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

To: Aric2000
How is a tan mouse any different than a brown one? What's the big deal here? Why do the evo's hold up such trifling stuff as proof of their theory? Is this the best that they've got?
12 posted on 06/17/2003 7:55:54 PM PDT by plusone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]


To: plusone; Ichneumon; Dimensio; PatrickHenry; Junior; jennyp
It shows Microevolution at work, without Microevolution, there is NO macroevolution.

A bunch of micros, make a macro, therefore Microevolution is very important for us to understand.

So, why is it that one mouse is dust colored and the other is dark colored? Why is it that one gene has been twisted in order to create this difference, and why is ANOTHER gene turned in another creature to create the same effect.

IT IS VERY IMPORTANT, it shows exactly what natural selection would do, because if it was DESIGNED, then most likely you would find the SAME gene twisted in the EXACT same way to get the SAME effect.

By showing that the gene sequences are different, it shows that natural selection is indeed the most likely cause.

Besides the fact that it is fun to see natural selection working as expected in the natural world, the more examples there are, then the Theory of Evolution becomes even stronger then it is.

Any of you others wish to add anything, or correct anything?
13 posted on 06/17/2003 8:12:12 PM PDT by Aric2000 (If the history of science shows us anything, it is that we get nowhere by labeling our ignorance god)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: plusone
How is a tan mouse any different than a brown one? What's the big deal here?

It's an example of selecting for a specific genetic variant within a species based upon environmental factors, similar to the peppered moth study. This is somewhat important because it does show that mutations can be beneficial (the genetic variant is caused by mutation) and because some creationists -- either through dishonesty or ignorance -- claim that the peppered moth study is a hoax either in its entirety or in its conclusions. For example, gore3000 claimed that the peppered moth study is held up as an example of speciation, even though he's yet to provide a single reference that presents the study as such "proof" (he then lied about me, claiming that I'd made a statement to the effect that I'd never heard of the study, when I backed him into a corner on the issue).
15 posted on 06/17/2003 8:21:04 PM PDT by Dimensio (Sometimes I doubt your committment to Sparkle Motion!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: plusone
dittoes
27 posted on 06/17/2003 9:02:47 PM PDT by LiteKeeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | 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