I was thinking that too. I think it was Carl Sagan that once said that we would be far more closely related to a tree, then to an alien that might evolve on some other planet.

This is why biologist still get excited about the possiblity of finding microbes on Mars or some other planet in our solar system. If those microbes evolved totally independent of life on earth chances are (they believe) that it will be radically different from anything we've ever seen.

I'm not sold on that idea personally. It seem to me that in a universe where the 'atomic soup' is fairly consistent and amino acids seem to be so easy to create that there should be a high probability that DNA will often evolve in a similar way.

It would also seem to me that they should be able to figure out how DNA itself evolves from amino acids and then look at what other possible paths it could have taken.

I wish I was 20 years old again so I could embark on a career as a biologist and study those very questions. I'm sure future generations will have the answers. It might not be that far into the future either.

elephants also weigh more than many cars and have a massive trunk located between both of their eyes... idk, maybe you've seen one before... but anyway, I think this is just another ridiculous theory that evolutionists are trying to use to further "prove" their point. we have similarities to many different animals... if we didn't, a lot of animals would be inadequately built to survive. don't get me wrong, microevolution is an absolutely proven point and is still witnessed to this very day... but if you are trying to tell me that billions of years ago elephants and man split off just because they breast feed and have knees, i dont know about that one...

one more question for you die-hard evolution fans... if macroevolution is real, why has there been no documentation of this in recorded history? have all species merely reached the extent of their evolutionary progress? kinda fishy, eh?

You aren’t following this discussion at all sir. You can’t just run around claiming that micro evolution is fact and macro is the work of Satan.

i said nothing about satan, i'm merely wanting to know if there is evidence... and if you dont believe in microevolution, then i challenge you to walk into your local pet store and contimplate the thought of whether or not the fierce Chihuahua has been roaming the earth for more hundreds of thousands of years.

Who are you talking to? You quoted yourself. I also told YOU that YOU can not declare that you accept micro evolution but not Macro. Please follow along.

I quoted myself so that you could re-read what i wrote and discover i said nothing about satan... and yes, you can believe in microevolution without believing in macro... wanna know how? because that is what I believe! woot! anyway, if you want to try and prove me wrong about macroevolution, i really would like to know.

Well if I asked you to cross the street could you do that? If I asked you to walk to the next town over would that be impossible for you to accomplish? But that is what you are essentially stating when you say that micro evolution is possible but macro is not for some odd reason.

but see, you used the wrong word... possible? yes. plausible? not so much. i'm a Christian, so you can tell me that my faith is also implausible if you'd like... but my faith isn't based on science, while evolution is... and yet somehow there is no scientific proof of a scientific theory which approximately equates to no substance.

again, i'm going to ask the same question... can somebody point me to some evidence that macroevolution really occurred, and why has there been no documented evidence of such an occurrence?

oh, and walking 20 minutes away compared to changing from a fish into an upright walking human is a little bit different... thats like comparing apples to laundry detergent.

So essentially you are telling me that because you are Christian you won’t listen to anything I say anyway? Why should I waste my time then? Also, why would your god allow for micro evolution if he supposedly created you and every other animal perfectly designed and formed already? You can’t just pick and choose the little bits you want to believe. Show me proof that anything was ever created fully formed and ready to go. Surely your god is omnipotent and that should have been a snap for him. Explain Neanderthal man and why his mitochondrial DNA sequencing is divergent of Homo sapien. How many tries did your god require in order to create human?

Dont you understand what an analogy is?

hmm... neanderthals... that would be microevolution right? right. i absolutely want to hear evidence of my questions, whether i'm Christian, Buddhist, Satanic, etc.

see, the Bible is very vague about how everything was created... for me to say macroevolution is impossible would be limiting the power of my God and i absolutely believe he could have made the universe in any way he liked. I merely just want proof... all you have done was divert my original question by turning it into, "you cant blah blah blah." either you know of proof or you dont... plain and simple.

most people are familiar with the 7 day theory from Genesis... the only thing is that no one really knows how long each "day" was... it also says in the bible that a blink of the eye is like an entire lifetime to God, so therefore the Earth really could be billions of years old... we just don't know.

you can keep turning this on me, but all i've asked... i believe it was about 4 times... is for proof, and for an explanation on why macroevolution doesn't continue to happen...

i understand what an analogy is... but yours was a horrible, horrible stretch...

No, that wouldnt be microevolution.

No it isnt. How is telling you that it is the same process that simply requires a greater length of time asking you to make a "stretch."

I was just curious as to why elephants are so unlike antelope and cows and horses and have knees and breasts like humans. This feature is so totally different from most herbivores. They are also very intelligent, and emotional.

I did not mean to upset you or anyone else, nor do I care to argue about evolution vs. creationism.

Not my thing. I'm not really a "die hard fan" of either one.

I am satisfied that elephants are related to humans and that's probably why they retained a few physical traits.

Your right its like walking to the moon. It would take billions of years. The analogy is actually quite genius. Each change of a protein can change not only a morphological aspect and characteristic of the creature in question, but it can also make no physical change, but when paired with other changes it can have sweeping change for the reproducibility with the group that did not get that change, thus separating them from sharing genes. Once this occurs change will branch off and eventually the two species will look very different.

Its very complex to explain in laymen terms that someone so undereducated on the processes can understand, however the fact that small steps are the fundamentals parts to evolution, and also the fundamental parts of walking across the street makes this a fabulous analogy. Just like each step is but a teeny tiny fraction of the distance to the moon, if you let them add up over billions of years you get big change, or big distance, perfect analogy in my not so humble opinion.

Here, study.

http://mingle2.com/topic/show/202703

There is a lot you need to learn to catch up.

Yeah I guess that analogy is a bit oversimplified but I don’t really understand how people can say that micro evolution is possible within a species but macro evolution over the course of 100 of thousands of years is somehow totally implausible.

Its the last gasp of a closed mind trying to make sense of a failing ideology.

If he thinks that is too hard to believe or comprehend, wait until he hears about the paradox of something vs. nothing and how, according to my new calculations,

... we don't really exist.


http://mingle2.com/topic/show/204224