Divergent Evolution Of New Species Is Not Genetically Expensive

PostmodernProphet said:
obviously because the divergence has not yet reached the level of speciation.......
Click to expand...

Divergence, in this context, means speciation, jackass. Look at the way it is used in the op article. I have used the word speciation to ask this question. No one ever uses divergence, in this context, to simply mean a genetic variation. Further, your first stupid posts on this show clearly that you meant that speciation occurs in individuals.

Does divergence or speciation occur within individuals or a group?
 
PostmodernProphet said:
divergence means divergence, jackass.......it does NOT mean speciation......speciation is the end point of divergence, it also needs a beginning......the whole process, including the beginning and the ending is divergence......
Click to expand...

Divergent evolution does mean speciation in the context of evolution. Besides I have also used the word speciation and you have given the same stupid answer.

Variations are common within a population and they can and do lead to evolution within the population. As I have explained to you repeatedly, divergence happens within a group due to accumulation of genetic variation between one group of a species and another.

I understand you are too much of a coward and a fool to make an honest defense of your silly beliefs and so you rely on tricks, deceitful use of language and backsliding. So just fuck off and/or slink away but it is quite clear that you claimed speciation occurs in the individual.

PostmodernProphet said:
you have the same problem with the first human that evolved from a primordial slime ancestor.....with the added complication of the frustration that must have occurred when he discovered the only other human that evolved was another guy......
Click to expand...


PostmodernProphet said:
it would be more stupid to believe that two humans happened to evolve at the same time and in the same place....I mean "shit happens" but how much shit do you expect to actually happen.....
Click to expand...

I responded with...

Professor Baxter said:
LOL. Speciation does not occur in one single individual alone, you fucking moron. That could not possibly work for a species dependent on sexual reproduction. You quite clearly do not have a clue what you are talking about. Nothing new, though.
Click to expand...

...and so you came back with...

PostmodernProphet said:
/grins...good, we both agree that speciation could not work....we're making progress.....
Click to expand...
 
PostmodernProphet said:
true, you have "explained" it repeatedly.....and each time I have told you where your mistake was......live with it....
Click to expand...

You, with your idiotic ideas about divergence or speciation in an individual, are the only one mistaken. You have not pointed out any of my mistakes, ever. You keep claiming you have but you can't list them explicitly. I can rattle off several of your stupid claims with links.

It would be quite easy for you to give a straight answer, state that divergence or speciation does occur amongst a group and not within an individual as you previously claimed. Since you refuse and only offer pussilanimous equivocations one has to assume that you are still holding to your error.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
I'm holding to reality......
Click to expand...

You are completely delusional ditzy deuce. Divergence or speciation does not happen in a single generation or to one individual as you claimed. Every sexually reproducing species shares in its own genic network, even though you claim there is no way for them to share genes. Those are part of the reality that you reject. You as so stupid, you are insane.
 
Professor Baxter said:
You are completely delusional ditzy deuce. Divergence or speciation does not happen in a single generation or to one individual as you claimed. Every sexually reproducing species shares in its own genic network, even though you claim there is no way for them to share genes. Those are part of the reality that you reject. You as so stupid, you are insane.
Click to expand...

never claimed it, as you are well aware....I simply reject your contention that divergence equals speciation.....you can characterize it any way you want but it doesn't make you any less foolish.....
 
PostmodernProphet said:
never claimed it, as you are well aware....I simply reject your contention that divergence equals speciation.....you can characterize it any way you want but it doesn't make you any less foolish.....
Click to expand...

I am well aware that you did claim it and I have posted the quotes. Hell you repeated just a few posts back. You are trying to pretend divergence means something other than speciation. But you are not going to slip out of it that way, you invertebrate, because you clealy used the word speciation (post 144) and claimed that it was a phenomena that supposedly happened to an individual alone.
 
Professor Baxter said:
I am well aware that you did claim it and I have posted the quotes. Hell you repeated just a few posts back. You are trying to pretend divergence means something other than speciation. But you are not going to slip out of it that way, you invertebrate, because you clealy used the word speciation (post 144) and claimed that it was a phenomena that supposedly happened to an individual alone.
Click to expand...

post #144 is yours......and in post #144 is your mischaracterization of what I said....a mischaracterization that you have repeated monotonously for many pages......

deviation occurs when an individual is born with a changed gene, a random mutation......shit happening.......one of two things may happen at that point......the change may be passed on to offspring or the change does not.....in either event, the individual has diverged from the normal gene pattern.......

if some offspring carry the change again two things can happen......they remain in the general population and the change is dispersed among all in a diluted fashion, showing up as an occasional deviation such as albinos or alchoholism, you don't end up with a species of albinos or a species of alcholics.....

but if the population is isolated and is NOT part of the general population those who have diverged from the norm become more prevalent......one individual with the diverging gene breeds with another and the change begins to breed true until the majority of the isolated population carries the diverging gene, other diverging genes are also occurring in the isolated group.....eventually the group emerges as a new species, incapable of breeding with the general population left behind.....

an excellent example is the meadowlark.....meadowlarks west of the Mississippi are much different from those east of the Mississippi.....they don't sing the same song, they look significantly different, they don't migrate to the same place.....because when they fly they seldom fly more than a hundred yards at a time and even in southern Minnesota the Mississippi river is wider than that.......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
post #144 is yours......and in post #144 is your mischaracterization of what I said....a mischaracterization that you have repeated monotonously for many pages......

deviation occurs when an individual is born with a changed gene, a random mutation......shit happening.......one of two things may happen at that point......the change may be passed on to offspring or the change does not.....in either event, the individual has diverged from the normal gene pattern.......

if some offspring carry the change again two things can happen......they remain in the general population and the change is dispersed among all in a diluted fashion, showing up as an occasional deviation such as albinos or alchoholism, you don't end up with a species of albinos or a species of alcholics.....

but if the population is isolated and is NOT part of the general population those who have diverged from the norm become more prevalent......one individual with the diverging gene breeds with another and the change begins to breed true until the majority of the isolated population carries the diverging gene, other diverging genes are also occurring in the isolated group.....eventually the group emerges as a new species, incapable of breeding with the general population left behind.....

an excellent example is the meadowlark.....meadowlarks west of the Mississippi are much different from those east of the Mississippi.....they don't sing the same song, they look significantly different, they don't migrate to the same place.....because when they fly they seldom fly more than a hundred yards at a time and even in southern Minnesota the Mississippi river is wider than that.......
Click to expand...

No 144, is a direct and complete quote of what you said with context. You referred to the process as speciation, indicated that it supposedly happened to an individual and that this presented a flaw in evolutionary theory. You are just a lying idiot though, there is no flaw and your argument was a strawman. I am sure I can find you using "speciation" to defend this stupid point elsewhere.

Though you are misusing the language to try to cover your tracks, I will accept that you have FINALLY acknowledged that you were wrong and that divergence or speciation occurs in a group in contrast to your previous claims.

A single mutation or variation in a gene will not cause divergence or speciation. If it did then the carrier would immediately speciate or diverge and have no one to mate with. A single variation is not divergence and it is foolish and sloppy to use the term as you attempt to cover your error. The accumulation of numerous variations among two groups but not shared across the groups causes speciation or divergence.

It is possible that a genetic variation could spread throughout the entire population of a species. You could wind up with all alcoholics or albinos if such a variation provided some advantage in natural selection. Whether or not it becomes "diluted" has nothing at all to do with isolation. If it is selected for it will spread through the population, whether it is the entire population or some isolated group. Most genes or mutations are neutral, that is, they have no effect on the body or in natural selection. They can and do become fixed within a population randomly.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
lol....yet I have said nothing I have not been saying for weeks....
Click to expand...

You have been equivocating and running away from your mistake like an immature coward for weeks. As long as you now acknowledge that these were absurd points then there is little left.

PostmodernProphet said:
you have the same problem with the first human that evolved from a primordial slime ancestor.....with the added complication of the frustration that must have occurred when he discovered the only other human that evolved was another guy......
Click to expand...

PostmodernProphet said:
it would be more stupid to believe that two humans happened to evolve at the same time and in the same place....I mean "shit happens" but how much shit do you expect to actually happen.....
Click to expand...

EXCEPT, if you understand that DIVERGENCE happens within a group then there should be little reason why you fail to understand that evolution happens within a group and from there that it can happen within the entire population of a species being the group. Your silly arguments against the possibility of the multiregional hypothesis are then shattered. But then maybe you are still holding to your equally asinine assertion that...

PostmodernProphet said:
no such network [for genic exchange] is visible for any other species of anything anywhere........
Click to expand...
 
PostmodernProphet said:
nope....
Click to expand...

Of course, it can and does. Every species on the planet living or extinct has evolved within its branch.

It is not necessary for a species to be divided into two or more groups in order to evolve and why would it be??? All that is necessary is variation and selection. Those two forces are present in the entire population of humans and every species.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top