Evolution is not observable admits Jerry Coyne

[outhouse]

Macroevolution has not been observed.

STOP

It factually has.

They didn't evolve into something else:

STOP! that is not how evolution works


Ducks don't turn into lizards

 

[outhouse]

head shape changes has also been observed in human populations within historic times, but the end product was still human.

False.

Much more then head shape changed and we have DNA evidence in factual support.


Bud, we see you coming and going. You cannot win this ever when addressing credible academia.

 

[Revoltingest]

STOP
It factually has.

This isn't really so, since the fossil record isn't real time.
But this doesn't harm the case for evolution at all.
The theory makes predictions, ie, it's testable.
These have been verified.
And there is no alternative other than faith based conjecture.

 

[outhouse]

This isn't really so, since the fossil record isn't real time.
But this doesn't harm the case for evolution at all.
The theory makes predictions, ie, it's testable.
These have been verified.
And there is no alternative other than faith based conjecture.

Speciation has been observed in some species. That was my context

I have already admitted not all speciation has been nor can be observed as Coyne noted.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

You don't need to see the fish jumping out of water to know what caused the ripples.

 

[*blank*]

Evolutionist Eugene Koonin has debunked darwinism

"The summary of the state of affairs on the 150th anniversary of the Origin is somewhat shocking: in the post-genomic era, all major tenets of the Modern Synthesis are, if not outright overturned, replaced by a new and incomparably more complex vision of the key aspects of evolution (Box 1). So, not to mince words, the Modern Synthesis is gone."

The Origin at 150: is a new evolutionary synthesis in sight? Trends Genet 2009 Nov; 25(11): 473–475

 

[outhouse]

Evolutionist Eugene Koonin has debunked darwinism

NO he has not. Try again. What part of we see you coming and going don't you understand?

Your taking him out of context.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_Koonin


He is a recognised expert in the field of evolutionary and computational biology

Koonin's principal research goals include the comparative analysis of sequenced genomes and automatic methods for genome-scale annotation of gene functions.[5] His research also investigates the application of comparative genomics for phylogenetic analysis, reconstruction of ancestral life forms and building large-scale evolutionary scenarios, as well as mathematical modeling of genome evolution.[6][7][8] Koonin's research also investigates computational study of the major transitions in the evolution of life (such as the origin of eukaryotes), the evolution of eukaryotic signaling and developmental pathways from the comparative-genomic perspective.[9]

 

[Lyndon]

You don't need to see the fish jumping out of water to know what caused the ripples.

A frog???

 

[Lyndon]

Funny thing I've never heard scientists talking about the fact of evolution, I've heard of the theory of evolution, when did theory turn into fact? Is that some new development pioneered by RF posters?? Inquiring minds want to know!!

 

[outhouse]

I've never heard scientists talking about the fact of evolution,

You would actually have to read and study the topic to understand it. Your just admitting you don't know common knowledge.

when did theory turn into fact?

2006

It has been theory and fact for a very long time and science has recently determined it factual.

http://www.interacademies.net/10878/13901.aspx

We agree that the following evidence-based facts about the origins and evolution of the Earth and of life on this planet have been established by numerous observations and independently derived experimental results from a multitude of scientific disciplines. Even if there are still many open questions about the precise details of evolutionary change, scientific evidence has never contradicted these results:

1. In a universe that has evolved towards its present configuration for some 11 to 15 billion years, our Earth formed approximately 4.5 billion years ago.
2. Since its formation, the Earth – its geology and its environments – has changed under the effect of numerous physical and chemical forces and continues to do so.
3. Life appeared on Earth at least 2.5 billion years ago. The evolution, soon after, of photosynthetic organisms enabled, from at least 2 billion years ago, the slow transformation of the atmosphere to one containing substantial quantities of oxygen. In addition to the release of the oxygen that we breathe, the process of photosynthesis is the ultimate source of fixed energy and food upon which human life on the planet depends.
4. Since its first appearance on Earth, life has taken many forms, all of which continue to evolve, in ways which palaeontology and the modern biological and biochemical sciences are describing and independently confirming with increasing precision. Commonalities in the structure of the genetic code of all organisms living today, including humans, clearly indicate their common primordial origin.

 

[averageJOE]

The evolutionist Jerry Coyne has written a book called "Why evolution is true". He explains in the book evolution is not observable.

If you are expecting a book with the title, "Why Evolution is True" to contain proof for the theory of evolution, you will be disappointed. The book is just a list of excuses why evolutionists can’t prove evolution is true.

Evolution can not be proven becuase nobody has ever seen it happening! Science is meant to be based on direct observation but evolutionists like Jerry Coyne believes in things they can not see.

"Given the gradual pace of evolution, it’s unreasonable to expect to see selection transforming one “type” of plant or animal into another—so-called macroevolution—within a human lifetime." - Coyne

So is your argument that if no one physically sees something happen then it didn't happen?

 

[Aquitaine]

Funny thing I've never heard scientists talking about the fact of evolution, I've heard of the theory of evolution, when did theory turn into fact? Is that some new development pioneered by RF posters?? Inquiring minds want to know!!

You are mistaking the scientific definition of the word "theory" with the layman's definition of it, which is closer to "an educated guess/hypothesis".

 

[Sunstone]

Science is meant to be based on direct observation but...

That's great to know! And your degree is in which one of the evolutionary sciences...?

 

[Lyndon]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_as_fact_and_theory

Obviously there is still no solid agreement that evolution is a fact not a theory. Remember Einsteins theory of Relativity.

The fact part is that species evolved over millions of years, evidently. The theory part is what made them evolve, with natural selection being one theory, even intelligent design being another.

 

[Sunstone]

Evolution can not be proven becuase nobody has ever seen it happening! Science is meant to be based on direct observation but evolutionists like Jerry Coyne believes in things they can not see.

No one has ever seen you actually think, but it seems reasonable to suppose you do. Yet, by your own reasoning, the implication is that, because no one has actually seen you think, you do not think. How do you explain that?

 

[Nietzsche]

Science is meant to be based on direct observation

So Jesus can't be scientifically verified.

I'm glad we've cleared this up.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Macroevolution has not been observed. Yes, i have seen the above articles many times such as the lizards. These lizards just changed size, head shape and colour etc., but they were still morphologically clearly lizards. They didn't evolve into something else: "As a result, individuals on Pod Mrcaru have heads that are longer, wider and taller than those on Pod Kopiste, which translates into a big increase in bite force", head shape changes has also been observed in human populations within historic times, but the end product was still human.

This is where you normally refer to 'kinds', then we ask for a definition of 'kinds' and you tell us it's obvious.
After that, if things get interesting, we'll post a picture of a dog and a fox or something.

 

[Sunstone]

Evolutionist Eugene Koonin has debunked darwinism

"The summary of the state of affairs on the 150th anniversary of the Origin is somewhat shocking: in the post-genomic era, all major tenets of the Modern Synthesis are, if not outright overturned, replaced by a new and incomparably more complex vision of the key aspects of evolution (Box 1). So, not to mince words, the Modern Synthesis is gone."

The Origin at 150: is a new evolutionary synthesis in sight? Trends Genet 2009 Nov; 25(11): 473–475

Please describe what the "Modern Synthesis" was in your own words and also name your three favorite sources for information on it.

 

[outhouse]

So Jesus can't be scientifically verified.

LOL nor any god concept

 

[psychoslice]

Well I think evolution makes more sense than a man in the sky waving a wand, and pop, there we are, and everything else.