Originally Posted by beachbum

thats why i said that helped the animal. what youre showing has nothing to do with survival of the fittest..

Originally Posted by superdude17*

f0ca1 refuses to erase my name from his signature....I believe that b/c I am a member, if I ask for him to remove it, he should. Of course, most normal and sympathetic individuals would have enough common courtesy to respect what other members have asked, but f0ca1 has again and again denied my attempts.

Originally Posted by JMS

yes, it does. if youre just talking about survival, animals bred for their qualities will be more prevalent than animals with less desirable traits.

Originally Posted by superdude17*

f0ca1 refuses to erase my name from his signature....I believe that b/c I am a member, if I ask for him to remove it, he should. Of course, most normal and sympathetic individuals would have enough common courtesy to respect what other members have asked, but f0ca1 has again and again denied my attempts.

Originally Posted by beachbum

theres no physical proof of change. i dont think you understand what change means.. just because you look at two skulls and they look different doesnt necessarily mean that on of them changed into the other. chimps and orangutans have similar skulls but one didnt evolve from the other...

Originally Posted by beachbum

yes it can. are you suggesting that mutations occur because of uv light? if so, shouldnt it be a continuous change?

Originally Posted by beachbum

not necessarily. humans are the most dominant animals on the planet yet we are not naturally selected(completely). if we were, there wouldnt be much of an animal kingdom left because we could easily kill off many of the known species. human intervention disproves natural selection.

Originally Posted by beachbum

yes.. existing traits. but this means nothing. the creatures dont get new tratis in fact, evolution states that a physical trait from a parent doesnt necessarily go to the offspring. in other words, if its easier for you to cut off one of your hands to adapt to the environment around you, that doesnt get passed down to your offspring unless your genes have a recessive gene that can come out more dominantly in that situation.

Originally Posted by beachbum

yes but again, its the same thing as uv light, if it was the cause of evolution that would meant that creatures would continuously evolve.

Originally Posted by beachbum

still waiting for that proof... the 3 generations.. remember?

Originally Posted by JMS

lol, it is proven. human intervention doesnt change that. when an animal survives because theyre less susceptible to predation, that was influenced by another animal as well (substitute humans). id isnt science. science is about being observable, testable. you cant observe or test intelligent design.

Originally Posted by Metrophobe

Do you understand what a species is?




The mutations that result in positive benefits are rewarded through natural selection. As you can imagine, the random changes in DNA created by UV-light rarely produce beneficial changes, therefore only a tiny percentage of the mutated DNA is ever passed on as beneficial traits. It takes time for that mutation to inundate the gene pool. It is a continuous change, albeit an incredibly slow one. You can't seem to grasp the time-scale involved here.



I'm convinced you have no idea what you are talking about by this crafty piece of work. You need to read more.

Here are a few links:

Origin of the Species

Evolutionary Biology

Evolution

Mutation

Adaptive Radiation



Once again, it is obvious that you don't know what you are talking about.



Creatures do continuously evolve, it just takes longer than a friggin' minute steak.




Homo habilis - Homo sapien. I know it's hard to look a fact in the eye from the Island of Ignorance.

Natural History Museum. Hall of Human Origins

Darwin Library at The Natural History Museum

Search Results for Evolution at the Natural History Museum

I don't have the time or the inclination to educate you further. Your lack of understanding of simple biology is too big a hurdle for me. Read more, look at the links in the hall of human origins. I can't help you any more.

Originally Posted by superdude17*

f0ca1 refuses to erase my name from his signature....I believe that b/c I am a member, if I ask for him to remove it, he should. Of course, most normal and sympathetic individuals would have enough common courtesy to respect what other members have asked, but f0ca1 has again and again denied my attempts.

Originally Posted by JMS

lol, you can test evolution. you just suggested that mans intervention disqualifies it. thats testing... you cannot observe intelligent design.

Originally Posted by beachbum

i dont expect you to understand what im talking about. you dont care about learning anyways. after all, you said it yourself, you dont think theres any way that evolution could be wrong. that just shows how unwilling you are to change you beliefs.

Originally Posted by Metrophobe

Sure, I'll concede that there might be some unknown phenomena that causes evolution, but that statement serves no purpose and no one...