Evidence for evolution, Installment 5: Lake Tanganyika, etc

by seattleniceguy 109 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  greven

  tijkmo:
  yeah for all i have difficulty believing in a god of justice anymore and certainly in a wt directing god...i cannot accept that there isnt a creator..as sherlock holmes said 'once you have ruled out the impossible whatever is left no matter how improbable must be true....and evoluton is impossible

  First of all: evolution does not rule out a creator. Evolution starts at the first organism. How this first organism came to be is not something the theory of evolution adresses. Secondly: what makes evolution 'impossible' according to you? It certainly works on paper, and we have real life examples of evolution happening under our noses... Third: when using Sherlock Holmes' rule of thumb it is important to remember that 1) it is a rule of thumb and 2) in order for it to work we MUST know ALL possible options. Greven
• 

  tijkmo

  Third: when using Sherlock Holmes' rule of thumb it is important to remember that 1) it is a rule of thumb and 2) in order for it to work we MUST know ALL possible options.

  why ???

  real life examples of evolution happening under our noses

  go on then

  How about a creator of the first basic organism which had an ability to evolve, and was then LEFT to evolve

  why ??? ill grant you it doesnt explain lake tangenika or marsupials in australia..but then neither does evolution. the difficulty arises in the genesis account stating that god rested from creation which implies he didnt create anything new but since fish werent in the ark then it could mean that the fish in lake tangenika were in fact all over after the flood but conditions were such that they didnt survive anywhere else..doesnt mean they evolved only in that lake because thats just as implausible as them swimming around for a year or so then all making their way there still doesnt explain kangaroos though
• 

  tetrapod.sapien

  :For me, can someone convert the cubits of the ark into our language, so I can work out how many animals it could carry? -- already well doc'd at http://talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html
• 

  tetrapod.sapien

  tijkmo, -- i was going to start replying to specific pieces of your last post here, but then realized that your entire post, and argument, display a lack of understanding about the theory of evolution. evolution does answer the things you say it does not. to be constructive, i would recommend re-reading the original post by SNG, and then reading some books on the theory you are critiquing.
• 

  DaCheech

  These fish need high alkaline water, seems like they cannot survive in other places
• 

  Midget-Sasquatch

  real life examples of evolution happening under our noses

  go on then

  I think that ring species can help you understand how the process of speciation, is not only possible, but actually happening. For example, there are races of gulls distributed across the globe (picture a ring of them), with nearly all of the races being able to interbreed with the races adjacent to them, except for the races at either terminus....they can't interbreed with each other. They are considered different species because they are reproductively isolated. Thats right before our eyes, with "links" and all. You can even check out ring species of salamanders. SNG - Great line of evidence , as always, and I love the added photos.
• 

  Frog

  Hey there SNG, thanks for the pretty fish pictures:-). I was curious to know if saltwater tests have been done on these fish... http://www.holysmoke.org/sdhok/cichlids.htm says that "saltwater usually kills them" and that they have evolved in "lakes and rivers where water quality is constantly changing". I can't help but raise an elementary pro-evolution argument, but if a world flood did occur all freshwater lakes would have become polluted by saltwater right? How is it that we in fact have freshwater fish then? I've heard of seemingly spontaneous generation of fish from eggs taken up into the sky, and coming back down again as fish, but if they were saltwater fish how would they have survived in freshwater?

  The said flood having occurred over a 12month period would not have provided sufficient time for freshwater fish to adapt to salty conditions. If say a world flood did occur though, is it possible that a freshwater lake of great depth may have become only minimally polluted by salt? At what depth does the Malawian Cichlids generally swim? I read somewhere that they don't thrive in aquariums (?). As a matter of survival, could the Cichlids have made their decent downwards, adjusting to the pressure as they went? (much in the same way that humans gradually adjust to the air quality when mountain climbing). Could their decent to lower depths explain why they may not have lingered on the now salty surface, and swum away elsewhere?

  Of the 'doesn't know much about fishes class' froglett...post script: many thanks for another thoroughly researched topic:-))
• 

  Frog

  These fish need high alkaline water, seems like they cannot survive in other places

  ...of course!
• 

  SixofNine

  Uh... there isn't a shred of evidence that a worldwide flood ever happened. *hello, McFly*
• 

  DaCheech

  There is salt in this lake too!

  When I had these fish in my aquarium, you have to add some salt to water