Evolution My ToE

[Dan From Smithville]

Lol. Seriously? You make it sound like there’s a lot!
Please.
All you’ve presented, are circumstantial evidences. Only inferences.

I’ve presented observable facts....human *capabilities* far exceed apes! Any animal.
I guess you don’t agree.

You really have developed this skill at not answering questios. If there isn't that much, then addressing it should be easy peasey.

Weren't you the one going on about misconstruing the words of others. Here, you are not just misconsruing, but dismissing what has been clearly stated. And moving goalposts too. Before, it was human intellectual capability and now it is all capability. You even contradict your own previous statements about some of that capability. Wow!

I will repeat what I previously said in two posts that you must have read since you responded to them. No one is disputing human intellectually capability. I am not disputing it, since you didn't seem to fathom that.

The questions you are avoiding go to the significance of that capability as a trait for comparison with other species.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

They are based on observations, and experience. The heart of science.

Not most of it. There is no observation for anything related to a global flood. That is just church doctrine regurgitated.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

A scientific position...from what? Observation and experience? Extremely little, actually.
From observation: “We look similar.”
From experience: nil.

So nothing. You can't address any of the evidence. Chromosomes, ERVs, physiology, morphology, cognition, the fossil record, genetics, etc. I thought you said there wasn't much. That's a big list for not much and it isn't even complete.

And here I am the one being insulted as disingenuous.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

A scientific position...from what? Observation and experience? Extremely little, actually.
From observation: “We look similar.”
From experience: nil.

If I didn't believe you were serious, I would swear this was a joke.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Lol. Seriously? You make it sound like there’s a lot!
Please.
All you’ve presented, are circumstantial evidences. Only inferences.

I’ve presented observable facts....human *capabilities* far exceed apes! Any animal.
I guess you don’t agree.

I haven't presented evidence. I have asked you questions that you avoid answering. Now you are making claims about me that are not true.

All you have said is people real smart. Apes not smart. My questions were asked to see the meaning of that, but instead I get standard creationist fallacies and diversions. Insults too.

Where are your answers to that teenie tiny bit of scientific evidence from those areas i mentioned earlier that form the basis for the conclusion we are apes and related most closely to chimps? If your position is sound, this should be easy for you and not require all the games I have seen from you so far.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

If I didn't believe you were serious, I would swear this was a joke.

I guess there’s more “observation” evidence, but to me & others, it’s not definitive....

https://evolutionnews.org/2016/05/human_chromosom/

The links are very informative!

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I guess there’s more “observation” evidence, but to me others it’s not definitive....

Human Chromosome Two: An Open Letter to BioLogos on the Genetic Evidence, Cont. | Evolution News

The links are very informative!

I haven't asked you to provide links to the evidence. You have made claims about how unimportant that evidence is. You are avoiding supporting those claims.

More tactics, but no argument based on science or evidence.. So we can agree your rejection is based on your religious views and not science. You should have opened with that. It would have been a real time saver.

Nighty night.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Careful. It sounds like a good idea, but you start making offers and get into all kinds of trouble. Do you know it is ok in the Bible, but it is against the law in the US. I don't get it. It's in the Bible.

Darn. There go my plans for the weekend.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You can date the rocks, maybe..... but the mountains? No.

Many of the mountain ranges, for instance, are geologically young. It’s easy to see, with the extent of erosion — or lack of, I should say — they display: There are quite a few ranges, that obviously existed prior to the Flood....their peaks are eroded, and have rounded features, from wind and other elements.

But many ranges, for example the Himalayas, have sharp and well defined features despite the extreme elements they endure, thus revealing a young age, geologically speaking. Sharp and well-defined features wouldn’t be observed, if these ranges were millions of years old, given the amount of elemental forces they face.

(It’s easy to see this evidence.)

The current topography of these ranges occurred, IMO and others’, when the ‘vast underground springs broke open’ according to Genesis 7:11, part of geologic events that caused the Flood.


I think it’s not so much that these ranges were elevated, but rather, the Earth basically imploded slightly, from the “underground springs” emptying. This would agree with Psalm 104, particularly what a ground observer would notice, from their standpoint....that’s how Genesis 1 was written, as you are aware.


There’s so much we can learn from the Scriptures, regarding Jehovah’s actions!

Take care.

As if creationists ever honestly try to see how quickly mountains erode. You are a laugh a minute sometimes. Show us the peer review that supports a young age for any of the mountains. The only young mountains that I am aware of are volcanic in nature.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I guess there’s more “observation” evidence, but to me others it’s not definitive....

Human Chromosome Two: An Open Letter to BioLogos on the Genetic Evidence, Cont. | Evolution News

The links are very informative!

Yes, they tell us how dishonest your sites are.

You do realize that is put out by the totally debunked and discredited Discovery Toot, don't you? Again, try to find some peer reviewed articles that support this.

 

[dad]

Defending the faith is not saying that all of the Bible is true no matter what.

Let me guess, if we call Jesus a liar for mentioning the flood and Noah, that is defending the faith?

People with strong faith do not have the weakness of demanding that the obviously false parts of the Bible are true.

Actually they know God is true even if every man be found a liar. It is Satan that tries to get people to doubt Him and His word and holiness. Right from the garden that old serpent was casting doubt on God's intentions and goodness and what He actually said. Those who allow themselves to get so deluded that they think Scripture is 'false parts' are not strong in faith but have denied the faith.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Let me guess, if we call Jesus a liar for mentioning the flood and Noah, that is defending the faith?
Actually they know God is true even if every man be found a liar. It is Satan that tries to get people to doubt Him and His word and holiness. Right from the garden that old serpent was casting doubt on God's intentions and goodness and what He actually said. Those who allow themselves to get so deluded that they think Scripture is 'false parts' are not strong in faith but have denied the faith.

Please drop the poor arguments. You after all are the one that continually claims that your God is a liar. No one else has made that claim.

Jesus often spoke in parables and used other literary tools. Saying that someone is as old as the hills is not lying since they are much younger than the hills it is a figure of speech. So Jesus was not necessarily lying when he said that. But since you claim that God made everything and all of the evidence tells us that there was no Flood you are claiming that God put the false evidence there you are claiming that your God is a liar.

Ain't logic a female dog that has had puppies?

 

[Alone]

{oooooooh oooooooh ooooooh aaaaaah aaaaaah aaaaaah!

 

[Alone]

At the risk of more utter embarrassment, Dan is evolution and or creationism the only two options here?

 

[Subduction Zone]

At the risk of more utter embarrassment, Dan is evolution and or creationism the only two options here?

Dan probably went to bed, but the answer is no. Which is why supposed evidence against evolution (in reality creationists have never been able to find any) is not evidence for creationism. And to be fair evidence against creationism would not be evidence for evolution.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

We are still humans. Some people have more empathy, sympathy, than others.

That's not an answer to my question. Since you consider yourself above animals because they lack some of our abilities, do you consider yourself above humans who lack those abilities?

If not, why do you consider yourself above animals?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Now there's an interesting question. What about those that some categorize as races? Are some races in your view, superior or inferior to other so-called races? If so, in what way?

Why haven't you answered my question?

And no, I don't consider any race superior or inferior.

Now, can you answer my question regarding how you determine humanity?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Lol. Seriously? You make it sound like there’s a lot!
Please.
All you’ve presented, are circumstantial evidences. Only inferences.

I’ve presented observable facts....human *capabilities* far exceed apes! Any animal.
I guess you don’t agree.

I've already demonstrated to you that human capabilities don't indicate anything. We still share a vast majority of our genes with other apes, and the wealth of evidence suggests we share a common ancestor.

Again, I could easily "observe" that my capabilities far exceed those of a child with severe developmental difficulties, but that doesn't mean we can't be related. Your argument makes no sense and isn't actually based on objective facts, just your personal perception. And it's one that essentially means you must view disabled or developmentally challenged people as non-human.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

true nature.
God gave him great wisdom.

Because God did not give biologists wisdom!



Perhaps I was trying to post with sensitivity to people devoid of understanding and wanted to start off giving some glimmer of hope? Ha.

With origin sciences that is exactly what it is about.

Example of a quote where you think I did that?

Those datapoint rascals seem to be in deep hiding, since you sure post none.


Add it to the big list I guess.




Then tell us what else you have than that alone to prove man descended from animals, worms, plants etc?? Post it.


Start anytime.


No. Real knowledge can be checked, not just claimed. Can I check your mother or all premises for past models...that there was this same nature?? No. Can I check if a plane flies well? Yes.

Save us all time and useless endless mind games here and show us anything in the real world due to your claimed same state past?!

No, your opinions concerning science aren't tainted by religion at all....

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Still can't mate a human with a chimp.

So? Did I claim otherwise?