wirelessguru1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> What specific processes? and please do not expect
> me to agree that 'random' mutations over time will
> produce, make or create complexity!!!

Random mutation is just one. I listed a second in symbiotic relationships becoming permanent. Also, environmental factors ie. sickle cell anemia is a genetic disorder that is common among African based populations and is very heavily suspected as having developed as a result of exposure to malaria. Part of our DNA has viral origins...surely that affects us somewhat.

>
> No way! There is rhyme and reason for the
> creation of every baby, even with artificial
> methods...

That is an opinion solely based on belief. Because it is based on belief does not necessarily make it wrong but it also does not prove that it is so.

>
> Also how life actually starts from an egg when a
> sperm enters the egg is not fully understood, like
> exactly what triggers the egg to start
> growing...There is no evolution going on at this
> specific process but rather the "creation" of a
> new life. In this case, the creators are the
> mother and the father of the babies, so they are
> acting as gods during that specific process...

How life starts from an egg and a sperm is actually very well understood. In fact, this process is found over and over again throughout life on this planet...whether simplified or not. The mother and father of a baby are not acting as any sort of "god" in the process. If that were the case, you'd find the number of unwanted pregnancies to be substantially lower. It's a physical process of which, beyond the choice of whether we procreate or not, we have very little control.

>
> > However, the creation of various species is
> actually a concept to humans alone. Does a
> > dog know that it is its own species?
>
> I really don't know what you mean by that. A dog
> will also have the reproduction and survival
> instincts (among others) like every other species
> that has survived must have in order to be able to
> continue to survive. To me these are rather clear
> concepts.

We taxonomize different lifeforms into families, genus, and species. Animals do not. Therefore, what is a "species" really other than a manmade term?
>
> > Does it attempt to classify plants and
> animals found living in its environment and
> > labelling them? Probably not.
>
> Well, that is pretty much irrelevant as far as
> 'survival' is concerned...

I'm talking taxonomy...
>
> Well, I am very glad that we both can agree on
> that...

I think you'd find that most agree on that part. It is not simply a case of random mutations and any scientist would be quick to point that out.

>
> That is not the way that I see it. It becomes
> rather noticable in times of great Earth changes
> in its most clear form of survival ...

Evolution is a constant process. There is significant evidence to show, particuliarly in the insect world as well as among bacteria and viruses where "life"spans are extremely short.

>
> In other words, many species are periodically
> wiped out by Nature. That is exactly what all the
> evidence suggests...

Yes, species are wiped out whether by man or nature and that has been the case since the dawn of life on this planet. However, the wiping out of a species does not equate to evolution. If anything, reduced numbers of any species has shown that the gene pool becomes limited. However, in a limited gene pool, random genetic mutations can have a much more profound effect on the population overall.

> So, in essence, reality is flat for you! You don't
> see the natural food chain (big fish eats little
> fish) and/or the various layers and how the
> dominant or stronger forms will most likely
> survive...

Reality is not flat for me at all. I have a good deal of background in ecosystems: forest, freshwater and marine. It was a bit of a requirement for me considering what my chosen field was to be...I am very well versed in the "food chain" which is a bit deeper than big fish eating little fish. lol, you're making a very ill-informed judgement there...Were you a biology major? Have you ever taken anything beyond 200 level bio?

> In other words, in your flat reality you attribute
> no real value to those higher forces or dominant
> forms! Everything is just an average when evidence
> shows it to be otherwise where the more dominant
> are the ones that rule!!!

What "higher forces"? Preaching to me about dominance winning is a little off, though...anybody who watches the Discovery channel has probably seen two animals duking it out and the winner getting chosen as the mate...Actually, I find the world absolutely fascinating and having incredible depths. We all profoundly affect not only each other but the earth in which we live. Even something as small as termites have a profound effect on our planet...


> I am truly amazed how you compute things in this
> 'flat' reality where it is not the strong or the
> more dominant that survive!!!

Perhaps you shouldn't jump to conclusions.

Stephanie




In every man there is something wherein I may learn of him, and in that I am his pupil.--Ralph Waldo Emerson