Vous savez qu'il n'y a pas de débat entre créationniste et évolutionniste sur l'existence de la spéciation, de la sélection naturelle, de la diversité génétique ?
Vous semblez arrivé de loin.
Vous devriez relire les exemples que vous avez courageusement copier-coller et nous indiquer les nouvelles innovations/structures morphologiques/fonctions qui émergent de ces croisements inter-espèces. La spéciation ou l’isolement reproductif, n’implique pas "nouveau matériel génétique menant au développement d’une nouvelle structure morphologique" synonyme plus explicite "d'évolution".
Ah, aussi vous devriez lire ceci concernant le FAQ de Talkorigins ou vous pigez courageusement vos « arguments-canon » :
http://www.trueorigin.org/isakrbtl.asp
The “Observed Instances FAQ”
As for the “Observed Instances of Speciation” FAQ (the reading of which is encouraged by this writer), after one goes to the trouble of digesting all the preliminary verbiage, all the “speciation” examples given fall into one of two categories:
1) “new” species that are “new” to man, but whose “newness” remains equivocal in light of observed genetic “variation” vs. genetic “change” (as discussed above), and/or because a species of unknown age is being observed by man for the first time.
2) “new” species whose appearance was deliberately and artificially brought about by the efforts of intelligent human manipulation, and whose status as new “species” remain unequivocally consequential to laboratory experiments rather than natural processes.
In neither of the above examples cited by Isaak was the natural (i.e., unaided) generation of a new species accomplished or observed, in which an unequivocally “new” trait was obtained (i.e., new genetic information created) and carried forward within a population of organisms. In other words, these are not examples of macro-evolutionary speciation—they are examples of human discovery and/or genetic manipulation and/or natural genetic recombination. They serve to confirm the observable nature of genetic variation, while saying absolutely nothing in support of Darwinian “macro-evolution,” which postulates not just variations within a type of organism but the emergence of entirely new organisms.
Definitions of “species” and (therefore) “speciation” remain many and varied, and by most modern definitions, certain changes within organism populations do indeed qualify as “speciation events”—yet even after many decades of study, there remains no solid evidence that an increase in both quality and quantity of genetic information (as required for a macro-evolutionary speciation event) has happened or could happen.
|