'Murica! (203 Viewers)

[abstract]

You're not creating a different species. Just like different dog breeds are not evolution. They may look different but they are still the same species as before.

Microevolution is also evolution,so yes selective breeding is also evolution just not by natural selection.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Maddy]

Intelligent design in a biology class

 

[Zacheryah]

Of course. But my point is that it shows evolution exists. True evolution can only take place over a much longer period of time.

Dogs have evolved from wolves btw and much of it might have had to do with human interaction.

based on DNA research, dogs and wolves separated somewhere 40 000 years ago

 

[Seven]

Adaptation of a species to its enviroment which leads to newer species.

With complexer organisms that takes millions of years


However, put Escherichia Coli in a culture and let it fill most of the culture. add Peniciline to the culture. 99.99999...% will die. But there is a 0.000...1% which accidently had a genetic mutation which makes it produce a certain enzyme that blocks the function of peniciline in the cell, preventing it to do its work.

From these surviving E.Coli, an entire culture will grow that has the peniciline resistance.




THE intelligent design question, is "how do you explain an eye", as an eye is an incredibly complex organic structure.

You could be lazy, and respond "why are we full of nonsense coding dna ? Why are we full of nonactive dna sequences ?


Or you could take a biology book and make a timeline, explaining how you start with a simple thing, and becomming more complex by chance(genetic mutation), allowed this to outcompete the existing kind

I know all of that. But my point is that breeding proves that there is adaptation.

 

[Zacheryah]

Intelligent design in a biology class

Offcourse, its the best place to explain why its wrong, think about it

- - - Updated - - -

I know all of that. But my point is that breeding proves that there is adaptation.

yeah but you cant use that as an example. Dogs and wolves look alot the same.


"but surely there is a creator who made the human eye (never get why they arent asking about a birds eye), cause its so very complex, how could that come from evolution of a silly amphibious"

All can be explained

 

[Seven]

Offcourse, its the best place to explain why its wrong, think about it

- - - Updated - - -



yeah but you cant use that as an example. Dogs and wolves look alot the same.


"but surely there is a creator who made the human eye (never get why they arent asking about a birds eye), cause its so very complex, how could that come from evolution of a silly amphibious"

All can be explained

It's not the best example, but we haven't working with bacteria cultures for centuries. That's why I used it.

Anyway, all of this is besides the point

 

[Zacheryah]

It's not the best example, but we haven't working with bacteria cultures for centuries. That's why I used it.

Anyway, all of this is besides the point

But its so much more interesting then the point man

- - - Updated - - -

Microevolution is also evolution,so yes selective breeding is also evolution just not by natural selection.

Breeding is not evolution, its an alteration of the phenotype without a change of the genotype.

If Osman would have sex with preet (she's fat enough to take his slong), and he nuts it right, it would create a 'mulat'. (if this term is offensive, i do appologise, but its how we call it, i'm open to better suggestions).

A mulat will have phenotypical traits lying in between the two. For example, the median of the pigmentation, curlyness of hair, etc.


This is not a new species. Its a different phenotype.

 

[Maddy]

Offcourse, its the best place to explain why its wrong, think about it

No. It's not.

It's not a teacher job to debunk belief. It's a teacher's job to educate in subjects and "create bildung".

 

[Zacheryah]

No. It's not.

It's not a teacher job to debunk belief. It's a teacher's job to educate in subjects and "create bildung".

True. But its a great place to adress questions and doubts

 

[Maddy]

True. But its a great place to adress questions and doubts

That's a whole nother matter and I agree.

But it's key for a teacher to not preach.

 

[Zacheryah]

That's a whole nother matter and I agree.

But it's key for a teacher to not preach.

Yes, agreed

 

[GordoDeCentral]

But its so much more interesting then the point man

- - - Updated - - -



Breeding is not evolution, its an alteration of the phenotype without a change of the genotype.

If Osman would have sex with preet (she's fat enough to take his slong), and he nuts it right, it would create a 'mulat'. (if this term is offensive, i do appologise, but its how we call it, i'm open to better suggestions).

A mulat will have phenotypical traits lying in between the two. For example, the median of the pigmentation, curlyness of hair, etc.


This is now a new species. Its a different phenotype.

 

[Seven]

But its so much more interesting then the point man

- - - Updated - - -



Breeding is not evolution, its an alteration of the phenotype without a change of the genotype.

If Osman would have sex with preet (she's fat enough to take his slong), and he nuts it right, it would create a 'mulat'. (if this term is offensive, i do appologise, but its how we call it, i'm open to better suggestions).

A mulat will have phenotypical traits lying in between the two. For example, the median of the pigmentation, curlyness of hair, etc.


This is now a new species. Its a different phenotype.

That debate is more about semantics though. As abstract said microevolution is still evolution. And the reason I used it as an example is because apparently humans have known for thousands of years that you can, in fact, change the characteristics of an animal through selective breeding.

Trying to defend intelligent design in spite of this is, as one would say in Dutch, denying the light of the sun.

That's a whole nother matter and I agree.

But it's key for a teacher to not preach.

It is. And intelligent design as a theory has no merits whatsoever. It would be crazy for a biology teacher to teach it.

 

[ALC]

But its so much more interesting then the point man

- - - Updated - - -



Breeding is not evolution, its an alteration of the phenotype without a change of the genotype.

If Osman would have sex with preet (she's fat enough to take his slong), and he nuts it right, it would create a 'mulat'. (if this term is offensive, i do appologise, but its how we call it, i'm open to better suggestions).

A mulat will have phenotypical traits lying in between the two. For example, the median of the pigmentation, curlyness of hair, etc.


This is now a new species. Its a different phenotype.

Except that it's not a new species.

 

[Seven]

Except that it's not a new species.

You say different dog breeds are not different species. Does the same go for different primates? Or different deer?

 

[Zacheryah]

Except that it's not a new species.

oh god


not*

typo

Edited it
- - - Updated - - -

You say different dog breeds are not different species. Does the same go for different primates? Or different deer?

That depends on the DNA sequence.


A tiger and a lion are both feline creatures but different species

 

[ALC]

You say different dog breeds are not different species. Does the same go for different primates? Or different deer?

No, because those are different species. Black people and white people are not different species either and neither are a Doberman and German Shepherd.

 

[Ocelot]

I haven't tried to learn something about it, but trying to scientifically tell the Bible creation story sounds like a bad idea, it should be presented for what it is, a belief.

And that's why ot should be taught in a religious education subject, along with the beliefs of other religions, not next to evolution.

- - - Updated - - -

Intelligent design is not a sound theory though. It makes no sense. It has no scientifical basis. Presenting it as if it does is dangerous in itself.



I don't get why people think Trump is so much more harmless. He's using a lot of the same rhetoric, has the same ideas about politics and even has similar physical oddities.

That can be a fair argument, though with all the similarities there are stark differences (Hitler being much more ideological, driven by his terrible ideology, while Trump's motivations are much more ego-centered), the political and social environment is very different.

- - - Updated - - -

It has some tracking in scientology and certain islamic regions, who try to debunk evolution.



I find it extremely easy to debate




fuck it. I applaud trump for doing this


I can make a career in debating these people that they are wrong. more debates, more money #morality

What


Like what

Dude you know this is not at all what's gonna haplen here. Trump's (or his cabinet's) plan isn't to show pupils how scientifically speaking creationist views make no sense. How the hell could you even interpret it as such?

 

[Zacheryah]

And that's why ot should be taught in a religious education subject, along with the beliefs of other religions, not next to evolution.

- - - Updated - - -



That can be a fair argument, though with all the similarities there are stark differences (Hitler being much more ideological, driven by his terrible ideology, while Trump's motivations are much more ego-centered), the political and social environment is very different.

- - - Updated - - -



What


Like what

Dude you know this is not at all what's gonna haplen here. Trump's (or his cabinet's) plan isn't to show pupils how scientifically speaking creationist views make no sense. How the hell could you even interpret it as such?

Its a joke. Read the line below

 

[Seven]

And that's why ot should be taught in a religious education subject, along with the beliefs of other religions, not next to evolution.

- - - Updated - - -



That can be a fair argument, though with all the similarities there are stark differences (Hitler being much more ideological, driven by his terrible ideology, while Trump's motivations are much more ego-centered), the political and social environment is very different.

- - - Updated - - -



What


Like what

Dude you know this is not at all what's gonna haplen here. Trump's (or his cabinet's) plan isn't to show pupils how scientifically speaking creationist views make no sense. How the hell could you even interpret it as such?

Zach was joking.

And there are differences, yes. But people so desperately want to think they're different from the people who elected Hitler that they are choosing to overlook the similarities.