{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
9/6/2015 8:46:36 PM
1
-
Correct it's not debatable.
-
So is evolution a fact? If by "evolution" one simply means "evolution #1," i.e. small-scale change over time within a species, then evolution is indeed a fact. No one disputes this kind of "evolution." Thus when Johnjoe McFadden states that "[s]cientists have measured evolutionary changes in scores of organisms" and therefore evolution "is as much a fact as gravity or erosion," he is stating the obvious because he is simply referring to evolution #1. But Dr. McFadden is pulling a bait-and-switch: he is using relatively trivial examples of evolution #1 to bolster more controversial definitions of "evolution." Thus if by "evolution" one means universal common descent (evolution #2), or neo-Darwinian evolution (evolution #3), where the primary adaptive force building the complexity of life is unguided natural selection acting upon random mutations, then many scientists would argue that such "evolution" most certainly is not a fact. http://www.discovery.org/a/6401
-
You need to look up speciation, natural selection and evolution you are blurring the three under one title of evolution.
-
No you are. You say evolution is a fact, but the only part that is a fact is small adaptation that happens over a short period of time. The other aspects are not fact, just like the link that I posted says.
-
I have a masters degree on this I know what I am taking about what you refer to as neodarwinism evolution is natural selection and speciation is the process of how [b]evolution[/b] can lead to the development of 2 species from one. My claim is correct evolution is fact. You are arguing against other processes not evolution.
-
Only changes that occur in a short period of time can be observed. Anything outside of that is speculation and inference, it is not fact.
-
Evolution is a single nucleotide polymorphism (mutation) that has a phenotypic change to the organism that provides a fitness benefit for that individual.
-
I understand that and that aspect is a fact, I'm not arguing that. But the theory that that mechanism gave rise to every living thing is not a fact. And common descent is an integral part of the the theory of evolution and it is also not a fact. Therefore as a whole, the theory of evolution is not a fact.
-
Right what u agreed with is evolution thats what I am trying to get across to you. You have the rest reversed evolution is the mechanism behind or the backbone to those processes.
-
And that's precisely what isn't a fact. There is no observable proof that said mechanism can produce all the varieties of life that we have.
-
Never said that I said evolution was a fact
-
I was talking about the theory of evolution as a whole.
