Slashdot Mirror
Butterfly Unlocks Evolution Secret
Anonymous Coward writes "The BBC has an article about a dramatic discovery in the quest for understanding evolution. From the article: 'Why one species branches into two is a question that has haunted evolutionary biologists since Darwin. Given our planet's rich biodiversity, "speciation" clearly happens regularly, but scientists cannot quite pinpoint the driving forces behind it. Now, researchers studying a family of butterflies think they have witnessed a subtle process, which could be forcing a wedge between newly formed species.'"
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/12/25/002420 8&tid=105&tid=159
firstposr
Zonk posted it, and I can't find a dupe for it. What the hell's going on here?!
Can someone please find me the dupe? I'm freaking out, man...
Fantasy Football
After reading the the article I wonder why dogs, for example, do not fracture into mutliple species? Great Danes for example do not repoduce with say Boston Terriers. Their genetic line are continously reinforced and isolated.
actually as a moslem i was taught by moslems and christians that jesus' messagae [muslims belive him a prophet bt not the son of god]
wasa live like me - be nice and inclusive
but no matter what - i forgive and we will all go to heaven.
perobably not very good for business [churches moques and temple revenues down , partying goes up] probably why they preach hate in the name of one of the first anarachist reveolutionary
i wonder how long before the creationists demand the scienctists personal data:
0 2224&tid=158
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/07/24/0
Evolution isn't a "theory" in that sense of the word, any more than the theory of gravity is "just a theory". Both are fact as far as the scientific community is concerned.
If evolution is "fact" then why the need to study it further?
To me, a confirmed fact would mean that we know (that we know) 100% of everything about the theroy to be correct - therefore, why study it further?
Don't get me wrong, my beliefs sway strongly towards evolution as there is a lot of evidence associated with it. But it is still a theroy - it's just a lot more plausible than many others.
"Who says nothing is impossible? Some people do it every day!" - Alfred E. Neuman
Some of us think that God _designed_ evolution.
"But science can only be created by those who are thoroughly imbued with the aspiration toward truth and understanding. This source of feeling, however, springs from the sphere of religion. To this there also belongs the faith in the possibility that the regulations valid for the world of existence are rational, that is, comprehensible to reason. I cannot conceive of a genuine scientist without that profound faith. The situation may be expressed by an image: science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind. Though I have asserted above that in truth a legitimate conflict between religion and science cannot exist, I must nevertheless qualify this assertion once again on an essential point, with reference to the actual content of historical religions. This qualification has to do with the concept of God. During the youthful period of mankind's spiritual evolution human fantasy created gods in man's own image, who, by the operations of their will were supposed to determine, or at any rate to influence, the phenomenal world. Man sought to alter the disposition of these gods in his own favor by means of magic and prayer. The idea of God in the religions taught at present is a sublimation of that old concept of the gods. Its anthropomorphic character is shown, for instance, by the fact that men appeal to the Divine Being in prayers and plead for the fulfillment of their wishes."
Albert Einstein: "Science, Philosophy and Religion, A Symposium", published by the Conference on Science, Philosophy and Religion in Their Relation to the Democratic Way of Life, Inc., New York (1941)
No sig for the moment.
I have often seen people use the provable/unprovable argument against ID. ID states that life arose from an intelligent designer instead of from natural, random (unintelligent) processes. Here is an intelligent design claim:
There is NO natural/random unintelligent process that could produce a living organism (because, for non-ID evolution to be true, you would have to have life from nonlife).
To falsify that, you would have to come up with just ONE unintelligent process that created a living organism. Now, here's a Darwinist claim:
SOME unintelligent natural/random process created a living organism.
To falsify THAT, you would have to rule out an infinite number of natural/random processes.
Now, which one sounds falsifiable?
I, too, love science and the new and exciting discoveries that come about with regularity. That's not in contradiction with believing in intelligent design.
I'm pro-accordion and I vote
In 2101 war was beginning.
Main screen turn on.
It's You!
All your base are belong to us.
In the late 20th and early 21st century, several startling scientific breakthroughs were made. Most notably, the human race (as it was known back then) discovered cloning and they also discovered that humans were acutally comprise of 500 different groups with homosexuals being the most genetically pure of the entire species. Once this was revealed, the gay and lesbian faction of all the world's military set out on a power play to dominate the world. They had discovered the secret to converting all heterosexuals into homosexuals through the use of Oxytocin. Just a simple change in the way that the brain deciphers the chemical emission and all men became gay and all women lesbian. Utopia had finally arrived. This happened in 2025 and was an important day in human history.
It's been 76 years since that day and the Earth is a very different place. Wars have stopped worldwide. Religion has finally been rightfully expunged. World hunger has been eradicated. The bizarre and dangerous practice of heterosexuality has been completely eliminated and engineered out of the gene pool. And more importantly, the Earth's population is finally shrinking since reproduction is now completely optional and not a function of sex in any way. Reproduction is now solely achieved through cloning and the United World Gene Bank keeps a very strict world census to make certain that we lower the population from the all time high in 2010 of 14 billion people to the eventual goal of 500,000 people world wide. So far plans have progressed beautifully. We are currently at the 1990s world population level of 11.2 billion people.
We've also been moving a lot of people offworld to the various colonies spreading out of Sol. One thing we've learned is that as the population shrinks, there is more to go around. The heterosexuals of the 20th century had exceeded Earth's carrying capacity and drastically reduced the human race's chance of survival due to overpopulation. But fortunately, with the conversion to gay and lesbian lifestyles for every man, woman and child on the planet, we've increased the liklihood of humanity's survival for at least another thousand years. As sad as it sounds, we were lucky to have had the (Nixon Administration designed virus to kill black people) AIDS virus to thin out some of the world population. To bad it wasn't more effective on heteros. But now that we've found a cure since we now know that it goes after the gene that determines sexual preference, it's a non issue. It is kind of ironic that the Republican party with all it's anti-Gay and anti-Lesbian rhetoric actually knew in secret that people are born this way and not made.
The only conflagration we've had in the past 15 years are the great shampoo and conditioner wars of 2014. These were sparked by a vicious disagreement on hair care products between the Carson party and the Jackson party. Fortunately, the Carson party won the war and we all have nice feathered blond hair with nice tans. The world is much healthier now.
Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.
James 2:19