Dr Collins, top geneticist, and CHRISTIAN....

[Dr.Drock]

Btw the word "might" was referring to the particular processes, not whether or not speciation happens.

 

[AllieBaba]

That is a definition of speciation, not of evolution, you moron.

This is why I don't take anything you idiots say seriously, or engage. It's impossible to have an intelligent conversation because you have some serious issues when it comes to understanding basic English.

Either that or you're just dishonest.

 

[Dr.Drock]

I see, in your selected quote did it say anywhere that that was cause to think that it doesn't happen?


When Allie uses the f word and a childish name-call, you know she's losing, by a lot .

Is Allie under 15? It might appear so by that kind of behavior, hardly "adult" !

I've given up on teaching her basic middle school science, now I'm just trying to get her to be honest, which may be even more of a difficult task.


She'll spend one post saying she doesn't deny evolution, then in the next post deny components of evolution, I'm not sure why she's so insecure about just being honest and saying she's an evolution denier.

 

[AllieBaba]

And I use words like *fucking* and *moron* when I find that straight English is useless. If you can't understand the simple English of a first-tier class, there's no use in taking it further. You need to return back to English comp.

 

[AllieBaba]

Your link is ridiculous. It doesn't reference evolution at all. It's a definition of the word speciation. I've made my point.

I wish I was still on speaking terms with my ex, he's a Rhode's scholar who majored in biology. He doesn't visit these forums because the level of stupidity of people who pretend to know what the hell they're talking about when it comes to science overwhelms him, of which this is an excellent example.

 

[Dr.Drock]

That is a definition of speciation, not of evolution, you moron.

This is why I don't take anything you idiots say seriously, or engage. It's impossible to have an intelligent conversation because you have some serious issues when it comes to understanding basic English.

Either that or you're just dishonest.

Speciation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Speciation is the evolutionary process by which new biological species arise. The biologist Orator F. Cook seems to have been the first to coin the term 'speciation' for the splitting of lineages or 'cladogenesis,' as opposed to 'anagenesis' or 'phyletic evolution' occurring within lineages.

Connecting Concepts: Evolution

Evolution > Species and Speciation

Evolution: Speciation

Evolution above the species level (genera, orders, etc.) is simply speciation expanded over a much longer period of time, with increasing differences accumulating to very high levels.

Evolution at NYU--Speciation

II. Speciation = the evolution of barriers to gene flow



You tell me how many sources I need to prove speciation is an aspect of evolution, this isn't difficult.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Your link is ridiculous. It doesn't reference evolution at all. It's a definition of the word speciation. I've made my point.

I wish I was still on speaking terms with my ex, he's a Rhode's scholar who majored in biology. He doesn't visit these forums because the level of stupidity of people who pretend to know what the hell they're talking about when it comes to science overwhelms him, of which this is an excellent example.

Yep, I'm sure he'd be on here siding with a person who said T-Rex was once a herbivore and Noah's Ark could carry 2 of every species with all the plants and freshwater they needed.

 

[Dr.Drock]

And I use words like *fucking* and *moron* when I find that straight English is useless. If you can't understand the simple English of a first-tier class, there's no use in taking it further. You need to return back to English comp.

No you use those at the same point when everyone else uses them, when they're losing and desperate.

This sums it up;

"I'm angry I lost the debate, now I'm going to try to find a way to make my opponent as angry as I am."

 

[AllieBaba]

I haven't lost the debate, you retard. The only point I've made is that evolution doesn't count for speciation (and you lost that one a long, long time ago). And that you and cbirch are too stupid to argue in this field. Also proven long, long ago.

A disclaimer about my ex...yes, he's a Rhode's scholar and happens to be quite learned about biology, genetics, certain history and math...

Sadly, he's a complete backward retread in all over areas of his life.

I wouldn't want anyone to think I am overly impressed by his creds cuz believe me, they accounted for little in everyday living.

 

[AllieBaba]

Your link is ridiculous. It doesn't reference evolution at all. It's a definition of the word speciation. I've made my point.

I wish I was still on speaking terms with my ex, he's a Rhode's scholar who majored in biology. He doesn't visit these forums because the level of stupidity of people who pretend to know what the hell they're talking about when it comes to science overwhelms him, of which this is an excellent example.

So you ignored the TITLE of the WEBSITE with the word "EVOLUTION" in it???



Speciation is one of many many words used within the study of the process of evolution.

The TITLE of the website is "UNDERSTANDING EVOLUTION", your one-stop source of information on EVOLUTION
What the heck is your point?

"the level of stupidity of people who pretend to know what the hell they're talking about"

I can agree with THAT comment you made, but not about many people here. Look up the Latin phrase "Q E D"!

So every single word that is on that website is a statement of evolution?

You fucking idiots. That page is a definition of SPECIATION. Not of EVOLUTION.

I would honestly love to know the REAL level of education you guys have. Because it's clear you didn't get as far as Evolution 101. And the teacher would flunk the shit out of you and have a word with you if he heard you using that page as some sort of warped proof that evolution results in speciation.

 

[Dr.Drock]

I haven't lost the debate, you retard. The only point I've made is that evolution doesn't count for speciation (and you lost that one a long, long time ago). And that you and cbirch are too stupid to argue in this field. Also proven long, long ago.

A disclaimer about my ex...yes, he's a Rhode's scholar and happens to be quite learned about biology, genetics, certain history and math...

Sadly, he's a complete backward retread in all over areas of his life.

I wouldn't want anyone to think I am overly impressed by his creds cuz believe me, they accounted for little in everyday living.

Speciation is an aspect of evolution, as all the education websites I've supplied have shown and you've done nothing to discredit them.

It's you vs places of education like Berkeley and NYU, thank goodness I'm not on your side.

But one thing I'll concede though, is when those esteemed universities like Berkeley get into debates, they throw around words like "fucking moron" and "retard" throughout their dialogue because of their intellectual prowess.

 

[Iridescence]

Go figure.

This should make drock and cbirch implode as they try to intelligently divert and pontificate this away, using non-related wiki articles and such....

"
Francis Sellers Collins (born April 14, 1950), is an American physician-geneticist, noted for his landmark discoveries of disease genes and his leadership of the Human Genome Project (HGP) and described by the Endocrine Society as "one of the most accomplished scientists of our time".[1][2] He currently serves as Director of the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Maryland. Collins has written a book about his Christian faith. He founded and was president of the BioLogos Foundation before accepting the nomination to lead the NIH. On October 14, 2009, Pope Benedict XVI appointed Francis Collins to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences.[3]
Dr. Francis Collins is a member of the USA Science & Engineering Festival's Nifty Fifty, a collection of the most influential scientists and engineers in the United States that are dedicated to reinvigorating the interest of young people in science and engineering.[4] "

Funny how the main players in the Human Genome Project are Christians.

Isn't that odd? They know more about human genetics than anyone on the planet...and yet they believe God created us.

CRRAAAAAZZZYYYY!

Francis Collins - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

OMGorsh is he single? I wonder where he hangs out...

 

[Youwerecreated]

No kidding,but that is not what oil comes from.

Where did you study petroleum geology? Let me let you in on a little secret. Coal, oil, and natural gas are all formed from the same "organic" sources, using the naturally decaying plant matter and the pressurizing processes of goeological forces over millions of years.

Maybe THIS video from Ohio's Oil and Gas Energy Education Program (funded by EXXON) can help you out.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XoyqQgmwY9E]‪Formation of Natural Gas and Crude Oil - Exit 1 of 6‬‏ - YouTube[/ame]

You believe everything you read on wiki ,you believe everything you are taught in school the one thing missing from your education is research. That is why I say the things I do and you think I'm crazy because I don't agree with what you have been brainwashed in to believing. Test me evidence is on the way.

 

[Youwerecreated]

And you missed this, apparently:

"This is a simplified model of speciation by geographic isolation, but it gives an idea of some of the processes that might be at work in speciation. In most real-life cases, we can only put together part of the story from the available evidence."

Fucking idiot.

I see, in your selected quote did it say anywhere that that was cause to think that it doesn't happen?


When Allie uses the f word and a childish name-call, you know she's losing, by a lot .

No sometimes it is used as an exclamation mark . I feel like using on you youngsters sometimes like later today.

 

[Youwerecreated]

I see, in your selected quote did it say anywhere that that was cause to think that it doesn't happen?


When Allie uses the f word and a childish name-call, you know she's losing, by a lot .

Is Allie under 15? It might appear so by that kind of behavior, hardly "adult" !

I've given up on teaching her basic middle school science, now I'm just trying to get her to be honest, which may be even more of a difficult task.


She'll spend one post saying she doesn't deny evolution, then in the next post deny components of evolution, I'm not sure why she's so insecure about just being honest and saying she's an evolution denier.

Really guys this is getting old,we believe change within a group call it evolution or micro evolution or micro adaptations but what we don't believe in is macro evolution which none of you can prove.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Ok

No sometimes it is used as an exclamation mark . I feel like using on you youngsters sometimes like later today.

Later today or? Later Trader? Youngster?

A Later Trader is a retired guy who trades information.

Ok I stand corrected,you're the only one on the wrong side above the age of 25.

 

[Youwerecreated]

.....

Really guys this is getting old,we believe change within a group call it evolution or micro evolution or micro adaptations but what we don't believe in is macro evolution which none of you can prove.

Actually one process, MICRO, is part of the OTHER PROCESS, and has been well proved by thousands and thousands of examples ever since Darwin.

Then in the 1950's to the 1990's the discovery of DNA and the resulting codification of the human (and many plant and other animal) genomes PROVED the process of evolution beyond any reasonable doubt within the scientific community, (as well as the law enforcement community, and so many other "communities" of open-minded rational thinkers).

Macro evolution, micro evolution, just different places along the same spectrum, following the same laws of genetics. Just as a feather and a stone follow the laws of gravity when they fall to the ground, you CANNOT accept one without the acceptance the the other. It is logically impossible. The laws and processes are both the very same.

You are forgetting one important issue,one has been observed and proven beyond any doubt the other has not. I gave reasons it is impossible and it goes ignored by your side or they try to what I'm saying wrong by terms and definitions ,is that what our kids are being taught forget the evidence,and just prove your points with terms and definitions.

 

[Youwerecreated]

God i hate doing this with my smart phone. Forgive the typos.

 

[AllieBaba]

Sigh.

You people just don't comprehend, do you?

And that is why you aren't scientists or even employed in the scientific field.

Didn't we used to have someone who was? I don't remember who...if it was California Girl...Foxy??? I don't remember. You'll notice they avoid the shit out of these ridiculous threads, though.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Actually one process, MICRO, is part of the OTHER PROCESS, and has been well proved by thousands and thousands of examples ever since Darwin.

Then in the 1950's to the 1990's the discovery of DNA and the resulting codification of the human (and many plant and other animal) genomes PROVED the process of evolution beyond any reasonable doubt within the scientific community, (as well as the law enforcement community, and so many other "communities" of open-minded rational thinkers).

Macro evolution, micro evolution, just different places along the same spectrum, following the same laws of genetics. Just as a feather and a stone follow the laws of gravity when they fall to the ground, you CANNOT accept one without the acceptance the the other. It is logically impossible. The laws and processes are both the very same.

You are forgetting one important issue,one has been observed and proven beyond any doubt the other has not. I gave reasons it is impossible and it goes ignored by your side or they try to what I'm saying wrong by terms and definitions ,is that what our kids are being taught forget the evidence,and just prove your points with terms and definitions.

I highlighted your misstatements above. You have provided no links to such

There are observations extending back tens thousands of years in DNA structures, so it has been OBSERVED..through the structure of DNA.

I tend not to argue with people who have never taken a college science course in genetics, because I, as a decent adult, don't like to beat up five years olds, either.

Suffice to say, MANY MANY MANY people are NOT IGNORING your mis-understandings of genetics and evolution, and have put together literally hundreds or even THOUSANDS of written and video responses, out there on the internet for you to read or study. Accusations like: it goes ignored by your side are simply NOT TRUE.

I will give one example: You have a computer and can find thousands of others.

"So successful was this synthesis that today all but the most committed young-Earth creationists accept that microevolution happens. However, it has become an article of faith among anti-evolutionists of all denominations, including “intelligent design” supporters, that there is no scientific explanation for macroevolution, and that in the case of the origin of humans, it didn’t happen.

There isn’t enough room in this post to address both of these misconceptions, so I will concentrate here on the first: that there is no evidence that macroevolution has happened, and that therefore it didn’t happen (or if it did, it required supernatural intervention). What follows is a brief sample of some examples of macroevolution and the mechanisms by which they have taken place, from the level of species up to the level of whole kingdoms. This is not an exhaustive sample by any means. However, it should give anyone with an open mind enough examples and evidence to form their own conclusions about the validity of modern macroevolutionary theory. "

THE EVOLUTION LIST: Macroevolution: Examples and Evidence

Your "side" is NOT being ignored.

Yes,I am familiar with the supposed 29 evidences of macro evolution on the talk origins site. I can't remember who did it but there was a critique done by someone that brought up some troubling questions for who put those evidences out. Yesterday I had to point out who coined the yet micro and macro evolution and I referred this site . Kids are not being taught the differences between the two. Its just not true there is no difference. The problem is in how we determine a species. They try to show divergence in distinguishing between species from the same kind. Today they want us to believe that through natural selection and mutations are the cause of macro evolution . This has never been proven and there are many reasons why its not possible. Mutations can't provide the change necessary. A generation only has about 60 mutations if that is the case man could have not possibly evolved in the time frame that evolutionist need. Dr. Spetner made that very clear.