What's the Deal with Evolution?

[McBell]

You obviously aren't following the thread. I understand .. it's too confusing for you.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Darwin's theory is the model all the finds are plugged into. Put the same find into a creation model and it fits fine.

Show us how the fossil record is explained by biblical creation if it fits so fine.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Go get some DNA from an ape and send it to ancestor.com then. See if it's related to George Washington.

I am related to John Hart. You probably do not even know who that is. According to science he is an ape and I am an ape and you are an ape. We might be related. Though I hope not.

 

[Valjean]

Lol, it's still full of assumptions.


The basic principle, evolution, is taken for granted. F.M. Wuketits, an evolution theorist, writes:“We pre-suppose the essential correctness of biological evolution, yes, we assume that evolution is universally valid.”

Explain "presupposed." The ToE is evidenced and tested. It's predictive, observable, reproducible and utilitarian

Ernest Kahane:... “It is absurd and absolutely preposterous to believe that a living cell could come into existence by itself; but, notwithstanding, I do believe it, because I cannot imagine anything else.”

Why is it absurd? What does he know of what life is based on?
Had he been familiar with modern chemistry he wouldn't have needed to bother with imagining. The steps of chemical evolution are there for all to see, test and reproduce.

If there were only one single example (experiment or observation) of the origin of a new kind of organism or a new structure, then this would have been a derived theory. The mechanisms, mutation and selection, do occur, and the appearance of a new kind would imply new genetic information.

Yet there are thousands of such experiments and observations. Did you think biologists just pulled evolution out of their hats?
The ToE is evidenced and tested. It's observed every day.

Explain this "new genetic information." How is it different from changed genetic information? You don't think selective breeding works?
Find me some wild Maize, or a wild Chihuahua. Do you know what Down's syndrome is? It's caused by the reduplication of a chromosome, ie: new information.

Reduplications, deletions and rearrangement of genetic sequences happen all the time. How do you not know this? We'd all be identical clones if genetic information were not shuffled with every generation.

Because of the lack of any evidence of new genetic information, it remains an assumption.

See above. "New genetic information" happens all the time. The evidence is there for anyone to see.
Genetic changes can be shown by any DNA lab. DNA sequences get altered with every generation. If they weren't, we'd all be clones.

 

[Valjean]

Go get some DNA from an ape and send it to ancestor.com then. See if it's related to George Washington.

Ancestor.com would see the relationship clearly, but the relationship would be too distant to be of interest to their clients.
Their clients already know we're apes.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Disclaimer: I could myself be considered a kind of creationist, so I'm not here to rag on them!

But what is with this mostly Christian obsession (although I have seen it in the Muslim world too) with the theory of evolution? Aren't there better things to wrangle about? Healthier things to focus on?

Evolution.....it evolves

 

[ratiocinator]

The basic principle, evolution, is taken for granted. F.M. Wuketits, an evolution theorist, writes:“We pre-suppose the essential correctness of biological evolution, yes, we assume that evolution is universally valid.”

Another assumption: One should not drag in a creator (or synonyms such as designer, planning spirit, or “demiurge”). Ernest Kahane, a French molecular biologist, formulates it as follows: “It is absurd and absolutely preposterous to believe that a living cell could come into existence by itself; but, notwithstanding, I do believe it, because I cannot imagine anything else.”

Mutation and selection are the driving forces of evolution” (K. Lorenz).
If there were only one single example (experiment or observation) of the origin of a new kind of organism or a new structure, then this would have been a derived theory. The mechanisms, mutation and selection, do occur, and the appearance of a new kind would imply new genetic information. Because of the lack of any evidence of new genetic information, it remains an assumption.

You appear to have just copied this from Answers in Genesis [here], a site I wouldn't trust to tell me the time of day, without attribution or any context to any of the supposed quotes. What's more, the last part is just a comment from AiG and is obvious nonsense. There are endless experiments and observations that support evolution and the appearance of new information.

Answers in Genesis, together with every other creationist site I've ever looked at, is riddled with misinformation, misrepresentation, and blatant falsehoods.

 

[Wildswanderer]

LOL! Canines are mammals. Humans are mammals. We share DNA sequences to a point.

But even a biological relationship does not mean that we cannot have the relationship we have with dogs.

Just because we all evolved doesn't mean you can't have a puppy. You just have to treat it nice.

Why? Why can't I rip it apart with my teeth? According to evolution I'm a mammal and a predator.

 

[ratiocinator]

Why can't I rip it apart with my teeth?

It might put up a fight.

According to evolution I'm a mammal and a predator.

And...? You do realise how silly all this makes you look, yes?

 

[Wildswanderer]

Which doesn't change the fact that your claim ("It means a dog is my ancestor.") was simply false.

Because it followed another branch?
If we came from animals, they all have to be back in our past somewhere.

 

[Wildswanderer]

It might put up a fight.



And...? You do realise how silly all this makes you look, yes?

Why? It's simply survival of the fittest.

 

[ratiocinator]

If we came from animals, they all have to be back in our past somewhere.

What were you saying about using logic? Did you even stop to think for a second before you typed this?

 

[Wildswanderer]

Show us how the fossil record is explained by biblical creation if it fits so fine.

I can but it would require a lot of typing.

 

[ratiocinator]

Why? It's simply survival of the fittest.

How do you think making a fool of yourself in public by criticising something you have no understanding of is helping?

 

[Wildswanderer]

How do you think making a fool of yourself in public by criticising something you have no understanding of is helping?

I see you have no helpful answers. In fact all you have are insults.

 

[Heyo]

I made this thread.​

I tried to keep it on topic but I failed hard. Sorry, but sometimes there is nothing you can do.

 

[ratiocinator]

I see you have no helpful answers.

Answers to what, exactly? You seem to have gone off in a bizarre tangent about behaving like different animals. I see no questions that need answers. You can't logically go from a scientific theory, that describes what is to some sort of moral idea about how things ought to be and how you ought to behave. Different animals have totally different behaviours to each other. Why would a human behave like some other animal?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Why? Why can't I rip it apart with my teeth? According to evolution I'm a mammal and a predator.

So you no longer have serious responses to the posts. As I see it, your claims were left unsupported. Questions to you left unanswered. And your arguments fell apart about as can be expected considering how fatally flawed and dusty they were to start.

The theory of evolution does not tell you to behave or not to behave like a monster. That is up to you.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I can but it would require a lot of typing.

Simply saying you are incapable of supporting your claims would have been sufficient.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I see you have no helpful answers. In fact all you have are insults.

That is rich coming from you.