Is macroevolution demonstrable?

[PaulP]

So if science is 'demonstrable', can you prove and test before me transpeciation/macroevolution?

[Eise]

6 hours ago, PaulP said:

So if science is 'demonstrable', can you prove and test before me transpeciation/macroevolution?

As you have shown already, you do not understand clearly what science is, I can only say: read talkorigins on macroevolution and its proofs. 

Further you could read Phi for All's very apt remark.

[Strange]

7 hours ago, PaulP said:

So if science is 'demonstrable', can you prove and test before me transpeciation/macroevolution?

There are lots of examples observed speciation. However, I suspect you will just reject them all and demand to see a dinosaur giving birth to a chicken.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html

[SamCogar]

On ‎4‎/‎30‎/‎2018 at 6:39 AM, Strange said:

There are lots of examples [of] observed speciation.

Sure is, and PaulP can observe it happening iffen he chooses to.

To wit: the transformation of a caterpillar to a butterfly, for one example.

 

Transpeciate - to change from one species to another; to transform.

 

Metamorphosis - a conspicuous and relatively abrupt change (transformation) in the animal's form or structure through cell growth and differentiation.

 

And "HA", ….. maybe caterpillars and butterflies should be declared "separate species" because they are incapable of sexual reproduction.

[CharonY]

1 minute ago, SamCogar said:

Sure is, and PaulP can observe it happening iffen he chooses to.

To wit: the transformation of a caterpillar to a butterfly, for one example.

 

Transpeciate - to change from one species to another; to transform.

 

Metamorphosis - a conspicuous and relatively abrupt change (transformation) in the animal's form or structure through cell growth and differentiation.

 

And "HA", ….. maybe caterpillars and butterflies should be declared "separate species" because they are incapable of sexual reproduction.

That is a horrible example as they are just different stages of the same organism.  

[John Cuthber]

On 4/30/2018 at 4:31 AM, PaulP said:

So if science is 'demonstrable', can you prove and test before me transpeciation/macroevolution?

Well, it would be interesting to see a chihuahua trying to mate with a great Dane.            

[dimreepr]

7 minutes ago, John Cuthber said:

Well, it would be interesting to see a chihuahua trying to mate with a great Dane.            

That would definitely go viral, the irony would be an amusing offspring. 

[Phi for All]

4 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

That would definitely go viral, the irony would be an amusing offspring. 

Ruh roh, Raggy!

[John Cuthber]

19 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

That would definitely go viral, the irony would be an amusing offspring. 

Probably the only offspring.

[swansont]

2 hours ago, SamCogar said:

Sure is, and PaulP can observe it happening iffen he chooses to.

To wit: the transformation of a caterpillar to a butterfly, for one example.

 

Transpeciate - to change from one species to another; to transform.

 

Metamorphosis - a conspicuous and relatively abrupt change (transformation) in the animal's form or structure through cell growth and differentiation.

 

And "HA", ….. maybe caterpillars and butterflies should be declared "separate species" because they are incapable of sexual reproduction.

That's not evolution. We've talked about this before.

maybe expend more effort learning what evolution is rather than answering questions about it 

[SamCogar]

1 hour ago, swansont said:

That's not evolution. We've talked about this before.

maybe expend more effort learning what evolution is rather than answering questions about it 

Oh, I sorry, ……. I thought the question was ……. "transpeciation" as stated by PaulP.

So, I was assuming that “transpeciation” could be best explained by "horizontal gene transfers" during the Cambrian “Explosion” Period when most major animal phyla began appearing in the fossil record, ……. or at any time during the past 500mya, …… or in bio-genetic labs during the past 30 years, ….. that has resulted in new species, sub-species, new varieties, etc., etc., …… but is apparently not considered “evolution of the species”, ……. Right?

[swansont]

4 minutes ago, SamCogar said:

Oh, I sorry, ……. I thought the question was ……. "transpeciation" as stated by PaulP.

Metamorphosis is not an example of that.

4 minutes ago, SamCogar said:

So, I was assuming that “transpeciation” could be best explained by "horizontal gene transfers" during the Cambrian “Explosion” Period when most major animal phyla began appearing in the fossil record, ……. or at any time during the past 500mya, …… or in bio-genetic labs during the past 30 years, ….. that has resulted in new species, sub-species, new varieties, etc., etc., …… but is apparently not considered “evolution of the species”, ……. Right?

None of that is the example you gave.

[Itoero]

On ‎30‎-‎4‎-‎2018 at 5:31 AM, PaulP said:

So if science is 'demonstrable', can you prove and test before me transpeciation/macroevolution?

On Wikipedia you find a lot evidence concernng macroevolution:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_transitional_fossils

[Scott of the Antares]

4 hours ago, Phi for All said:

Ruh roh, Raggy!

That’s worth a +1 of anyone’s money!

[Moontanman]

On 4/29/2018 at 11:31 PM, PaulP said:

So if science is 'demonstrable', can you prove and test before me transpeciation/macroevolution?

 

Please define what you mean by "transpeciation/macroevolution" would a population of lizards evolving into two different species of lizard do? Or do you have some different definition? 

[Herrie]

If one means e.g. a cat like species giving rise to a new cat like species then the answer is yes.  Even young earth creationists have no problem with this.  They accept that within a "kind" different species can evolve. (one dog like species evolved into wild dogs, wolves, coyotes, etc.)  If however you mean that a dinosaur evolves into a bird then the answer is no.  (there are bird fossils that are older than many dinosaur fossils and these bird fossils are also older than archeopteryx)  All the transitional fossils between different phyla are questionable or have been shown not to be transitional at all.  It all depends on ones perspective.  Experiments with fruit flies just gave rise to more flies and not to a non-insect like species.  I hope that this helps.

[John Cuthber]

1 hour ago, Herrie said:

these bird fossils are also older than archeopteryx

Really?

 

[Moontanman]

3 hours ago, Herrie said:

If one means e.g. a cat like species giving rise to a new cat like species then the answer is yes.  Even young earth creationists have no problem with this.  They accept that within a "kind" different species can evolve. (one dog like species evolved into wild dogs, wolves, coyotes, etc.)  If however you mean that a dinosaur evolves into a bird then the answer is no.  (there are bird fossils that are older than many dinosaur fossils and these bird fossils are also older than archeopteryx)  All the transitional fossils between different phyla are questionable or have been shown not to be transitional at all.  It all depends on ones perspective.  Experiments with fruit flies just gave rise to more flies and not to a non-insect like species.  I hope that this helps.

Since archeopteryx was not a modern type bird and not in the direct evolutionary path of modern birds not to mention that modern birds are but a tiny subset of flying dinosaurs known as birds I'm not sure what your point is. 

[Francis]

On ‎30‎/‎04‎/‎2018 at 1:31 PM, PaulP said:

So if science is 'demonstrable', can you prove and test before me transpeciation/macroevolution?

One can observe a tadpole evolving into a frog in a matter of a few weeks and you doubt macroevolution?!

[dimreepr]

7 minutes ago, Francis said:

One can observe a tadpole evolving growing into a frog in a matter of a few weeks and you doubt macroevolution?!

ftfy

[Sensei]

34 minutes ago, Francis said:

One can observe a tadpole evolving into a frog in a matter of a few weeks and you doubt macroevolution?!

No. It is not example of macroevolution. It is example of metamorphosis

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metamorphosis

"Metamorphosis is a biological process by which an animal physically develops after birth or hatching, involving a conspicuous and relatively abrupt change in the animal's body structure through cell growth and differentiation. Metamorphosis is iodothyronine-induced and an ancestral feature of all chordates."

 

Edited November 11, 2018 by Sensei

[Strange]

1 hour ago, Francis said:

One can observe a tadpole evolving into a frog in a matter of a few weeks and you doubt macroevolution?!

As noted in another thread, you are simply demonstrating your ignorance.