|
Post by lighthorseman on Dec 26, 2010 16:30:32 GMT -5
For them what couldn't make it all the way through without suffering catastrophic brain asplodey... he gives his personal email addy in the final para, if'n ya'll wanted to correct his misunderstandings.
|
|
|
Post by Vene on Dec 26, 2010 16:40:16 GMT -5
Correction: a species is a population capable of interbreeding, and furthermore, the offspring must also be able to breed. That is why horses and donkeys are of different species: a horse can breed with a horse to produce horses that can breed with more horses, and a horse can breed with a donkey, but a mule is sterile and cannot produce any more mules. Also... what the flying fuck? Okay, now apply that to species that reproduce asexually. The species definition is a useful lie, but it is a lie. There is no such thing as a species.
|
|
|
Post by malicious_bloke on Dec 26, 2010 16:43:11 GMT -5
According to the theory in the OP, what species do beastialists fall into? Anything with its arse in the air and an easily accessible cage?
|
|
|
Post by canadian mojo on Dec 26, 2010 21:04:24 GMT -5
Correction: a species is a population capable of interbreeding, and furthermore, the offspring must also be able to breed. That is why horses and donkeys are of different species: a horse can breed with a horse to produce horses that can breed with more horses, and a horse can breed with a donkey, but a mule is sterile and cannot produce any more mules. Also... what the flying fuck? Okay, now apply that to species that reproduce asexually. The species definition is a useful lie, but it is a lie. There is no such thing as a species. Or ask a botanist why there are so many plant 'species' that are capable of interbreeding and producing fertile offspring that are intermediaries of their parents... intermediaries that are known to exist naturally in the wild where the ranges of the parents overlap.
|
|
|
Post by worlder on Dec 26, 2010 21:38:37 GMT -5
Okay, now apply that to species that reproduce asexually. The species definition is a useful lie, but it is a lie. There is no such thing as a species. Or ask a botanist why there are so many plant 'species' that are capable of interbreeding and producing fertile offspring that are intermediaries of their parents... intermediaries that are known to exist naturally in the wild where the ranges of the parents overlap. What is this thread? Syntax debate?
|
|
|
Post by Sigmaleph on Dec 26, 2010 22:26:04 GMT -5
...what the hell does syntax have to do with anything?
|
|
|
Post by Jodie on Dec 27, 2010 0:05:48 GMT -5
What is this, I don't even....
|
|
|
Post by Thejebusfire on Dec 27, 2010 0:29:05 GMT -5
That never stoped Mary.
Why couldn't God follow his own rules?
|
|
|
Post by mechtaur on Dec 27, 2010 1:48:00 GMT -5
That never stoped Mary. Why couldn't God follow his own rules? Because?
|
|
|
Post by lighthorseman on Dec 27, 2010 5:15:54 GMT -5
That never stoped Mary. Why couldn't God follow his own rules? God made the rules, therefore he doesn't have to abide by them (see also murder, genocide and abortion for more examples of OT God not following "the rules") [/standard fundie handwave]
|
|
|
Post by The_L on Dec 27, 2010 6:59:55 GMT -5
WTF?
|
|
|
Post by faythofdragons on Dec 27, 2010 13:30:48 GMT -5
Okay, now apply that to species that reproduce asexually. The species definition is a useful lie, but it is a lie. There is no such thing as a species. Or ask a botanist why there are so many plant 'species' that are capable of interbreeding and producing fertile offspring that are intermediaries of their parents... intermediaries that are known to exist naturally in the wild where the ranges of the parents overlap. Because they're the same genus. The classification goes: Kingdom; Order; Family; Genus; Species. For example, roses. They're the same Genus: Rosa. This means that a R. damascena can hybridize with other species within Rosa to produce a new species. The farther you go up the classification, the less chance you have of successfully interbreeding. This is why dogs and wolves can produce viable offspring, but dogs and cats can't.
|
|
|
Post by malicious_bloke on Dec 27, 2010 13:59:53 GMT -5
On a related note, I've always wanted a pet Liger.
|
|
|
Post by lighthorseman on Dec 27, 2010 14:09:11 GMT -5
On a related note, I've always wanted a pet Liger. They had/ have some ligers and tigons at the National Zoo in Canberra. Did you know, that when the tigers in the next compound roar, the ligers and tigons roar back like tigers, but when the lions over the other side roar, they roar back as lions? How cool is that?
|
|
|
Post by malicious_bloke on Dec 27, 2010 14:42:10 GMT -5
Amphoteric cats...love it ![:D](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/grin.png)
|
|