Evolution: Not Only the Fittest Survive
Darwin’s notion that only the fittest survive has been called into question by new research published in the journal Nature. A collaboration between the Universities of Exeter and Bath in the UK, with a group from San Diego State University in the US, challenges our current understanding of evolution by showing that biodiversity may evolve where previously thought impossible.
The work represents a new approach to studying evolution that may eventually lead to a better understanding of the diversity of bacteria that cause human diseases.
Conventional wisdom has it that for any given niche there should be a best species, the fittest, that will eventually dominate to exclude all others.
This is the principle of survival of the fittest. Ecologists often call this idea the `competitive exclusion principle’ and it predicts that complex environments are needed to support complex, diverse populations.
Professor Robert Beardmore, from the University of Exeter, said: “Microbiologists have tested this principle by constructing very simple environments in the lab to see what happens after hundreds of generations of bacterial evolution, about 3,000 years in human terms. It had been believed that the genome of only the fittest bacteria would be left, but that wasn’t their finding. The experiments generated lots of unexpected genetic diversity.”
This test tube biodiversity proved controversial when first observed and had been explained away with claims that insufficient time had been allowed to pass for a clear winner to emerge.
The new research shows the experiments were not anomalies. – More here
On freerepulic.com, a Catholic biased website, which discriminates against non-Catholics, in an evil way, there were these significant comments about this story:
“This isn’t really news, it just shows that the self-correction claim of scientists is for all practical purposes mythical. Extinction happens suddenly to entire taxa due to various catastrophes; mutations arise at random; and that’s it”
and a reply to that,
“‘This probably isn’t news… even to Darwin. It is the most adept in the given the selection circumstances, that survive, and not the “fittest”.’
That’s what the “fittest” means: those most fit to survive under the circumstances. This “fitness” may be a genetic predisposition, innate qualities, size, color, etc., or even something learned…but whoever or whatever has it will have a greater chance to survive under specific circumstances.”
Here is a related article:
Why Do Evolutionists Insist On Using Strawmen and Bait and Switch Against Creationists and Fundamentalists?
Post link: http://talkorigins.tk
Written in response to an essay by Jorge A Fernandez entitled “Talk.Origins: Deception by Omission”:
Why Do Creationists Insist on Linking Abiogenesis and Evolution?
One of the problems that Christian fundamentalists (specifically Biblical literalists) have in dealing with biologists who say “Evolutionary biology and abiogenesis are two different topics” is that they have no answer.
And why do fundamentalist evolutionists insist on using over-generalizations and strawmen attacks on creationists like that? Even a moron could type “abiogenesis problems” in a search engine and find articles by ICR and AIG treating them as separate, and hundreds of others.
And what hypocrisy:
In Talk.Orgins’ pre-feedback rules, it says:
“Understand that abusive, inflammatory, and willfully dishonest statements, as well as cowardly anonymity (e.g., bogus email addresses), lend no credibility to one’s position. ”
And yet childish jabs at fundamentalists like the screed above are accept by the Talk.Orgins cult? What did you do take a survey on fundamentalists Jorge? So you said, “Hey you who say abiogenesis is impossible and therefore evolution, are you a fundie?”
Being that Talk.Origins doesn’t obey it’s own hypocritical rules (and by the way where did you get those rules? Did you just magically come up with them on their own, or could CHRISTIANITY HAVE POSSIBLY INFLUENCED THOSE ARBITRARY RULES? YOU KNOW: LIKE, OH: “DO TO OTHERS AS YOU WOULD HAVE THEM DO TO YOU”? OR, “DON’T LIE,” “DON’T MURDER,” “DON’T ENDANGER THE LIFE OF YOUR NEIGHBOR,” OR “LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.” OR HOW ABOUT, “DON’T EXCHANGE REVILING FOR REVILING”? You are blind credit thieving hypocrites, just like your father Satan.
But here’s an answer for you stereotyping moron: “IF LIFE CREATED BY RANDOM CHANCE ISN’T POSSIBLE, THEN HOW THE HELL IS ONE ANIMAL TURNING INTO ANOTHER BY RANDOM CHANCE? WHICH IS HARDER: THE CREATION OF MULTI-EMOTIONAL, SENTIENT, REPRODUCING (IN MULTIPLE WAYS) LIVING THINGS, THAT ARE BORN KNOWING HOW TO EAT AND REPRODUCE AND SURVIVE, BY RANDOM CHANCE, BY STILL UNKNOWN MEANS, OR, AFTERWARDS, WHEN ALL THAT MAGIC IS ACCOMPLISHED, A LITTLE ROUND BACTERIA TURNING INTO A LONG ONE WITH A DIFFERENT CELL WALL AN MORE ARMS?
And why do evolutionists keep insisting on pretending “evolution” only means one thing, and so committing the logical fallacy of ambiguity by doing so and setting up, in your willful bigotry, the same old strawman argument of “Creationists say evolution is wrong” against us? MACRO AND MICRO EVOLUTION ARE NOT THE SAME THINGS. HOW MANY TIMES DO YOU NEED TO BE TOLD THAT YOU PSYCHOPATHS?
And why do evolutionist keep insisting on associating CREATIONISTS AND FUNDAMENTALIST CHRISTIANS when they attack creationists? What a big “Ooops, oh yeah, we, forgot we do that all the time.” And why do Darwinists insist on calling fundamentalists “biblical literalists”? Evil morons: can you stop misdefining fundamentalism and pretending we believe a multihorned monster is going to come out of the sea with a whore riding on it with a crown on her head, you conniving ignorant arrogant morons who hate to be called what you are? Do you love the fallacy of ambiguity much? Love using weasel words much? Love bait and switch much? Bigoted much? Discriminate much? Block science much? Hypocrites much? So much for your CREDibility and love. What you love to do is argue in your lazy mindedness towards the truth and hatred towards God.
And please: stop the avoidance game already: IT IS YOU, WHO HAVE NO ANSWER. NO ANSWER FOR THAT PRACTICE AND NO ANSWER FOR WHERE THE EVIDENCE FOR ABIOGENESIS, “EVOLUTION”, OR YOUR BIG DEFLATED BANG. You have, NO TRANSITIONAL FOSSILS. IT’S YOU WHO WORSHIP A GOD OF THE GAPS. We do have an ever increasing amount of living fossils though, including bacteria that “skeptics” insist can’t be real even when their own scientist kin find them in “millions of years old” rocks, tar, animal stomachs and ice. I wonder why they just can’t believe it? I wonder. Not: BECAUSE THE “MILLIONS OF YEARS OLD BACTERIA” ARE VERY LITTLE DIFFERENT THEN THEIR MODERN ANCESTORS. And of course, they know their enemies, the real scientists, the fundamentalists and creationists, will point that out. So no evidence against their God of the Gaps Trinity: Big Bang God, Magic Puddle of Spontaneously Generated Life From Whatever Soup God and Magical Animals God,which forms the “Flying Spaghetti and Meatballs Monster” godhead, is good enough for a deluded liar who refuses to love the truth, and is only interested in rebellion.
More on the Mainstream Science cult and how these pleasure and money-addicted Mainstream morons obstructs scientific progress and causes it to stagnate and enables mass murder, even of babies: http://vainstream.tk
Why ‘sophisticated’ cavemen were not so different to us
from the DailyMail.co.uk
Cavemen were far more sophisticated than their dimwitted reputation suggests, a leading archaeologist claims.
Professor John J Shea says evidence of early humans’ weapons, symbols and burials 195,000 years ago shows they had more in common with us than we like to think.
He claims Homo sapiens emerged all at once, ‘not as modern-looking people first and as a modern-behaving people later.’
Professor Shea, of Stony Brook University, New York, started researching ‘behavioral variability’ in 2002 after excavating a 195,000-year-old site in Ethiopia.
‘Nothing about the stone tools … struck me as archaic or primitive,’ he wrote in his article, Refuting a Myth About Human Origins, published by American Scientist magazine.
‘We need to discard an incorrect and outdated idea about human evolution, the belief that prehistoric Homo sapiens can be divided into “archaic” and “modern” humans.’ [NO: YAH THINK?] You’re about 6,500 years late. Anti-Christians sure are stubborn. You tell them 34,000,000 times God made us intelligent from the start, 6,500 years ago, show them the evidence in every direction they look, and after 34,000,000 years of ignoring that they finally evolve to say, “Eureka! We just found out our fathers weren’t as stupid as we thought!” Why not just say, “Nanny nanny boo boo we can’t hear you, oh look what we found, all on our own, but ur still wrong, and we’re still right, we’re the scientists, ur not, hahaha.”? It’s not like your followers would reject that either, being that they deeply hate God and his children (meaning: those he loves). And how interesting: Only 34 people commented on that article and it’s already been a day. Just goes to show how resistant evolutionists are to truth, even when their science leaders give a sliver of it to them. You’re turned people into monsters you Mainstreamers. That includes you news propagandists and hate-profiteers who support them, like Wikipedia, Encyclopedia Brittanica, National Geographic, Livescience, Sciencedaily, Physorg, Discovery Networks, the BBC, Scientific American, Discover Magazine, Popular Science, the Los Angeles Times, the New York Times, the Washington Post, Greenpeace and countless other myth machines.
Post link: http://sheepdog.tk
A mutant sheep that looks like a god. There’s no end to the amazing things God shows us eh?
May an alien messed with the baby sheep’s DNA? What’s next? Rhino dogs? Hippo dogs? Giraffe dogs?
I can hear the music and lyrics now: “Teenage Mutant Ninja Sheep Dogs”. Don’t even talk about “evolution” Darwinists. That takes millions of years to make a transition like this, and it isn’t going to be a sudden change. In fact this is evidence against it, because it shows how similar DNA is (which is NOT evidence of evolution despite what Darwinists say), so similar, because there was no evolution, but a God who used very similar structures to create life on Earth.
I hope they clone this sheep, animal, whatever it is, and breed lots of them.
By the way, for those of you anti-Christian and fake Christian idiots who keep lobbing around the term, “sheeple”, you’re the ones being dumb:
The ‘intelligent’ side of sheep
Sheep can remember faces says professor
Study shows Welsh sheep ‘more clever than thought’
They pulled the wool over our eyes! Sheep are so intelligent they can make ‘executive decisions’
Far-farmyard-dunces-sheep-intelligent-think.html Baa! Far from being farmyard dunces, scientists insist that sheep are intelligent
Scientists say sheep are brighter than we thought. But they don’t know the half of it…
And about other animals, they aren’t stupid either, in comparison to intelligent humans, yes, but to our inventions (made possible by God, and which are often based on what we learn about them, no): www.animalbrains.tk
“Research Meteorologists See More Severe Storms Ahead: The Culprit — Global Warming” from ScienceDaily.com. Huh? I thought Global Warming was replaced by “Climate Change”, you know, to fool all us intelligent people and newbies in life into thinking no one ever said anything about Global Warming being that it’s gettin’ colder, not warmer (plus the fraud and bad science is gettin’ too risky for liberals to keep betting their “reputations” on). So which is it? Are we back on Global Warming as the appropriate term for whatever is happening in the minds of liberals now? And what in thee Hell is “research meteorologists”? What’s the diff between r.m. and an m? Is that like what skeptics are to scientists, like, cheap knock offs who wish they were scientists, but too lazy and stupid to actually be scientific? Isn’t there anything better for ScienceDaily aka Physorg to report on? How about why certain pizza’s tastes best? I’d say my fave but since I prob won’t get paid for it, no. Anyways: make up your minds liberals and whatever it is you are, stop going back and forth, you can’t have it both ways. Stop being cowards and get saved before you really do burn up, because the next time you burn, it won’t ever stop, and for many of you, it will much worse than a mere few degrees rise in temperature, and you’ll wish you were floating in a lake or ocean once you end up in Hell.