Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: allmendream

That’s pitiful....

Adaptation within a species is far different than the notion of a transition to a new species.

They can either breed in kind or not.
And then you’d have us believe that these shifts to a “new species” happen in sufficient numbers AT THE SAME TIME, so as to sustain the “new”....
...if you’d like to stop, I can see why....


53 posted on 10/27/2009 11:18:13 AM PDT by G Larry (DNC is comprised of REGRESSIVES!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies ]


To: G Larry
Your reasoning is pitiful.

Adaptation within a species is evolution by definition.

It might help if you knew you were arguing against “common descent” and not “evolution”, but you obviously don't know enough about the subject to differentiate the two.

New species arise not by the genetic changes within an individual; but from the changes and selective pressures within an entire interbreeding population; much as the selective pressure of living in Europe led to pale skin in the populations that lived there.

So where does this variation that you and other creationists propose happens thousands of times faster than any evolutionary biologist proposed COME FROM? Did you not understand the question the first time, or are you trying to avoid it?

55 posted on 10/27/2009 11:24:19 AM PDT by allmendream (Wealth is EARNED not distributed, so how could it be RE-distributed?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson