Total Posts:3|Showing Posts:1-3
Jump to topic:

GodSands and his Evolution test.

Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2009 3:14:41 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
This topic will be for constructive criticism. GodSands is legitimately trying to learn so I ask the members of the forum to contribute constructive criticism only. I will be posting questions that GodSands does not understand here, and will open it up to discussion. This topic is not to make fun of GodSands but to help him understand why he got the question incorrect, and to see if I was wrong in not granting him points.

The first question was split into three parts. GodSands failed the first part and would not stop arguing back with me.

Question 1: Part A- Define a species.

GodSands' answer: A species is a lion or a tiger, a family is all the groups of cats, as the cat family. A species can be identitified by sight, and can be singled out, in this case, among other cats. You can differ a lion to a tiger but both are cats which belong to the cat family.

His revised answer: Species is a single breed of creature, they can inter breed with other species of the same family, yet even then they have to be similiar in size and appearence. A lion is an example of a species.

After a heated dispute, I have decided not to grant him any more chances. The answer that I was looking for was this:

A species is a group of animals which are genetically similar enough to produce offspring which are able to, themselves, produce offspring.

Please discuss.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
omelet
Posts: 416
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2009 6:41:04 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 12/17/2009 3:14:41 PM, Kleptin wrote:
This topic will be for constructive criticism. GodSands is legitimately trying to learn so I ask the members of the forum to contribute constructive criticism only. I will be posting questions that GodSands does not understand here, and will open it up to discussion. This topic is not to make fun of GodSands but to help him understand why he got the question incorrect, and to see if I was wrong in not granting him points.

The first question was split into three parts. GodSands failed the first part and would not stop arguing back with me.

Question 1: Part A- Define a species.

GodSands' answer: A species is a lion or a tiger, a family is all the groups of cats, as the cat family. A species can be identitified by sight, and can be singled out, in this case, among other cats. You can differ a lion to a tiger but both are cats which belong to the cat family.

His revised answer: Species is a single breed of creature, they can inter breed with other species of the same family, yet even then they have to be similiar in size and appearence. A lion is an example of a species.

After a heated dispute, I have decided not to grant him any more chances. The answer that I was looking for was this:

A species is a group of animals which are genetically similar enough to produce offspring which are able to, themselves, produce offspring.

Please discuss.

To be honest, there isn't a single definition of species that the scientific community has adopted. Though I would have to say the definition you provided, Kleptin, is the most widely accepted. Of course, under your definition it is difficult to ascertain whether things can be considered part of the same species, and it leads to the prospect of some creatures belonging to multiple species*.

Another problem is that current naming does not follow this definition perfectly in all cases, and another problem is that this definition cannot be used to classify creatures that mate asexually. But I generally agree that it's the best definition for general purposes, even if it's not perfect.

*for instance, if creature A and creature C can both produce fertile offspring by mating with creature B, but they are not able to mate with each other, then B will have to be classified under multiple species categories.
alto2osu
Posts: 277
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/29/2009 8:39:17 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Agreed with above poster-- there are going to exceptions to just about every definition. However, on a general scale, your definition is much more accurate than either of Godsands.

Under Godsands definitions, different breeds of dog would be considered their own species, for example. Obviously problematic. You can't really "eyeball" a genetic, special link and then base assertions off of that.