nevertheless, all domestic dogs are genetically similar enough to br
>
> So what? Darwin's finches are different species.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin's_finches
>
> I also noticed that you deleted the web pages I recommended without
> indicating that fact, which is intellectually dishonest. You would do
> well to read and understand them.

Don't propose to preach to me, Jeff. From what you've written above,
it isn't me that's having a hard time differentiating between evolution
and mutation.

And I never edit to omit context or proof; just to trim for brevity's sake.

--
Never argue with an idiot. They'll just drag you down to their level
and beat you with experience!