Evolution is a Joke IX

That is adaptation...

http://www.biology-online.org/dictionary/Adaptation

The adjustment or changes in behavior, physiology, and structure of an organism to become more suited to an environment.

 

Wow...Wow, truly quote mining. How about you read further down the page?

"Supplement

(ecology) According to Charles Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection, the organisms adapt to their environment to become better fitted to survive and passing their genes on to the next generation."

So, in this context, adaptation is a synonym for evolution.

 

You are correct… If it was 150 years ago!! Now… Let us break down this sentence shall we? According to Charles Darwin’s Theory of evolution by natural selection. We stop right there because is the theory the same now as it was 150 years ago? Because it’s not. Back then, all they had was “adaptation” to go off of – Darwin stated that adaptation “was” evolution… Now, we know that it’s not. Adaptation does not “lead” to evolution. Adaptation is adaptation. 150 years ago – not so – all we knew was adaptation and that is evolution... Nobody thinks that now, well, no biologist…

 

Exactly. And that is the slow, relentless process that leads to evolution.

 

Not a synonym, but a building block in the process.

 

When it comes to goats, you have a dominant female goat and if she eats a bad plant she rubs her face on the ground, snorts and lets the other goats know that this particular plant is bad....so the bad plants are not eaten and the good ones are. The bad plants reproduce and pass the genes on. The good ones are eaten....see how that works?

And a female ant with a bad mutation will most likely die before she reproduces... and does not pass the gene on.

If you get a colony of ants with bad mutations the ants with good mutations will overpopulate the bad ones and most likely kill them off...ants are like that.

Most animals that are plant eaters are pretty dumb...they just know when things taste bad...not when they are poison.
That is why you check your fields for bad plants before you let the animals graze them.

 

Evolution as a theory was rapidly accepted after the Origin of Species was published. Numerous observations and experiments were discussed in the text. Did you actually read it? If you are so sure the ToE is flawed please provide some empirical evidence that falsifies it.

 

How... How does it lead to evolution... Please explain how adaptation leads to something like a fish turning into a man... Please, I would love to hear it. How does DNA and whole chromosomes change since we can't get them to change in a lab. We can make cats glow in the dark, which is quite unnatural, but what is natural - per evolution - we can't do...

Explain please... How does adaptation "lead" to evolution....

 

The most fundamental study of the subject lays that out quite clearly. If you haven't done even that much investigation of the topic, why are you posting?

Here's a starter kit. You would have to stay in the lab for millions of years.

 

You are correct that the most fundamental studies on the subject of evolution is laid out quite clearly… I have done extensive investigations on the topic, so you ask why am I posting?

That’s easy – because what you state below.

You are incorrect. I would not have to stay in a lab for “millions” of years. Why would you think that? Are you suggesting you do not know how evolution works, but believe in evolution? I will ask you this – how long do you think evolution takes? Does all life “evolve” at the same time? Please explain…

Of course I know the answer, but I don’t believe in evolution… You “DO” believe in evolution and I don’t think you have the slightest on the subject and that is why the evolution thread is here in the religion area of this site. Because you have “FAITH” that evolution is a real thing. You “believe” that evolution takes millions of years because that is what they told you to believe!

Here’s a starter kit – evolution isn’t measured in years…

 

You are very sadly misinformed, my friend.

 

Nope... I am not... Here is what I will do for you... From the University of Berkeley (the leading school in Evolutionary Biology): Some of the questions that evolutionary biologists are trying to answer include:

Does evolution tend to proceed slowly and steadily or in quick jumps?

How does evolution produce new and complex features?

Are there trends in evolution, and if so, what processes generate them?
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/0_0_0/evo_50


How evolution is measured is not in years... Just to help you out because I like to teach - evolution is measured in generations. It's measured by when life can reproduce... So, for some life it's measured in years - others hours...

Now, explain why you think I am misinformed? Like I said - you are believing the WRONG people... Those Darwinist have your head spinning...

 

Hmmmm...
Not if one applied Hybrization between two different species as is done with the mule, donkey, and ass.

Or if as we now understand, Neanderthal men mated with Modern Homo sapiens or the other species from which we evolved.



Gen. 6:4 There were giants, (Homo Erectus of Methusaelian and Methuselahian kinds according to the bible), in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God, (that line of ascent which would not become extinct, Methuselahian links, through Seth, i.e.; Modern Homo Erectus), came in unto the daughters, (the sister species of Tubal-cain, (?), Naamahians, a late stage Neanderthal type), of men, ("daughters" of the previous adaptation of the Methusaelian line of Cain, i.e.; Homo antecessor, derived through the line of Cain), and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men, (Neanderthals), which were of old, (powerful) men of renown (physical strength).

 

Here's a clip from the link YOU provided. Thanks for your help.

All available evidence supports the central conclusions of evolutionary theory, that life on Earth has evolved and that species share common ancestors. Biologists are not arguing about these conclusions. But they are trying to figure out how evolution happens, and that's not an easy job. It involves collecting data, proposing hypotheses, creating models, and evaluating other scientists' work. These are all activities that we can, and should, hold up to our checklist and ask the question: are they doing science?

All sciences ask questions about the natural world, propose explanations in terms of natural processes, and evaluate these explanations using evidence from the natural world. Evolutionary biology is no exception. Darwin's basic conception of evolutionary change and diversification (illustrated with a page from his notebook at left) explains many observations in terms of natural processes and is supported by evidence from the natural world.

 

No problem… I’ve been posting this site since “Evolution is a Joke” the first one about three years ago. It’s a great site! Here – you didn’t finish so I’ll finish it for you at the bottom…

Evolutionary biology is no exception. Darwin's basic conception of evolutionary change and diversification (illustrated with a page from his notebook at left) explains many observations in terms of natural processes and is supported by evidence from the natural world.
Some of the questions that evolutionary biologists are trying to answer include:
1. Does evolution tend to proceed slowly and steadily or in quick jumps?
2. Why are some clades very diverse and some unusually sparse?
3. How does evolution produce new and complex features?
4. Are there trends in evolution, and if so, what processes generate them?
Now, just to let you know – you can’t distract the true subject which is it takes millions of years to see evolution and that I’m misinformed about it not being measured in years. So, you posting what the conclusion of the that page of the site does nothing for your case.

Evolution is not measured in years. In fact, they don’t even know how long it takes, trends, how things come about, why they do, or what processes generates them… It’s right there in black and white! So… am I misinformed on evolution takes millions of years?

 

Completely.
Besides, why are you arguing how long it takes, when you don't believe it happens at all?

 

I'm not arguing how long it takes at all... I am pointing out, and this is a good case, that those who believe in Darwinism know nothing about their religion. You just believe what the Preachers of Darwinism told you without question. If you did know about the biology behind their "fairytales" you wouldn't have stated "it takes millions of years" because the biology behind the relgion Darwinism - it doesn't take millions of years...

Do you get it?

 

Who cares if some people that believe evolution occurs have no idea how long it takes? That is still a question REAL biologists are trying to figure out, so why would a random layman know? It's like making fun of gravity for being a religion because we don't know what causes gravity to happen, we only know HOW it operates. Same thing, dude.

 

You're so funny.
When they talk about short and long times in evolutionary history, they are talking about hundreds of thousands vs. millions of years.

 

Hybrization between two different species as is done with the mule, donkey, and ass.

Or if as we now understand, Neanderthal men mated with Modern Homo sapiens or the other species from which we evolved.



Gen. 6:4 There were giants, (Homo Erectus of Methusaelian and Methuselahian kinds according to the bible), in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God, (that line of ascent which would not become extinct, Methuselahian links, through Seth, i.e.; Modern Homo Erectus), came in unto the daughters, (the sister species of Tubal-cain, (?), Naamahians, a late stage Neanderthal type), of men, ("daughters" of the previous adaptation of the Methusaelian line of Cain, i.e.; Homo antecessor, derived through the line of Cain), and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men, (Neanderthals), which were of old, (powerful) men of renown (physical strength).

 

Okay… millions of years… We will take our year (since life is based on different time sets – like dog years as an example) and show you something quite simple and easy to understand about your religion called Darwinism… You ready? Okay – here we go!

We can reproduce at the age of 14, but don’t now until about 20 (on average) years of age on average around this planet…. You “believe” that it takes Homosapien Sapiens (us) one (1) million years to evolve, and that means common descent/ancestry, we will not be able to mate with Homosapien sapiens anymore, we have evolved into something else, a new species… So, we divide 20 into 1,000,000 and get 50,000. Therefore, every 50,000 generations, on average, we should see a new species come about within our species.

Okay – Now, let’s take some simple life shall we… life that replicates. It replicates every three (3) hours. If evolution is real, we could put some replicating life in a tube, watch it for 50,000 replications and in 17.12328 years it would evolve into something completely different.

Therefore, your post saying it takes hundreds of thousands of years versus millions is quite inaccurate. No worries though – now you know! You won’t make that mistake again dealing with evolution, you’ll understand that it is a “faith” based religion and not believe the Darwinism preachers when they start telling you crap that just simply isn’t true.

Want to know anything else? I just posted why Natural Selection is not true, then this about how long it “supposed” to take for things to evolve… Any other things you want me to show you about how evolution is a religion?

 

I apologize… I saw this earlier and didn’t respond.

This is very interesting. But, I do not attach the religion of Darwinism with Theology. I don’t know what you are actually getting at though, with using the mule, donkey and ass part then quoting scripture. Can you elaborate a little more?

 

It's not the same thing... How is "gravity" the same thing as evolution?

If you think it's the same thing - then show me an equation dealing with evolution please...

 

It isn't the same thing, it's a very pertinent comparison since they are both scientific theories, with our current view of gravity actually being YOUNGER than the theory of evolution.

An equation dealing with evolution: p2+2pq+q2 = 1, the Hardy-Weinberg Principle, a mathematical equation directly derived from Punnett squares. I'm not sure why you asked for this in the first place, it isn't a requirement to have some sort of equation to be called a scientific theory. It isn't like the germ theory of disease or plate tectonics are represented by any equations.

 

Don't bother. He's learned his science on some far right Christian website. He's a gonner.