bugsy
your wuote is talking about genetics
a valid science[not evolution]
the process of breeding the parental wild type
is genetics
[a thing darwin did with pigions cattle rabbits and mice
but it is no proof for evolution

wow the ancestor of the wheat is a weed
that returns to wild type when crossed

that via MANS deliberated selection [not natural selection]
has MICRO evolved within its species mean to be 'classified ' as different species[i did the same stuff with hemp in the 70's

we even got polyploids by using gout mnedicine
but it was all still cannabis[if thats evolution i been doing it for 40 years] maybe you could evolve your theory a tad?

meaning it didnt evolve by natural selection[duh]
nat selection is a theory of the evolving theory [A wannabe]science

even your egsample rejects and refutes the 'natural' from selection
[ie your egsample is the result of SELECTIVE breeding]

and the only science is the proven genetic inheritsance[not evolution]

my bro when you stand up you become exposed

selective breeding is not evolution on the macro level[its microEvolution at best][not nature and survival of the FITtest]
so another evolution theory exposed[survival of the selected?]

think why you need to grasp at straws my brother
[what has a weed to explain about biogenesis?[the BEGINNING}
clearly ANYweed is not the FIRST SEED

that is the topic

foxy quote..>>evolution from five principal sources which are:
1)fossils, 2) adaptations in organisms 3) geographic
distribution of species 4) comparative studies of the
various species and finally 5) embryology..>>

ok foxy the words have hypnotised you
but add nothing nor explain anything

which fossils PROVE what?
how were they VERIFIED

addaptions in organisms
WHICH ones [what 'addaptions']

geographic distribution again just a word[which geographic evolved which distribution[pre gondwanna or post?]

did darwins geo distrubution make the finches evolve to be NOT finches[or the turtles evolve not to be turtles
its all micro progression WITHIN a species]

budgie breeders have isolated budgies for 200 years[they have not evolved into parrots or doves]

Richie 10 wrote:

could you please explain what you mean by literal belief. The reason I ask this is because I have a personal relationship with God the Holy Spirit.

Dear Richie 10,

Literal belief refers to belief of some Christians and Jews that their Bible is true, in the literal sense, and is the word of God.

I don’t understand how one can have a personal relationship with imaginary or dead beings.

My personal relationships are restricted to the living. When my cousin Richard was a child he used to have an imaginary friend called John Pick. As he grew older John Pick disappeared. Some people continue to have relationships with imaginary beings as adults. As long as they are harmless and are able to function reasonably well they should be left alone.

The Bible contains legends that may be based on fact to some degree, wisdom, beauty, foolishness and superstition. It is neither a history book nor a scientific text.

david f.

My older brother tells me, I invented a character called Mr Rich Pussy whom owned a motor cycle factory. I don't recall this fabrication; but, suspect, or, at least, hope, I really didn't believe it; even as a three year old.

Richie 10,

The God of Islam is more distant than the Christian god(s). Morever, the Gods of the OT are more scarey than the God of NT. The relationships between gods and humanity seem variable over time and location from the days of Abraham, the father of three mother religions, let alone, the zillion sects.

AL-lah seems more tribal than Jesus, whom has been especially individualised in the Western world.

Ok OUG, a couple of points:

Apart from the fact that your grasp of English seems to be at best tenuous you have failed at understanding anything.
-the "egsample" given is NOT a result of artificial selection or deliberate breeding,
-it's a purely natural situation brought about by the mixing of introduced feral species
-it does not have anything to do with pigeons, rabbits, cattle or mice
-it definitely does not have anything to do with hemp
-it certainly DOES have something to do with what the definition of species is.
-you are the one who wandered off topic and started spouting off about evolution- and you are still doing it, don't complain about me correcting you off topic.
-I am definitely NOT your brother.

Quite frankly, since it appears that you don't understand the concepts or the meanings of the words involved I wonder why I bothered in the first place. I certainly won't bother in the future. Given the trepidation that Graham had over the previous creationist bullsh!t thread, and the others that have sprung up immediately after it ad nauseum I wonder why he even bothered allowing this one.

Realistically, I don't think you should bother with On the Origin of Species, or even a biology textbook, I know you won't like it. I really think you would be much better off with Horton Hears a Who, it's much more your style.

Oliver: << ...Rich Pussy whom owned a motor cycle factory >>

That sounds decidedly more interesting than the 'imaginary friends' we hear most about on OLO!

I could go possibly go with that...

Hi OUG,
At first, I didn’t want to post on your thread, because as Fractelle and Foxy said, what’s the point if you ignore discussion points, questions and links provided by others?
But since you posted on my thread I thought I’d be kind and make some time to return the favour. :+)

RObert, on Thursday, 20 November, explained better than I could have why I find it very hard to explain abiogenisis in detail. I have a basic understanding of abiogenesis and would refer them to the experts if people ask for details rather than torture them with my own explanations.

Links to videos and websites are totally necessary in discussions like this one not only because of the complexity of the topic but also because of limited words and posts available here.
There's so much stuff on this topic, and if you sincerely want to learn about biogenesis and evolution, you should go to the links provided by previous posters as well as go to your library.

Scientists are not in the same position as creationists, who can just refer to a Bible quote and say, ‘See? God did it all’ and that’s the end of their explanation.

Bugsy,
I think that OUG will really like the brand-new book aimed at junior High School Kids published by Kent Hovind. (US Young-earth creationist nut Dr Dino).
He’s the fraud who owns Dinosaur Adventure Land.
Last I heard, he got a prison sentence of 10 years..
He calls himself Dr but –not surprisingly- he holds ‘degrees’ from unaccredited institutions only.

Title
“Help! I'm Being Taught Evolution In My Earth Science Class!” by Dr Kent Hovind.
Description:
“Looking for help for your public-school earth science student? How about a resource with some practical steps for confronting evolution in the classroom? Written in an e-conversation format between a student and Dr. Hovind, this book is a fun, easy read that helps equip public-school students to defend the truth in a respectful manner. ”

http://shopping.drdino.com/product-exec/product_id/872/nm/Help_I_m_Being_Taught_Evolution_In_My_Earth_Science_Class_/category_id/85?utm_medium=email&utm_source=Campaign+Monitor&utm_content=399941597&utm_campaign=Two+NEW+books+by+Dr.+Kent+Hovind&utm_term=Help!+Order+No