Darwin's Illusion

[YoursTrue]

Plants and animals share elements, ergo: no DNA similarity or evolution by natural selection.
Yeah, that makes sense....

It makes sense that there are different DNA combinations forming the various entities, plants and animals. That is a known FACT. But this again does not evidence, prove (oops), manifest, show, or demonstrate that they evolved.

 

[Valjean]

OK, leave the "somethng like that" out. Just here is this:
Fossils do not demonstrate, show, or manifest (and certainly not prove) evolution as the Darwinian theory suggests. I understand that monkeys do not look like lions and may resemble humans more than camels do, but -- it does not mean that humans evolved from some Unknown Common Ancestor of monkeys, bonobos, gorillas also. One may say these things, but -- the model is assumption that plants and animals evolved according to the theory of natural selection and/or survival of the fittest. Fossils are not evidence that these things happened. Fossils show that organisms died.

For the hundredth time: What alternative explanation do you propose?

 

[Valjean]

It makes sense that there are different DNA combinations forming the various entities, plants and animals. That is a known FACT. But this again does not evidence, prove (oops), manifest, show, or demonstrate that they evolved.

DNA maps morphology. The gradual changes in morphology (form) are mapped perfectly by changes in the DNA.

 

[John53]

OK, leave the "somethng like that" out. Just here is this:
Fossils do not demonstrate, show, or manifest (and certainly not prove) evolution as the Darwinian theory suggests. I understand that monkeys do not look like lions and may resemble humans more than camels do, but -- it does not mean that humans evolved from some Unknown Common Ancestor of monkeys, bonobos, gorillas also. One may say these things, but -- the model is assumption that plants and animals evolved according to the theory of natural selection and/or survival of the fittest. Fossils are not evidence that these things happened. Fossils show that organisms died.

You're still not showing evidence to back your claim. I do agree fossils are evidence that something has died.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Again, I see that bones have elements in them that plants do also. Conclusion: DNA similarities do not prove, I mean show, evidence or demonstrate that evolution is the way things came about.

They are evidence.; You do not understand the concept.

 

[YoursTrue]

For the hundredth time: What alternative explanation do you propose?

ok, what do you think? Could it be that God created the various distinct forms? Continue to think that foxes and lions do not mix, or interbreed insofar as I know. I'll leave it there for you to think about. Because I personally had to pray for wisdom. The more I read about scientific views of evolution, the greater is my view that evolution could not possibly have happened. So then, yes -- if evolution is not true via the scientific explanations of what or how it must have occurred, then what's left?

 

[Subduction Zone]

ok, what do you think? Could it be that God created the various distinct forms? Continue to think that foxes and lions do not mix, or interbreed insofar as I know. I'll leave it there for you to think about. Because I personally had to pray for wisdom. The more I read about scientific views of evolution, the greater is my view that evolution could not possibly have happened. So then, yes -- if evolution is not true via the scientific explanations of what or how it must have occurred, then what's left?

Fooling yourself is not the Christian thing to do.

Why is that fact that you are a monkey such a problem for you? Let's assume that evolution is the fact that it appears to be. There is no evidence for any other explanation. If you were descended from a monkey would you be perfect? Or would you be flawed?

I would say that you would be flawed. According to Christianity you would still need to be saved. You do not have to believe a myth that if one understands it paints God as the bad guy. In the Genesis myth God is incompetent, vain, and evil. Why claim that is your God?

 

[YoursTrue]

You're still not showing evidence to back your claim. I do agree fossils are evidence that something has died.

, that's good for a start. Since some genes are missing from one form to another, even considering that humans are said to be genetically the closest to gorillas or bonobos if I recall correctly, that does not mean that they evolved from an "Unknown Common Ancestor,."

 

[Subduction Zone]

, that's good for a start. Since some genes are missing from one form to another, even considering that humans are said to be genetically the closest to gorillas or bonobos if I recall correctly, that does not mean that they evolved from an "Unknown Common Ancestor,."

But our genetic similarity is evidence for it.

And of course ERV's are a slam dunk for evolution.

 

[YoursTrue]

DNA maps morphology. The gradual changes in morphology (form) are mapped perfectly by changes in the DNA.

there is no evidence that demonstrates the differences of DNA between humans and gorillas came as a result of evolution. If you think there is, I'm willing to look at it. But along with that, you need to explain what it says instead of just posting a link, thanks. From everything I read from and about scientists, it is all -- conjecture, based on a theory they are convinced supports the conjectures about what and how it happened.

 

[John53]

, that's good for a start. Since some genes are missing from one form to another, even considering that humans are said to be genetically the closest to gorillas or bonobos if I recall correctly, that does not mean that they evolved from an "Unknown Common Ancestor,."

Hopefully you can understand that I need more evidence than words from someone who is not sure if they are recalling correctly.

 

[YoursTrue]

Hopefully you can understand that I need more evidence than words from someone who is not sure if they are recalling correctly.

lol, that's ok. I just know what I know and you know what you know, and so maybe as time goes on, more can be learned. If YOU can find proof of the claims of evolution as per the Darwinian program, please do present it. Thanks. (I haven't found any.) <g>

 

[F1fan]

ok, what do you think? Could it be that God created the various distinct forms?

No. Because the facts and patterns we observe don't support this. Let's note this a non-science, religious view, so not relevant.

 

[YoursTrue]

Hopefully you can understand that I need more evidence than words from someone who is not sure if they are recalling correctly.

Yes, I remember reading something to that effect. Surely you must be familiar with that posit, aren't you? If you're not aware of it, please let me know and I'll look for it again and post it. Thanks.

 

[Valjean]

ok, what do you think? Could it be that God created the various distinct forms? Continue to think that foxes and lions do not mix, or interbreed insofar as I know. I'll leave it there for you to think about. Because I personally had to pray for wisdom. The more I read about scientific views of evolution, the greater is my view that evolution could not possibly have happened. So then, yes -- if evolution is not true via the scientific explanations of what or how it must have occurred, then what's left?

So, just to clarify, you think plants and animals just popped into existence "by the hand of God?" And you think this is reasonable and better evidenced than evolution. And you believe the mechanism used for all this is....what?

 

[YoursTrue]

OK, @John53, here's a bit more info, not just what I remember.
"Ever since researchers sequenced the chimp genome in 2005, they have known that humans share about 99% of our DNA with chimpanzees, making them our closest living relatives. What makes a bonobo different from a human? Our closest cousins, bonobos share 98.7 percent of our genetic makeup."
Short-Facts – Fresh ideas for every day › how-are-bonobos-and-humans-similar

 

[Valjean]

there is no evidence that demonstrates the differences of DNA between humans and gorillas came as a result of evolution. If you think there is, I'm willing to look at it. But along with that, you need to explain what it says instead of just posting a link, thanks. From everything I read from and about scientists, it is all -- conjecture, based on a theory they are convinced supports the conjectures about what and how it happened.

Yet all the evidence: DNA, fossil, stratigraphic, radiometric, point to an evolution of forms over time, and they all agree with one another, and they all rely on known, observable mechanisms.
Contrast this with your "theory" of Goddidit: No evidence, no mechanism.

You're trying to support your unevidenced view by undermining our well evidenced theory. You're proposing magic as more reasonable than known, observed, tested mechanisms.

 

[YoursTrue]

So, just to clarify, you think plants and animals just popped into existence "by the hand of God?" And you think this is reasonable and better evidenced than evolution. And you believe the mechanism used for all this is....what?

I wasn't there and don't know HOW He did it exactly, so obviously I can't say. But I do believe that God made plants and animals according to His will, separating the types (sometimes known as kinds). It now makes more sense to me than the theory of evolution. The Bible speaks of God's creative acts, and uses some expressions symbolically.
"Long ago you laid the foundations of the earth, And the heavens are the work of your hands." (Psalm 102:25)

 

[Valjean]

, that's good for a start. Since some genes are missing from one form to another, even considering that humans are said to be genetically the closest to gorillas or bonobos if I recall correctly, that does not mean that they evolved from an "Unknown Common Ancestor,."

No. Why would it show that?
It shows we are related.

 

[Valjean]

I wasn't there and don't know HOW He did it exactly, so obviously I can't say. But I do believe that God made plants and animals according to His will, separating the types (sometimes known as kinds). It now makes more sense to me than the theory of evolution. The Bible speaks of God's creative acts, and uses some expressions symbolically.
"Long ago you laid the foundations of the earth, And the heavens are the work of your hands." (Psalm 102:25)

OK. So, in answer to my question, You believe Goddidit, by magic, according to his will.
Yet you have no evidence of this other than a two thousand year old collection of assorted writings by unknown authors, compiled and edited by true believers with an agenda.
Your belief is pure, unevidenced faith. You have no explanation of what mechanism was used, and, for that matter, no evidence for any god. How are you in any position to criticize people who have whole libraries of observable, familiar, tested evidence?