Just Accidental?

[metis]

For me, it isn't a god belief that makes me doubt that evolution without a supernatural power is possible. It is TIME. If science has the time since the beginning right, it isn't enough. It is more than 200 years since the start of the controversy and in that time there has been no drastic change in any living thing. It has been about six thousand years since human communications began and there are no accounts of any drastic changes. The fact that so many changes have happened in the time since life began on the Earth, surely there should be something solid to point to. I think @Deeje is right. You have not got it.

Actually there's been a lot of changes that have taken place since life forms have been around for close to around 4 billion years.

The rate of evolution is not the same for all species, so with us humans we tend to evolve much more slowly than mosquitoes or bacteria. Therefore, significant evolutionary changes that might take place in weeks or months with viruses may take millions of years with humans on the same scale. The last significant physical change in humans occurred roughly 20,000 b.p. and it deals with the development of our overbite with our front teeth. But remember, 20,000 years is but a drop in the bucket when compared to millions of years of human evolution.

Nor is evolution "pretty" in that it can be quit haphazard. The concept that Species A will gradually evolve to form Species B is not the model we see. Instead, Species A needs to be viewed as a variety of groups, all evolving in their own way, only some of which may form new species.

BTW, you might want to google "speciation", and even the Wiki article on that is quite decent, plus it provides links to studies.

 

[savagewind]

Actually there's been a lot of changes that have taken place since life forms have been around for close to around 4 billion years.

The rate of evolution is not the same for all species, so with us humans we tend to evolve much more slowly than mosquitoes or bacteria. Therefore, significant evolutionary changes that might take place in weeks or months with viruses may take millions of years with humans on the same scale. The last significant physical change in humans occurred roughly 20,000 b.p. and it deals with the development of our overbite with our front teeth. But remember, 20,000 years is but a drop in the bucket when compared to millions of years of human evolution.

Nor is evolution "pretty" in that it can be quit haphazard. The concept that Species A will gradually evolve to form Species B is not the model we see. Instead, Species A needs to be viewed as a variety of groups, all evolving in their own way, only some of which may form new species.

BTW, you might want to google "speciation", and even the Wiki article on that is quite decent, plus it provides links to studies.

Speciation is just the mode of evolution.
When people say that the time was sufficient to produce the many different kinds of life do they consider the short time that each species can reproduce? Think of a human woman. How much time in her life is she able to conceive?
Let's give it the longest time. Say from ten years old to forty years old. That is thirty years. Multiply that by twelve.

360 times in her life she is able to conceive. I think it can be multiplied by four (I am guessing).
1440 days only for one woman to be impregnated successfully and bring to term a viable life form.
That life form must survive until she can repeat the process.

I do not care about six billion years. It isn't enough time.

You have to consider the period of time each species is able to reproduce. It isn't their whole life!

 

[metis]

Speciation is just the mode of evolution.

It's a by-product of evolution.

When people say that the time was sufficient to produce the many different kinds of life do they consider the short time that each species can reproduce?

Absolutely.

I do not care about six billion years. It isn't enough time.

Who said 6 billion?

Secondly, even one billion years goes well beyond our ability to comprehend how many changes could take place. Even in one year, viruses can significantly mutate at least partially due to their rapid reproduction rate. We have seen bacteria evolve in recent decades to the point whereas some strands can survive antibiotics that used to kill them.

 

[savagewind]

Even in one year, viruses can significantly mutate at least partially due to their rapid reproduction rate. We have seen bacteria evolve in recent decades to the point whereas some strands can survive antibiotics that used to kill them.

Let Science discovers that a virus has mutated into a bacteria and that would be some real evidence.

Do you all really and truly not get it? One species into another species. OK? You all say it can't be witnessed.
Can it be witnessed in a one cell life form?

 

[metis]

Let Science discovers that a virus has mutated into a bacteria and that would be some real evidence.

Who says it has to evolve that way?

Do you all really and truly not get it? One species into another species. OK? You all say it can't be witnessed.
Can it be witnessed in a one cell life form?

That was covered in the "speciation" recommendation I gave you that can be found in Wikipedia, so it's apparent you didn't link up to it. But to answer your question, the answer is yes, so maybe check out the article for some confirmation.

BTW, your use of sarcasm is really quite annoying.

 

[savagewind]

Who says it has to evolve that way?

That was covered in the "speciation" recommendation I gave you that can be found in Wikipedia, so it's apparent you didn't link up to it. But to answer your question, the answer is yes, so maybe check out the article for some confirmation.

BTW, your use of sarcasm is really quite annoying.

I can tell you what you do that is annoying to me.
You call @Deeje a liar, but it has been proven here on the forum that a liar is someone who says something that she knows is not true.
Deeje believes that everything she says is the truth, so she isn't a liar.

I read some of the Wiki articles. Oh sigh. Is there real evidence in it? I am sorry. I am not going to examine the whole article. I think that if species to species has been witnessed and documented it should be real big news.
Did I miss something?

 

[savagewind]

Maybe you can cut and copy the part which tells of the evidence. Please. And thank you.

 

[savagewind]

Does it sound like sarcasm? It is not intended........so........like lying........is it not sarcasm?

I apologize. I am just saying what I think is true.

 

[metis]

You call @Deeje a liar, but it has been proven here on the forum that a liar is someone who says something that she knows is not true.

There's a big difference between the words "liar" and "lying", and I never used the former in regards to her or anyone else here. We all "lie" at times, so this is a unfortunate process; whereas the word "liar" labels the entire person.

 

[metis]

It is not intended........so........like lying........is it not sarcasm?

Not if the person was indeed lying.

I apologize.

Accepted.

Take care.

 

[savagewind]

There's a big difference between the words "liar" and "lying", and I never used the former in regards to her or anyone else here. We all "lie" at times, so this is a unfortunate process; whereas the word "liar" labels the entire person.

OK. That is a good post. But you still said she is lying. She isn't lying.

 

[savagewind]

Not if the person was indeed lying.

I was the odd one out because I do believe that saying something that isn't true is lying. It need not be obvious to the person who is saying something that is not true that it isn't true, in my opinion. I believe the Jehovah's Witnesses are lying. Most people don't agree with me. Almost all people don't agree with me, it seems.

Accepted.

You are a gentleman.

Take care.

Thank you. You too take care.

 

[Jose Fly]

I have thought it through. You haven't. The reason why I know YOU haven't is it would not take "a study" to see what you say happens. Just eyes and a brain. How many times has what you say happened? Billions!

Then please explain why we haven't observed a glacier carve an entire U-valley.

 

[savagewind]

Then please explain why we haven't observed a glacier carve an entire U-valley.

It was in the past. Isn't evolution still happening?

 

[Jose Fly]

I think that if species to species has been witnessed and documented it should be real big news.
Did I miss something?

Haven't you been paying attention? @Deeje has been saying that evolution within a taxonomic family is no big deal, and @shmogie has been saying that evolution within a taxonomic class is "just microevolution".

So the evolution of new species should be nothing at all for you Christian creationists.

 

[Jose Fly]

It was in the past. Isn't evolution still happening?

Glacial erosion continues today. Again, why haven't we witnessed a glacier erode an entire U-valley?

 

[savagewind]

Google what is the fastest reproducing species and what comes up is information on the species with the most offspring.
There is one page which describes species that reproduce often. There is where to look for the emergence of new species, I think.

Re: What is the fastest reproducing animal???

"A new organism can be formed in less than a day."

In a five-year study, almost two thousand generations can be observed.

 

[savagewind]

Haven't you been paying attention? @Deeje has been saying that evolution within a taxonomic family is no big deal, and @shmogie has been saying that evolution within a taxonomic class is "just microevolution".

So the evolution of new species should be nothing at all for you Christian creationists.

I don't understand. And, I am not a Christian creationist.

Change within a species is an everyday occurrence. Change within a family and class is observable.
The thread is about what has not been observed.

 

[savagewind]

Glacial erosion continues today. Again, why haven't we witnessed a glacier erode an entire U-valley?

Please read the next post after that one.

 

[Jose Fly]

I don't understand. And, I am not a Christian creationist.

What are you?

Change within a species is an everyday occurrence. Change within a family and class is observable.
The thread is about what has not been observed.

You're not making any sense. On one hand you say that if we saw a new species emerge it would "be real big news", but just above you say that evolution within a class is observable?