The myth of the "Nested Hierarchy of Common Descent"

[lifepsyop]

Agreed, just as they asserted that speciation occurred in Darwin's Finches - until of course someone got around to actually studying them and doing DNA analysis. Now we find they have been interbreeding from the moment they got to the islands - showing that speciation never occurred in the first place.

Yet despite the DNA evidence and their own conclusions of interbreeding from the beginning, they continue to spout off speciation and separate species, even if the science is totally against their claims. More like "Silly Putty" which can accommodate any claim one wants to make, being as they define everything however it suits them at that particular moment to do so. The sad part is they won't even use the definitions which they have set - because doing so would give lie to their claims.

And you and I both know they are NOT going to read anything which might shatter their religious and dogmatic views of evolution, which is why not a single one of them have read the article you cited.

Yes, evolutionists spend I don't know how many decades teaching people that finches are branching into very distinct species. Then they finally figure out that the finches are still interbreeding and morphological changes are reverting, completely negating the claim that these populations are following some evolutionary trajectory towards new types of animals.

Like most evolutionary claims, they ride on rumor and speculation, with a stunning lack of anything that could be considered empirical evidence. The Evolution creation story has gotten by on philosophical popularity since its inception.

 

[Loudmouth]

Yes, evolutionists spend I don't know how many decades teaching people that finches are branching into very distinct species. Then they finally figure out that the finches are still interbreeding and morphological changes are reverting, completely negating the claim that these populations are following some evolutionary trajectory towards new types of animals.

No one has ever claimed that incipient speciation can not be reversed.

You are like children at a construction site who proclaim that sky scaper's are impossible because you watched the men work for a whole 5 minutes and no sky scraper appeared.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

No one has ever claimed that incipient speciation can not be reversed.

You are like children at a construction site who proclaim that sky scaper's are impossible because you watched the men work for a whole 5 minutes and no sky scraper appeared.

Except the DNA evidence showed they interbred from the start, never diverging into separate species to begin with. Speciation isn't being reversed, it never occurred in the first place. And this is the prime example we are talking about - evolutionists refusal to admit they are just flat out wrong. Religious dogmatic adherence to pre-concieved ideas despite the evidence. It's pathetic Loud, that you even attempt to defend something so obviously wrong, all because you don't want to admit when you are wrong.

Except we are claiming a skyscraper is being built - you are claiming individual buildings are being built instead. It is you that is acting like the little child, refusing to accept scientific evidence denouncing speciation in the first place, when you know it is wrong just as much as I do. But your dogmatic religious beliefs won't let you admit to it.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Yes, evolutionists spend I don't know how many decades teaching people that finches are branching into very distinct species. Then they finally figure out that the finches are still interbreeding and morphological changes are reverting, completely negating the claim that these populations are following some evolutionary trajectory towards new types of animals.

Like most evolutionary claims, they ride on rumor and speculation, with a stunning lack of anything that could be considered empirical evidence. The Evolution creation story has gotten by on philosophical popularity since its inception.

And now they'll spend the next decade trying futilely to defend an indefensible stance. Knowing they have been interbreeding from the moment they got to the island, and speciation never occurred in the first place - they continue to spout rhetoric instead of just admitting they made an initial classification error at the start. Instead of admitting to their mistake, they simply give ammunition to the opposition by continuing to hold onto a stance that they are unable to defend. Scared little children watching as Santa Claus becomes less real every year - desperately seeking to hold on to the myth.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Haha, Loudmouth does it again. I just wanted to confirm you still don't have an argument or evidence, thanks.

If it was not for his total commitment to his beloved theory he would see how he fails to produce anything to support his own claims and he always shifts the burden. IN fact, all of the materialists on this forum are under the false assumption they have no burden.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

If it was not for his total commitment to his beloved theory he would see how he fails to produce anything to support his own claims and he always shifts the burden. IN fact, all of the materialists on this forum are under the false assumption they have no burden.

I believe they KNOW they have no true empirical support, and so instead try to fake their way through by claiming everyone else is wrong and they have support. Support that never materializes, because they know they have none.

Year by year as science advances it only shows them the error of their ways - at which time they switch ways while still claiming the tired old "evolution through mutation and transitory species." Even if we all understand that when an Asian race mates with an African race and produces an Afro-Asian race - all within the species - it is not done by mutation, but by the recombination of genes producing new dominant and recessive traits.

They got by for so many years by faking their way through - they still think it's acceptable by people that understand science. And now someone will claim we don't understand science, without producing the science we supposedly do not understand. And all the while they will continue to ignore that breed mates with breed producing new breeds within the species - and no evolution by mutation occurred and only the recombination of that genome that was separated at the beginning.

In those that reproduce by binary fission in which they still have both sets - they always remain the exact same thing they started out as. Billion year old bacteria that never once evolved does not prove evolution despite their twisted claims - it proves that there is no such thing as evolution.

 

[Loudmouth]

If it was not for his total commitment to his beloved theory he would see how he fails to produce anything to support his own claims and he always shifts the burden. IN fact, all of the materialists on this forum are under the false assumption they have no burden.

How are shared homologous features not evidence? How is the nested hierarchy not evidence?

All lifepsyop can come up with in response are made up stories.

 

[Oncedeceived]

I believe they KNOW they have no true empirical support, and so instead try to fake their way through by claiming everyone else is wrong and they have support. Support that never materializes, because they know they have none.

Year by year as science advances it only shows them the error of their ways - at which time they switch ways while still claiming the tired old "evolution through mutation and transitory species." Even if we all understand that when an Asian race mates with an African race and produces an Afro-Asian race - all within the species - it is not done by mutation, but by the recombination of genes producing new dominant and recessive traits.

They got by for so many years by faking their way through - they still think it's acceptable by people that understand science. And now someone will claim we don't understand science, without producing the science we supposedly do not understand. And all the while they will continue to ignore that breed mates with breed producing new breeds within the species - and no evolution by mutation occurred and only the recombination of that genome that was separated at the beginning.

In those that reproduce by binary fission in which they still have both sets - they always remain the exact same thing they started out as. Billion year old bacteria that never once evolved does not prove evolution despite their twisted claims - it proves that there is no such thing as evolution.

I agree. When they can't support their claims they either claim we are ignorant of the science, we are the ones that have the burden no matter who makes the claims and if all that fails we will see where that leads...I think we all know

 

[Oncedeceived]

How are shared homologous features not evidence? How is the nested hierarchy not evidence?

All lifepsyop can come up with in response are made up stories.

He has provided a scientific paper to support his position...you...nothing...Zero.

 

[Loudmouth]

He has provided a scientific paper to support his position...you...nothing...Zero.

I am still waiting to see what evidence supports the conclusions in the paper. Perhaps you could point to them?

 

[lifepsyop]

How are shared homologous features not evidence? How is the nested hierarchy not evidence?

See, you have to assume what you're trying to prove. You're assuming homologous features as 'evidence' for homologous features.

When you're challenged to actually demonstrate homology, all you can do is post a picture. You literally have no argument... not a bad argument, but NO argument. I've honestly never seen such a pathetic display. I can only imagine the other evolutionists on here are cringing when they watch you do this.

 

[Loudmouth]

See, you have to assume what you're trying to prove. You're assuming homologous features as 'evidence' for homologous features.

I observe homologous features.

When you're challenged to actually demonstrate homology, all you can do is post a picture.

All it shows is that you won't accept the evidence even when it is staring you right in the face.