Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (383391)	5/9/2008 12:07:31 PM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1586776

"LOL. Sure. " Yep. "Of course not. He'd be fired if he did." At A&M? Get real. "What's the difference between "chemical evolution" and "biological evolution"?" Pretty much everything with the possible exception of natural selection. "Other than that one is hypothetical. " Well, that would be a biggie. Biological evolution has a substantial body of evidence behind it. "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. "Okay, make the term species as vague as you want and you can claim anything" I didn't make the terminology. "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. "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. "Well, because races can and do interbreed with no problems." So? "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.