• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Fallacies of Evolution

Status
Not open for further replies.

usfan

Well-Known Member
The burden of proof is on the claimant. You are the ones claiming the truth of this phenomenon, so you have to provide the evidence.

Science observes that organisms stay within their genetic parameters.. they do not flit about randomly, adding genes, traits, chromosomes, or features that are not in the original organism. This is observable reality. You are claiming something different from this reality, so you have to prove your theory with evidence, not just assert it as fact.

I can drop a rock over a bridge for thousands of times, & it will always go down.. that is observable reality. You may theorize that after enough attempts, the rock will fly up in the air, instead of down, then demand that i disprove your theory. I cannot. I can only demonstrate observable reality. The burden of proof is on you to prove the rock can fly in the air & overcome gravity, by some mysterious process. That is the same with evolution. Observable reality says that organisms stay within their genetic definitions, & can only draw upon that that has been passed down to them. You are claiming that new traits, new genes, & new chromosomes can be added, but you provide no mechanism for this, or explain HOW you can overcome the 'gravity' of the DNA, which always reproduces the organism to its parent stock.

So what will it be? More deflections? Ad hominem? Anything but science?
 

usfan

Well-Known Member
You appear to have no actual interest in discussing "the topic", as I've asked multiple times now for actual examples of the claims in the OP appearing in any academic scientific curricula and you refuse to respond.
Care to tackle the science? Or is attacking the poster a better method to avoid the subject?
 

Kangaroo Feathers

Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...
The burden of proof is on the claimant. You are the ones claiming the truth of this phenomenon, so you have to provide the evidence.
and you have yet to supply proof, as the claimant, for any of your claims in the OP
Science observes that organisms stay within their genetic parameters.. they do not flit about randomly, adding genes, traits, chromosomes, or features that are not in the original organism. This is observable reality. You are claiming something different from this reality, so you have to prove your theory with evidence, not just assert it as fact.
Third time. Nylon eating bacteria. And many other observed speciation events.
 

usfan

Well-Known Member
Third time. Nylon eating bacteria. And many other observed speciation events.
Ok, now you're back. ;)

Just saying, 'nylon eating bacteria!', is hardly evidence, of anything. You make no point, and it illustrates nothing. E coli can adapt to digest citrates, but this only reflects the adaptive nature of bacteria, and is not a structural change in the genome.

What 'observed speciation events!'? Any structural changes in the genome?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top