Total Posts:26|Showing Posts:1-26
Jump to topic:

Do you believe in dogs?

seraine
Posts: 734
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/24/2011 12:22:10 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I fail to see how it is possible to believe in dogs and creationism (don't get into semantical stuff, I'm talking about YEC and other similar beliefs). Humans have selectively bred dogs for a variety of traits (coat color, coat length, nose, ears, etc) and in doing so have created many separate breeds that can't produce viable offspring. In a similar manner, nature has selectively bred different species for a single trait- ability to pass on your genes- and have created many separate breeds that can't produce viable offspring.

Is it possible to believe in dogs and creationism?
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/24/2011 12:35:20 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/24/2011 12:22:10 PM, seraine wrote:
I fail to see how it is possible to believe in dogs and creationism (don't get into semantical stuff, I'm talking about YEC and other similar beliefs). Humans have selectively bred dogs for a variety of traits (coat color, coat length, nose, ears, etc) and in doing so have created many separate breeds that can't produce viable offspring. In a similar manner, nature has selectively bred different species for a single trait- ability to pass on your genes- and have created many separate breeds that can't produce viable offspring.

Is it possible to believe in dogs and creationism?

I'm not familiar with YEC claiming that God created all animals exactly as they are now, only that he initially created them.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
seraine
Posts: 734
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/24/2011 6:08:36 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/24/2011 12:35:20 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 8/24/2011 12:22:10 PM, seraine wrote:
I fail to see how it is possible to believe in dogs and creationism (don't get into semantical stuff, I'm talking about YEC and other similar beliefs). Humans have selectively bred dogs for a variety of traits (coat color, coat length, nose, ears, etc) and in doing so have created many separate breeds that can't produce viable offspring. In a similar manner, nature has selectively bred different species for a single trait- ability to pass on your genes- and have created many separate breeds that can't produce viable offspring.

Is it possible to believe in dogs and creationism?

I'm not familiar with YEC claiming that God created all animals exactly as they are now, only that he initially created them.

The main point is that if man can and has selectively bred dogs, why can't and why hasn't nature does the same? I.e., why is evolution false, but not dogs?
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/24/2011 6:13:23 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/24/2011 6:08:36 PM, seraine wrote:
At 8/24/2011 12:35:20 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 8/24/2011 12:22:10 PM, seraine wrote:
I fail to see how it is possible to believe in dogs and creationism (don't get into semantical stuff, I'm talking about YEC and other similar beliefs). Humans have selectively bred dogs for a variety of traits (coat color, coat length, nose, ears, etc) and in doing so have created many separate breeds that can't produce viable offspring. In a similar manner, nature has selectively bred different species for a single trait- ability to pass on your genes- and have created many separate breeds that can't produce viable offspring.

Is it possible to believe in dogs and creationism?

I'm not familiar with YEC claiming that God created all animals exactly as they are now, only that he initially created them.

The main point is that if man can and has selectively bred dogs, why can't and why hasn't nature does the same? I.e., why is evolution false, but not dogs?

I wasn't aware the YEC saying that evolution/adaptation is false, but merely that evolution wasn't the start of it all. I don't see why a YEC can't view that God created the earth 6,000 years ago, and still believe that evolution has worked over the last 6,000 years.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/24/2011 7:01:49 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/24/2011 6:13:23 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 8/24/2011 6:08:36 PM, seraine wrote:
At 8/24/2011 12:35:20 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 8/24/2011 12:22:10 PM, seraine wrote:
I fail to see how it is possible to believe in dogs and creationism (don't get into semantical stuff, I'm talking about YEC and other similar beliefs). Humans have selectively bred dogs for a variety of traits (coat color, coat length, nose, ears, etc) and in doing so have created many separate breeds that can't produce viable offspring. In a similar manner, nature has selectively bred different species for a single trait- ability to pass on your genes- and have created many separate breeds that can't produce viable offspring.

Is it possible to believe in dogs and creationism?

I'm not familiar with YEC claiming that God created all animals exactly as they are now, only that he initially created them.

The main point is that if man can and has selectively bred dogs, why can't and why hasn't nature does the same? I.e., why is evolution false, but not dogs?

I wasn't aware the YEC saying that evolution/adaptation is false, but merely that evolution wasn't the start of it all. I don't see why a YEC can't view that God created the earth 6,000 years ago, and still believe that evolution has worked over the last 6,000 years.

That may be strictly true, as in it seems *possible* that a YEC could affirm evolution in that manner, but I know of no YEC who does affirm that.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
VainApocalypse
Posts: 74
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2011 2:11:42 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/24/2011 8:48:49 PM, mongeese wrote:
All dog breeds can breed with each other, because they're all part of the same species.

That's not necessarily true. All dogs maybe chromosomally compatible, but they aren't all mechanically able to interbreed. For example, a teacup chihuahua and a great dane can't readily copulate.
VainApocalypse
Posts: 74
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2011 2:13:42 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/25/2011 2:11:42 AM, VainApocalypse wrote:
At 8/24/2011 8:48:49 PM, mongeese wrote:
All dog breeds can breed with each other, because they're all part of the same species.

That's not necessarily true. All dogs maybe chromosomally compatible, but they aren't all mechanically able to interbreed. For example, a teacup chihuahua and a great dane can't readily copulate.

The lack of gene flow between the two will necessarily eventually lead to even chromosomal incompatibility.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2011 7:39:37 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/24/2011 12:22:10 PM, seraine wrote:
I fail to see how it is possible to believe in dogs and creationism (don't get into semantical stuff, I'm talking about YEC and other similar beliefs). Humans have selectively bred dogs for a variety of traits (coat color, coat length, nose, ears, etc) and in doing so have created many separate breeds that can't produce viable offspring. In a similar manner, nature has selectively bred different species for a single trait- ability to pass on your genes- and have created many separate breeds that can't produce viable offspring.

Is it possible to believe in dogs and creationism?

Yes, because creationists believe in micro-evolution.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
BennyW
Posts: 698
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2011 10:06:59 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/25/2011 7:39:37 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 8/24/2011 12:22:10 PM, seraine wrote:
I fail to see how it is possible to believe in dogs and creationism (don't get into semantical stuff, I'm talking about YEC and other similar beliefs). Humans have selectively bred dogs for a variety of traits (coat color, coat length, nose, ears, etc) and in doing so have created many separate breeds that can't produce viable offspring. In a similar manner, nature has selectively bred different species for a single trait- ability to pass on your genes- and have created many separate breeds that can't produce viable offspring.

Is it possible to believe in dogs and creationism?

Yes, because creationists believe in micro-evolution.

Exactly the point I was going to bring up.
You didn't build that-Obama
It's pretty lazy to quote things you disagree with, call it stupid and move on, rather than arguing with the person. -000ike
VainApocalypse
Posts: 74
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2011 10:39:23 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/25/2011 7:39:37 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 8/24/2011 12:22:10 PM, seraine wrote:
I fail to see how it is possible to believe in dogs and creationism (don't get into semantical stuff, I'm talking about YEC and other similar beliefs). Humans have selectively bred dogs for a variety of traits (coat color, coat length, nose, ears, etc) and in doing so have created many separate breeds that can't produce viable offspring. In a similar manner, nature has selectively bred different species for a single trait- ability to pass on your genes- and have created many separate breeds that can't produce viable offspring.

Is it possible to believe in dogs and creationism?

Yes, because creationists believe in micro-evolution.

There are not different scales of evolution. It is a singular, indivisible process, "micro" being indeterminable from "macro."
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2011 11:10:31 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/25/2011 10:39:23 AM, VainApocalypse wrote:
At 8/25/2011 7:39:37 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 8/24/2011 12:22:10 PM, seraine wrote:
I fail to see how it is possible to believe in dogs and creationism (don't get into semantical stuff, I'm talking about YEC and other similar beliefs). Humans have selectively bred dogs for a variety of traits (coat color, coat length, nose, ears, etc) and in doing so have created many separate breeds that can't produce viable offspring. In a similar manner, nature has selectively bred different species for a single trait- ability to pass on your genes- and have created many separate breeds that can't produce viable offspring.

Is it possible to believe in dogs and creationism?

Yes, because creationists believe in micro-evolution.

There are not different scales of evolution. It is a singular, indivisible process, "micro" being indeterminable from "macro."

I know that.

In short creationists may argue that God created the wolf, selective breeding created the dog, but in a million years time, or 100 million years time the descendants of the wolves and the dogs will still be recognisably canine.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
headphonegut
Posts: 4,122
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2011 11:17:52 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/25/2011 10:06:59 AM, BennyW wrote:
At 8/25/2011 7:39:37 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 8/24/2011 12:22:10 PM, seraine wrote:
I fail to see how it is possible to believe in dogs and creationism (don't get into semantical stuff, I'm talking about YEC and other similar beliefs). Humans have selectively bred dogs for a variety of traits (coat color, coat length, nose, ears, etc) and in doing so have created many separate breeds that can't produce viable offspring. In a similar manner, nature has selectively bred different species for a single trait- ability to pass on your genes- and have created many separate breeds that can't produce viable offspring. : : :
Is it possible to believe in dogs and creationism?

Yes, because creationists believe in micro-evolution.

Exactly the point I was going to bring up.

so your point is you were going to use his point? lol noice

I don't think Nature is the type of person to put a gun to a species head just sayin'.
crying to soldiers coming home to their dogs why do I torment myself with these videos?
headphonegut
Posts: 4,122
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2011 11:25:22 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/25/2011 10:39:23 AM, VainApocalypse wrote:
At 8/25/2011 7:39:37 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 8/24/2011 12:22:10 PM, seraine wrote:
I fail to see how it is possible to believe in dogs and creationism (don't get into semantical stuff, I'm talking about YEC and other similar beliefs). Humans have selectively bred dogs for a variety of traits (coat color, coat length, nose, ears, etc) and in doing so have created many separate breeds that can't produce viable offspring. In a similar manner, nature has selectively bred different species for a single trait- ability to pass on your genes- and have created many separate breeds that can't produce viable offspring.

Is it possible to believe in dogs and creationism?

Yes, because creationists believe in micro-evolution.

There are not different scales of evolution. It is a singular, indivisible process, "micro" being indeterminable from "macro."

I don't think you understand evolution as well as you think you do Vain just saying
crying to soldiers coming home to their dogs why do I torment myself with these videos?
seraine
Posts: 734
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2011 11:45:42 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/25/2011 7:39:37 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 8/24/2011 12:22:10 PM, seraine wrote:
I fail to see how it is possible to believe in dogs and creationism (don't get into semantical stuff, I'm talking about YEC and other similar beliefs). Humans have selectively bred dogs for a variety of traits (coat color, coat length, nose, ears, etc) and in doing so have created many separate breeds that can't produce viable offspring. In a similar manner, nature has selectively bred different species for a single trait- ability to pass on your genes- and have created many separate breeds that can't produce viable offspring.

Is it possible to believe in dogs and creationism?

Yes, because creationists believe in micro-evolution.

It's kind of hard to believe in micro but not macro evolution.
seraine
Posts: 734
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2011 11:46:36 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/25/2011 11:17:52 AM, headphonegut wrote:
At 8/25/2011 10:06:59 AM, BennyW wrote:
At 8/25/2011 7:39:37 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 8/24/2011 12:22:10 PM, seraine wrote:
I fail to see how it is possible to believe in dogs and creationism (don't get into semantical stuff, I'm talking about YEC and other similar beliefs). Humans have selectively bred dogs for a variety of traits (coat color, coat length, nose, ears, etc) and in doing so have created many separate breeds that can't produce viable offspring. In a similar manner, nature has selectively bred different species for a single trait- ability to pass on your genes- and have created many separate breeds that can't produce viable offspring. : : :
Is it possible to believe in dogs and creationism?

Yes, because creationists believe in micro-evolution.

Exactly the point I was going to bring up.

so your point is you were going to use his point? lol noice

I don't think Nature is the type of person to put a gun to a species head just sayin'.

Survival of the fittest.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2011 11:49:14 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/25/2011 11:45:42 AM, seraine wrote:
At 8/25/2011 7:39:37 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 8/24/2011 12:22:10 PM, seraine wrote:
I fail to see how it is possible to believe in dogs and creationism (don't get into semantical stuff, I'm talking about YEC and other similar beliefs). Humans have selectively bred dogs for a variety of traits (coat color, coat length, nose, ears, etc) and in doing so have created many separate breeds that can't produce viable offspring. In a similar manner, nature has selectively bred different species for a single trait- ability to pass on your genes- and have created many separate breeds that can't produce viable offspring.

Is it possible to believe in dogs and creationism?

Yes, because creationists believe in micro-evolution.

It's kind of hard to believe in micro but not macro evolution.

That is what they believe. They feel that there is a threshold beyond which changes do not occur.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
seraine
Posts: 734
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2011 11:49:15 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/24/2011 8:48:49 PM, mongeese wrote:
All dog breeds can breed with each other, because they're all part of the same species.

Woops. Apparently I was mistaken, though the point still stands.
headphonegut
Posts: 4,122
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2011 11:51:36 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/25/2011 11:46:36 AM, seraine wrote:
At 8/25/2011 11:17:52 AM, headphonegut wrote:
At 8/25/2011 10:06:59 AM, BennyW wrote:
At 8/25/2011 7:39:37 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 8/24/2011 12:22:10 PM, seraine wrote:
I fail to see how it is possible to believe in dogs and creationism (don't get into semantical stuff, I'm talking about YEC and other similar beliefs). Humans have selectively bred dogs for a variety of traits (coat color, coat length, nose, ears, etc) and in doing so have created many separate breeds that can't produce viable offspring. In a similar manner, nature has selectively bred different species for a single trait- ability to pass on your genes- and have created many separate breeds that can't produce viable offspring. : : :
Is it possible to believe in dogs and creationism?

Yes, because creationists believe in micro-evolution.

Exactly the point I was going to bring up.

so your point is you were going to use his point? lol noice

I don't think Nature is the type of person to put a gun to a species head just sayin'.

Survival of the fittest.

LOL
crying to soldiers coming home to their dogs why do I torment myself with these videos?
VainApocalypse
Posts: 74
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2011 3:36:37 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/25/2011 11:25:22 AM, headphonegut wrote:
At 8/25/2011 10:39:23 AM, VainApocalypse wrote:
At 8/25/2011 7:39:37 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 8/24/2011 12:22:10 PM, seraine wrote:
I fail to see how it is possible to believe in dogs and creationism (don't get into semantical stuff, I'm talking about YEC and other similar beliefs). Humans have selectively bred dogs for a variety of traits (coat color, coat length, nose, ears, etc) and in doing so have created many separate breeds that can't produce viable offspring. In a similar manner, nature has selectively bred different species for a single trait- ability to pass on your genes- and have created many separate breeds that can't produce viable offspring.

Is it possible to believe in dogs and creationism?

Yes, because creationists believe in micro-evolution.

There are not different scales of evolution. It is a singular, indivisible process, "micro" being indeterminable from "macro."

I don't think you understand evolution as well as you think you do Vain just saying

I think your assumptions are premature.

"Microevolution" is a change in allele frequency between successive generations. The only thing "macroevolution" is purported to be is a change in allele frequency between successive generations.

It is not possible to determine the precise generation at which one species has transitioned into another. Generation 1 maybe compatible with 2 through 9 but not with 10. Generation 2 maybe compatible with 1 through 11. How are you going to describe Generation 2 as belonging to two separate species? You cannot separate intraspecies evolution from interspecies evolution, and neither can you describe taxonomy as anything other than a human convention. For these reason, evolution is said to be a single, indivisible process.
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2011 9:44:32 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/25/2011 10:39:23 AM, VainApocalypse wrote:
There are not different scales of evolution. It is a singular, indivisible process, "micro" being indeterminable from "macro."

Actually, they believe that the cut-off line is in a strange taxonomic term they invented called "kinds". It's a biblical term and I came across it in some debate with a creationist.
: 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.
VainApocalypse
Posts: 74
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2011 10:15:30 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/25/2011 9:44:32 PM, Kleptin wrote:
At 8/25/2011 10:39:23 AM, VainApocalypse wrote:
There are not different scales of evolution. It is a singular, indivisible process, "micro" being indeterminable from "macro."

Actually, they believe that the cut-off line is in a strange taxonomic term they invented called "kinds". It's a biblical term and I came across it in some debate with a creationist.

I'm familiar with it, but if we're going to attribute their peculiar disbelief to their interpretation of some biblical taxonomy, we may as well attribute it to mental disability. It's equivalent and easier to type.
seraine
Posts: 734
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/26/2011 8:12:29 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/25/2011 11:51:36 AM, headphonegut wrote:
At 8/25/2011 11:46:36 AM, seraine wrote:
At 8/25/2011 11:17:52 AM, headphonegut wrote:
At 8/25/2011 10:06:59 AM, BennyW wrote:
At 8/25/2011 7:39:37 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 8/24/2011 12:22:10 PM, seraine wrote:
I fail to see how it is possible to believe in dogs and creationism (don't get into semantical stuff, I'm talking about YEC and other similar beliefs). Humans have selectively bred dogs for a variety of traits (coat color, coat length, nose, ears, etc) and in doing so have created many separate breeds that can't produce viable offspring. In a similar manner, nature has selectively bred different species for a single trait- ability to pass on your genes- and have created many separate breeds that can't produce viable offspring. : : :
Is it possible to believe in dogs and creationism?

Yes, because creationists believe in micro-evolution.

Exactly the point I was going to bring up.

so your point is you were going to use his point? lol noice

I don't think Nature is the type of person to put a gun to a species head just sayin'.

Survival of the fittest.

LOL

I fail to see what's strange about that. Nature selectively breeds animals by killing the ones with a bad ability to pass on their genes and letting the ones with a good ability to pass on their genes survive, albeit unconsciously.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/26/2011 9:29:09 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/25/2011 3:36:37 PM, VainApocalypse wrote:
At 8/25/2011 11:25:22 AM, headphonegut wrote:
At 8/25/2011 10:39:23 AM, VainApocalypse wrote:
At 8/25/2011 7:39:37 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 8/24/2011 12:22:10 PM, seraine wrote:
I fail to see how it is possible to believe in dogs and creationism (don't get into semantical stuff, I'm talking about YEC and other similar beliefs). Humans have selectively bred dogs for a variety of traits (coat color, coat length, nose, ears, etc) and in doing so have created many separate breeds that can't produce viable offspring. In a similar manner, nature has selectively bred different species for a single trait- ability to pass on your genes- and have created many separate breeds that can't produce viable offspring.

Is it possible to believe in dogs and creationism?

Yes, because creationists believe in micro-evolution.

There are not different scales of evolution. It is a singular, indivisible process, "micro" being indeterminable from "macro."

I don't think you understand evolution as well as you think you do Vain just saying

I think your assumptions are premature.

"Microevolution" is a change in allele frequency between successive generations. The only thing "macroevolution" is purported to be is a change in allele frequency between successive generations.

It is not possible to determine the precise generation at which one species has transitioned into another. Generation 1 maybe compatible with 2 through 9 but not with 10. Generation 2 maybe compatible with 1 through 11. How are you going to describe Generation 2 as belonging to two separate species? You cannot separate intraspecies evolution from interspecies evolution, and neither can you describe taxonomy as anything other than a human convention. For these reason, evolution is said to be a single, indivisible process.

Cut and saved for future arguments.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
VainApocalypse
Posts: 74
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/26/2011 6:13:58 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/26/2011 9:29:09 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 8/25/2011 3:36:37 PM, VainApocalypse wrote:
At 8/25/2011 11:25:22 AM, headphonegut wrote:
At 8/25/2011 10:39:23 AM, VainApocalypse wrote:
At 8/25/2011 7:39:37 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 8/24/2011 12:22:10 PM, seraine wrote:
I fail to see how it is possible to believe in dogs and creationism (don't get into semantical stuff, I'm talking about YEC and other similar beliefs). Humans have selectively bred dogs for a variety of traits (coat color, coat length, nose, ears, etc) and in doing so have created many separate breeds that can't produce viable offspring. In a similar manner, nature has selectively bred different species for a single trait- ability to pass on your genes- and have created many separate breeds that can't produce viable offspring.

Is it possible to believe in dogs and creationism?

Yes, because creationists believe in micro-evolution.

There are not different scales of evolution. It is a singular, indivisible process, "micro" being indeterminable from "macro."

I don't think you understand evolution as well as you think you do Vain just saying

I think your assumptions are premature.

"Microevolution" is a change in allele frequency between successive generations. The only thing "macroevolution" is purported to be is a change in allele frequency between successive generations.

It is not possible to determine the precise generation at which one species has transitioned into another. Generation 1 maybe compatible with 2 through 9 but not with 10. Generation 2 maybe compatible with 1 through 11. How are you going to describe Generation 2 as belonging to two separate species? You cannot separate intraspecies evolution from interspecies evolution, and neither can you describe taxonomy as anything other than a human convention. For these reason, evolution is said to be a single, indivisible process.

Cut and saved for future arguments.

I'm flattered.
Calvincambridge
Posts: 1,141
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/17/2011 8:43:45 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/24/2011 12:22:10 PM, seraine wrote:
I fail to see how it is possible to believe in dogs and creationism (don't get into semantical stuff, I'm talking about YEC and other similar beliefs). Humans have selectively bred dogs for a variety of traits (coat color, coat length, nose, ears, etc) and in doing so have created many separate breeds that can't produce viable offspring. In a similar manner, nature has selectively bred different species for a single trait- ability to pass on your genes- and have created many separate breeds that can't produce viable offspring.

Is it possible to believe in dogs and creationism?

Yea D.
Trying to figure out women is like trying to solve a Rubik's cube with missing pieces. While blind. And on fire. And being shot.-Agent_Orange
Dude. Shades
That is all.- Thaddeus Rivers
One thing that isn't a joke though is the fact that woman are computers.Some buttons you can press and it'l work fine, but if you push the wrong one you'll get the blue screen of death.
silly, thett. girls are only good for sex. being friends with a female is of no value.-darkkermit