The Theory of Evolution

Unfortunately still no case from Pro, so to make do, I will tackle generic ID claims. My apologies if they were not part of your argument. ID claims: 1.It is not a testable theory, it is all speculation. 2.Argument of complexity/probability 3.Irreducible complexity 4.Age of the earth (new earth creationists) 5.Evolution is a theory of everything 1.Please see first post for evidence to the contrary, here is more; speciation and anagenesis. Speciation: Yes speciation occurs, and yes it is well documented, amongst both plants and animals. Insect populations are especially useful in studying speciation due to the speed of generations. It is both observable and testable (controlled separation of species). In animals, speciation is defined in populations in four ways: Peripatric: a small population isolated at the edge of a larger population, Parapatric: a continuously distributed population, Sympatric: within the range of the ancestral population, Allopatric: geographically isolated populations. If allopatric speciation happens, we'd predict that populations of the same species in different geographic locations would be genetically different. There are abundant observations suggesting that this is often true. For example, many species exhibit regional "varieties" that is slightly different genetically and in appearance, as in the case of the Northern Spotted Owl and the Mexican Spotted Owl. Also, ring species are convincing examples of how genetic differences may arise through reduced gene flow and geographic distance. If the association between two species is very close, they may speciate in parallel. This is called co-speciation. It is especially likely to happen between parasites and their hosts. And yes, there is genetic evidence for the speciation of humans and primates. http://www.nature.com... Speciation in Plants: In terms of reproduction, plants have a lot more options than animals do. Many plants can reproduce sexually, by fertilising other individuals or themselves, and asexually, by creating clones of themselves through vegetative reproduction, while most animals only reproduce sexually. Similarly, in terms of speciation, plants have more options than animals do. Two modes of speciation are particularly common in plants: Speciation by hybridization: Rieseberg reconstructed the phylogeny of several sunflower species, and found that several species had been formed by fertilisations between other species. Often the hybrid offspring of such fertilisations are sterile, but occasionally they are fertile and are reproductively isolated from their "parent" species. In the latter case, a new species is formed. Speciation by ploidy changes: In terms of plant speciation, a ploidy change generally means multiplying the number of chromosomes the species has by some number. A species that has 18 chromosomes might produce a lineage that has 36 or 54 chromosomes. Ploidy changes are common in plants and often produce a species that is reproductively isolated and distinct from the "parent" species. Speciation in anemones is an example of a ploidy change. Anagenesis: Again we can directly observe changes in species; plants, animals all exert changes over time that we can observe; we document natural shifts in populations, we can see the changes in plants from chemicals, metals in the soil, documented changes between GM crops cross pollinating with natural variants. We have behavioural evolutionary changes in lizards; again, insects provide a wealth of observational records. Darwin's own Galapagos finches have been tracked, showing beak changes in the population due to weather patterns. Artificial selection used by breeders has wrought immense changes in plants and animals. From the ancestral wolf, humans selected forms as diverse Chihuahuas, St. Bernards, poodles, and bulldogs etc. Starting with wild cabbage, breeders have produced domestic cabbage, broccoli, kohlrabi, kale, cauliflower, and brussels sprouts. Artificial selection is analogous to natural selection, except that humans, rather than the environment determine which variants leave offspring. If artificial selection can generate such a diversity of domesticated plants and animals, natural selection could evidently do much more over millions of years. 2.Argument of probability/complexity That either an individual species is too complex, or that the chances of a change are too small. The underlying false premise of both these claims is that evolution is a random process. It is far from it. Natural selection in all its glory is far from a random process; it is a force that actively pressures selection of traits within a species; those traits that harm a species tend to disappear, those that provide an advantage spread through a population. The eye has separately developed around 40 different times across species. How does this occur? Simply because natural selection favours it. Each change is gradual; it is a building process of mutation and selective pressure. 3.Irreducible complexity Irreducible complexity is the statement that certain biological systems are too complex to have evolved from simpler, precursors. Unfortunately for ID, they have yet to find any that has not been explained by more knowledgeable experts. 4.Age of the earth (new earth creationists) Evolution cannot work because the age of the earth is around 6, 000 -10, 000 years old. This age is usually taken by working out the "begat" lineage of the bible, and a literal view of the biblical genesis. Scientists have settled on the age of the earth of about 4.6 billion years. This is based upon experiments, that compare the ratios in rock samples of parent elements to daughter elements (some of which would have been from radioactive decay of the parent, some of which may have been present in the sample at the time of formation). Radioactive decay occurs at a constant rate, the age of a rock can be determined from the ratio of the parent element to the daughter element. Concerns about this dating method are exactly the same that creationists still raise: changes to the rock may have caused loss or gain of either the parent or daughter element, this would lead to a false date (too old if parent element were lost, too young if daughter element were lost). Two methods that have been designed that account for this possibility: isochron dating and the uranium-thorium-lead discordia/concordia method (so three independent age calculations for one sample). These methods have internal checks for possible loss/gain of elements to the rock. Whilst these values do not calculate an age for the Earth, they do ascertain a lower limit (the Earth must be at least as old as any formation on it). This lower limit is at least in agreement with the independently derived figure of 4.6 billion years for the Earth's actual age. 5.Evolution is a theory of everything Common rhetoric claims that evolution seeks to explain how life/universe began, planets formed etc. Evolutionary theory is not a cosmological theory. It does not postulate about the origin of the universe, nor the origin of life itself. Once we have self replicating RNA strands, then natural selection can begin to operate. Again, I leave it up to my opponent to make a case for the intelligent designer.