View Single Post
  #176  
08-08-2003, 04:53 AM
Sydney
Oddworld Forums Founder
Queen of the Damned
 
: May 2000
: Australia
: 1,408
Rep Power: 25
Sydney  (32)

:
And your response is scientifically inaccurate. Mutations occure randomly. Ask any evolutionist scientist and they would tell you that species do not evolve from need. It is a random process with no specific goal. If a mutation is beneficial to a new environment, it will stay, and if it isn't it will probably not. But mutations do not occur just because there is a greater need to survive, they are random occurances
I never said that mutations aren't random, but natural selection certainly isn't random, because an animal is selected on a very rigid criteria: the environment. You fail to grasp the most basic concept of evolution if you're saying that evolution isn't driven by need. Like I explained in my previous post, the environment is what dictates whether or not an organism will survive. A species perfectly suited to its environment has no need to change, and therefore any variations will be ignored by the species as a whole. On the other hand, if the environment changes, or the species migrates, there might be a dramatic change of requirements for survival, and so the mechanism of evolution will choose those with features beneficial to survival while killing off those which are unable to cope with the changes. My point stands: a species suited perfectly will not change, and a species not suited will. This is the most integral aspect of evolution, it shouldn't confuse you.

:
Bacterial adaptation does not prove evolution. The bacteria is still the same type of bacteria. The only difference is that now they can resist a certain type of antibiotic. Macroevolution involves change across phylogenetic walls. This is not the case in bacteria adapting to antibiotics.
I don't understand how you can accept evolution on a minor scale but reject it on a major scale. Both are the same thing, there's no barrier between the two, they both operate using the same mechanisms.

If you're going to debate evolution, you should at least make sure you have a basis of understanding of the issue, because you seem majorly confused.
Reply With Quote