The ToE and common ancestry of all life forms did not come from looking at the evidence

[Man of Faith]

Here is proof that the ToE and common ancestry of all life forms did not come from looking at the evidence. The evidence that is presented below wasn't around when the ToE was formed by Darwin. So what we have is a theory presented then the data being interpreted to support the theory.

My DNA contains:
1) The genes for generating a tail (deactivated) in exactly the right spot for common descent.
2) The gene for generating vitamin C (deactivated) in exactly the right spot for common descent.
3) The gene for superior olfactory function (deactivated) in exactly the right spot for common descent.
4) Sub telomeric duplication in exactly the right spot on my chromosome #2 to be consistent for common descent.
5) Duplicated inactive centromere in my chromosome #2 in exactly the right place to be consistent for common descent.
6) Dozens of endogenous retroviruses in exactly the right places to be consistent with common descent.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Here is proof that the ToE and common ancestry of all life forms did not come from looking at the evidence.

Have you ever read Darwin? Never mind; the answer is obvious ...

 

[te_lanus]

. So what we have is a theory presented then the data being interpreted to support the theory.

The same can be said of Creationism. Nobody was around back then. Both Evolution and Creationism can only be interpreted with facts. Saying one is right and the other is wrong with out being there to see what happened is a bit far fetched.

As the facts gets "rediscovered" the facts shows more and more that maybe evolution is right.

 

[Man of Faith]

The same can be said of Creationism. .

I don't deny that. Everyone decides what they want to believe then interpretes the data to support their position, or support the scientists on their side. I believe by faith in a 6 day creation as described in the Bible and I interpret the scientific data to support my position. This post is to show the evolutionists that their theory came first, the evidence did not lead to the ToE.

 

[rojse]

Here is proof that the ToE and common ancestry of all life forms did not come from looking at the evidence. The evidence that is presented below wasn't around when the ToE was formed by Darwin. So what we have is a theory presented then the data being interpreted to support the theory.

The facts that were cited by themadhair are facts that were discovered over a century after Darwin originally formulated his Theory of Evolution, and these facts support Darwin's theory.

But I have no doubt that this is lost on you.

As for your "facts didn't come until after the theory", this is incorrect - evolutionary theory had many facts to support it - it is why a similar theory about evolution was published slightly before Darwin published his work.

 

[Man of Faith]

The facts that were cited by themadhair are facts that were discovered over a century after Darwin originally formulated his Theory of Evolution, and these facts support Darwin's theory.

But I have no doubt that this is lost on you.

Thank you for supporting my position that the ToE came before the evidence, the cart before the horse so to speak. Which would conclude that the evidence did not lead to the ToE.

 

[sandandfoam]

Thank you for supporting my position that the ToE came before the evidence, the cart before the horse so to speak. Which would conclude that the evidence did not lead to the ToE.

Have a look here.
Scientific method - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[tumbleweed41]

The observable evidence at the time lead Darwin and others (Alfred Wallace) to propose the Theories of Natural Selection.
In the 1930s, Darwinian natural selection was combined with Mendelian inheritance to form the modern evolutionary synthesis, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution#cite_note-Kutschera-11 which connected the units of evolution (genes) and the mechanism of evolution (natural selection).
This Theory of Evolution became the central principle of modern biology, directing research and providing a unifying explanation for the diversity of life on Earth.
Thus providing a predictive theory that has been the guiding force in biological sciences.

Man of Faith, you should learn about that which you try to "prove" wrong. Otherwise you come off as an ignorant fool.

 

[MSizer]

You really have no idea just how dense you make yourself appear, do you? Look at the incredible diversity of cabbage, kolrobi, cauliflower and broccoli, which all came from the same wild plant less than 10 000 years ago. Entire dog breeds are created in less than 100 generations. Less than 100 generations separates poodles from bulldogs. If controlled selection can produce that diversity in less than 1 000 years, imagine what natural selection can do over the course of a 30 000 times that period. In fact, we don't have to imagine. All we have to do is look around.

 

[Man of Faith]

You really have no idea just how dense you make yourself appear, do you? Look at the incredible diversity of cabbage, kolrobi, cauliflower and broccoli, which all came from the same wild plant less than 10 000 years ago. Entire dog breeds are created in less than 100 generations. Less than 100 generations separates poodles from bulldogs. If controlled selection can produce that diversity in less than 1 000 years, imagine what natural selection can do over the course of a 30 000 times that period. In fact, we don't have to imagine. All we have to do is look around.

You seem to be producing evidence of a young earth with diversity being able to come so quickly. Anyway, do you have any evidence that led to the ToE?

 

[rojse]

You seem to be producing evidence of a young earth with diversity being able to come so quickly. Anyway, do you have any evidence that led to the ToE?

Have you read Darwin's work on the subject?

 

[tumbleweed41]

Anyway, do you have any evidence that led to the ToE?

The observable evidence at the time lead Darwin and others (Alfred Wallace) to propose the Theories of Natural Selection.
In the 1930s, Darwinian natural selection was combined with Mendelian inheritance to form the modern evolutionary synthesis, which connected the units of evolution (genes) and the mechanism of evolution (natural selection).
This Theory of Evolution became the central principle of modern biology, directing research and providing a unifying explanation for the diversity of life on Earth.
Thus providing a predictive theory that has been the guiding force in biological sciences.

Again, Man of Faith, you should learn about that which you try to "prove" wrong. Otherwise you come off as an ignorant fool.

 

[Man of Faith]

Have you read Darwin's work on the subject?

Yes, he had a great imagination, but no evidence for ToE and common descent of all life forms.

 

[Magic Man]

Thank you for supporting my position that the ToE came before the evidence, the cart before the horse so to speak. Which would conclude that the evidence did not lead to the ToE.

Nice try, but ultimately a fail. Why do people like you try so hard to convince yourself of your delusions? This thread is obviously not about trying to convince any of us that you're right, it's about trying to convince yourself that you're right.

As Rojse and others said (and you chose to ignore), there was evidence for evolution when the theory was first produced. That's why and how the theory was produced. Since Darwin first put forth the theory, other evidence has come to light that also supports the theory. See, that's part of what makes a good theory, the ability to make accurate predictions.

 

[Magic Man]

Yes, he had a great imagination, but no evidence for ToE and common descent of all life forms.

So, that's a "no", then?

 

[tumbleweed41]

Yes, he had a great imagination, but no evidence for ToE and common descent of all life forms.

Once again your ignorance is obvious.
Darwin did not propose the Theory of Evolution.
Darwin proposed the Theory of Natural Selection, using observable evidence.
Which, when is was combined with Mendelian inheritance in the 1930, became the basis of modern Evolutionary theory.
A powerful and predictive basis of modern Biology.

Trying to compare this with the unpredictive speculation of Creation "Science" is an effort in futility.

 

[Man of Faith]

Nice try, but ultimately a fail. Why do people like you try so hard to convince yourself of your delusions? This thread is obviously not about trying to convince any of us that you're right, it's about trying to convince yourself that you're right.

As Rojse and others said (and you chose to ignore), there was evidence for evolution when the theory was first produced. That's why and how the theory was produced. Since Darwin first put forth the theory, other evidence has come to light that also supports the theory. See, that's part of what makes a good theory, the ability to make accurate predictions.

Let me assume that you are correct that there was evidence for ToE and common descent of all life forms, what is it? I didn't find it in the Orgin of the Species, all I saw was a good imagination.

 

[Willamena]

Thank you for supporting my position that the ToE came before the evidence, the cart before the horse so to speak. Which would conclude that the evidence did not lead to the ToE.

You're being silly. Yes, the Theory of Evolution came before the quoted evidence, built on other evidence that you conveniently ignore.

 

[tumbleweed41]

Let me assume that you are correct that there was evidence for ToE and common descent of all life forms, what is it? I didn't find it in the Orgin of the Species, all I saw was a good imagination.

Theory of Natural Selection, I am sure you meant to say.

 

[Man of Faith]

Once again your ignorance is obvious.
Darwin did not propose the Theory of Evolution.
Darwin proposed the Theory of Natural Selection, using observable evidence.
Which, when is was combined with Mendelian inheritance in the 1930, became the basis of modern Evolutionary theory.
A powerful and predictive basis of modern Biology.

Trying to compare this with the unpredictive speculation of Creation "Science" is an effort in futility.

I disagree and say that Darwin proposed that the diversity of life arose from common descent.