I'm fairly confident that macro evolution... isn't possible. I mean, no matter how many times you breed a dog, it's not going to turn into a cat, is it? That's what this kind of theory of evolution is really saying... Personally, the idea of a God creating everything just perfectly in the space of a few days quite appeals to me.
20 comments
Personally, the idea that I have a narrow waist, clear skin, perky bosoms and fairies at the bottom of my garden appeals to me.
Personally, the idea of a God creating everything just perfectly in the space of a few days quite appeals to me.
I'm sure it does. It's intellectually easy. Too bad that doesn't make it true.
"I'm fairly confident that macro evolution... isn't possible."
Suggesting that "microevolution" is possible but "macroevolution" isn't is akin to accepting the existence of the number 1 but refusing to acknowledge the number 1,000,000.
"I mean, no matter how many times you breed a dog, it's not going to turn into a cat, is it? That's what this kind of theory of evolution is really saying..."
You fail biology forever.
"Personally, the idea of a God creating everything just perfectly in the space of a few days quite appeals to me."
Whereas to me it's an inelegant god of the gaps argument that raises more questions than it answers and lacks any practical application.
Yeah, but a wolf will turn into a Siberian Husky, which could breed with a Golden Retriever, which could itself breed with a Golden Retriever, until it's nothing like a husky, let alone a wolf.
FAIL.
"no matter how many times you breed a dog, it's not going to turn into a cat"
No, because that boat has already sailed. However there is nothing stopping dogs evolving into something cat-like or vice versa.
"That's what this kind of theory of evolution is really saying"
No, the ToE posits that many organisms have arisen from common ancestry. So while cats and dogs can (and do) have a common ancestor, modern cats can't now descend from modern dogs.
It's like a tree-trunk splitting into two branches, twigs on the one branch can't ever grow into becoming twigs on the other, even if they can grow very close to them. But that that can't happen doesn't disprove the branches' common 'ancestry' from the trunk.
If a dog should miraculously give birth to a fully formed cat, that would actually be an argument for creationism. I have no idea why these fundies don't get that... maybe it has something to do with the total absence of basic chemistry, biology, taxonomy, as well as the entire scientific method in their homsku'l curriculum.
The more we breed dogs, the further away from the wolf they get. That's what this kind of theory of evolution is really saying.
Personally, the idea of a world without war and famine quite appeals to me.
> I mean, no matter how many times you breed a dog, it's not going to turn into a cat, is it?
If, by modifying the DNA of dogs, I could artificially "evolve" canine offspring into a cat, would you accept the fact that macro evolution is possible?
Pennies add up, as the old saying goes.
> Personally, the idea of a God creating everything just perfectly in the space of a few days quite appeals to me.
And you are entitled to your opinion.
As we are entitled to being taught and accepting reality.
The more you breed a dog, the further away it gets from the wolf. In just a few hundred thousand years, they might not be able to breed with each others any longer. At that time, macro-evolution has happened.
But, selective breeding is more like intelligent design than evolution, actually.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.