Renegade Public Forums
C&C: Renegade --> Dying since 2003™, resurrected in 2024!
Home » General Discussions » Heated Discussions and Debates » Intelligent design vs Evolution
Re: Intelligent design vs Evolution [message #444685 is a reply to message #444684] Mon, 07 March 2011 17:16 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
shippo is currently offline  shippo
Messages: 65
Registered: August 2009
Karma:
Recruit
Dover wrote on Sun, 06 March 2011 16:39

I'm not sure I understand the distinction between the two. How are they different if the process is the exact same? Are you saying evolution is only possible within a species, so one breed of dog evolving into another is okay, but a dog evolving into a wolf is not? I don't see your reasoning for putting arbitrary boundaries on a process you apparently agree with. I can drive from home to the store, I can drive from the store to the edge of the city. From the edge of the city I can drive out of town, and from there I can get to San Fransisco. The same process that takes me one step can take me the entire way, given enough time. In your mind, why is evolution any different? So if you agree a bird can evolve a different beak to get its food better, wouldn't it make sense that it could alson later have a change in wingspan to adapt to new air currents or something, and then grow thicker feathers to adapt in a change in climate, and then adapt new feet for a better kind of tree to nest in? How many of these changes can it take before it goes too far and becomes "macroevolution"?

Your shit just doesn't make any sense. At all.


A wolf is the same specie as a dog, they can interbread. Sarcasm

According to Genetics the animal changes certian features based on what genes it already has not a brand new one.
With the example of the bird, the bird has both a gene for a small beak and a large beak. Lets say the large beak is a dominant gene and the small beak recessive. Now, if for some reason in the environment the birds with small beaks can get to food beter, those birds will survive and pass on the resesive gene. The other birds with the dominant gene will die out. the only gene then seen here would be the small beak gene. However no new gene was created.

To get an new gene, a gene must get mutated by either transcription errors or by some sort of viral infection. The statistic for transcription errors is 10-100 million the majority being harmful or non efective. Is it plausable to get a "good" mutation, yes but this takes more faith in my opinion than "creationism"

[Updated on: Mon, 07 March 2011 17:19]

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: FoxNews on the horrific game "Bulletstorm"
Next Topic: The Story of Your Enslavement
Goto Forum:
  

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [ RSS ] [ PDF ]

Current Time: Fri Aug 02 14:15:03 MST 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01394 seconds
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

Powered by: FUDforum 420.69.
Copyright ©2001-2023 FUDforum Bulletin Board Software