[Simo Häyhä]

GOD IS A BANANA

JEWS DID 9/11

[CoMaToSe]

now I want a naner

[Chronic Diarrhea]

This guy is pretty funny:

[url:7298a]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ENEF3OoS-U&mode=related&search=[/url:7298a]

[jujumantb]

[quote=c312]

Originally Posted by jujumantb

umm... natural selection is the process through which evolution takes place... you cant say you think evolution is BS, but agree with natural selection, stupid: but you can say it the other way around,
natural selection is a theory to EXPLAIN how evolution takes place

[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macroevolution:155dc]Macroevolution[/url:155dc] vs. [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microevolution:155dc]Microevolution[/url:155dc][/quote:155dc]
it doesnt matter, natural selection is the ONLY process which needs to function for speciation to occur.
on another somewhat related note, i took an intermediate evolutionary biology course last semester and you wouldnt believe how much upper level math is needed to compute allele frequencies and shit through generations ed: dont take anything like it unless you need to...

[[DAS REICH] Blitz]

[quote="Simo Häyhä":d995f]GOD IS A BANANA

JEWS DID 9/11[/quote:d995f]NO JEWS

[c312]

[quote=jujumantb]

Originally Posted by c312

[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macroevolution:8802f]Macroevolution[/url:8802f] vs. [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microevolution:8802f]Microevolution[/url:8802f]

it doesnt matter, natural selection is the ONLY process which needs to function for speciation to occur.
on another somewhat related note, i took an intermediate evolutionary biology course last semester and you wouldnt believe how much upper level math is needed to compute allele frequencies and shit through generations ed: dont take anything like it unless you need to...[/quote:8802f]

But there's a difference in believing that natural selection led to adaptive changes within a species and believing that natural selection led to changes from a species to a new species.

[jujumantb]

Originally Posted by c312

But there's a difference in believing that natural selection led to adaptive changes within a species and believing that natural selection led to changes from a species to a new species.

well, to a biologist that wouldnt make sense.

lets first define what a species is, which a commonly accepted definition is "a reproductively isolated population". now, with this definition, all it takes for a new species to arise is to have those "adaptive changes" you state change their reproductive status within a population. Generally, this occurs through whats called speciation where a single reproductively isolated population is divided for a number of reasons into two or more populations.

Over many generations, these two populations will go through natural selection in their environments (your "adaptive changes") and eventually lose the ability or drive to breed with eachother. Thus, even if those populations were reintroduced with eachother, they would not breed, and, according to the defition of a species, we end up with one or more new species.

As this happens over billions of years, we get that branching effect with more and more variance and more and more species. We see how the only process identified here in the creation of new species is, in fact, natural selection (genetic drift too, but thats not important in this discussion)

So if you believe in natural selection, you really cannot present a good arguement about how you dont believe it can create new species.

[CoMaToSe]

[quote=c312]

Originally Posted by jujumantb

it doesnt matter, natural selection is the ONLY process which needs to function for speciation to occur.
on another somewhat related note, i took an intermediate evolutionary biology course last semester and you wouldnt believe how much upper level math is needed to compute allele frequencies and shit through generations ed: dont take anything like it unless you need to...

But there's a difference in believing that natural selection led to adaptive changes within a species and believing that natural selection led to changes from a species to a new species.[/quote:790f2]
Um, no. Natural selection is part of evolution, of how a single, advantageous feature in a species will soon become dominant in the gene pool leading to changes in the species wide phenotype

[Jotun]

bananas would go extinct if it werent for the human race, and thats a fact. banana trees cannot reproduce without human interference.

that really has nothing to do with this topic, just a fun fact.

and i cant stand people like that...they go out of their way to "prove" that religion exists. who cares?

[[DAS REICH] Blitz]

cats are evolving in Japan!

[img]http://content.ytmnd.com/content/c/f/5/cf5bf13ee5f03f6488a8a5b6b2d94e91.gif[/img]

[Mr.Buttocks]

That cat's evolving into a new type of penguin.

[[DAS REICH] Blitz]

Evgeni Malkin?

[jujumantb]

Originally Posted by Jotun

bananas would go extinct if it werent for the human race, and thats a fact. banana trees cannot reproduce without human interference.

well, to my knowledge, real wild bananas have seeds in the middle, thus, can reproduce. humans simply stumbled upon a mutant banana tree without seeds and began reproducing it artificially, so clearly, yes, the "human engineered" bananas would go extinct, but not wild bananas. same thing with grapes.

[Pyro]

[quote="[DAS REICH] Blitz":0e158][quote=c312]

Originally Posted by jujumantb

umm... natural selection is the process through which evolution takes place... you cant say you think evolution is BS, but agree with natural selection, stupid: but you can say it the other way around,
natural selection is a theory to EXPLAIN how evolution takes place

[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macroevolution:0e158]Macroevolution[/url:0e158] vs. [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microevolution:0e158]Microevolution[/url:0e158][/quote:0e158]ugh, i saw that and thought economics[/quote:0e158]

lmao me too glad im done with that shit now.

[jujumantb]

[quote=Pyro][quote="[DAS REICH] Blitz":b6c86]

Originally Posted by c312

[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macroevolution:b6c86]Macroevolution[/url:b6c86] vs. [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microevolution:b6c86]Microevolution[/url:b6c86]

ugh, i saw that and thought economics[/quote:b6c86]

lmao me too glad im done with that shit now.[/quote:b6c86]
im not glad im majoring in that...