"The origin of species"

a reply to: spacedoubt

This is not what thread drift means.

a reply to: wisvol

Have you tried googling it? Try under images. Plenty of visuals if words arent your thing. Or if you are literate, have a gander over to wikipedia. they have everything to get you started in the particulars of speciation, and it really doesnt get more condensed than that. point being, this thread is a rerun. aka redundant.

Censoring my response again denotes your mind's incompatibility with ATS motto, as well as a willingness to make me appear to attempt drifting my own thread, filled with dogmatic and unconstructive answers from others in the same mindset.

So again, If I'm literally literate, Chasm, I'm able to respond to your written comments.

If I'm figuratively literate, I don't consider Wikipedia a source of research in controversial matters.

originally posted by: wisvol
a reply to: TzarChasm

Or if you are literate, have a gander over to wikipedia.

If I'm literate literally, I'm able to respond to your writing.

If I'm literate figuratively, Wikipedia isn't my source for scientific research.

You need to be better at mocking if you're going to mock.

Still not sure what youre asking for here. Pictures? Got em. Articles? Check. Links? Links for days, dude. What have you not gotten?

a reply to: TzarChasm

What I haven't gotten, dude, is why links, pictures, articles and links for days is enough to make you think that speciation is beyond questioning.

This said, I thank you again for participating and wish you the full benefits of your understanding of the origin of species.

originally posted by: wisvol
a reply to: TzarChasm

What I haven't gotten, dude, is why links, pictures, articles and links for days is enough to make you think that speciation is beyond questioning.

This said, I thank you again for participating and wish you the full benefits of your understanding of the origin of species.

Its not that its beyond questioning. Its that the questions you are asking have already been answered. Give an example of speciation. Explain the mechanics. Did all that. Now you refute, but you cant, so you demand more evidence, more reasons to do what you wont do anyway. This is an old game.

a reply to: TzarChasm

Its not that its beyond questioning. Its that the questions you are asking have already been answered. Give an example of speciation.

Still interested in an example of speciation.

a reply to: TzarChasm

Did all that.

On a previous thread that has eluded my attention? Great.

Now whether you're altruistic enough to kindly reproduce an example of speciation here or not is up to you, and my most humble apology awaits you if you do.



Please bear in mind that speciation means a species becoming another.

originally posted by: wisvol
a reply to: TzarChasm

Now whether you're altruistic enough to kindly reproduce an example of speciation here or not is up to you, and my most humble apology awaits you if you do.

Observed Instances of Speciation

a reply to: Prezbo369

Weren't you the guy who posted a similar link earlier where the author says "I have evidence of speciation provided speciation means something it doesn't?"

Enjoy the show

a reply to: Prezbo369

Same link, too.

In case your short term memory isn't as good as it could be:

4.0 Telling Whether a Speciation Event Has Occurred What evidence is necessary to show that a change produced in a population of organisms constitutes a speciation event? The answer to this question will depend on which species definition applies to the organisms involved.

From your link.

originally posted by: wisvol
a reply to: TzarChasm

Did all that.

On a previous thread that has eluded my attention? Great.

Now whether you're altruistic enough to kindly reproduce an example of speciation here or not is up to you, and my most humble apology awaits you if you do.



Please bear in mind that speciation means a species becoming another.

Challenge accepted.



And a yale course on the subject.

oyc.yale.edu...

Aw shucks, prezbo beat me. Well, you have your examples. Challenge completed.

Achievement unlocked: Beating a Dead Horse

a reply to: TzarChasm

Challenge accepted.

Wonderful

Overview Speciation is the process through which species diverge from each other and/or from a common ancestor. There are several definitions of species, most of which focus on reproductive isolation and/or phylogenetic similarities. This can cause some controversy. Speciation can result from geographical separation or ecological specialization. There are stages of speciation in which organisms cluster first into distinct populations before finally becoming different species.

In other words, if speciation is defined as not speciation, then I too have evidence of speciation.
IMPORTANT: Using Content From Other Websites on ATS
MOD NOTE: Posting work written by others

originally posted by: wisvol
a reply to: Prezbo369

Weren't you the guy who posted a similar link earlier where the author says "I have evidence of speciation provided speciation means something it doesn't?"

Enjoy the show

The OP never got back to me as far as I can tell, and you miss-quoting the author like that is typical of those that deny evolution, usually in favour of magic. Is that you?

a reply to: TzarChasm

Aw shucks, prezbo beat me. Well, you have your examples. Now refute or relent.

Prezbo relinked to an article even more direct about the fact that they consider speciation to not mean what it means, then "show speciation as the fact that children aren't exact copies of parents".

Speciation means a species becoming another species.

a reply to: wisvol

Thats what we just provided examples of. Take it or leave it.

a reply to: TzarChasm

You have indeed provided examples of children not being exact copies of their parents.
Something nobody is disputing that I know of.

Supposing this expounds to speciation is akin, again, to drawing a graph of anything happening over an observed period of time (I used the example of stock market variations earlier) millions of years and expecting observed tendencies to be consistent because that would fit a theory.

This is not how science works, and because this point has been accepted by the author of the lecture you have linked to, which I'm again not trying to re-appropriate, that he has seen fit to publish a written caveat before uploading his video.