Not actually, these were lizards left on a island for 36 years, they have already started adapting to their new enviornment! Check it out. Lizards!
Cool, if you didn't know about their DNA they would be classified as a new species. In fact if it wasn't know that they were planted there they would be assigned sub species status.
Best,
Brett
8 comments:
"DNA analysis identified the lizards as identical to the species of the five adult pairs that were originally released on the island." This is awesome news-support for Intelligent Design and proof of adaptation without a hint of Evolutionary change. Well, I'm only half joking. I'm sure some would consider this evolutionary change, but again it isn't any more convincing than Darwin's finches. I guess the next logical step is remove the lizards and put them back in their original habitat and see if the new characteristics disappear or revert back to their previous state.
Steve
The next logical step would be to leave them be and come back and observe them again later.
And the fact that they evolved new organs basically says that macroevolution (which is just such a stupid term) is true. This more than changing size or color this is making new organs. What will these guys be in another 36 years. Evolution takes time.
Brett
Steve,
You keep bringing up this Dawkin's and lying about eyes or something. I tried looking it up because I never actually read about this. But I could only find information on Creationists sites. Could this be just more propaganda that you've read?
Brett
Oh and this article says they haven't done DNA testing yet.:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/04/080421-lizard-evolution.html
So if there are differences this is more proof of evolution via 'macroevolution'
Thanks for the link Erin!
Brett
I'm confused. The article says "DNA analysis identified the lizards as identical to the species of the five adult pairs that were originally released on the island" So did they or did they not do the DNA analysis? Exactly how long would this type of test take minutes? months? The only possible variation of note is the addition of the cecal valves. This would be a major plus for evolutionists if they could show that it was a mutation and had altered the DNA. Of course if the DNA is the same as the parent lizards you immediately see the problem; no change took place which wasn't already preprogrammed in the DNA, and then you run into the whole problem of Intelligent Design being a more plausible answer than spontaneous undetectable DNA changes.
-Steve
Well, one is from a blog the other from a more reliable news source, but that doesn't make it infallible. I could be a mistake on either parts.
I did read this in the comments of the first:
identical here does not mean "identical." It's funny that you would seize on that without realizing that the lizards are obviously not clones of each other. The only way to get identical genomes in two different individuals would be if the two were identical twins, and even in that case there is probably a copying error somewhere that makes them not "identical."
I'll wait to see if they do anymore research on this. It might have a been a base test or something, or they might have not released the paper yet and something got leaked out. I don't know.
This would not prove ID either way. You need to show that something was spontainiously created and that it is not possibly related to anything else. Either that or a signature'God Was Here";) That has not happened. This is meerly one small step in evolution. It's only 30 generations. But these changes are proof of 'macroevolution' to me.
Brett
When I say identical I mean it is the same species. All humans have human DNA, but obviously we aren't all identical twins. Adaptation to the environment without genetic change is more akin to a line of programming being executed than to a random mutation or spontaneous evolution. Remember evolution still can't get their act together and say what directs these changes. Evolutionists will say what happened as if that also provides the method. The fact that what the lizards developed is a pre-existing known trait of similar lizards, cecal valves, is further proof of a common designer. No one would seriously believe that the exact same appendage randomly occurred in the exact same anatomical location, with the exact same function; science just doesn't allow for it-unless evolution is a magic process and whatever happens can be explained as proving evolution. This is proof of design not luck or randomness. Evolution makes you ignore any appearance of intelligence. Everytime I find a painting on the sidewalk I recognize intelligence was at play. Sure some dyes and chalks are naturally forming, but it is less plausible that the intelligence displayed in sidewalk drawings is the work of undirected nature than the work of an artist. This doesn't even get into the whole body plan rigiditity we find in DNA-What we obseve again and again is slight modification within some pretty strict peremeters. If you looked at every person alive today you would see an extreme level of variation, but yet no one is moving away from being human-variation within a species. This is what nature shows us and what the fossil record shows.
-Steve
There is no evidence of design. Sorry Steve, comparing a painting to an animal is just like apples and oranges. We have DNA, junk DNA we have transitional fossils, molecular evidence. Your just sticking your head in the sand and saying la la la la la la. You tell me that cancer and birth defects only happened after the 'fall'. But this isn't true we have fossils of dinosaurs with cancers, infections... It just ridiculous. I'm supposed to be believe a few religious people and a few scientists that there is designs when the REST of the scientific world disagrees with you? Evolution has stood up to rigorous scientific testing for a 150 years. And your iriducable complexity was proven false in the 70's, before it was even thought of. You tell me at first this is evidence for adaption, something that both ID and evolution agree on. Something that happens WITHOUT a creator. Now you tell me this is designed. mmHmm.
Riiiight.
Brett
Post a Comment