Evolution Promotes Brutality

[joshua 1 9]

The common ancestor of chimps and humans was a primate.

Nice theory, only problem is that NO ONE has ever produced a common ancestor. With all the millions of species alive today you have zip, zero, nothing to show for a common ancestor. Even Bill Nye the Science Guy admits this when he says that there could not have been any Kangaroos on the Ark. If there was then there would be a skeleton, fossil or the remains of a Kangaroo between where the Ark landed and where we find Kangaroos today in Australia. In the same way you are not able to produce your mythical common ancestor.

 

[Loudmouth]

Nice theory, only problem is that NO ONE has ever produced a common ancestor.

We have evidence demonstrating that we share a common ancestor. It is just like finding DNA evidence at a crime scene.

With all the millions of species alive today you have zip, zero, nothing to show for a common ancestor.

Yes, I do.

"First, the distribution of provirus-containing loci among taxa dates the insertion. Given the size of vertebrate genomes (>1 × 10^9 bp) and the random nature of retroviral integration (22, 23), multiple integrations (and subsequent fixation) of ERV loci at precisely the same location are highly unlikely (24). Therefore, an ERV locus shared by two or more species is descended from a single integration event and is proof that the species share a common ancestor into whose germ line the original integration took place (14)."
http://www.pnas.org/content/96/18/10254.full

We share over 200,000 retroviral integrations with chimps. I have over 200,000 pieces of evidence. That is far from zero.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Species do not change over time. If you go to the Cambrian you have Trilobites in the beginning and you have Trilobites in the end. They remain unchanged, they did not evolve at all during the whole Cambrian period, from the beginning of when they show up in the fossil record to the end of their existence.

You do know that the trilobite is not one single animal, right? It's an entire GROUP of animals, all with various morphological changes and that all lived at various points in the Cambrian.
Here's a website that'll explain it for you.

 

[joshua 1 9]

overwhelming evidence for evolution.

"Evolution is change in the heritable traits of biological populations over successive generations." Correction, there is overwelming evidence for what they call evolution. There is NOT overwelming evidence for the mutation theory of evolution. Just because you have "overwelming" evidence for change, that does not give you any evidence at all for macro evolution. This is what in advertising they call bait and switch and it is against the law.

"noun

1. the action (generally illegal) of advertising goods that are an apparent bargain, with the intention of substituting inferior or more expensive goods. "a bait-and-switch scheme"

 

[joshua 1 9]

We have evidence demonstrating that we share a common ancestor. It is just like finding DNA evidence at a crime scene.

You have inferred evidence and that will not stand up in a court of law. Although the real court for science is what the insurance company will pay for. Or what research they can get grant money for. Remember the court is ONLY interested in DNA if it can be used to predict something with a high degree of accuracy. Science is based on replication. Being about to delicate results.

 

[Loudmouth]

You have inferred evidence and that will not stand up in a court of law.

Why wouldn't it stand up in a court of law?

 

[Loudmouth]

"Evolution is change in the heritable traits of biological populations over successive generations." Correction, there is overwelming evidence for what they call evolution. There is NOT overwelming evidence for the mutation theory of evolution.

29+ Evidences for Macroevolution

 

[joshua 1 9]

29+ Evidences for Macroevolution

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0204.htm

 

[joshua 1 9]

Why wouldn't it stand up in a court of law?

Inferred evidence does not stand up in court. You need direct evidence not Circumstantial evidence.

 

[Loudmouth]

Inferred evidence does not stand up in court.

DNA evidence is inferred evidence, and it is accepted all of the time.

 

[joshua 1 9]

You do know that the trilobite is not one single animal, right? It's an entire GROUP of animals, all with various morphological changes and that all lived at various points in the Cambrian. Here's a website that'll explain it for you.

There are 150 species of Roses but a Rose is still a Rose, it does not turn into a Daisy. You can claim there was a common cause or a common ancestor that all flowers originated from. But we say that the seed comes before the flower, not the flower before the seed. DNA is the language that God uses to create life. DNA did not spontaneously generate itself. Even the whole universe starts out as a seed smaller then a mustard seed. Actually according to science quite a bit smaller then a mustard seed. Everything that ever was and ever will be is contained in the beginning. God knows the end from the beginning. And the end is contained within the beginning. Life is not a process that results though errors, mistakes and mutations.

 

[Loudmouth]

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0204.htm

So you are going to ignore the evidence for macroevolution, and just keep repeating that there is no evidence? Seems a bit dishonest to me.

 

[Loudmouth]

There are 150 species of Roses but a Rose is still a Rose, it does not turn into a Daisy.

There are hundreds of species of primates, including humans. Are you saying that the evolution of humans from a common ancestor shared by all primates is microevolution?

You can claim there was a common cause or a common ancestor that all flowers originated from. But we say that the seed comes before the flower, not the flower before the seed.

Then where did the seed come from?

 

[joshua 1 9]

DNA evidence is inferred evidence, and it is accepted all of the time.

Show me you DNA evidence for macro evolution. Show me how one species evolves into another species under controlled conditions that can be repeated.

 

[Loudmouth]

Show me you DNA evidence for macro evolution.

Already did.

"First, the distribution of provirus-containing loci among taxa dates the insertion. Given the size of vertebrate genomes (>1 × 10^9 bp) and the random nature of retroviral integration (22, 23), multiple integrations (and subsequent fixation) of ERV loci at precisely the same location are highly unlikely (24). Therefore, an ERV locus shared by two or more species is descended from a single integration event and is proof that the species share a common ancestor into whose germ line the original integration took place (14)."
http://www.pnas.org/content/96/18/10254.full

We share over 200,000 retroviral integrations with chimps. I have over 200,000 pieces of evidence. That is far from zero.

Show me how one species evolves into another species under controlled conditions that can be repeated.

Do forensic scientists have to observe the killer killing the suspect in the laboratory during testimony in a trial.

 

[joshua 1 9]

There are hundreds of species of primates, including humans. Are you saying that the evolution of humans from a common ancestor shared by all primates is microevolution?

You are saying that all of life evolved from pond scum.

Then where did the seed come from?

My opinion is that the universe goes though periods of expansion and contraction. That does not deal with the issue of where does all the energy come from. We are only talking about the physical universe or substance. That does not address the issue of energy and the non physical universe. That is not even the issue because the issue has to do with when did TIME come into a relationship with matter or the physical universe. Because energy itself is not subject to time.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

There are 150 species of Roses but a Rose is still a Rose, it does not turn into a Daisy. You can claim there was a common cause or a common ancestor that all flowers originated from. But we say that the seed comes before the flower, not the flower before the seed. DNA is the language that God uses to create life. DNA did not spontaneously generate itself. Even the whole universe starts out as a seed smaller then a mustard seed. Actually according to science quite a bit smaller then a mustard seed. Everything that ever was and ever will be is contained in the beginning. God knows the end from the beginning. And the end is contained within the beginning. Life is not a process that results though errors, mistakes and mutations.

But your claim that trilobite stayed the same throughout the Cambrian is demonstrably false. There were various species and subspecies of trilobites that existed.
And no life came through errors or mistakes. The errors and mistakes in the genepool died when the animals with those mistakes and errors died, ensuring they were not passed down.
The rest of your comment is just your usual bluster: all waffle, no substance.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

You are saying that all of life evolved from pond scum.

No he didn't. Stop lying.

My opinion is that the universe goes though periods of expansion and contraction. That does not deal with the issue of where does all the energy come from. We are only talking about the physical universe or substance. That does not address the issue of energy and the non physical universe. That is not even the issue because the issue has to do with when did TIME come into a relationship with matter or the physical universe. Because energy itself is not subject to time.

Energy in the universe has nothing to do with evolution. Try and stay on topic.

 

[Loudmouth]

You are saying that all of life evolved from pond scum.

Where did I say that? Pond scum is not a primate species.

Humans are a primate species. Are you saying that humans evolving from a common ancestor shared with all other primates would be microevolution since humans are still primates? Yes or no?

My opinion is that the universe goes though periods of expansion and contraction. That does not deal with the issue of where does all the energy come from. We are only talking about the physical universe or substance. That does not address the issue of energy and the non physical universe. That is not even the issue because the issue has to do with when did TIME come into a relationship with matter or the physical universe. Because energy itself is not subject to time.

Will you please try to answer the question instead of wandering off into la la land?

Then where did the seed come from?

 

[JonFromMinnesota]

Gradualism has been falsified. Science now supports punctuated equilibrium. So your time theory is a myth that has been busted.

Punctuated equilibrium is the same thing. Same mechanisms. What's the difference? Time

"Evolution is change in the heritable traits of biological populations over successive generations." Correction, there is overwelming evidence for what they call evolution.

I didn't realize you had the authority to change definitions in biology. What makes you think you can do this? Science has no authority. It follows the evidence. The definition for evolution stands. You don't get to change it because you don't want it to be true.

There is NOT overwelming evidence for the mutation theory of evolution.

It's an observable fact. Facts are demonstrable and don't care what you believe.

Just because you have "overwelming" evidence for change, that does not give you any evidence at all for macro evolution.

I just gave you several links that demonstrate this evidence. You closed your eyes and plugged your ears. Would you please respond to those links instead of repeating your tired old, refuted arguments?

This is what in advertising they call bait and switch and it is against the law.

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

No this is just confirming my prediction in my previous post

I predict you'll do some mental gymnastics to ignore all this evidence instead of conceding that you are wrong.