Suppose evolution was refuted, then what?

[Heathen Hammer]

Well, millions of people and many scientists disagree with you. And I will agree to disagree with you also.

Millions of people ignorant of the facts, yes, I am well aware.

Your appeal to numbers is a fallacy. Wrong people are wrong no matter how many of them there are. You are factually wrong, in this. Adapt.

 

[painted wolf]

Right. And the ToE apologists are the judge and jury as to what genuine discussion is? If you can't refute the argument, attack the person. Or did you forget this is a Religious forum where religious views are discussed? Or is free speech only for those who agree with your views?

No the rules of the forum are... please stop with the "Help help I'm being oppressed" act. It's childish.

wa:do

 

[camanintx]

There is no evidence that DNA evolved (or anything else, for that matter.) To the contrary, the complexity of DNA is so great no human scientist has yet been able to 'make' DNA, nor is it likely they ever will.

Another argument from ignorance.

A prominent microbiologist stated:"The complexity of the mechanisms required for the funtioning of a living cell is so large that a simultaneous emergence by chance seems impossible." - Radu Popa.

Another out-of-context quote.

No human alive today was present when God created the plant and animal life on earth. That evolution was not involved in creation, we have the Creator's own testimony on record in the Bible. Both plants and animals were created by God "according to their kinds." (Genesis 1:11,12,21) The available evidence supports the Genesis account.

Still more affirming the consequent.

Is this your idea of "devastating logic"?

 

[shawn001]

There is no evidence that DNA evolved (or anything else, for that matter.) To the contrary, the complexity of DNA is so great no human scientist has yet been able to 'make' DNA, nor is it likely they ever will. A prominent microbiologist stated:"The complexity of the mechanisms required for the funtioning of a living cell is so large that a simultaneous emergence by chance seems impossible." - Radu Popa.
No human alive today was present when God created the plant and animal life on earth. That evolution was not involved in creation, we have the Creator's own testimony on record in the Bible. Both plants and animals were created by God "according to their kinds." (Genesis 1:11,12,21) The available evidence supports the Genesis account.

We have actual pictures of the light of the big bang 13.7 billion years ago before stars existed or galaxies.

There is overwelming evidence everything has evolved from that point on.

We know how stars are born now and see thgem everyday being born, we know how the earth and solar system formed. By stellar and planetary accreation.


We know there have been five mass extintion events on earth and life has evolved back.

These aren't quesses they are facts. Billions of facts support evolution.

 

[shawn001]

The new human evolution website from the new 20+ million dollar museam hall at the smithsonian.


Evidence of Evolution
Scientists have discovered a wealth of evidence concerning human evolution, and this evidence comes in many forms. Thousands of human fossils enable researchers and students to study the changes that occurred in brain and body size, locomotion, diet, and other aspects regarding the way of life of early human species over the past 6 million years. Millions of stone tools, figurines and paintings, footprints, and other traces of human behavior in the prehistoric record tell about where and how early humans lived and when certain technological innovations were invented. Study of human genetics show how closely related we are to other primates – in fact, how connected we are with all other organisms – and can indicate the prehistoric migrations of our species, Homo sapiens, all over the world. Advances in the dating of fossils and artifacts help determine the age of those remains, which contributes to the big picture of when different milestones in becoming human evolved.

Exciting scientific discoveries continually add to the broader and deeper public knowledge of human evolution. Find out about the latest evidence in our What’s Hot in Human Origins section.
Behavior
Explore the evidence of early human behavior—from ancient footprints to stone tools and the earliest symbols and art – along with similarities and differences in the behavior of other primate species.
3D Collection
Explore our 3D collection of fossils and artifacts.
Human Fossils
From skeletons to teeth, early human fossils have been found of more than 6,000 individuals. Look into our digital 3-D collection and learn about fossil human species.
Genetics
Our genes offer evidence of how closely we are related to one another – and of our species’ connection with all other organisms.
Dating
The layers that contain fossils and archeological clues can be dated by more than a dozen techniques that use the basic principles of physics, chemistry, and Earth sciences. Some techniques can even estimate the age of the ancient teeth and bones directly. Advances in dating have made human evolution very exciting!


One Species, Living Worldwide
The billions of human beings living today all belong to one species: Homo sapiens.
As in all species, there is variation among individual human beings, from size and shape to skin tone and eye color. But we are much more alike than we are different. We are, in fact, remarkably similar. The DNA of all human beings living today is 99.9% alike.
We all have roots extending back 200,000 years to the emergence of the first modern humans in Africa, and back more than 6 million years to the evolution of the earliest human species in Africa. This amazing story of adaptation and survival is written in the language of our genes, in every cell of our bodies—as well as in the fossil and behavioral evidence.
This ancient heritage is yours.
Explore the origins of modern humans in Africa about 200,000 years ago and celebrate our species’ epic journey around the world in this video: "One Species, Living Worldwide."

New Research Confirms 'Out Of Africa' Theory Of Human Evolution

Homo sapiens originated in Africa 150,000 years ago and began to migrate 55,000 to 60,000 years ago. It is thought he arrived in Australia around 45,000 years before present (BP). Australia was, at the time, already colonised by homo erectus. This dispersal, from Africa to Australia through Arabia, Asia and the Malay peninsula, could have occurred at a rate of 1km per year. (Credit: Image courtesy of University Of Cambridge)


DNA Agrees With All the Other Science: Darwin Was Right
Molecular biologist Sean Carroll shows how evolution happens, one snippet of DNA at a time


One of the great triumphs of modern evolutionary science, evo devo addresses many of the key questions that were unanswerable when Charles Darwin published On the Origin of Species in 1859, and Carroll has become a leader in this nascent field. Now a professor of molecular biology and genetics at the University of Wisconsin, he continues to decode the genes that control life’s physical forms and to explore how mutations in those genes drive evolutionary change. These days, Carroll also devotes increasing energy to telling the public about his field’s remarkable discoveries through a series of books—Endless Forms Most Beautiful, The Making of the Fittest, and the brand-new Remarkable Creatures. He spoke with DISCOVER senior editor Pamela Weintraub about what his work has taught him about Darwin, the nature of evolution, and how life really works.
It has been 150 years since Charles Darwin proposed his theory of evolution in On the Origin of Species, yet in some ways the concept of evolution seems more controversial than ever today. Why do you think that is?


It is a cultural issue, not a scientific one. On the science side our confidence grows yearly because we see independent lines of evidence converge. What we’ve learned from the fossil record is confirmed by the DNA record and confirmed again by embryology. But people have been raised to disbelieve evolution and to hold other ideas more precious than this knowledge. At the same time, we routinely rely on DNA to convict and exonerate criminals. We rely on DNA science for things like paternity. We rely on DNA science in the clinic to weigh our disease risks or maybe even to look at prognoses for things like cancer. DNA science surrounds us, but in this one realm we seem unwilling to accept its facts. Juries are willing to put people to death based upon the variations in DNA, but they’re not willing to understand the mechanism that creates that variation and shapes what makes humans different from other things. It’s a blindness. I think this is a phase that we’ll eventually get through. Other countries have come to peace with DNA. I don’t know how many decades or centuries it’s going to take us.


They Don't Make Homo Sapiens Like They Used To
Our species—and individual races—have recently made big evolutionary changes to adjust to new pressures.


Hundreds of Human Genes Still Evolving
A comprehensive scan of the human genome finds that hundreds of our genes have undergone positive natural selection during the past 10,000 years of human evolution.



It has been 150 years since Charles Darwin proposed his theory of evolution in On the Origin of Species, yet in some ways the concept of evolution seems more controversial than ever today. Why do you think that is?
It is a cultural issue, not a scientific one. On the science side our confidence grows yearly because we see independent lines of evidence converge. What we’ve learned from the fossil record is confirmed by the DNA record and confirmed again by embryology. But people have been raised to disbelieve evolution and to hold other ideas more precious than this knowledge.



a joint statement of IAP by 68 national and international science academies lists as established scientific fact that Earth is approximately 4.6 billion years old and has undergone continual change; that life, according to the evidence of earliest fossils, appeared on Earth at least 3.8 billion years ago and has subsequently taken many forms, all of which continue to evolve; and that the genetic code of all organisms living today, including humans, clearly indicates their common primordial origin

 

[rusra02]

This is simply and demonstrably untrue. Synthetic DNA has been a reality for years.

No, what they do (if the article is to be believed) is take existing DNA and strand it together. To create DNA, one would need to construct it from the ground up.

 

[rusra02]

Millions of people ignorant of the facts, yes, I am well aware.

Your appeal to numbers is a fallacy. Wrong people are wrong no matter how many of them there are. You are factually wrong, in this. Adapt.

And yet evolutionists appeal to the number of scientists they have propagandized, or threatened into accepting (at least publicly) the evolution theory as proof that it must be right. It took a lot of courage in Nazi Germany to not Heil Hitler and not profess support of the party line. Same thing with not supporting evolution. Invariably, (as in this forum) those who disagree with the ToE faithful are attacked and ridiculed.

 

[rusra02]

We have actual pictures of the light of the big bang 13.7 billion years ago before stars existed or galaxies.

Yes, the Bible agrees that "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth." (Genesis 1:1)

There is overwelming evidence everything has evolved from that point on.

Saying it doesn't make it so.

We know how stars are born now and see thgem everyday being born, we know how the earth and solar system formed. By stellar and planetary accreation.

This is a theory but doesn't disprove creation.

We know there have been five mass extintion events on earth and life has evolved back.

Saying it doesn't make it so.

These aren't quesses they are facts. Billions of facts support evolution.

Billions of facts? Really?

 

[McBell]

Billions of facts? Really?

Compared to the number of facts that support creation, I would go so far as to say trillions...

But then, it matters not how many facts are going against zero facts...

Saying it doesn't make it so.

The fact that it is so makes it so.

Your hypocrisy is most revealing.

 

[McBell]

This is a theory but doesn't disprove creation.

Ah yes, the ever popular safety net fallacy of "well, you can't prove it false".

 

[McBell]

Saying it doesn't make it so.

yet "saying it is so" is all creationists have.
Not only for creation, but also for their "evolution is false" mantra.

One wonders why you would push that creation is true with nothing more than "saying it is so" then turn right around and claim that saying it is so does not make it so?

Do you not see your own blatant hypocrisy?

 

[rusra02]

Compared to the number of facts that support creation, I would go so far as to say trillions...

But then, it matters not how many facts are going against zero facts...



The fact that it is so makes it so.

Your hypocrisy is most revealing.

Many scientists disagree with the claim that the ToE is a fact. You know this. So who is being the hypocrite?

 

[McBell]

Many scientists disagree with the claim that the ToE is a fact. You know this. So who is being the hypocrite?

Regardless of how badly you want to believe otherwise, disagreeing with the truth does not make the truth a lie.

I shall not mention that you are right back to merely saying it is so.

However, if you really want to play the numbers fallacy game:

How many scientists agree with evolution?
How many disagree with evolution?
​

We can even ignore the fact that your list of scientists who disagree with evolution are in fields that have nothing to do with evolution.

 

[rusra02]

yet "saying it is so" is all creationists have.
Not only for creation, but also for their "evolution is false" mantra.

One wonders why you would push that creation is true with nothing more than "saying it is so" then turn right around and claim that saying it is so does not make it so?

Do you not see your own blatant hypocrisy?

I said the evidence supports Creation, notwithstanding the flood of evolution propaganda endlessly propagated by the theory's apologists.

 

[McBell]

I said the evidence supports Creation, notwithstanding the flood of evolution propaganda endlessly propagated by the theory's apologists.

Only to those who want creation to be true.

How about you present some SCIENTIFIC evidence for creation?

 

[rusra02]

Regardless of how badly you want to believe otherwise, disagreeing with the truth does not make the truth a lie.

I shall not mention that you are right back to merely saying it is so.

However, if you really want to play the numbers fallacy game:

How many scientists agree with evolution?
How many disagree with evolution?
​

We can even ignore the fact that your list of scientists who disagree with evolution are in fields that have nothing to do with evolution.

Of course, it is not true that all the scientists who disagree with the ToE are not in the science fields where this theory is generally accepted. But you knew that, didn't you? These are men who have examined the facts instead of drinking the ToE kool-aid, and are courageous enough to publicly make known their conclusions.

 

[johnhanks]

No, what they do (if the article is to be believed) is take existing DNA and strand it together. To create DNA, one would need to construct it from the ground up.

And here's a company that does exactly that:

DNA2.0 utilizes proprietary technologies to synthesize gene sequences of any size. Most genes range from 200bp to 60kb, with the longest gene made by us >400kb. DNA2.0 is the industry leader at synthesizing long and/or difficult sequences.

... (if the article is to be believed) ...

If you have evidence that the publishers of Scientific American have committed fraud, you really should produce it. Failing that, you might consider withdrawing the slur.

 

[Photonic]

Refuted or not, it would still be what occurs, humans can lie to themselves all they want, it won't make it more true.

 

[rusra02]

And here's a company that does exactly that:


If you have evidence that the publishers of Scientific American have committed fraud, you really should produce it. Failing that, you might consider withdrawing the slur.

So am I to understand these companies manufacture the enzymes, RNA, and proteins, creating them from the raw chemical components of which DNA is made?
Then forming the DNA with all it's replication and transcription abilities?
I think not. But if you have convincing proof, do tell.

 

[rusra02]

Refuted or not, it would still be what occurs, humans can lie to themselves all they want, it won't make it more true.

And I believe that is exactly what ToE advocates have done concerning their theory.