I hardly see how this is "epic bullshit". Remember it's a serious thread, you could atleast be respectful of other people's views on the subject.
To clarify... the example was BS. I wasn't making a personal attack on you. I teach biology, and I get tired of sh*tty evidence being passed off as ironclad fact. The moths are just one particular example I grit my teeth at because it comes up so often... and NOBODY EVER mentions the "funny business" associated with it.
Please gift me some source of evidence for your genetic drift theory please.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_drift
- It's a basic tenet of population genetics. It's not a theory.
Because of what I heard, recent studies did indeed prove that the peppered moth was, after all, an example of Darwinian evolution.
Again, where did you hear this? If you're referring to the bit at the bottom of the BBC page you referenced, I find it highly suspect that a "professor of evolution" was the one heading up the study. Conflict of interest much, prof?
And even if the peppered moth isn't an example of evolution, that doesn't mean that evolution does not exist at all, there are numerous cases of evolution around the world, and I'm sure since we have hardly scratched the surface in relation to animal species on the planet, it's extremely likely that evolution does infact exist
I agree with MOST of this... My original point was that the moth is a BOGUS (albeit well-known) example of what other, more reliable evidence (comparative genomics, for example) does a much better job of illustrating. The "numerous cases" you refer to are primarily in simple organisms (bacteria and protists mostly) whose short generation times allow for much more detailed studies of natural selection at work. (See Behe's discussion of Malaria/plasmodium evolution HERE
for an example.) What is much more difficult to find is evidence of speciation, especially among "higher" organisms, eg. animals.
Please don't take things so personally. I'm merely suggesting that you should try to have more to base your beliefs on than false examples and assumed likelihoods.
I think it is illogical to believe in an almighty omnipotant being such as "god", so therefore, I'm searching for a plausible scientific explaination...
Out of curiosity, why do you find the possible existence of an omnipotent being/deity/etc. so "illogical?" As you stated above, we've "hardly scratched the surface" in our understanding of much of anything. Why is the idea of "God" scientifically implausible?