Black Leopard-Macroevoulution ?

numeral2_5 · Post by **numeral2_5** » Wed Nov 23, 2005 12:37 am

I have recently heard on television that the Black Leopard has attained high population in the area around India. It has said that there has been substantal growth of this mutation in the last hundred years.

They have said that taxonomists may start to classify this population in India as a new species. It is claimed as an early documented case in history of macroevoulution.

I want to know other peoples take on this.

Ark~Magic · Post by **Ark~Magic** » Wed Nov 23, 2005 1:32 am

What does this have to do with macroevolution? A black leopard populating at high levels does nothing to prove this, IMO.

It provides a case for a microevolution, but not macro.

numeral2_5 · Post by **numeral2_5** » Wed Nov 23, 2005 1:44 am

It's not my opinion just what I had heard on television; I don't consider it macroevolution neither.

numeral2_5 · Post by **numeral2_5** » Wed Nov 23, 2005 1:49 am

They were also saying it was because of the rainforest environment of central asia causing this trend as opposed to them regulars in the savannah of Africa.

AttentionKMartShoppers · Wed Nov 23, 2005 7:55 am

Wow, someone is looking for anything that looks like proof of macroevolution.....lol...black tiger is microevolution, and still a tiger...

BGoodForGoodSake · Post by **BGoodForGoodSake** » Wed Nov 23, 2005 8:40 am

AttentionKMartShoppers wrote:Wow, someone is looking for anything that looks like proof of macroevolution.....lol...black tiger is microevolution, and still a tiger...

By definition macroevolution is a result of many microevolution events, so how does one observe it?

David Turell · Post by **David Turell** » Wed Nov 23, 2005 11:23 am

...[/quote]

By definition macroevolution is a result of many microevolution events, so how does one observe it?[/quote]

The Cambrian Explosion shows no evidence of many microevolution events. Darwin cannot explain it, but it was a 5 million year macroevolutionary process

numeral2_5 · Post by **numeral2_5** » Wed Nov 23, 2005 11:36 am

So David what do you think about this leopard thing?

AttentionKMartShoppers · Wed Nov 23, 2005 12:08 pm

BGoodForGoodSake wrote:
AttentionKMartShoppers wrote:Wow, someone is looking for anything that looks like proof of macroevolution.....lol...black tiger is microevolution, and still a tiger...
By definition macroevolution is a result of many microevolution events, so how does one observe it?

No it's not-macroevolution is not a build up of microevolution. If you have a build up of microevolution, you just have more variants of one kind of animal.

David Turell · Post by **David Turell** » Wed Nov 23, 2005 12:15 pm

numeral2_5 wrote:So David what do you think about this leopard thing?

The definition of a species is reproduction within the type. If these black leopards can reproduce with other leopards then it is microevolution.

numeral2_5 · Post by **numeral2_5** » Wed Nov 23, 2005 12:22 pm

That is the true definition of a species but it is a rule that is often ignored when they are determining species differences like domestic animals like the dog and their wild counterparts.

sandy_mcd · Post by **sandy_mcd** » Wed Nov 23, 2005 12:33 pm

AttentionKMartShoppers wrote:No it's not-macroevolution is not a build up of microevolution. If you have a build up of microevolution, you just have more variants of one kind of animal.

Hey Kmart, can you tell blue from green ? [Simple yes or no answer will suffice.]

AttentionKMartShoppers · Wed Nov 23, 2005 12:37 pm

sandy_mcd wrote:
AttentionKMartShoppers wrote:No it's not-macroevolution is not a build up of microevolution. If you have a build up of microevolution, you just have more variants of one kind of animal.
Hey Kmart, can you tell blue from green ? [Simple yes or no answer will suffice.]

I sense a trap....yes? I think I know where you're going with this...

sandy_mcd · Post by **sandy_mcd** » Wed Nov 23, 2005 1:06 pm

AttentionKMartShoppers wrote:I sense a trap....yes?

Exactly, you are correct, it is a setup, and you know where I am going, so you already have a response, which you can post as soon as I figure out how to include pictures rather than links.
Humans have a penchant for putting things into boxes, even if there is a continuum of categories. For examples, race, grades, whatever.

Caption for second picture, preview is not same as post. [Now to figure out how to delete errant posts.] In fact, the color spectrum is continuous. Where does blue stop and green begin ? Given the conventional definitions of color, there are some shades of blue and green (green-blue and blue-green) that are closer in appearance than some shades of blue (violet-blue and green-blue). So it is with the definition of species; it is hard to tell where one stops and another starts. There are no proposed big jumps (e.g., raccoons do not give birth to cats) just as colors do not suddenly change in the spectrum; but if you look at both ends, blue and green are distinct colors. [Note that the definition of kinds - descendants of a pair of animals created by God - does have separate boxes.]

sandy_mcd · Post by **sandy_mcd** » Wed Nov 23, 2005 1:11 pm

why is post caption shorter than preview caption ?
i will delete this later
FAq on how to delete does not mention how to do it
also my pictures disappeared.

Evidence for God from Science

Black Leopard-Macroevoulution ?

Black Leopard-Macroevoulution ?

RE:

Macroevolution