Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And allow me to say that peer-reviewed literature can go one way or another or the exact opposite way; so that if there could prevail no consensus among peers, peers also go into downgrading each other as not peer enough for each other on their respective self-accreditation of being a peer.
It appears that you do not even know what "peer reviewed" means or what the process of "peer review" entails.
That does not bode well for your alleged search "after the facts."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryrge
And you can do what I demand in few exact precise words.
Moving the goal posts? Typical creationist tactic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryrge
Like this:
Name of species from
Name of species to
Where, when, evidence
Who scientist or evolutionist
How, from chance mutation and natural selection or from the laboratory
Fine. Here goes:
Name of species from: Podaris sicula
Name of species to: Podaris mrcaruensis
Where, when, evidence: Pod Mrcaru, Croatia,"Rapid large-scale evolutionary divergence in morphology and performance associated with exploitation of a different dietary resource" PNAS 2008 105 (12) 4792-4795; published ahead of print March 14, 2008, doi:10.1073/pnas.0711998105
Who scientist or evolutionist:Anthony Herrel,Katleen Huyghe,Bieke Vanhooydonck,Thierry Backeljau,Karin Breugelmans,Irena Grbac,Raoul Van Damme,and Duncan J. Irschick
How, from chance mutation and natural selection or from the laboratory: Chance mutation and natural selection.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryrge
Then I will check it up on my own with published data in reputable peer-reviewed literature.
Why do I doubt that? Oh yeah... because I already gave you several peer-reviewed references a few days ago and you were incapable of looking up those.
But here, I made it even easier for you by giving you the reference with great detail. If you don't know... "PNAS" is the "Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences."
Are you sure you got the names correctly?
Name of species from: Podaris sicula
Name of species to: Podaris mrcaruensis
Not really into nitpicking, but we are into science, so you have got to be meticulously correct with your spelling of species' names.
I don't mind that you have not really given any workable links, though.
I have been up to this point in time trying to locate the very first report of such an account of a new species of lizard having developed from an extant previous species.
Would you like for being an expert on evolution tell me what you mean by a species?
Or what evolutionary biologists mean by a species?
So that we can be on firm ground to decide whether a new species has come about from a previous species?
You can do everyone a favor if you just share with us the very first source in published writing of this experiment by which a new species of lizard came about from a previous species.
That is if you know.
Anyway, suppose you tell us what is your most original source of this story?
Do you not know how to access a link or read English? I provided that information in both a scientific site and a video...No sound on your computer maybe?
Speciation often begins when a single species becomes geographically separated into two populations. Individuals cannot travel between the populations, preventing the two populations from interbreeding. Because the two populations cannot exchange genes, and because they may be subject to different environmental conditions, they slowly evolve differences.
Eventually the two populations become different enough that they do not interbreed even if they come into contact (in other words, they are ‘reproductively isolated’), and are therefore separate species.
Do you not know how to access a link or read English? I provided that information in both a scientific site and a video...No sound on your computer maybe?
Speciation often begins when a single species becomes geographically separated into two populations. Individuals cannot travel between the populations, preventing the two populations from interbreeding. Because the two populations cannot exchange genes, and because they may be subject to different environmental conditions, they slowly evolve differences.
Eventually the two populations become different enough that they do not interbreed even if they come into contact (in other words, they are ‘reproductively isolated’), and are therefore separate species.
Want more to ignore, or perhaps you are expecting something like this?
This is the most important text of your message:
Eventually the two populations become different enough that they do not interbreed even if they come into contact (in other words, they are ‘reproductively isolated’), and are therefore separate species.
But can you be more clear, precise, and exact?
Okay, in regard to lizards.
As you seem to be an expert on what is a species and therefore how to discern that a species is different from another species, answer these two questions:
Test 1. Do the members of one species reproduce with members of the other species? yes or no.
Test 2. Do their offsprings reproduce among themselves? yes or no.
Your possible answers are:
A. 1 yes 2 yes
B. 1 yes 2 no
C. 1 no 2 no
D. 1 no 2 yes
As you seem to be an expert on how to discern one species to be different from another, tell me your answer(s), whether it is A. or B. or C. or D., and you can choose not only one, but also two or three or even all four choices if you so prefer according to your expertise knowledge, so that I will know what you understand by a species being different from another species.
I am still doing my own probe and trying to get to the bottom of that 'story' of lizards of one species giving rise to lizards which are now making up another species.
I am still doing my own probe and trying to get to the bottom of that 'story' of lizards of one species giving rise to lizards which are now making up another species.
Ryrge
Are you disputing "descent with modification"? If you accept that genes can change, why can't you accept that given enough time, all of your genes would change?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryrge
To HistorianDude:
I am still doing my own probe and trying to get to the bottom of that 'story' of lizards of one species giving rise to lizards which are now making up another species.
Ryrge
Are you disputing "descent with modification"? If you accept that genes can change, why can't you accept that given enough time, all of your genes would change?
I am asking for a new species coming forth at present from a previous species by way of the theory of evolution, random mutation and natural selection, or by laboratory.
Someone says that he has one, a certain lizard species which has developed into a new lizard species.
I am asking for a new species coming forth at present from a previous species by way of the theory of evolution, random mutation and natural selection, or by laboratory.
This is roughly equivalent to humans evolving to use arsenic as food.
In a lab, duplicated, corroborated, peer-reviewed, published, fact.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
