Evidence for God from Science

http://news.yahoo.com/world-first-hybri ... _multiline




Can anyone say "MICRO" evolution?

Indeed microevolution in this case...but the point of macroevolution is that with enough of these adaptations and changes a population can become completely different than its ancestors...Honestly, it would be nearly impossible to expect macroevolution to occur in one step, and evolution does not say that at all...if nothing else this is a good demonstration of how these types of changes can happen in nature in a very brief period of time. So tell me, how does this really demonstrate your point?

I am confused with the article, isn't this just interbreeding between two types of sharks?

It's not really the type of evolution typically debated over...It's not natural selection technically. But it is extremely uncommon to find two completely separate species that can mate and produce a fully fertile offspring. Most of the time, even if two species interbreed, the offspring is either infertile or has a number of genetic defects or problems that limit its survival capabilities.

So I think the point the biologist here is making is that it's a really big deal that, while one species is likely going to die off soon, it's hybrid offspring have the ability to survive based on the new genetic material introduced to that population. It's just really rare for this kind of thing to occur in such a brief period of time.

But it is extremely uncommon to find two completely separate species that can mate and produce a fully fertile offspring.

Uncommon but not unheard of?
Doesn't sound like such a big deal.

More or less it's highly uncommon for it to work as well as this instance I guess. Personally I agree with you, this article seems to kind of blow it out of proportion, as it probably only really matters to people who study sharks haha. But that's what Yahoo editors and writers get paid to do I suppose...Just make it sound good.

Personally I agree with you, this article seems to kind of blow it out of proportion, as it probably only really matters to people who study sharks haha. But that's what Yahoo editors and writers get paid to do I suppose...Just make it sound good.

all media these days seem to spew forth sensationalist news. Money talks and it sounds like blah blah blah.

Nothing more than an obvious case of adaptation.

Simply reproducing according to their kind.

Danieltwotwenty wrote:

Personally I agree with you, this article seems to kind of blow it out of proportion, as it probably only really matters to people who study sharks haha. But that's what Yahoo editors and writers get paid to do I suppose...Just make it sound good.

all media these days seem to spew forth sensationalist news. Money talks and it sounds like blah blah blah.

Also the atheists can get all excited and wet their pants, frothing over at the mouth while they furiously type to post the link on their blogs decrying theism, all because they found a shark-hybrid. (Read comments sections on pieces like this and you'll see it immediately.) Really, is it much different than a Labrador retriever and a poodle getting together and having puppies? Still a dog. Still a shark.

Callisto wrote:

Danieltwotwenty wrote:

Personally I agree with you, this article seems to kind of blow it out of proportion, as it probably only really matters to people who study sharks haha. But that's what Yahoo editors and writers get paid to do I suppose...Just make it sound good.

all media these days seem to spew forth sensationalist news. Money talks and it sounds like blah blah blah.

Also the atheists can get all excited and wet their pants, frothing over at the mouth while they furiously type to post the link on their blogs decrying theism, all because they found a shark-hybrid. (Read comments sections on pieces like this and you'll see it immediately.) Really, is it much different than a Labrador retriever and a poodle getting together and having puppies? Still a dog. Still a shark.

so true.

We may be only a few mutations away from our worst nightmare ....

ROBE wrote:Simply reproducing according to their kind.

Precisely. Rottweiler's can breed with pitbulls, lions with tigers, etc., etc.

I get the sense this is more like a horse breeding with a donkey and producing a mule that isn't sterile. Jokes aside it is different than breed differences within the same species.

Canuckster1127 wrote:I get the sense this is more like a horse breeding with a donkey and producing a mule that isn't sterile. Jokes aside it is different than breed differences within the same species.

You mean like a Liger or Tigon?