The Dangers Of Creationism In Education

Started by JesusIsAlive14 pages

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The Dangers Of Creationism In Education

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Well, the second part is correct.

That's where your wrong, a species does not have to completely change in order to be classified as Macro-Evolution. Evolution can be combared to a tree with each species branching off into different directions. Macro-Evolution is when that branch happens.

Your credentials? None? Okay then can you provide a website that supports what you have said?

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The Dangers Of Creationism In Education

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Your credentials? None? Okay then can you provide a website that supports what you have said?

And, what are yours or your websites credentials? 😕

Species are expected often to have fuzzy and imprecise boundaries because evolution is ongoing. Some species are in the process of forming; others are recently formed and still difficult to interpret. The complexities of biology add further complications. Many pairs of species remain distinct despite a small amount of hybridization between them. Some groups are asexual or frequently produce asexual strains, so how many species to split them into becomes problematical.

Creation, defining things as kinds that were created once and for all, implies that all species should be clearly demarcated and that there should be a clear and universal definition of kind or species. Since there is not, creationism, not evolutionary theory, has something to explain.

Different definitions of species serve different purposes. Species concepts are used both as taxonomic units, for identification and classification, and as theoretical concepts, for modeling and explaining. There is a great deal of overlap between the two purposes, but a definition that serves one is not necessarily the best for the other. Furthermore, there are practical considerations that call for different species criteria as well. Species definitions applied to fossils, for example, cannot be based on genetics or behavior because those traits do not fossilize.

Originally posted by AngryManatee
Species are expected often to have fuzzy and imprecise boundaries because evolution is ongoing. Some species are in the process of forming; others are recently formed and still difficult to interpret.

A species in a "Transitional Form" is still none the less remains the same species. Also, species that give birth to hybrid off-springs, said off-sring are sterile. This is what is known as "Post Zygotic Species Barrier".

Originally posted by AngryManatee

Different definitions of species serve different purposes. Species concepts are used both as taxonomic units, for identification and classification, and as theoretical concepts, for modeling and explaining. There is a great deal of overlap between the two purposes, but a definition that serves one is not necessarily the best for the other. Furthermore, there are practical considerations that call for different species criteria as well. Species definitions applied to fossils, for example, cannot be based on genetics or behavior because those traits do not fossilize.

True, especially amongst plants.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The Dangers Of Creationism In Education

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
And, what are yours or your websites credentials? 😕
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
And, what are yours or your websites credentials? 😕

So then why do you claim that my post was wrong? I am basically asking you to support your view of macroevolution by something other than your own opinion. Below is what you wrote about what I said:

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
Well, the second part is correct.

That's where your wrong, a species does not have to completely change in order to be classified as Macro-Evolution. Evolution can be combared to a tree with each species branching off into different directions. Macro-Evolution is when that branch happens.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The Dangers Of Creationism In Education

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
So then why do you claim that my post was wrong? I am basically asking you to support your view of macroevolution by something other than your own opinion. Below is what you wrote about what I said:

My opinion?

You do know what the phylogenetic tree is, right?

Because I used it in my argument.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The Dangers Of Creationism In Education

Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
My opinion?

You do know what the phylogenetic tree is, right?

Because I used it in my argument.

Actually no, I don't recall ever hearing about the phylogenetic tree (I guess my old adage that I learn something new everyday is true).

But I do not endorse it.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
LOL!

And why does chimps do not finally evolve in to humans?

*Spills coffee*

Some people just need to be beat to death.

I'm actually glad I'm not able to access the internet every day.

I wish I didn't spend as much time on the internet aswell.

Rip your internet connection out of the wall.

Problem solved.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The Dangers Of Creationism In Educat

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Actually no, I don't recall ever hearing about the phylogenetic tree (I guess my old adage that I learn something new everyday is true).

But I do not endorse it.

not surprised

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
LOL!

And why does chimps do not finally evolve in to humans?

Worse sentence structure ever.

Not to mention that he's an idiot.

Originally posted by lord xyz
Worse sentence structure ever.

Kinda ironic.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Kinda ironic.
Only you think that.

Originally posted by lord xyz
Only you think that.

No, the thought went through my head as well. 😉 😆

bag

firefirefireph

Originally posted by Alliance
Not to mention that he's an idiot.

Resorting to personal attacks now?

You have failed to give a satisfactory answer to any of my points aimed towards your points. So why not try that first?