Originally Posted by RayF
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Please explain how a Ring Species is not evidence for evolution.

A little niche, but okay. I’m not a scientist and haven’t dedicated my life to proving the bible is correct (despite believing it is), however….

It would make sense to me if a qualified scientist said 2 species that could (suggesting “theory”) already be genetically related and produce offspring, I could see that. But are they evolving? Is the argument now: Evolution can be opportunity and promiscuity?

…and it still doesn’t address the length of existence of the parent species.

Ray,

Ring species are most common in birds, usually gulls. There will be a series of member so the same species, each in it's own geographic region making a "ring" around the earth. Each member is able to mate with it geographical neighbors except the two at the ends of the ring.

One of those will be the original of the species from which the others evolved. The last will be the newest member of the species, which, because it can no longer bread with the original is technically not of the same species, giving us an unbroken chain in the process of speciation and a clear demonstration of one species evolving into another.

You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.

You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell