Science against evolution

reply to post by iterationzero

This sentence sums up all of your scientific ignorance into one nicely wrapped package. If, after all of your years of scholarly studies and all of your years investigating biology and all of your years searching for evidence of interventionism, you still think that "evolution changes our DNA" then there is absolutely no point in trying to have any kind of factual, evidence driven conversation with you about evolution.

Good, now we are getting to the bottom of the problem.

So if evolution can't do it, at least by your understanding, FYI others have said other wise. THEN WHO DID IT?

reply to post by stereologist

Humans are animals. Pretty obvious actually. Too bad the obvious is not obvious to creationists.

And what exactly are you basing this information on? I was always taught that animals are animals and humans are humans. Which is also why humans don't have animal instinct.

If you think it's obvious, then it only goes to show you just how hard your willing to see something that fits your claims. There is nothing that ties us to animals. We do share the same planet, we do both drink water and breath air but aside from that, nothing.

I get such a kick out of creationist lecturers. These clowns can't wait to lie. I see them up on stage just salivating. They can't wait to tell the audience of bible page flipping eager beavers lies such as Aldous Huxley being Darwin's "bulldog". Not true. They can't wait to lie that a slab of rock shows stitching of a sandal in a deposit famous for its detailed trilobites. They can't wait to lie about the definition of uniformitarianism.

Fact is I have never seen one of these clowns bring up the lie of target foods.

Thats because "I" made the observation in case you have fallen in the cracks. Creationists don't need to lie, there is nothing I have seen that proves evolution to be correct. There is a lot of speculation, and assumptions, but I'm not interested in that, if I were, I would be looking at a religion.

reply to post by stereologist

First off you are mistaking proof with evidence. Second, it seems that you are stating that you are clueless. That is what you appear to be posting. Not going to argue with that. I believe that is true. Not sure why you posted that although I agree wholeheartedly.

You also have the cart before the horse. DNA changes are evolution.

I think its more like YOUR putting the cart before the horse.

There is no proof that these claimed changes happen because of evolution, it's only assumed, and I'm not interested in assumptions.

Speaking of which, stating that humans are actually a GMO best described by PYE. If evolution didn't do it, then who did? We only recently have come up on this technology so how could it happen?

There is an entire website dedicated to the idea that aliens did this. It does seem to be the ONLY logical reason behind it.

As an example right about now, most evolutionists will still argue that evolution can do all this.

Only problem I'm seeing is that DNA methylation does not occur naturally in the wild, at least I'm not able to find any proof of it happening. I'm also not able to find proof that fusion of them happens either.

We have six segments in our DNA that are clearly removed, inverted, and reinserted, and you evolutionists are trying to tell me that evolution can do this. I call total BS on that. First of all you need to understand why segments would be removed, inverted and reinserted. It's a process that is done to make the change stay as wanted.

According to a DNA study I read about where testing of changes was being done on plants, they found out that if you ever tried to remove or add DNA to a segment, The DNA would automatically correct the attempted change as though it was viewing it as an error. This error was found out to be based on the gene count, and if you try to change the gene count, it will automatically make a reverse correction by not allowing the change to stay.

Who ever, or what ever made these six changes to our genome, did it in this way so that the change would stick, and not be automatically be corrected. So in other words if evolution did this, evolution has the mind of a cutting edge scientist.

reply to post by stereologist

When I first heard of the idiocy of target foods I laughed because it was trivial to show failure after failure after failure for this childish claim.

Yet you fail to explain why some species eat ONE food and one food only while others eat a few, to a dozen, to dozens of foods.

You also failed to produce an alternate reason why all species choose the SAME food, while target food also explains this.

You also failed to explain why you claim there is decision and choice made by all species that eat. You also failed to explain why there is never any proof of the aleged experimental phase, proving choice.

Sounds to me like you failed badly.

Target food is observed through our existing information of any number of diets you look at.
The evidence speaks for itself.
We have species living on one food only, and this alone proves that the theory is plausible.
We have species all choosing the same food, without holding meetings or phone calls to let the others know.
We never see experimentation with food, unless they are starving, proving they allready know what they are suppose to be eating.

reply to post by stereologist

Here we have verbal diarrhea in which someone makes nonsense claims. Typical creationist gibberish.

I've been to many creationist lectures to see just what they have to say.

A typical lie by creationists is that evolution is not falsifiable. Yes it is. Creationists often try to use the ploy of finding out of sequence fossils. It seems every lecture I attend involves a claim of a shoe print among dinosaur prints or a shoe print smashing a trilobite.

Here you make the false claim that evolution has been witnessed. In order for it to be falsifiable, it would have to be witnessed. Now I'm not aware of any case that has witnessed a species changing into another species, but I would love to see it.

hen there are the simply ludicrous claims about appearance. You have to shake your head in disbelief as someone makes it evident that they have no clue about biology. I remember one lecture where the knucklehead creationist tells the zoology professor that they needed to take an intro course in biology. Made the lecture hall laugh and the dolts in the crowd had no idea the sort of gaffe made by the creationist. The audience was too busy thumbing through their bronze age fairy tale.

Here you make the false claim that biblical events are a bronze age fair tale. I wasn't aware that you single handedly disproved those events, I would like to see some proof, since you seem to have so much of it.

Then there is the silly idea that evolution is just accepted like religion. Such claims are made by the illiterate that have never been to a scientific meeting and do not understand the process in which ideas are tested. There is a name to make for yourself in science if you can overturn an accepted idea. If you can show that others did not scrutinize the data as well as you did then others will take notice. Test and retest is the way science works.

Evolution is NOT predictable, so these claims about it being tested are false. You can't rely on unreliable data. It's is in fact a religion when you believe in it and its never been proven or witnessed. No one has witnessed man evolving from apes, No one has witnessed any common ancestors being born either. So the burden of proof is on you and your religion.

Then again there are the wingnuts that no matter how often you show that jokes such as "target foods" is a failure simply can't handle it. These folks making these absurd claims are really there to make the idiocy of creationism look relatively reasonable.

In order for the food cycle to exist in a balance it would require a hell of a lot of intellgence, something that evolution just doesn't have.

After a century and a half of vociferous discussion the ideas of Darwin have changed because better ideas were discovered. There is no end to the testing of the theory of evolution. There never will be. Science is never going to give a free pass to any theory. That is why science will always triumph over fairy tales from the bronze age.

Yes the goal posts were moved, because evolution was busted. No explanation was good enough for explaining why no missing link had ever been found. So the goal post was moved and we were led on the adventure of accepting the idea that there will be no missing link, instead we will have whats called a common ancestor. Just another way of saying the theoy still goes on, only this time we don't need proof.

Get a real religion.

reply to post by flyingfish

Argument from incredulity.
Again, you cannot provide any evidence you are simply invoking your belief even after things have been explained to you time and again "with evidence."
You are afflicted with a sad case of willful ignorance, and that's nothing to be proud of.

No one has ever presented me with proof of a species evolving into another species, I'm sorry but your wrong.

reply to post by itsthetooth
Jeeze are you still peddling your crazy home made religion that you are still the only member of

Crazy and sad

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by flyingfish

 

Argument from incredulity.
Again, you cannot provide any evidence you are simply invoking your belief even after things have been explained to you time and again "with evidence."
You are afflicted with a sad case of willful ignorance, and that's nothing to be proud of.

No one has ever presented me with proof of a species evolving into another species, I'm sorry but your wrong.

LOL and what do you do? prove my point
I'm embarrassed for you..

Originally posted by colin42
reply to post by itsthetooth

 

Jeeze are you still peddling your crazy home made religion that you are still the only member of

Crazy and sad

edit on 19-1-2013 by colin42 because: (no reason given)

Not true! I see he got one star, for what it's worth he's at least got one member bamboozled

reply to post by colin42

Jeeze are you still peddling your crazy home made religion that you are still the only member of

Crazy and sad

Wrong, I'm not the creator of intervention.

reply to post by flyingfish

LOL and what do you do? prove my point
I'm embarrassed for you..

I'm embarrased for YOU. No one has ever proven evolution to be a working theory, no one has every proven that a species can evolve into another species. Shame on you.

reply to post by flyingfish

Not true! I see he got one star, for what it's worth he's at least got one member bamboozled

Being bamboozled is only required to believe in evolution.

reply to post by itsthetooth

Good, now we are getting to the bottom of the problem.

We have been getting to the bottom of your problem almost since the day you joined ATS -- that you do no understand what evolution is, have created your own version of it that bears no resemblance to reality, and continue to argue against that strawman.

So if evolution can't do it, at least by your understanding,

It's sad that you still don't understand. Evolution is a shift in allele frequency within a given population over time. Evolution does not cause genetic changes. Evolution is heritable genetic changes.

FYI others have said other wise.

I have yet to see anyone other than you claim that "evolution changes DNA".

THEN WHO DID IT?

No one. That's the point. You continue to ascribe a natural process to supernatural causation. You're like the Greeks thinking that lightning was being hurled down by Zeus from the top of Mt. Olympus. And, by your reasoning, since no one has ever disproved the existence of the Greek pantheon of gods, that must be the correct explanation. Except that we know it isn't.

Originally posted by fastbob72
abiogenesis not evolution,try again.

why is it the anti-evolution lobby singularly fail to understand what evolution is.

In the same way that the evolution lobby fail to understand the creation lobby. Empathy between the two is never encouraged its always one against the other with no room for consensus. Evolutionists guard their belief against the intrusion of creation possibilities with religious-like fanaticism and vice versa. Really. I ask, you what is the likelihood that one side is absolutely right and the other absolutely wrong?

This 'I'm right you're wrong and an idiot' attitude gets us nowhere. I think the truth is that people will always find ways to disagree because it is in our makeup, in our genes somewhere because what other reason could there be for the world being so divided on every subject under the sun?

reply to post by iterationzero

We have been getting to the bottom of your problem almost since the day you joined ATS -- that you do no understand what evolution is, have created your own version of it that bears no resemblance to reality, and continue to argue against that strawman.

Well that would be because evolution and reality have nothing to do with each other. There is assumption that a species can evolve into another species, but I have yet to see any proof.

It's sad that you still don't understand. Evolution is a shift in allele frequency within a given population over time. Evolution does not cause genetic changes. Evolution is heritable genetic changes.

I'm sorry but in order to believe that evolution is capeable of the things that you claim, it must be privy to some serious intelligence. As an example, the six segments of our DNA that have been obviously removed, inverted and reinserted. It takes obvious intelligence to make this change, and the reasons behind it. There is obviously to much intent behind all this as you can see.

I have yet to see anyone other than you claim that "evolution changes DNA".

Thats because no one has proven or been able to rule out the possibility that there is intent behind the changes. It's only assumed that the changes happen through the assumption of evolution, there is no proof.

No one. That's the point. You continue to ascribe a natural process to supernatural causation. You're like the Greeks thinking that lightning was being hurled down by Zeus from the top of Mt. Olympus. And, by your reasoning, since no one has ever disproved the existence of the Greek pantheon of gods, that must be the correct explanation. Except that we know it isn't.

With this statement you are claiming that DNA would naturlly have the ability to just change on its own, or perhaps your claiming evolution did it I don't know.
Either way your wrong, if your correct, you need to promptly contact the authorties and let them know that the precious DNA that they rely on to identify crimes is botched, based on the fact that you know DNA or evolution can change DNA.

What a joke.

reply to post by itsthetooth

Well that would be because evolution and reality have nothing to do with each other. There is assumption that a species can evolve into another species, but I have yet to see any proof.

You have been provided evidence of speciation in this thread and others. Whether you choose to accept that evidence or not is none of my concern. But when you keep saying that it's never been provided to you, that is simply a falsehood.

I'm sorry but in order to believe that evolution is capeable of the things that you claim, it must be privy to some serious intelligence. As an example, the six segments of our DNA that have been obviously removed, inverted and reinserted. It takes obvious intelligence to make this change, and the reasons behind it. There is obviously to much intent behind all this as you can see.

You keep making it clear that you don't understand what you're trying to hard to refute.

Thats because no one has proven or been able to rule out the possibility that there is intent behind the changes.

Because it's up to those making a positive claim -- that there is "intent behind the changes" -- to provide evidence. You have consistently failed to do so.

With this statement you are claiming that DNA would naturlly have the ability to just change on its own,

It does. This has been observed. You have been provided evidence in support of this. You choose to ignore that evidence.

or perhaps your claiming evolution did it I don't know.

Again, you're the only one I see making a claim that evolution changes DNA.

Either way your wrong, if your correct, you need to promptly contact the authorties and let them know that the precious DNA that they rely on to identify crimes is botched, based on the fact that you know DNA or evolution can change DNA.

Unsurprisingly, you have a fundamental lack of understanding of the science behind how DNA comparison is used in law enforcement.

What a joke.

Yes, it is a colossally bad joke that you, being someone that lives in a developed nation where access to the information germaine to this discussion is free available, chooses to be willfully ignorant.

reply to post by Shema

This 'I'm right you're wrong and an idiot' attitude gets us nowhere.

That is not what is going on here. If tooth could make just one argument, backed with evidence he would have been taken seriously. Let me list a few things he repeats and has been repeating for over a year.

No one has ever seen a rat turn into a cat. He has had the explanation that this is not what evolution describes yet continues to repeat it.

A man can live in a whale. Again has had more than enough examples and explanations to show he is in error but he claims 'there use to be magic'

Target food shows evolution wrong. He maintains that if a species evolves it would loose its food source. Again showing a complete and wilful disconnect with the explanation evolution gives and frankly the world he lives in. He made a thread claiming he could prove his claim and did not offer one piece of evidence.

Makes claims about alien creators and explains the diversity we see as the aliens used spare parts

He claims because we farm we are unnatural and cannot be from here yet cannot explain the ant that also farms.

His favourite animal is the ant eater yet his very own criteria means the ant and therefore the anteater cannot be from here if he were correct.

Asks for a relationship man has with other animals and when given shows he does not understand what a relationship is. In fact his grasp of the English language and his ability to read what is written is so shockingly bad his rare links always prove the point he is trying to make wrong.

He even thinks the chaos theory causes chaos. He claims to be a science major but shows no signs of even a basic grasp of science and a borderline genius the proof of which is also well hidden

This is not an exhaustive list of his repeated nonsense so as you can see this is not a conversation between creation Vs evolution. It is just the destruction of another thread on the subject.

Ask him about his balanced tank. He claimed to be a fish and plant in perfect harmony. Yet when he was corrected and shown it was a Hawian Red shrimp and algea and that the shrimp slowly injests itself from hunger cutting an expected 20 year life span to 18 months still claims it is balanced because the manufacturers said so.

He only accepts what he wants to believe and has an insane hatred of a word. Evolution.

Edit
How could I forget. He claims black people and white people are from different planets and that the Bushman is a different species.

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by flyingfish

 

LOL and what do you do? prove my point
I'm embarrassed for you..

I'm embarrased for YOU. No one has ever proven evolution to be a working theory, no one has every proven that a species can evolve into another species. Shame on you.

Catching speciation in the act is nearly impossible because of the timescales that are evolutionarily relevant but that does mean that it has not been witnessed (see links).
This allows ID/creation proponents, like tooth, to say it has never been observed.
They are looking for an example where a population of creatures produces a completely new creature over a short period.
This strawman argument will convince the uninformed, but should not deter reasonable individuals.
This is the information age, posting factually inaccurate information is no longer a viable alternative to selling snake oil from the pulpit.

Observed Speciation Events
www.talkorigins.org...
Team discovers microbes speciating
news.illinois.edu...
The mechanics of speciation
www.nimbios.org...
Predicting the formation of new species
www.eawag.ch...

reply to post by Shema

In the same way that the evolution lobby fail to understand the creation lobby. Empathy between the two is never encouraged its always one against the other with no room for consensus. Evolutionists guard their belief against the intrusion of creation possibilities with religious-like fanaticism and vice versa. Really. I ask, you what is the likelihood that one side is absolutely right and the other absolutely wrong?

This 'I'm right you're wrong and an idiot' attitude gets us nowhere. I think the truth is that people will always find ways to disagree because it is in our makeup, in our genes somewhere because what other reason could there be for the world being so divided on every subject under the sun?

It's one thing when both sides approach an issue with a similar level of basic understanding to have an educated discussion on the matter. It's another when one side can even be bothered to gain the most simplistic level of understanding of the issue to have a meaningful discussion.

Imagine, for a moment, a discussion of the volatile political situation in the Middle East. Now imagine that one side says something along the lines of, "LOL!!! Palestinians! They support the struggle of the ethnic Han Chinese against the Maori and Mayans! What morons!" Do you feel your place in the discussion would be to try and reason with them intelligently or to suggest that they should, perhaps, educate themselves further on the matter?

reply to post by iterationzero

You have been provided evidence of speciation in this thread and others. Whether you choose to accept that evidence or not is none of my concern. But when you keep saying that it's never been provided to you, that is simply a falsehood.

I choose to accept the evidence and clearly what it states. That is that speciation has been witnessed but that in itself doesn't prove a species changing into another species

I'm hoping your seeing the flaw in this evolution and the assumptions that are being made .

You keep making it clear that you don't understand what you're trying to hard to refute.

It's actuallly YOU thats not understanding. In order for the actions to take place that evolution is responsible, it would require cognitive thought. Just like how evolution is supposedly responsible for rendering over a billion species but you claim that its NOT a creator. Come on man, open your eyes and your lack of common sense.

It does. This has been observed. You have been provided evidence in support of this. You choose to ignore that evidence.

So you ARE admitting that DNA can be changed in the process of evolution. Seriously, you need to contact the authoritys and let them know about this earth breaking news because we rely on that information to not be changed and that change can alter the decision it has in crimes. Basically from what your saying, DNA is useless and we can't depend on it for anything because evolution can change it at anytime, and we have no way of knowing the difference.

Again, you're the only one I see making a claim that evolution changes DNA.

Now your claiming that it doesn't. Are you sure your understanding the claims? You seem to be confused. Everything I understand shows that DNA changes through evolution, can this really be true? If it is, then our understanding and use of any and all DNA is useless, especially since we have no way of knowing or tracing what changes were brought on by what.

Unsurprisingly, you have a fundamental lack of understanding of the science behind how DNA comparison is used in law enforcement.

All this tells me is that you either believe DNA doesn't change in large amounts to make that much of a difference, in regards to law enforcement, or you believe that there is a way to specifically identify changes brought on by evolution. My recent find about ADHD proving to have altered genes proves you wrong again. No one was jumping up and claiming that these changes should be ignored by evolution as they don't apply. It wasn't until recently that scientists realized that these are changes NOT brought on by evolution. So again, your wrong.

Yes, it is a colossally bad joke that you, being someone that lives in a developed nation where access to the information germaine to this discussion is free available, chooses to be willfully ignorant.

Not everything on the internet is GOOD information, evolution included. I could spend years devising theory after theory to build up intervention and just slam people into notes everything they reject any part of it. Not having a single ounce of proof, just like evolution.