The scientific method requires something to be observed and tested in a controlled environment. This has yet to be done.
As of now it is an incomplete theory, as it has been for over a century.
English
-
Edited by Vicex: 4/10/2015 6:21:58 AMNo, that's absolutely wrong. You could not have misused the ideology behind the scientific process and what it is meant for... I... I just...
-
That gif though!
-
What? Dude. Come on now.
-
But that's wrong.
-
[url=http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/science-sushi/2011/12/18/evolution-watching-speciation-occur-observations/]Observations in nature?[/url] -check [url=http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/0_0_0/conover_04 ]Observations in a lab?[/url] - check [url=http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/misconceptions_faq.php]this too[/url]
-
No...sorry not.
-
Not what?
-
Edited by angry0lbgrampa: 4/10/2015 1:50:17 AMEvolution has never been observed. A virus, or bacteria changing does not represent the type of evolution were discussing. Darwinian evolution does not exist currently in any observable form. Virus's and bacterias, adapt and often assimilate traits into themselves, this is not evolution.
-
[quote]Evolution has never been observed. A virus, or bacteria changing does not represent the type of evolution were discussing. Darwinian evolution does not exist currently in any observable form. Virus's and bacterias, adapt and often assimilate traits into themselves, this is not evolution.[/quote] See, "shifting the goalposts".
-
I literally posted a link that proves that 100% not true
-
No you didn't. Did you read any of those? The mixing of different plants is a natural occurrence. It is not evolution. Again, there are no observable evolutionary events in animals or humans that we can watch and see in a Lab setting. I am not discrediting evolution as a whole. I am simply questioning it. I do not blindly accept science as fact.
-
But that's what evolution is. Its changes in a species through natural processes. Evolution isn't some special process that involves magic.
-
Edited by angry0lbgrampa: 4/10/2015 2:08:29 AMI didn't say it does. Plants do not evolve. I worked under a Horticulturists from U of M for 2 years. It does not involve evolution when a plant changes. Any idiot can take an apple tree and a cherry tree root system and graft them together. This is how we create a hybrid tree. You can also connect the branches of two opposing trees and where they meet a hybrid fruit forms. Also you can plant other vegetation around each other and eventually a hybrid is created. There is no observable evolution in plants. They simply change based on interaction. There is no individual chemical change that takes place over generations. Evolution requires a species change without any outside influence. ( not including environmental )
-
No evolution is a change in species, that is OFTEN fueled by the environment. Its not spontaneous. Its driven by nature.
-
....no. Sorry, not at all. Evolution cannot be jump started. This is the typical logical fallacy all evolution pushers fall into. Evolution is clearly defined as a spontaneous evolutionary change in a species from one generation to another. Different species of plants can be created at will. It is not evolution. I am not going to go into great detail. I will simply reiterate my previous statements. Evolution is a spontaneous change from one generation to the next without any outside influence. The only exception being environmental stimulus.
-
[quote] Evolution is clearly defined as a spontaneous evolutionary change in a species from one generation to another. [/quote] It is absolutely [i]not[/i] defined as such. http://thinkevolution.net/blog/what-is-evolution
-
Evolution is genetic adaption or error being passed down via descent, with natural selection deciding the success and continued retention of the more successful genes. It is very real and exists in plants just as it does in animals. You are probably familiar with unnatural selection, whereby you pick the best traits to retain and reproduce that crop to create genuinely enhanced produce. It is a similar process.
-
The thing that allows the changes to remain or not is the environment. Each individual animal/plants unique characteristics being passed on is what causes the change, the environment either supports the change or it doesn't. Speciation is a process of evolution. You're arguing for evolution, but saying its not evolution. Which is kind of strange.
-
No, I am arguing that only recently those who support evolution have tried to claim this ability of plants.
-
So your saying plants are incapable of change without human intervention?
-
You must have a hard time reading. I stated it is not evolution that causes a plant to change. It is simply cross pollination, or interbreeding. I simply used man made examples.
-
Edited by Britton: 4/10/2015 2:48:14 AMEvolution is a description. Any change in a plant or animal is literally evolution. It may be artificial or natural, but its still evolution. You're literally describing evolution, and saying it isn't.
-
No, I am not. You clearly have no idea what evolution is.
-
Then tell me what it is.
-
Edited by angry0lbgrampa: 4/10/2015 3:00:14 AMBiological (or organic) evolution is change in the properties of populations of organisms or groups of such populations, over the course of generations. The development, or ontogeny, of an individual organism is not considered evolution: individual organisms do not evolve. The changes in populations that are considered evolutionary are those that are ‘heritable' via the genetic material from one generation to the next. Biological evolution may be slight or substantial; it embraces everything from slight changes in the proportions of different forms of a gene within a population, such as the alleles that determine the different human blood types, to the alterations that led from the earliest organisms to dinosaurs, bees, snapdragons, and humans. [spoiler]Two completely different species combining to form a new species is not evolution. It must occur within the genus. [/spoiler]