There's the Theory of Evolution and the Interpretation of Evolution

a reply to: turbonium1

The evidence was given to you. That you don't understand it is your problem.

a reply to: turbonium1


Your inability to comprehend that the material provided to you is actually the evidence supporting that which you disagree with out of willful ignorance and confirmation bias isn’t the fault of anyone but yourself. We aren’t responsible for your lack of reading comprehension or your lack of understanding the basics of the topic while demanding answers to complicated questions far above your head. As I said, just business as usual in this forum. Deny there’s evidence, claim it’s faith and mock people who spent years learning and studying the subject matter. It’s pretty sad really when you have a wealth of resources and educated people here with backgrounds in biology, bioinformatics and paleoanthropology spoon feeding you the data which you then turn to the right, spit on the floor and deny that anyone gave you your supper.

originally posted by: JameSimon
Just wanted to point this out:

We also have hybridisation, where you can mate a lion with a tiger, for example (two different species) to create a Tigon or a Liger. Their offspring are a totally different species capable of reproduction. You know what's even funnier? Different species being able to mate is proof that they evolved from a common ancestor.

Nonsense.

Male ligers cannot reproduce AT ALL. They are sterile.

Apparently, some female ligers can reproduce, but only with a male lion, or male tiger. That's not 'evolution' of any sort.

In fact, this shows the complete opposite of 'evolution'.

Male and female ligers cannot produce offspring, which proves it is NOT an actual species.


Face the reality here.

originally posted by: peter vlar
a reply to: turbonium1


Your inability to comprehend that the material provided to you is actually the evidence supporting that which you disagree with out of willful ignorance and confirmation bias isn’t the fault of anyone but yourself. We aren’t responsible for your lack of reading comprehension or your lack of understanding the basics of the topic while demanding answers to complicated questions far above your head. As I said, just business as usual in this forum. Deny there’s evidence, claim it’s faith and mock people who spent years learning and studying the subject matter. It’s pretty sad really when you have a wealth of resources and educated people here with backgrounds in biology, bioinformatics and paleoanthropology spoon feeding you the data which you then turn to the right, spit on the floor and deny that anyone gave you your supper.

Science is based on evidence, and facts.

I've pointed out why it's not valid, and you fail to address it. As usual.

You just spew on about how I 'don't understand the evidence'!


Your evidence was presented to me, earlier on. I then addressed your evidence, and specifically told you why it was not valid evidence.

To wit - they began with assumptions, on Y chromosome degeneration over millions of years, because of earlier assumptions, which had no validity to begin with, but supported their claims.


Evolution is based on assumptions, without any valid evidence, which serve more unfounded assumptions, and so forth.


Your source suggests that the Y chromosome degrades over time, supposedly, which they suggest unfolds over millions of years, since it was suggested earlier on, without a shred of proof, that all species were evolved from other species, over millions of years. So they use their own claims, which had never been proven to begin with, to support their other claims, which are surely 'proof' of evolution!


That's why I've mentioned the Y chromosome, and why it's not proof of evolution', on any level.


Can you simply address it, like a mature adult, or not?

a reply to: turbonium1

There are over 500 recognized journals and thousands of articles investigating evolution. Which ones have you read? None.
What evidence do you have that it's "assumptions"? None. What do you know about evolutionary biology? Nothing.

I think you have it backward. You're the one who needs to come up with evidence. The rest of us have posted research articles and evidence ad infinitum. And once again, that you don't understand it, is your problem - not ours.

If you think evolution is based on "assumptions", post the evidence. If you don't have the evidence, disappear into the aether like the rest of the ignorant crowd.

Here's something for starters - pick out any journal, any article, anything that is written under the guise of "assumptions". Thanks for playing.
"Beauty is skin deep. But stupid goes all the way to the bone".

Millions of papers are obviously impressive, to you.

What actually matters, here, is valid evidence. Not piles of papers.

I've addressed the evidence your side has presented, but you only reply with silly excuses.

a reply to: Lucid Lunacy

Here’s how creation by God from nothing as you put it is entirely possible...
And I’m not asking you to grant me that...
But for your own sake to understand just how and why it’s possible...
You see God can not be held in check by any rules or laws which govern our entire Universe for they would all have to be his creation that’s what makes him God by definition after all...
This also means that before he created the Universe he would have to exist in an entirely separate realm...universe...dimension... whatever the case may truly be but one thing is for certain he can not have exist in this Universe before it was created or he just couldn’t be God by definition...
So now that we can assume this we can also assume that wherever he is truely from had plenty of stuff to make all of this with...
Because he as well as his location is separate and not bound by anything in this Universe there is nothing saying that it took him no more than a handful of material to become all that is here in this Universe or for that matter that nothing from his realm was even needed perhaps thought or vocalization was enough as fantastic as that sounds it could very well be true because although an impossibility here there it was...
The real problem with trying to understand how something would be possible for God is almost always flawed because we automatically introduce our own limitations or possibilities on him...
It’s absurd to do that...

a reply to: turbonium1

Thanks for the good info

Science is supposed to look at all available evidence, and follow wherever the evidence leads, in forming a scientific theory.

Several different theories are often considered, obviously.

Science is not concerned with where, or what, or how, or why, the evidence proves a theory, or disproves a theory....all that matters is the evidence.

Anyone who has looked into all of the evidence to support evolution, as well as all of the evidence against it, knows what the evidence supports, without a doubt.

There is more evidence of NO EVOLUTION, than evidence for any other case, in all human history.


Millions of species existing on Earth, which have all reproduced the exact same species, many thousands, or perhaps millions, of times.

Millions, or billions, of each species have reproduced millions, or billions, of this same species, as well.

It's been estimated that about 108 billion humans have lived on Earth in the past 2000 years. Not one human, among 108 billion humans, has 'evolved' into another species. Not any sign of it, either.

All other species have never 'evolved', as well.

Maybe a quadrillion species, in all?


Obviously, a quadrillion examples of no evolution is easy for scientists to overlook! Especially compared to finding nothing at all supporting 'evolution'!!


This argument would be laughed out of any court of law, and tribunal, any debate, any genuine scientific presentation.....it is that ridiculous.

What you are trying to claim is that all living species on Earth are constantly 'evolving' into other, different species, while the truth is that over a quadrillion species have NEVER changed, in any way, ever.


Quadrillions of examples prove my argument, beyond any possible doubt.

It's not very difficult to use one's own brain, once in awhile.....

If there were any indications of even a few species changing, it could support the case for evolution... at least as being a valid theory.

But, all the evidence shows, is that over a quadrillion species have lived, as the exact same species, without a single exception, since they first existed, and ever afterwards will exist on Earth.


I cannot understand why anyone would believe this overwhelming evidence is not enough to dismiss the idea of evolution, without even a shred of valid evidence to support the idea of evolution....

a reply to: turbonium1

Millions of papers are obviously impressive, to you. What actually matters, here, is valid evidence. Not piles of papers. I've addressed the evidence your side has presented, but you only reply with silly excuses.

So what do you think is in those papers???? You're writing on a computer whose discovery was also published in "papers". You drive a car whose research and development was published in "papers". Every medical and scientific advancement is published in those "papers". All the evidence that you refer to is in those papers.

Why don't you do this: pick out just one of those "papers" in any one of the journals on evolutionary biology and tell us why it's wrong. Tell us why the thousands of scientists who published those papers are wrong. And why you are right. Discuss the evidence - or lack thereof.

You can't do that. You know why? Because you've bought into willful ignorance.

The next time you go to a doctor and he/she prescribes a medication or procedure - remember that all the research and development of those procedures are recorded in those "papers" - with the evidence.

The next time you fly, drive or ride a bicycle - remember that the physics of those developments are recorded in those "papers" - with the evidence.

We've put men on the Moon and soon humans will be on Mars. At this moment in time, some scientist is writing one of those "papers" for publication - with the evidence.

Evolutionary biologists continue to publish - with their evidence.

Here's a list of articles in the current issue of "Evolutionary Biology" - it's a free access journal so you can read any article you choose. Select one article and tell us why it's wrong:

onlinelibrary.wiley.com...



Issue Information
Free Access
Issue Information
Pages: 1607-1609 First Published: 02 November 2018
PDF Request permissions
Research Papers

Sperm is a sexual ornament in rose bitterling
Carl Smith Rowena Spence Martin Reichard
Pages: 1610-1622 First Published: 01 August 2018
Abstract Full text PDF References Request permissions

Multispecies coalescent analysis confirms standing phylogenetic instability in Hexapoda
Lucas Freitas Beatriz Mello Carlos G. Schrago
Pages: 1623-1631 First Published: 30 July 2018
Abstract Full text PDF References Request permissions

Costs of walking: differences in egg size and starvation resistance of females between strains of the red flour beetle (Tribolium castaneum) artificially selected for walking ability
Kentarou Matsumura Takahisa Miyatake
Pages: 1632-1637 First Published: 28 July 2018
Abstract Full text PDF References Request permissions
Open Access

Good parenting may not increase reproductive success under environmental extremes
Rebecca J. Fox Megan L. Head Iain Barber
Pages: 1638-1646 First Published: 31 July 2018
Abstract Full text PDF References Request permissions

A competitive environment influences sperm production, but not testes tissue composition, in house mice
Renée C. Firman Francisco Garcia‐Gonzalez Leigh W. Simmons Gonçalo I. André
Pages: 1647-1654 First Published: 03 August 2018
Abstract Full text PDF References Request permissions

Genetic signatures of lipid metabolism evolution in Cetacea since the divergence from terrestrial ancestor
Yoshinori Endo Ken‐ichiro Kamei Miho Inoue‐Murayama
Pages: 1655-1665 First Published: 03 August 2018
Abstract Full text PDF References Request permissions

Resources mediate selection on module longevity in the field
Karin Svanfeldt Keyne Monro Dustin J. Marshall
Pages: 1666-1674 First Published: 03 August 2018
Abstract Full text PDF References Request permissions

Grab my tail: evolution of dazzle stripes and colourful tails in lizards
Gopal Murali Sami Merilaita Ullasa Kodandaramaiah
Pages: 1675-1688 First Published: 13 August 2018
Abstract Full text PDF References Request permissions

Selective differentiation during the colonization and establishment of a newly invasive species
Gina L. Marchini Tina M. Arredondo Mitchell B. Cruzan
Pages: 1689-1703 First Published: 18 August 2018
Abstract Full text PDF References Request permissions
Open Access

Quantitative host resistance drives the evolution of increased virulence in an emerging pathogen
Daisy Elizabeth Gates John Joseph Valletta Camille Bonneaud Mario Recker
Pages: 1704-1714 First Published: 14 August 2018
Abstract Full text PDF References Request permissions

Resource stability and geographic isolation are associated with genome divergence in western Palearctic crossbills
Thomas L. Parchman Pim Edelaar Kathryn Uckele Eduardo T. Mezquida Daniel Alonso Joshua P. Jahner Ron W. Summers Craig W. Benkman
Pages: 1715-1731 First Published: 19 August 2018
Abstract Full text PDF References Request permissions

An experimental evaluation of traits that influence the sexual behaviour of pollinators in sexually deceptive orchids
Ryan D. Phillips Rod Peakall
Pages: 1732-1742 First Published: 25 August 2018
Abstract Full text PDF References Request permissions
Short Communications

Experimental evolution demonstrates evolvability of preferential nutrient allocation to competing traits in response to chronic malnutrition
Roshan K. Vijendravarma
Pages: 1743-1749 First Published: 03 August 2018
Abstract Full text PDF References Request permissions

Learning‐induced host preference in male parasitoid wasps as a potential driver of ecological speciation
Kôji Sasakawa Yûsuke Kon
Pages: 1750-1755 First Published: 06 August 2018
Abstract Full text PDF References Request permissions
Submit an Article

Browse free sample issue
Get content alerts
Recommend to a librarian
Subscribe to this journal
Published on behalf of the European Society for Evolutionary Biology (ESEB)


So once again, pick out any article in this journal and tell us why it's wrong, why it's just a meaningless pile of trash.

I'll tell you where the trash is - it's in your head. You might consider cleaning house one of these days.

a reply to: turbonium1

If there were any indications of even a few species changing, it could support the case for evolution... at least as being a valid theory. But, all the evidence shows, is that over a quadrillion species have lived, as the exact same species, without a single exception, since they first existed, and ever afterwards will exist on Earth. I cannot understand why anyone would believe this overwhelming evidence is not enough to dismiss the idea of evolution, without even a shred of valid evidence to support the idea of evolution....

Can you prove that? Where's your "evidence"? What experiments have been published that validate your opinion? What journal? Which scientist(s)? Where is the molecular biology evidence that speciation is a myth, that it doesn't happen? List all the publications with the evidence that confirm your position.

We'll wait.

a reply to: turbonium1

Anyone who has looked into all of the evidence to support evolution, as well as all of the evidence against it, knows what the evidence supports, without a doubt. There is more evidence of NO EVOLUTION, than evidence for any other case, in all human history.

Prove it. Where is that evidence? Where's the experiments? Who's the scientist(s)? What is the numerical ratio of publications with evidence for evolution versus publications with evidence against evolution? Is it 2:1 or 1:2?

We'll wait.

The silence of the lambs - guaranteed to happen every time.




Col. Jessep: *You want answers?* Kaffee:*I want the truth!* Col. Jessep: *You cant handle the truth!*A Few Good Men (1992)

originally posted by: Phantom423
a reply to: turbonium1

Millions of papers are obviously impressive, to you. What actually matters, here, is valid evidence. Not piles of papers. I've addressed the evidence your side has presented, but you only reply with silly excuses.

So what do you think is in those papers???? You're writing on a computer whose discovery was also published in "papers". You drive a car whose research and development was published in "papers". Every medical and scientific advancement is published in those "papers". All the evidence that you refer to is in those papers.

Why don't you do this: pick out just one of those "papers" in any one of the journals on evolutionary biology and tell us why it's wrong. Tell us why the thousands of scientists who published those papers are wrong. And why you are right. Discuss the evidence - or lack thereof.

You can't do that. You know why? Because you've bought into willful ignorance.

The next time you go to a doctor and he/she prescribes a medication or procedure - remember that all the research and development of those procedures are recorded in those "papers" - with the evidence.

The next time you fly, drive or ride a bicycle - remember that the physics of those developments are recorded in those "papers" - with the evidence.

We've put men on the Moon and soon humans will be on Mars. At this moment in time, some scientist is writing one of those "papers" for publication - with the evidence.

Evolutionary biologists continue to publish - with their evidence.

Here's a list of articles in the current issue of "Evolutionary Biology" - it's a free access journal so you can read any article you choose. Select one article and tell us why it's wrong:

onlinelibrary.wiley.com...

Issue Information
Free Access
Issue Information
Pages: 1607-1609 First Published: 02 November 2018
PDF Request permissions
Research Papers

Sperm is a sexual ornament in rose bitterling
Carl Smith Rowena Spence Martin Reichard
Pages: 1610-1622 First Published: 01 August 2018
Abstract Full text PDF References Request permissions

Multispecies coalescent analysis confirms standing phylogenetic instability in Hexapoda
Lucas Freitas Beatriz Mello Carlos G. Schrago
Pages: 1623-1631 First Published: 30 July 2018
Abstract Full text PDF References Request permissions

Costs of walking: differences in egg size and starvation resistance of females between strains of the red flour beetle (Tribolium castaneum) artificially selected for walking ability
Kentarou Matsumura Takahisa Miyatake
Pages: 1632-1637 First Published: 28 July 2018
Abstract Full text PDF References Request permissions
Open Access

Good parenting may not increase reproductive success under environmental extremes
Rebecca J. Fox Megan L. Head Iain Barber
Pages: 1638-1646 First Published: 31 July 2018
Abstract Full text PDF References Request permissions

A competitive environment influences sperm production, but not testes tissue composition, in house mice
Renée C. Firman Francisco Garcia‐Gonzalez Leigh W. Simmons Gonçalo I. André
Pages: 1647-1654 First Published: 03 August 2018
Abstract Full text PDF References Request permissions

Genetic signatures of lipid metabolism evolution in Cetacea since the divergence from terrestrial ancestor
Yoshinori Endo Ken‐ichiro Kamei Miho Inoue‐Murayama
Pages: 1655-1665 First Published: 03 August 2018
Abstract Full text PDF References Request permissions

Resources mediate selection on module longevity in the field
Karin Svanfeldt Keyne Monro Dustin J. Marshall
Pages: 1666-1674 First Published: 03 August 2018
Abstract Full text PDF References Request permissions

Grab my tail: evolution of dazzle stripes and colourful tails in lizards
Gopal Murali Sami Merilaita Ullasa Kodandaramaiah
Pages: 1675-1688 First Published: 13 August 2018
Abstract Full text PDF References Request permissions

Selective differentiation during the colonization and establishment of a newly invasive species
Gina L. Marchini Tina M. Arredondo Mitchell B. Cruzan
Pages: 1689-1703 First Published: 18 August 2018
Abstract Full text PDF References Request permissions
Open Access

Quantitative host resistance drives the evolution of increased virulence in an emerging pathogen
Daisy Elizabeth Gates John Joseph Valletta Camille Bonneaud Mario Recker
Pages: 1704-1714 First Published: 14 August 2018
Abstract Full text PDF References Request permissions

Resource stability and geographic isolation are associated with genome divergence in western Palearctic crossbills
Thomas L. Parchman Pim Edelaar Kathryn Uckele Eduardo T. Mezquida Daniel Alonso Joshua P. Jahner Ron W. Summers Craig W. Benkman
Pages: 1715-1731 First Published: 19 August 2018
Abstract Full text PDF References Request permissions

An experimental evaluation of traits that influence the sexual behaviour of pollinators in sexually deceptive orchids
Ryan D. Phillips Rod Peakall
Pages: 1732-1742 First Published: 25 August 2018
Abstract Full text PDF References Request permissions
Short Communications

Experimental evolution demonstrates evolvability of preferential nutrient allocation to competing traits in response to chronic malnutrition
Roshan K. Vijendravarma
Pages: 1743-1749 First Published: 03 August 2018
Abstract Full text PDF References Request permissions

Learning‐induced host preference in male parasitoid wasps as a potential driver of ecological speciation
Kôji Sasakawa Yûsuke Kon
Pages: 1750-1755 First Published: 06 August 2018
Abstract Full text PDF References Request permissions
Submit an Article

Browse free sample issue
Get content alerts
Recommend to a librarian
Subscribe to this journal
Published on behalf of the European Society for Evolutionary Biology (ESEB)


So once again, pick out any article in this journal and tell us why it's wrong, why it's just a meaningless pile of trash.

I'll tell you where the trash is - it's in your head. You might consider cleaning house one of these days.

So you can't show a source, and cite it? You want me to look through these articles for you??

I've asked you to show me any sources that prove your claim, with specific examples of it.


'Look at all these papers, it's up to you to find something wrong, not me!!'


Sheesh.

a reply to: turbonium1

So you can't show a source, and cite it? You want me to look through these articles for you?? I've asked you to show me any sources that prove your claim, with specific examples of it. 'Look at all these papers, it's up to you to find something wrong, not me!!' Sheesh.

That statement says everything we need to know about your mentality. You're lazy and ignorant. You can't respond to the citations because you can't be bothered to read them.

I would remind you that it is YOU who denies the science of evolution. The links to the papers are there. If you don't bother to read them and can't challenge the work, then by default you lose.

Beauty is skin deep but stupid goes right to the bone.

All those recent articles on 'evolutionary biology' start from earlier theories, to then use for supporting their own theories.


Start with one ball of crap, use it to support another ball of crap, and so on, over and over again.....


Soon, articles pile up, and nobody realizes it's all just a pile of crap, from the very start.

Why do you think nobody ever questions it?

Quadrillion examples of species replicating the same, exact species, over thousands of years.....while not a single example of NEW species created, or even an indication of one species changing??

What a joke!

a reply to: Phantom423

Phantom, he's trolling us. No-one can possibly be that stupid. He's trolling for reactions.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
a reply to: Phantom423

Phantom, he's trolling us. No-one can possibly be that stupid. He's trolling for reactions.

I've asked for any specific example supporting the argument for evolution of a species, into another, different species.


You have infantile personal attacks in reply. Grow up, already. Or get lost.

a reply to: turbonium1

And I suppose you know all that because you read all those articles. How did you come to that conclusion? Mental telepathy?

AngryCymraeg is right - you're a troll. You have no interest in evolution or any science for that matter.

As I said before, your posts tell us everything we need to know about your "intellectual acuity". You're a joke.