Re: Using evolution's effects

On May 1, 3:39 pm, livewire <andre...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
One thing most people forget, on BOTH sides of the discussion, is that
we have been using the effects of evolution for over ten thousand
years.

Nope.



After domesticating animals, we began toying with their internal
workings...

This is an example of Intelligent Design.

adapting to drinking cows' milk fairly recently (compared to the
actual age of the universe). Since that time, our ancestors began
breeding cows

"Breeding" cows has nothing to do with evolution. It is using your
"intelligence" to "design" a result that you are aiming for. In other
words, it is intelligent design.

Also, genetics does not equal evolution. Genetics and breeding would
be expected in a Creationist scenario. Breeding is even mentioned in
the Bible.

It is SPECIATION which is forbidden in a Creationist scenario.
Everything else is allowed, such as genetic variation and even Natural
Selection within species.

You evolutionists keep trying to define evolution in the usual
chameleon-shifting ways, to make it look more plausible. But I won't
allow you to do so. Evolution equals speciation period. That is why
Darwin called his book "Origin of Species."

Anything less than speciation is not contested by ANYONE, and
certainly not by Creationists. Every Creationist agrees with both
genetic variation and natural selection WITHIN species. So stop trying
to use those to back up your ultra-weak theory.

that had the gene for high milk production as well, or bulls that
carried the gene for high milk output. Through successive breedings,
the amount of milk produced began exceeding either parents' ancestors'
milk production levels.

Yeah, through successive applications of Intelligent Design, the
amount of milk produced began exceeding either parents' anscestors'
milk production levels. Do you have some sort of point?


display the same characteristics, etc. The geometric sequence created
here is very powerful, and if the attribute is strong enough in the
population to make a difference in the quality of life, then it may
become the predominant trait in the species.

The Geometric sequence is what happens when you apply ID to
naturalistic processes.



Again, I highly suggest reading Dawkins' "The Blind Watchmaker," it
certainly cleared up many questions I had.


Dawkins is a raving idiot. His arguments are ridiculous, often
centuries out of date, and hilarious in the parts where he is trying
to be dead serious.




.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Out-dated theory
    ... commercial gain - it's called selective breeding. ... It is only because there are limits to what breeding can ... Why genetic engineering? ... All the alleged triumphs of laboratory evolution - moths on polluted trees, ...
    (uk.religion.christian)
  • Re: Darwins principle of divergence - Tautology
    ... nor very strong, would not have been used for breeding, and will thus ... that when Darwin talks about "the inferior animals ... ... All Darwin had was a dead bone after the event, ... evolution entry on Wikipedia. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Re: Using evolutions effects
    ... "Breeding" cows has nothing to do with evolution. ... Darwin called his book "Origin of Species." ... certainly not by Creationists. ... milk production levels. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Mary Ann from "Gilligans Island" popped for weed
    ... *his* evolved choice, tho... ... and who was still breeding. ... evolution isn't working properly here in OH. ... We generally died about the time our child bearing ability waned, ...
    (alt.true-crime)
  • Re: This Getting Plain Silly .
    ... The theory of evolution is sound. ... breeding of numerous species alive today. ... Yes, we are apes too. ...
    (uk.sport.football.clubs.celtic)