At A&M? Get real.
So do Christian professors flog their faith in class there?
"What's the difference between "chemical evolution" and "biological evolution"?"
Pretty much everything with the possible exception of natural selection.
And yet, you didn't describe any of those many differences.
"Other than that one is hypothetical. "
Well, that would be a biggie. Biological evolution has a substantial body of evidence behind it.
And chemical evolution?
"The concept of species may differ somewhat for different forms of life, but there are species of bacteria."
There are. However, if you think about prokaryote species like you do animal species, you will get really confused.
So do prokaryote species reproduction (by division of course) sometimes produce another prokaryote species?
"Okay, make the term species as vague as you want and you can claim anything"
I didn't make the terminology.
Granted, biological terms are often vaguely defined though.
"But we don't get by selective breeding two kinds of creatures which can't interbreed. "
In some senses we have. Try crossing a chihuahua with an Irish Wolfhound. It ain't going to happen without help.
So are chihuahuas and wolfhounds not members of the same species? Oh right, depends on what you mean by species. So the answer might be yes or no.
"BTW biology would be a more rigorous science if it had terms with firm definitions."
It is getting there. The genetic techniques that were developed during the 1970's were the final pieces to the puzzle. It will take a few more decades to settle down, but biology has been going through a revolution because of it. The portion that is purely observational is shrinking by the day.
Biology is being shaken by revolutionary paradigm shifting advances in biochemistry, though its probably NOT gonna settle down in a few more decades. And hopefully the science will be improved from its present primitive state.
"Well, because races can and do interbreed with no problems."
So?
So I am using a firm definition of species. If they can produce fertile offspring, they're in the same species. If not, they aren't.
"How many human species do you think we should recognize? "
One. The things you mention is probably why Linnaeus made the exception he did. And that was before humans were as mobile as they are now.
But, take a Watusi, an Aborigine, an Asian, etc. They are very morphologically distinct. Much more so than, say, a black bass and a white bass.
So why all the observations about sickle cell carring blacks and Ashkenazi Jews? |
