La Macroevolucion es un postulado


http://the-geek.org/intro-biologia.html#id2492600

La microevolución puede estudiarse directamente.
La macroevolución no.
La macroevolución se estudia examinando los patrones en las poblaciones
biológicas y los grupos de organismos relacionados,
e infiriendo un proceso a partir del patrón.(#)
Dada la observación de la microevolución
y el conocimiento de que la Tierra tiene miles de millones de años,
se puede * P O S T U L A R * la macroevolución.

DRAE
postulado.
(Del part. de postular).


1. m. Proposición cuya verdad se admite sin pruebas

y que es necesaria para servir de base en ulteriores razonamientos.

2. m. Geom. Supuesto que se establece para fundar una demostración.

tex.
PD
(#) Patrón
¿que patrón?
¿el evolucionista?
argumento circular
"MJ" <systemfailure11***gmail.com> escribió en el mensaje
news:2cdc2556-9a53-419d-bbbf-9fd886615d51***s8g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
Este enlace se incluyó ayer en un mensaje del grupo "talk.origins"; de
los 100 comentarios reseñados, hay algunos sobre temas científicos que
no tienen desperdicio. He extraído cuatro que me han parecido
especialmente desternillantes, los pego tal cual.

http://duggmirror.com/comedy/100_Gre...an_chat_rooms/

"One of the most basic laws in the universe is the Second Law of
Thermodynamics. This states that as time goes by, entropy in an
environment will increase. Evolution argues differently against a law
that is accepted EVERYWHERE BY EVERYONE. Evolution says that we
started out simple, and over time became more complex. That just isn't
possible: UNLESS there is a giant outside source of energy supplying
the Earth with huge amounts of energy. If there were such a source,
scientists would certainly know about it."

"Gravity: Doesn't exist. If items of mass had any impact of others,
then mountains should have people orbiting them. Or the space shuttle
in space should have the astronauts orbiting it. Of course, that's
just the tip of the gravity myth. Think about it. Scientists want us
to believe that the sun has a gravitation pull strong enough to keep a
planet like neptune or pluto in orbit, but then it's not strong enough
to keep the moon in orbit? Why is that? What I believe is going on
here is this: These objects in space have yet to receive mans touch,
and thus have no sin to weigh them down. This isn't the case for
earth, where we see the impact of transfered sin to material objects.
The more sin, the heavier something is."

"Everyone knows scientists insist on using complex terminology to make
it harder for True Christians to refute their claims.
Deoxyribonucleic Acid, for example... sounds impressive, right? But
have you ever seen what happens if you put something in acid? It
dissolves! If we had all this acid in our cells, we'd all dissolve! So
much for the Theory of Evolution, Check MATE!"

"Sorry but scientists have just shown that mice DNA is more similar to
humans than human DNA. So would evolutionists then declare tha"t
humans came from mice? Probably. That's because most people can't
think for themselves and are confused about reality. That's why they
believe anything scientists say."

"><(((((***>" <texoki***gmail.com> escribió en el mensaje
news:fnn5so$uut$1***stable.tornevall.net...

On 30 mayo, 22:56, "><((((***>" <tex...***gmail.com> wrote:


Usted parece un retrasado mental
sin Macroevolucion todos serian del mismo genero
tex.


http://groups.google.es/group/es.cha...e=source&hl=es