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 : Evolution -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jacques Chitte who wrote (10620)	12/7/2010 1:46:44 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 69300

Okay, so speciation IS part of evolution. But you say evolutionary theory doesn't specify any mechanism. What was all that natural selection business about? Mutations ... endosymbiosis ..... etc? Also, if the mechanism of speciation is unknown, how can ID be rejected as a hypothesis .... particularly when any and every other convenient mechanism is pushed forward? --------------------------------------------------------------- My counterargument has been that the mechanism of speciation need not be known for the statistics and chronology of speciations to be scientifically significant. The theory deserves to be called theory on the strength of established data, which do not (yet?) give us the insight into how speciation works. Okay, there is "data" that speciation exists so that proves the theory even if we have no idea how speciation occurs. Now how do we know that speciation exists? Whats the data? Well, because species exist, so their existence is the data that proves speciation and thus evolutionary theory. This "theory" is seeming weaker and weaker.