Is this a valid example of evolution?

Question

If no, why not?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/biology/variationandinheritance/3evolutionrev5.shtml

wordman---need a yes or a no there buddy. BTW---evolution need not change a species to be evolution.

enviro---sorry I meant the ecoli experiment

enviro---BTW Darwin has been long dead....they've made some progress since then...so what about the ecoli?

ponderer----just showing evolution is a fact, one step at a time is how we do it in science.

ponderer---we've come a long way since Darwin.......you go back 100+ years to criticize the author of a book who's had most of assertions proven correctly in a field that hadn't been researched by anyone else yet......I'm not talking about 100+ years ago I'm talking about today, now and 1 simple example of evolution...that's all....you can back up the "gotta defend my beliefs" truck now.

ponderer ---I apologize I've misread your post....please disregard the previous posts.

envirodude----it takes more than one mutation to change a species....over the millenia they add up........I love this macro-evolution argument, it's religion on the ropes.....we keep giving them the answer and they keep ignoring it because they don't have a backup argument...a Plan B so to speak.

envirodude---"I notice you did not answer the question: Do you think a whale came from a bear?"---did you post this a question in the forum because I didn't see it?

No. They both came from the same ancestor though.

Answer 1

microevolution builds up over millions of years to create full-blown evolution... so yes, this is actual "real" evolution, although not very interesting

Answer 2

No. Darwin did not "think a bear came from a whale". By way of illustration, he gave a hypothetical example of how natural selection might work, by a swimming bear maybe becoming as large as a whale (and as it was a bit simplistic and silly, he deleted it from later versions of the huge Origin of Species). He did NOT say that whales came from bears.

This is the kind of dishonesty that anti-evolutionists must stoop to time and time again to maintain their denial.

Just like, the origin of the universe is nothing to do with evolution or geology. And the "where did it come from" "argument" applies equally to a Creator, and is thus NOT any sort of logical argument against astrophysics anyway. Again with the intellectual dishonesty.

Straw-man characterisation of abiogenesis. Again, blatant dishonesty. And still not evolution.

And then the real blatant whopper of a lie. Nebraska man getting taught at a university???? NO. "Nebraska man" was published by a newspaper journalist/artist in 1922!!! based on a pigs tooth. And promptly proved to be nothing of the sort when the first scientists had a look at the site in 1925. It was never considered anything but a possible ape or pigs tooth by scientists in the meantime. Yet his university course told him it was the "missing link"???

What a disgraceful liar.

There are copious transitional species between reptiles and mammals. There is even a transtional branch still living - the monotremes. And there is an overwhelming mountain of evidence for evolution.

Oh and pepper moths becoming white again would be evolution too!

And the final bit is just too utterly lacking in logic to even bother.

-------

But anyway, yes, nice example. Examples of speciation would be even better (see link).

Answer 3

It is a great example of adaptation. The peppered moth that went from white to dark is still a moth. And what Darwinist's don't tell you is that after the London industrial revolution, the moth's went back to their natural white colors.

Do you think a whale came from a bear? Or a bear came from a whale? Darwin did.

edit:

From your link E.coli can grow and multiply rapidly .... the mutation will give rise to an antibiotic-resistant strain of E.coli.

Hmm, doesn't say that E Coli is anything else but E Coli. Granted, it has mutated, and adapted to the environment, but it is still an E Coli.

Kind of like the moth that stays a moth, or a horse that was once as big as a cat, is now a horse that is taller than a man.

Answer 4

Cool link

Answer 5

Yep

Answer 6

Yup, looks good to me.

Answer 7

These are some minor changes not the formation of separate species.

It's a far cry from 'slime to man'!