Re: Creationist Psychology Revealed

Selective breeding results in animals that are better for humans (milk, meat, docility, neotony, rapid growth ect.) not better for the specific animals. And the selective pressure never stops, since they are never allowed to breed under "natural" circumstances. Why would you expect speciation to occur?

And then...

Look up speciation through polyploidy. There has also been speciation of the Drosophila the work of Rice and Salt is among many that have been done with the fruit fly.

Care to make up your mind? Would speciation occur or not?

Well, of course, it didn't, so the question is rhetorical.

Besides, you're confusing micro-evolution with macro-evolution. You're also being very liberal with your definition of "speciation".

Wheat is just another example of taking an existing species and super-selecting the desired attributes and then calling it a different species, when what we actually have is a different breed. You might as well try to explain to me how chihuahuas are a different "species" than Great Danes.

Polyploidy is one case where we might call that "evolution", I'll grant you, except that, when the resultant species survives, that's the end of its evolution. Just one step. For example, a flower that is the cross of two different flowers and contains the sum of the chromosomes from both parents is a nice hybrid, but it's not exactly "random mutation". It's just a different possible parenting pathway. What's the next step for such a species, and where are the examples?

As for Darwin predicting DNA -- you're kidding, right? Darwin is to DNA as Joseph Smith is to caffeine.