It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: puzzlesphere
a reply to: VegHead
Macro and Micro-evolution are the same thing. Macro-evolution is just a term for the cumulative effect of lots of micro-evolution.
The equivalent of saying a swimming pool of water is the cumulative effect of lots of buckets of water.
originally posted by: Raggedyman
originally posted by: puzzlesphere
a reply to: VegHead
Macro and Micro-evolution are the same thing. Macro-evolution is just a term for the cumulative effect of lots of micro-evolution.
The equivalent of saying a swimming pool of water is the cumulative effect of lots of buckets of water.
Yeah but macro has never been seen to happen so it's a faith not science
originally posted by: puzzlesphere
a reply to: Raggedyman
No... "creationists" say macro-evolution has never been seen to happen... the scientific community doesn't distinguish between micro and macro-evolution other than as an arbitrary distinction of scale (even just 2 micro-evolutions make a macro-evolution, or 100, or nth number of micros can all be classified as a macro).
The scientific community, in general, understands that evolution is a cumulative effect of lots of small changes... not a dog turning into a cat in a single generation (as creationists would like to have you believe that evolution is saying).
Is a cricket living under water, and developing some semblance of gills not enough of a macro-evolution for you? What else is required for this cricket to achieve this elusive macro-evolution you speak of? Maybe some pincers?
originally posted by: flyingfish
LOL! Fundies using the word "faith" as form of derision and at the same time pretending to know what science is!?
If you bother to understand what evolution actually says, you would know we observe evolution occurring every day in living species and what we are observing is the ongoing process of both "micro" and "macro" evolution, as they are one in the same process.
Your opinion, like any other opinion, is woefully inadequate at affecting reality outside your fictitious, self-imposed delusion.
originally posted by: Raggedyman
originally posted by: puzzlesphere
a reply to: VegHead
Macro and Micro-evolution are the same thing. Macro-evolution is just a term for the cumulative effect of lots of micro-evolution.
The equivalent of saying a swimming pool of water is the cumulative effect of lots of buckets of water.
Yeah but macro has never been seen to happen so it's a faith not science
originally posted by: Barcs
originally posted by: Raggedyman
originally posted by: puzzlesphere
a reply to: VegHead
Macro and Micro-evolution are the same thing. Macro-evolution is just a term for the cumulative effect of lots of micro-evolution.
The equivalent of saying a swimming pool of water is the cumulative effect of lots of buckets of water.
Yeah but macro has never been seen to happen so it's a faith not science
Have you seen nuclear fusion happen? So it's a faith not science, right?
Have you seen oxygen? Must be faith based that you can breathe.
originally posted by: Barcs
originally posted by: Raggedyman
originally posted by: puzzlesphere
a reply to: VegHead
Macro and Micro-evolution are the same thing. Macro-evolution is just a term for the cumulative effect of lots of micro-evolution.
The equivalent of saying a swimming pool of water is the cumulative effect of lots of buckets of water.
Yeah but macro has never been seen to happen so it's a faith not science
Have you seen nuclear fusion happen? So it's a faith not science, right?
Have you seen oxygen? Must be faith based that you can breathe.
originally posted by: flyingfish
a reply to: Raggedyman
On cue! Boorish behavior is expected from you and your ilk.
Your plea for evidence is touching, but most posters are on to you trick! and know evidence is a mere option for you depending on what fallacy you can spin out of it.
You need evidence in order to validate a scientific theory, it's not like a layman coming up with a theory about were Taco bell cheese comes from.
But you know this! and this is why you have zero credibility.
originally posted by: Raggedyman
originally posted by: Barcs
originally posted by: Raggedyman
originally posted by: puzzlesphere
a reply to: VegHead
Macro and Micro-evolution are the same thing. Macro-evolution is just a term for the cumulative effect of lots of micro-evolution.
The equivalent of saying a swimming pool of water is the cumulative effect of lots of buckets of water.
Yeah but macro has never been seen to happen so it's a faith not science
Have you seen nuclear fusion happen? So it's a faith not science, right?
Have you seen oxygen? Must be faith based that you can breathe.
What, Taco Bell and now we bring up nuclear fusion
We are talking about a cricket with gills, there is a post talking about a cricket with gills, no evidence, and then we go down taco bell and fusion
Barcs, you have lost all credibility
Tell me, be honest, do you believe that there is a cricket with gills, that, that cricket has gills?
I should post a picture of a whale launching out of the water and start a thread that whales fly, proof in a picture
originally posted by: Barcs
originally posted by: Raggedyman
originally posted by: Barcs
originally posted by: Raggedyman
originally posted by: puzzlesphere
a reply to: VegHead
Macro and Micro-evolution are the same thing. Macro-evolution is just a term for the cumulative effect of lots of micro-evolution.
The equivalent of saying a swimming pool of water is the cumulative effect of lots of buckets of water.
Yeah but macro has never been seen to happen so it's a faith not science
Have you seen nuclear fusion happen? So it's a faith not science, right?
Have you seen oxygen? Must be faith based that you can breathe.
What, Taco Bell and now we bring up nuclear fusion
We are talking about a cricket with gills, there is a post talking about a cricket with gills, no evidence, and then we go down taco bell and fusion
Barcs, you have lost all credibility
Tell me, be honest, do you believe that there is a cricket with gills, that, that cricket has gills?
I should post a picture of a whale launching out of the water and start a thread that whales fly, proof in a picture
Um, you are the one that suggested something was wrong because it hasn't been witnessed first hand. Welp at least that eliminates god based on your logic.
The OP did not say the cricket had gills either. It was said in the OP based on the show that it was a similar type of mutation, not that they were literally gills. Look, I'm skeptical about this find as well, because there is literally no information out there about it. I'll wait for the scientific research before passing judgement.
Please take your off topic anti evolution rants, somewhere else.
originally posted by: Raggedyman
It has nothing to do with evolution and creation
It's about people lying that it is anything but a cricket underwater
fusion, oxygen, what a winner