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 madnessinmysoul
Well, because that claim of yours is without evidence.
Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
I could also say that they sprung forth from trees in those areas
Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
Now, the evidence all points towards descent in this instance
Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
reply to post by theindependentjournal
This is why I created a whole thread on classification.
Rabbits: Family Leporidae
Birds: Class Aves
Monkees:60s pop band
Monkeys: ...that's a bit more complex
Fish: Various classes.
Please, learn some taxonomy.
Furthermore, nobody has defined a kind. I started a thread years ago and recently bumped it and not a single satisfactory scientific definition has been provided for this vague and nebulous term.
Even furthermore, evolution doesn't require birds to become monkeys. So...it seems like I could raise an army of straw men from the contents of this thread.
Originally posted by theindependentjournal
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
This is found in many species we know to be the same. Not a change of KIND the birds aren't turning into monkees or fish it's still a bird.
Just like the rabbits of Alaska and Florida can no longer have offspring but they are still rabbits.
And if they lost all ability t procreate they would become extinct. I see nothing but GOD's Hand here...
Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
reply to post by dusty1
They aren't 'cooking', they're mixing the ingredients to recreate conditions as found in the very early years of the Earth. It's running a miniature version of a natural phenomenon. I explained this to you, but you're obstinate enough to not care.
They mixed the molecules in water, heated the solution, then allowed it to evaporate, leaving behind a residue of hybrid, half-sugar, half-nucleobase molecules. To this residue they again added water, heated it, allowed it evaporate, and then irradiated it.
cook 1 [kook] Show IPA –verb (used with object) 2. to subject (anything) to the application of heat.
Two major clades correspond to western and eastern individuals. We sampled intensively across about 500 km in each of the regions where the two clades meet. In central Siberia the concordance between haplotype (western or eastern clade) and song (viridanus or plumbeitarsus) was perfect (17 western birds and 35 eastern birds), providing no evidence for mitochondrial introgression between the two Siberian taxa.
Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
reply to post by dusty1
The application of heat to the solution was to simulate the conditions of the early Earth.
If I want to simulate the Mojave desert in my living room, I'm going to make the room hot. Does that mean I'm cooking the room?
Listen, that quote...read it again. Introgression...it means genetic flow. There is no evidence for introgression. They do not breed with each other, yet their haplotypes can be traced by to a source.
Please, improve your reading comprehension skills, as I begin to feel embarrassed for people when I have to point out that what they're quoting refutes the position they're putting forth.
In central Siberia the concordance between haplotype (western or eastern clade) and song (viridanus or plumbeitarsus) was perfect (17 western birds and 35 eastern birds), providing no evidence for mitochondrial introgression between the two Siberian taxa
Playback experiments We prepared each playback tape by recording a singing male for 10 min. Whenever possible, three recordings (each from a different bird) from a source population were used in the playback experiments. At each target population, we conducted playbacks by locating a singing male, placing a speaker directly below the tree he was in, randomly determining which source tape to play (choosing from three tapes of each possible source population), and playing the tape for 7±10 min.We judged the response of the target bird on a scale of 0 (no response) to 3 (strong response, aggressively approaching the speaker).
For some reason, you (and others) are mistaking this as being a full speciation event, when it is merely one of those instances of big grey areas that demonstrates small bits of evolution.
They both have the same ancestral population, yet population W and population D are not able to reproduce.
Creationists reject the idea of evolution beyond a 'variation in kind'...and typically a kind is somehow linked to reproduction...but there's a point where two populations that should be in the same 'kind' cannot reproduce.
I'm sorry...but where is the evidence that they mate and produce fertile offspring? You're claiming it, I'd like to see the citation.
Interview
Darren Irwin: Well, what we know from genetic evidence is that the two Siberian forms, the West Siberian form and the East Siberian form co-occur in Central Siberia without interbreeding there; we see no evidence that there’s hybridisation.
We don’t know further down to the south whether a bird from one side of the ring might interbreed with the other but what we do know is that there’s a gradual genetic change all the way around the ring on the southern side, indicating that each population can sort of interbreed with the next population going around the ring.
Another Proof of Evolution
when it is merely one of those instances of big grey areas that demonstrates small bits of evolution.
You're clearly ignorant on the subject and are trying to poke holes.