Feedback and Notes

Due to Ning (our Web hosting company) being bought recently from the ashes of Mode Media we often experience 500 connection errors. Our apologies but these errors are out of our control. Hopefully, this will improve as the new company gains experience. Regards, AU

We are a worldwide social network of freethinkers, atheists, agnostics and secular humanists.

Information

Evolution Defenders

A group for Secularists, Agnostics, Atheists, etc... who believe we should keep the poison of creationism and Intelligent Design OUT of public school science classrooms.

Location: #science
Members: 61
Latest Activity: Nov 12

ID conspiracy proof... written by the proponents of ID themselves!!!

The Formerly-Secret "Wedge Document" written by the Intelligent Designers themselves. Proof that ID is creationism in disguise.
The Wedge Document.pdf
Also find this document at http://ncseweb.org/

This document was key evidence in the Dover, PA trial featured in "Judgement Day: Intelligent Design on Trial."

Discussion Forum

Why Being Human Makes Evolution Hard to Understand

Started by Neal. Last reply by Tom Sarbeck Oct 19. 5 Replies

Being human makes for foolishness.Cameron M. SmithVolume 37.6, November/December 2013Our difficulty accepting evolution isn’t just because some religions oppose it or that it is complicated—it isn’t.…Continue

Tags: to, understand, atheist, universe, hard

Homo erectus may have doodled on shellfish

Started by Davy. Last reply by doone Dec 6, 2014. 1 Reply

Early humans from Java used shells for tools and engraving long before Homo sapiens did, new research suggests.The findings, published today in the journal …Continue

Tags: University, National, Museum, of, Australia.

Evolution Notes and News

Started by doone. Last reply by archaeopteryx Jan 8, 2014. 74 Replies

Date of earliest animal life reset by 30 million years…Continue

Tags: News, and, Notes, Evolution

Promoting Evolution Through Cartoons.....

Started by Neo Jul 8, 2013. 0 Replies

I have been watching Cartoon Network lately. Mainly because adult TV has gotten really boring, but I also still love cartoons. One day I was watching this one show called "The World of Gumball" and…Continue

Comment Wall

Comment

You need to be a member of Evolution Defenders to add comments!

Comment by Stephen on September 12, 2016 at 12:31am

Comment by Stephen on September 12, 2016 at 12:31am

A new paper confidently claims that there are four giraffe species rather than one, but I’m not so sure

The giraffe, Giraffa cameleopardalis, was first described by Linnaeus, and gets its species name from its fancied resemblance to a hybrid beast (as notes, the name comes from the Greek καμηλοπάρδαλις” meaning “giraffe”, from “κάμηλος” (kamēlos), “camel” + “πάρδαλις” (pardalis), “leopard”, due to its having a long neck like a camel and spots like a leopard). It’s always been considered a single species, but divided into about a half dozen subspecies that live in different areas and are distinguishable by different patterns of reticulation in their coats. Here’s an old subspecies designation and map; note that the populations included in each of the six subspecies live in different areas:

Here’s a classification of nine subspecies based on pattern (the number of named subspecies has been between four and about nine (I haven’t searched extensively).

Note that this classification is more or less arbitrary because the populations are geographically isolated and so one can’t use the classical “biological species definition” (BSC), in which members of the same species are able to interbreed in nature and produce fertile hybrids, while members of different species, when present in the same area, either do not mate with each other, or, if they do mate, do not produce hybrids that are fertile. Note that to use the BSC, putatively different (or identical) species have to be “tested” when living in the same area (“sympatric”).If they do not encounter each other in nature, there’s little you can do to apply the BSC.

One way around this is to hybridize them in zoos. If different “subspecies” do not mate with each other, or can’t produce fertile hybrids when they do mate in captivity, they’re almost certainly unlikely to do so in nature, and can be considered members of different species. However, if two different types do hybridize and produce fertile offspring in captivity, that doesn’t mean they’re members of the same species, for in nature other “isolating barriers”, like different breeding times or a genetically-based aversion for mating with other types, could keep them genetically separated even though barriers could break down in the artificial environment of zoos.

Read more=read:https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2016/09/11/a-new-paper-con...

Comment by Chris on September 11, 2016 at 11:55pm

On Homosapiens,

What is race?

Comment by Stephen on September 9, 2016 at 8:23pm

That's a real kick ass point. Mrs.B.

Comment by Mrs.B on September 9, 2016 at 5:07pm

Comment by Mrs.B on September 5, 2016 at 2:37am

Yes, I would imagine his doctors gave him the go ahead to travel.

Comment by Stephen on September 5, 2016 at 2:09am

looks like Richard Dawkins has much improved from his light stroke. That's good to hear.

Photo

Comment by Mrs.B on August 28, 2016 at 2:35am

I own this book, & it explains a lot of this information.......

https://www.amazon.com/Your-Inner-Fish-Journey-3-5-Billion-Year-ebo...

Comment by Stephen on August 28, 2016 at 2:28am

A composite image of a mouse hand and a fish fin, each labeled with the same molecular markers.Credit Marie Kmita and Andrew Gehrke

Comment by Stephen on August 28, 2016 at 2:28am

From Fins Into Hands: Scientists Discover a Deep Evolutionary Link

To help his readers fathom evolution, Charles Darwin asked them to consider their own hands.

“What can be more curious,” he asked, “than that the hand of a man, formed for grasping, that of a mole for digging, the leg of the horse, the paddle of the porpoise, and the wing of the bat, should all be constructed on the same pattern, and should include similar bones, in the same relative positions?”

Darwin had a straightforward explanation: People, moles, horses, porpoises and bats all shared a common ancestor that grew limbs with digits. Its descendants evolved different kinds of limbs adapted for different tasks. But they never lost the anatomical similarities that revealed their kinship.

As a Victorian naturalist, Darwin was limited in the similarities he could find. The most sophisticated equipment he could use for the task was a crude microscope. Today, scientists are carrying on his work with new biological tools. They are uncovering deep similarities that have been overlooked until now.

On Wednesday, a team of researchers at the University of Chicago reported that our hands share a deep evolutionary connection not only to bat wings or horse hooves, but also to fish fins.

Read more= read:http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/18/science/from-fins-into-hands-scie...

 
 
 

© 2016   Created by Atheist Universe.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Service