Anti-Creationists......time to speak your clout

[Bodhi]

(emotions not included)

*yawn* are you finished?

1. Get off his nuts. The first shot since my post on the evolution of they eye was thrown by ignorant ass @bambu and he's been handed well deserved ether since then

2. You don't even know what Brooklyn means. Your emotions are showing.

 

[Bodhi]

Try again muthafucker.....

Nothing new to say? As I thought, clown.

wolf: canis lupus

domestic dog: Canis lupus familiaris

The domestic dog is what we call a SUB species of the gray wolf.

Drosophila mojavensis

Drosophila arizonae
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ece3.93/abstract

Shape variation was quantified using elliptic Fourier descriptors and compared among the four D. mojavensis host races, and between D. mojavensis and its sister species Drosophila arizonae.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sister_species

A sister group or sister taxon is a systematic term from cladistics denoting the closest relatives of a group in a phylogenetic tree.[1] The expression is most easily illustrated by a cladogram:

(see diagram in link)

The sister group to A is B. Likewise, the sister group to B is A. These two groups, together with all other descendants of their last common ancestor, constitute a clade; its sister group is C. The whole cladogram will again be rooted in a larger tree, offering yet more further removed sister groups. As per cladistic standards, A, B, and C may here represent specimens, species or groups. In cases where they represents species, sister species is sometimes used.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3790531.stm

the University of Arizona researchers believe the insects are in the early stages of diverging into separate species.

The emergence of a new species - speciation - occurs when distinct populations of a species stop reproducing with one another.

When the two groups can no longer interbreed, they cease exchanging genes and eventually go their own evolutionary ways becoming separate species.

Poor @bambu.. just holding onto what little he has (and failing) but still has not refuted all evidence for evolution and is avoiding the fossil records like the plague. Cannot explain shit with his intelligent design theory while the functioning of the universe is continuing to be made more clear by the theory of evolution.. hilarious

 

[bambu]

Species names are a big deal to you Bambu?

Primula verticillata and P. floribunda were crossed and sterile hybrids resulted. However in a few cases polyploidization occurred which resulted in a new specie, P. kewensis.

Many new species often do not get species names. The nylon eating bacteria is Flavobacterium Sp K172. That is species K172. This is also a new species that evolved in the wild and has a new species name.

Silly Nigga.....

Your previous posts does not prove shit......

1) All "new species" that were observed are hybrids that are sterile (unable to produce offspring)......

2) A "new species" that is unable to survive without aid from scientists *Einstein or Frankenstein*

3) In some rare cases scientists have been able to manipulate the gene pool so that some are able to reproduce......

This actually provides more evidence for creationism rather than evolution.....

Can you read nigga????

Dobzhansky and Pavlovsky (1971) reported a speciation event that occurred in a laboratory culture of Drosophila paulistorum sometime between 1958 and 1963. The culture was descended from a single inseminated female that was captured in the Llanos of Colombia. From 1963 onward crosses with Orinocan strains produced only sterile males. Initially no assortative mating or behavioral isolation was seen between the Llanos strain and the Orinocan strains. Later on Dobzhansky produced assortative mating (Dobzhansky 1972).

Digby (1912) crossed the primrose species Primula verticillata and P. floribunda to produce a sterile hybrid. Polyploidization occurred in a few of these plants to produce fertile offspring. Newton and Pellew (1929) note that spontaneous hybrids of P. verticillata and P. floribunda set tetraploid seed on at least three occasions. These happened in 1905, 1923 and 1926.

Your research, deconstructed.....

Sterile males

In the wild, Drosophila mojavensis and Drosophila arizonae rarely, if ever, interbreed - even though their geographical ranges overlap.

In the lab, researchers can coax successful breeding but there are complications. *Einstein or Frankenstein*

Drosophila mojavensis mothers typically produce healthy offspring after mating with Drosophila arizonae males, but when Drosophila arizonae females mate with Drosphila mojavensis males, the resulting males are sterile.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3790531.stm

Here is my theory again stupid nigga....

All living creatures were created with the ability to reproduce only after their own kind....

 

[waterproof]

(emotions not included)

*yawn* are you finished?

1. Get off his nuts. The first shot since my post on the evolution of they eye was thrown by ignorant ass @bambu and he's been handed well deserved ether since then

2. You don't even know what Brooklyn means. Your emotions are showing.

Ol hoe ass bite the hand that feeds u ass bi polar who's mother and father crawled on all fours foolish ass negro, u represent broken land because u is a broken bitch

 

[Bodhi]

(emotions not included)

*yawn* are you finished?

1. Get off his nuts. The first shot since my post on the evolution of they eye was thrown by ignorant ass @bambu and he's been handed well deserved ether since then

2. You don't even know what Brooklyn means. Your emotions are showing.

Ol hoe ass bite the hand that feeds u ass bi polar who's mother and father crawled on all fours foolish ass negro, u represent broken land because u is a broken bitch

lol.. you should try stand up

 

[whar]

1. None of the species I mentioned were sterile.

2. None of the species I mentioned needed the aid of scientist. They also occur in nature.

3. None require special manipulation of their gene pool.

 

[bambu]

1. None of the species I mentioned were sterile.

2. None of the species I mentioned needed the aid of scientist. They also occur in nature.

3. None require special manipulation of their gene pool.

1) Digby (1912) crossed the primrose species Primula verticillata and P. floribunda to produce a sterile hybrid. Polyploidization occurred in a few of these plants to produce fertile offspring. Newton and Pellew (1929) note that spontaneous hybrids of P. verticillata and P. floribunda set tetraploid seed on at least three occasions. These happened in 1905, 1923 and 1926.

2) Flavobacterium is a genus of Gram-negative, non-motile and motile, rod-shaped bacteria that consists of ten recognized species, as well as three newly proposed species (F. gondwanense, F. salegens, and F. scophthalmum).

All of which belong to the Flavobacterium species....

3) Where is the new species?????

 

[bambu]

Wolf: species:C. lupus

Great Dane: species: C. lupus

Chihuahua: species: C.lupus

mojavensis: species: Drosophila

arizonae: species: Drosophila

You fail.....

wolf: canis lupus

domestic dog: Canis lupus familiaris

The domestic dog is what we call a SUB species of the gray wolf.

Drosophila mojavensis

Drosophila arizonae
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ece3.93/abstract

Shape variation was quantified using elliptic Fourier descriptors and compared among the four D. mojavensis host races, and between D. mojavensis and its sister species Drosophila arizonae.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sister_species

A sister group or sister taxon is a systematic term from cladistics denoting the closest relatives of a group in a phylogenetic tree.[1] The expression is most easily illustrated by a cladogram:

(see diagram in link)

The sister group to A is B. Likewise, the sister group to B is A. These two groups, together with all other descendants of their last common ancestor, constitute a clade; its sister group is C. The whole cladogram will again be rooted in a larger tree, offering yet more further removed sister groups. As per cladistic standards, A, B, and C may here represent specimens, species or groups. In cases where they represents species, sister species is sometimes used.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3790531.stm

the University of Arizona researchers believe the insects are in the early stages of diverging into separate species.

The emergence of a new species - speciation - occurs when distinct populations of a species stop reproducing with one another.

When the two groups can no longer interbreed, they cease exchanging genes and eventually go their own evolutionary ways becoming separate species.

Poor @bambu.. just holding onto what little he has (and failing) but still has not refuted all evidence for evolution and is avoiding the fossil records like the plague. Cannot explain shit with his intelligent design theory while the functioning of the universe is continuing to be made more clear by the theory of evolution.. hilarious

Stupid nigga....

wolf: species: canis lupus

domestic dog: species: Canis lupus: subspecies: Canis lupus familiaris

Drosophila mojavensis species: Drosophila

Drosophila arizonae species: Drosophila

In both examples there is only one species........

Smart/Dumb nigga......

 

[bambu]

(emotions not included)

*yawn* are you finished?

1. Get off his nuts. The first shot since my post on the evolution of they eye was thrown by ignorant ass @bambu and he's been handed well deserved ether since then

2. You don't even know what Brooklyn means. Your emotions are showing.

1) I been schooling this faggot ass nigga Jaded Righteousness..... I seen you trying to get some respect in your tone in my thread.....

However you still a fucking herb.... and get dealt with accordingly...........

2) New York been soft ever since Snoop went through and crushed the buildings.......

 

[whar]

1) Digby (1912) crossed the primrose species Primula verticillata and P. floribunda to produce a sterile hybrid. Polyploidization occurred in a few of these plants to produce fertile offspring. Newton and Pellew (1929) note that spontaneous hybrids of P. verticillata and P. floribunda set tetraploid seed on at least three occasions. These happened in 1905, 1923 and 1926.

2) Flavobacterium is a genus of Gram-negative, non-motile and motile, rod-shaped bacteria that consists of ten recognized species, as well as three newly proposed species (F. gondwanense, F. salegens, and F. scophthalmum).

All of which belong to the Flavobacterium species....

3) Where is the new species?????

The Polyploidization variant that also occurred were fertile. Thank you for walking into that trap. I assumed you would latch onto the non-polyploidization plants that were non-fertile doing whatever you could to maintain your position even adopting something factual false.

"Flavobacterium is a genus" from the talk origins page your are quoting. Also the source of some of my info.

Then you say "All of which belong to the Flavobacterium species"

Perhaps basic Biology (well Zoology really) is in order here. Linnaes developed a category system for organisms. The most detail levels were the genus and species. This system also include kingdom, phylum, class, and order. As you quote but apparently did not read you list 3 different species of Flavobacterium (F. gondwanense, F. salegens, and F. scophthalmum) F. Sp. K172 is a unique species that arose in the wild to feed on nylon in the waste product pools near a Japanese factory.

Bambu it is one thing to argue an interpretation of the facts but you are making arguments that are not factually consistent within the quotes you are posting. Maybe you should go back to posting that picture of the dumbass 100 years old book about how our faces developed. That one, while having almost nothing to do with current evolution theory, was an ugly piece of racism at least.

 

[whar]

Stupid nigga....

wolf: species: canis lupus

domestic dog: species: Canis lupus: subspecies: Canis lupus familiaris

Drosophila mojavensis species: Drosophila

Drosophila arizonae species: Drosophila

In both examples there is only one species........

Smart/Dumb nigga......

Drosophila is the genus. A genus is a grouping of similar species. A species is a unique reproductively isolated group with in a genus.

Typically the species mojavesis would be written D. mojavensis

 

[bambu]

In biological nomenclature, a type species is the species to which the name of a genus is permanently linked; it is the species that contains the biological type specimen(s) of the taxon.

i.e. Flavobacterium, Drosophila and Primula ....

Perhaps I should go back to posting images for you dumb fucks.......

 

[whar]

In biological nomenclature, a type species is the species to which the name of a genus is permanently linked; it is the species that contains the biological type specimen(s) of the taxon.

i.e. Flavobacterium, Drosophila and Primula ....

Perhaps I should go back to posting images for you dumb fucks.......

*Sigh*

Ok a type species is the first defined species within a genus. Again you really need to pause and read this stuff.

Lets imagine a biologist has found a brand new species of some insect. A comparision to the type species with the related genus would help the biologist determine which genus to place the new species. If he finds that no genus qualifies he would have to create a brand new genus. The new species would then be the type species for that genus.

For instance for the genus Drosphilia D. funebris is type however there are more than 2000 species within that genus.

This concept of the type is used repeatedly in biology. For instance fossils species have a type fossil that is the first define fossil of a species. All subsequent fossil must match the type fossil to be assigned to that species.

Perhaps you should fully readhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_(biology) andhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_genus .

Also slow down your posts and reread them so you stop making such basic errors.

 

[bambu]

Please.....

That's the problem.....

You are imagining shit and want me to join you.....

I will not.....

Kingdom: Animalia

Phylum: Arthropoda

Class: Insecta

Order: Diptera

Family: Drosophilidae

Tribe: Drosophilini

Subtribe: Drosophilina

Infratribe: Drosophiliti

Genus: Drosophila

Type species
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drosophila

And you have already been squashed in this thread fella.....

From the fossil record to DNA and now this......

When is the bullshit gonna cease.....

 

[bambu]

Ape to humans took 6 million years. We see clear evidence of this in the fossil record but you are not going to see that occur in the lab or even in the wild given we have only been looking for 150 years.

Artificial Selection does give interesting result particularly in agriculture. Cabbage is a simple plant that is a popular crop in Russia and elsewhere. In fact its origins are from that region northern Asia basically. Through selective breeding cabbage has been changed into Broccoli, Brussel Sprouts, Cauliflower, and Kale.

That is a pretty significant set of changes to an organism. It is hard to argue that evolution can not produce large scale changes to an organism when farmers for 1000s of years have been using evolution to do just that.

@Whar....

This post illustrates your ignorance on the topic of evolution.....

Cabbage did not "evolve" into the other vegetables that you mentioned......

cabbage, Broccoli, Brussel Sprouts, Cauliflower, and Kale are genetic modifications of of the same species (Brassica oleracea)......

The plants are selected for desirable characteristics that can be maintained by propagation......

This is no different than the hybridization of cannabis.....

Several genetic variations.....


However, no new species.... let alone "proof" of evolution.....

Silly Europeans......

 

[whar]

From the wiki link you provide Bambu

Musca funebris or Dorsophilia funebris if you click that link you will find

Kingdom: Animalia

Phylum: Arthropoda

Class: Insecta

Order: Diptera

Family: Drosophilidae

Genus: Drosophila

Subgenus: Drosophila

Species group: funebris species group

Species: D. funebris

Here is some data regarding genushttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genus

Here is some on specieshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Species

You should stick to posting images. When you use words you run into trouble.

 

[bambu]

Says the moron trying to pass cabbage off as proof of evolution.....

 

[Bodhi]

1) I been schooling this faggot ass nigga Jaded Righteousness..... I seen you trying to get some respect in your tone in my thread.....

It's not about trying to gain respect. If anything, you gained respect from me at that particular point within the midst of losing so much, not the other way around. It's about you seemingly knowing the subject. I don't know much about it; it would only make sense that I ask someone who seems to. Just because I disagree with you on the topic of evolution does not mean I have to be childish and set a grudge against you and call you out of your name or click the wack button in every thread. You're a human being just like I am. Non of this is personal, G. Only a child is disrespectful toward gained respect. Try to grow up a little.

2) New York been soft ever since Snoop went through and crushed the buildings.......

LOL.. I'm not from New York nor have I ever lived there. Brooklyn New York isn't the only Brooklyn in the world. Brooklyn is a name that could be given to anything, anyone, or any place. hahaha... LOL @ your opinion of New York and its residents based off what you've seen on a snoop dogg video though. Hahaha.. Children..

 

[Bodhi]

In both examples there is only one species........

From the wikipedia link you provided:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drosophila

Drosophila is a genus of small flies, belonging to the family Drosophilidae, whose members are often called "fruit flies" or (less frequently) pomace flies, vinegar flies, or wine flies, a reference to the characteristic of many species to linger around overripe or rotting fruit.

The genus Drosophila is made up of several different species, mojavensis and arizonae being two of them

One species of Drosophila in particular, D. melanogaster, has been heavily used in research in genetics and is a common model organism in developmental biology.

lol.. moving on..

 

[Bodhi]

"Years before Darwin developed the notion of natural selection as a force capable of generating exquisitely complex adaptations, he was struck by the fact that, given the results of geological dating, Creationism required a Creator who intervened piecemeal and repeatedly, over many millions of years, with no indication of any overall plan, and creating many organisms only to see them become extinct. At first a Creationist, Darwin considered this kind of repeated and undirected intervention so dubious that a purely natural explanation began to seem more appealing to him, and this eventually led him to consider natural selection.

Intelligent Design theory makes no attempt to analyze the character of the Designer from the data of the Designer's performance. It is merely concerned with accumulating examples suggesting that there is a Designer, and that Darwinism can be rejected --- and there the theory of Intelligent Design stops.

There are many cases where we don't know the path evolution actually might have taken. It's always possible to point to some adaptation, assert that it could not possibly have come about by accumulated gradual adjustments, and reiterate this assertion for as long as biologists have not come up with any specific evolutionary pathway.

However, this is to look at only half the evidence relevant to the design hypothesis. We also have to consider those many aspects of living organisms which appear, from a design point of view, to be botched and incompetent. If the Designer is so Intelligent, how come he keeps screwing up?

Examples of outrageously bad 'design' can usually be explained by the path evolution has taken. There really are cases where 'you can't get here from there', or at least it's too improbable. Since natural selection cannot look ahead and try a radically different approach to solving a particular problem, but always has to move by slow increments from something which has worked in the recent past, there will sometimes be cases where the outcome is just hoplelessly inefficient.

There are innumerable such examples. One is the fact that human babies naturally have to be born through the bone-enclosed pelvic opening. Untold billions of babies and their mothers have died in childbirth because of this elementary 'design flaw', which arose because humans are descended from animals that scampered on all fours. In many cases today, the birth opening which idiot nature failed to hit upon is provided by a surgeon, in a caesarian section. This saves the lives of millions, and in many more cases reduces brain damage to the infant or hours of discomfort to the mother. Any intelligent designer planning the human body from scratch would have installed a birth opening in the lower abdomen, where there is no tight constriction by bones. But natural selection could not accomplish this clear and obvious improvement, because there was no way to get 'there from here' by minute adjustments.

The human body is an exhibition of engineering disasters. The routing of the optic nerve through the front of the retina, so that there is a 'blind spot' in each eye, and the routing of the male testis around the ureter, when it would be so much simpler and more efficient to take a direct route, are other instances. These sorry failings do not contradict the proposition that many features of the human body display marvelous construction, sometimes far exceeding what could have been accomplished by human ingenuity. The two aspects exist side by side: dazzling sophistication and crude sloppiness. ID theory has no explanation to offer for the latter. Darwinism tells us to expect both. A striking example occuring in all mammals is the routing of the recurrent laryngeal nerve, which instead of going directly from the brain to the larynx, makes a completely pointless detour to loop around a lung ligament. In the giraffe, whose neck lengthened in the course of evolution, this nerve is twenty feet long, instead of the required one foot.

Why can't evolution itself take care of these problems? Why can't evolution create a new birth canal in humans, reroute the optic nerve into the back of the retina, or shorten the routes of the male ureter and the recurrent laryngeal nerve in the giraffe's neck? The answer is that once a highly complex 'basic plan' for an animal's body is in place, there are some improvements that cannot be accomplished by slight changes, but only by a radical redesign. There are indeed cases where you can't get here from there, and precisely in such cases, very obvious and simple improvements don't come about in nature, exactly as Darwinism leads us to expect.

Aside from cases of bad design, there are also aspects of the acutal process of evolution which are difficult to explain from a Design point of view. Why did life for at least a billion years consist of nothing but single-celled organisms such as bacteria? Why were all plants non-flowering until 130 million years ago, when flowering plants proliferated into thousands of diverse forms? This doesn't give the impression of a Designer who had any idea where he was going. Facts like these are puzzling if we assume there's a Designer. If there's no Designer, these facts fall naturally into place: they are what we would expect"

--- David R. Steele