|
Author
|
Topic: Fernando Castro-Chavez: Some Implications for the Study of Intelligent Design ...
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 14. May 2004 16:38
Fernando
Thank you very much for your long list of references questioning the Darwinian perspective. Don't misunderstand my position about Mendel's laws. They are sound. They deal however with sexual reproduction, which I claim is antievolutionary. I believe there was a different kind of inheritance that was involved in evolution, a mechanism which involved the release of previously latent information contained in the genetic material, information that did not derive from the environment but was prescibed into the genome somehow. I am also not convinced that chromosomal rearrangements were random in the process of expressing that prescribed information. There is nothing random about the expression of prescribed information during ontogeny so why should that be assumed for phylogeny? There is really nothing new in my suggestions as revealed by the following:
"If that be the case, if the tendency toward variation be predetermined, if the production of variations is governed by law, the importance of natural selection is then reduced to zero, as was so admirably expressed by Strakhov so long ago as 1873."
Leo Berg, Nomogenesis, page 150, English edition 1926
IP: Logged
|
|
Fernando Castro-Chavez
Member
Member # 1201
|
posted 17. May 2004 10:08
Dr. Davison:
I have documented your statement that all the canis (domestic or feral) can interbreed and have a fertile offspring, being all of them members of the same species:
1-
www.ualberta.ca/~jzgurski/coyote.html
Coyotes and wolves can interbreed and produce fertile offspring. In fact all members
of the genus Canis (dogs, wolves, coyotes and jackals) are interfertile.
2-
http://www.wolf.org/wolves/learn/add_resource/hybrid.asp
Wolves and dogs can interbreed and produce [fertile] offspring. Wolves can be crossed with any breed of dog. The most common hybrids are wolf bred with malamute, husky, or German shepherd. Although wolf hybrids can occur naturally in the wild, this happens very infrequently due to the territorial nature of the wolf. Most hybrids are the result of deliberate breeding in captivity.
3-
www.ualberta.ca/~jzgurski/wwolf.html
[Wolves and dogs] are so closely related that they can interbreed and produce fertile offspring.
One important difference between wolves and domestic dogs is that dogs can breed twice a year and wolves can only breed once a year.
In captivity, wolves typically live to be about thirteen or fourteen years of age, and the oldest wolf on record lived to be eighteen years old. In the wild, however, wolves rarely live past ten years of age, because of disease, injuries, and parasites.
Most wild wolves do not live past five years, although there is one record of a wild wolf living to be thirteen years of age.
4-
http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/sci/A0852593.html
Three wolf species [again those are NOT 'species' but 'subspecies' !] (the gray wolf, red wolf, and coyote) are generally recognized, although there is much local variation within them.
Other living members of the genus Canis are the jackal and the dog. All Canis species can interbreed, producing fertile offspring; the Eskimos have interbred wolves and dogs to produce hardy animals for pulling sleds.
Taken from: The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. 2001 [http://www.bartleby.com/65/wo/wolf.html]
5-
http://dsc.discovery.com/stories/dinos/bbc/howdoweknow/q43.html
Species are usually defined as a population of animals which can only mate with each other to form fertile offspring.
[D]ogs can interbreed with wolves to form fertile wolf-dog hybrids. This tells us that dogs are technically not a different species from wolves. There are many other examples of this.
6-
http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/bio99/bio99524.htm
Wolves, coyotes and domestic dogs are so closely related that
they can interbreed with fertile offspring.
J. Elliott
7-
http://www.bullovedbulldogs.com/sarf.htm
The Relationship Between The Wolf And The Domestic Dog
As further evidence of the wolf and the domestic dog being a single species, wolves and domestic dogs can also interbreed and produce fully fertile offspring
To deny this to deny a fact of nature.
8-
http://www.courteouscanine.com/isitawolf.shtml
Is It A Wolf And What Will It Do?
By Elisabeth Duman, BA
Wolf-dog hybrids continue to grow in popularity.
If an animal is much wolf at all, it cannot be kept as a simple family pet. I hope that you will be able to help people make educated decisions in keeping these animals safely and humanely.
9-
http://www.api4animals.org/562.htm
Over several generations, the more tractable and useful animals were kept, each forming a breed: a tamed Northern wolf-dog here, an Asian wolf-dog there, a jackal-dog in another place, a dingo-dog some place else, and an African wild dog-dog or coyote-dog in other places and at other times.
Today, wolves, jackals, dingoes, and coyotes can all interbreed with the domestic dog and produce fertile offspring.
-----------
Have a good monday.
IP: Logged
|
|
nobody
Member
Member # 145
|
posted 17. May 2004 11:33
quote:
The Relationship Between The Wolf And The Domestic Dog
As further evidence of the wolf and the domestic dog being a single species, wolves and domestic dogs can also interbreed and produce fully fertile offspring
To deny this to deny a fact of nature.
Thanks Fernando,
That's all good information. I don't know your position on Noah's Flood, but it seems to me like this removes one of the key complaints by evolutionists. They say an ark of the size specified in the Bible could not hold all the species. But you are proving that, at least in some cases, evolutionists are using inflated numbers.
IP: Logged
|
|
Fernando Castro-Chavez
Member
Member # 1201
|
posted 20. July 2005 09:35
Back to my very first posting board!
To my previous poster: Yes, the Biblical record is trustworthy. The Bible is the inspiration for my research.
In an attempt to answer to your last question I wrote a second article for ISCID:
http://www.iscid.org/boards/ubb-get_topic-f-6-t-000553.html
As you know, I was unable to post at ISCID for a while, but at that time I found (through Google) your ARN post dealing with my first paper submitted to ISCID:
http://www.arn.org/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi/ubb/get_topic/f/12/t/001218
That was a topic that even peaked at Google, until some Moderator at ARN dumped it from the "Intelligent Design Forum" to the "off-topic forum" (in the days of pseudonym "dayton") ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
http://www.arn.org/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi/ubb/get_topic/f/14/t/001050.html
Anyway, William Dembski better articulates the medullar topic conveyed there, as his related and notable work manifests:
http://www.designinference.com/documents/2004.06.Human_Origins.pdf
Since then, other individuals have taken their times to ask questions or to comment on it. One example is next (for the record):
1. Aptamer had a question at ARN's "Intelligent Design Forum":
http://www.arn.org/ubb/ultimatebb.php/ubb/get_topic/f/13/t/002164/p/1.html
And,
2. Scholar Google noticed it:
[url= http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22Fernando+Castro-Chavez%22]http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22Fernando+Castro-Chavez%22[/url]
So, a brief article can start unraveling something useful at the end, don't you think? ![[Wink]](wink.gif)
[ 27. October 2005, 14:50: Message edited by: Fernando Castro-Chavez ]
IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Fernando Castro-Chavez
Member
Member # 1201
|
posted 04. August 2006 14:48
Another recent example on how a new VARIETY of Butterfly is produced from two different & compatible varieties of butterflies.
Again and again, the deliberate misuse of terms is wrongfully biased towards Evolutionism.
Like if the product of two differently skinned humans was producing "a new species". Isn't that "scientific" non-sense? ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/5080298.stm
IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view of this topic