Quote from NickelScalper:
Wrong.
"Unmet Condition of Evolution #1: A modification, beyond the mere loss of information due to mutation, in the genetic composition of a population resulting in a new species."
You have not show any evidence that the modifications you cite are beyond those caused by the mere loss of information due to mutation.
If you have such evidence, what is it?
From what in the cited study do you infer that the modifications are caused by the mere loss of information? How do you know that the modifications were not the product of an added gene, rather than a lost gene?
The summary only states that the keryotypes are slightly different, i.e., the worms have a different chromosome pattern.
For that matter, there is nothing in the summary that suggests that the modification is the result of mutation v. adaptation. The only thing that the study shows, is that the two field populations of worms can breed among themselves, the lab population can breed amongst itself, and that neither of the field populations can breed with the lab population.
The lab population can reproduce -- it is not sterile and it is genetically different than the field population. There is nothing in the summary that suggests how this happened -- only that it HAS happened, and without any apparent human involvement, other than to physically isolate the two populations, which were originally part of the field population.
If you are now stating, that in order for this to prove evolution according to your personal definition, that I must provide, not only a population that cannot interbreed, but ALSO a population that has at least one substantial physical difference, then this example is insufficient for your needs.
However, for the majority of the scientific community, which does not share your personal opinion about what is necessary to prove evolution, my cited example is "sufficient." To wit, the following are definitions of evolution from famous biologists:
"Biological evolution ... is change in the properties of populations of organisms that transcend the lifetime of a single individual. The ontogeny of an individual is not considered evolution; individual organisms do not evolve. The changes in populations that are considered evolutionary are those that are inheritable via the genetic material from one generation to the next. Biological evolution may be slight or substantial; it embraces everything from slight changes in the proportion of different alleles within a population (such as those determining blood types) to the successive alterations that led from the earliest protoorganism to snails, bees, giraffes, and dandelions." -- Douglas J. Futuyma in Evolutionary Biology, Sinauer Associates 1986
and:
"Evolution can be precisely defined as any change in the frequency of alleles within a gene pool from one generation to the next." -- Helena Curtis and N. Sue Barnes, Biology 5th ed. 1989 Worth Publishers, p.974
Note: An allele is a specific variation of a gene.
