What is the greatest evidence against the theory of evolution...?

[Loudmouth]

Haha!
LOL
That's a completely ridiculous statement.
Every system is irreducibly complex.
It simply needs the essential parts to function.
Take away an essential part, and it doesn't function anymore.

How can a sane person even doubt this?

It is the additional claim that such systems can't evolve which Behe has never supported with any evidence. In fact, we have the step by step evolutionary pathway for the irreducibly complex mammalian middle ear preserved in the fossil record.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section1.html#morphological_intermediates_ex2

 

[Hieronymus]

Yes, we know that. But you have not shown a logical reason for you to believe that.

He has, but you don't see it.
Probably because you can't accept a divine foot in the door.

 

[Loudmouth]

You have not shown there is a logical reason to believe that we evolved.

Here are 29+ logical reasons:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/

 

[Subduction Zone]

Because otherwise you would go blind without that added protection from radiation. Part of the plan to enable you to see in the first place. the fact you think an animal that lives in water should have the same eye composition and functionality as one that lives in air (or you think we should believe that) shows your confusion.

You design a sub differently than you design a boat or a car.

This nonsense does not explain why fish have the same eye that we do and not the eye of the octopus. You need to support your claims with real evidence, not with nonsense that you found on a creationist site.

 

[Loudmouth]

He has, but you don't see it.
Probably because you can't accept a divine foot in the door.

You can't present any evidence for a divine foot, or anything divine for that matter.

 

[ClothedInGrace]

That's why I present facts instead of beliefs.



Planaria have neither a brain nor a heart, and yet they have eyes.

How does the organism use these "eyes" to see? How do we know those are eyes?

That we all descended from a common ancestral population of cells that have DNA is one of the major conclusions of biology. How is that a problem? Are you saying that you accept universal common ancestry for all species?

No, I was asking how cells and DNA evolved if they cannot work apart from eachother.

The process of embryonic development and biological reproduction both occur without any detection of intelligence anywhere in the process.

God created us to reproduce; the very process of reproduction was designed.

 

[ClothedInGrace]

So all you have is an unreasonable belief. We have reasoned beliefs and massive supporting evidence. There is no reliable evidence for creationism.

Give us all this evidence then.

 

[Hieronymus]

It is the additional claim that such systems can't evolve which Behe has never supported with any evidence.

Neither has the evolution of meaningless parts into a meaningful system.

 

[Subduction Zone]

He has, but you don't see it.
Probably because you can't accept a divine foot in the door.

Sorry, but acting irrationally seems to be your trait, not mine. If you showed reliable evidence for this deity I would accept it. The plain and simple fact is that you have no reliable evidence.

 

[Loudmouth]

Yes, it is always my burden, isn't it? Me who says that we were intelligently created.

Yes, it is. Where is the evidence?

The burden isn't somehow on the person who says that we have no designer, and that we are just complex mutations of a primordial lifeform which cannot be explained.

We have supplied that evidence over and over again.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/

 

[ClothedInGrace]

Here are 29+ logical reasons:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/

No thanks, I'm not dealing with 29 reasons from a huge reading. Just give me one.

 

[Loudmouth]

Neither has the evolution of meaningless parts into a system.

Nor does the evolution of an IC system require the evolution of meaningless parts into a system.

 

[Hieronymus]

Give us all this evidence then.

They speak of this mountain all the time, but it seems to be an invisible mountain

 

[Subduction Zone]

Give us all this evidence then.

You have been given evidence and you rejected it. That is not what an honest person does. There are literally mountains of scientific evidence for the theory of evolution. But you don't even understand the concept of evidence yet. You need to crawl before you can walk and you can't even roll over on your own yet.

 

[Subduction Zone]

They speak of this mountain all the time, but it seems to be an invisible mountain

When you demonstrate that you understand the concept of evidence then you can demand it. So far you have only shown that evidence is a foreign notion to you.

 

[ClothedInGrace]

You have been given evidence and you rejected it. That is not what an honest person does. There are literally mountains of scientific evidence for the theory of evolution. But you don't even understand the concept of evidence yet. You need to crawl before you can walk and you can't even roll over on your own yet.

Your 'evidence' wasn't enough to prove that evolution is valid I'm sorry to say.

 

[Hieronymus]

Sorry, but acting irrationally seems to be your trait, not mine.

This seems so to you.

If you showed reliable evidence for this deity I would accept it.

No you wouldn't.

The plain and simple fact is that you have no reliable evidence.

I do, but you don't.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You keep saying that. I guess if you keep saying something it eventually becomes true.

He keeps saying that because it is true. If you want to challenge any part of his claim he can support it with evidence. Meanwhile you have no reliable evidence at all for your beliefs. Just because you follow an intellectually bankrupt concept you should not assume that everyone else has no capital too.

 

[Loudmouth]

No thanks, I'm not dealing with 29 reasons from a huge reading. Just give me one.

I discuss the endogenous retrovirus evidence in this thread:

http://www.christianforums.com/threads/the-new-retrovirus-thread.7942101/

 

[Subduction Zone]

Your 'evidence' wasn't enough to prove that evolution is valid I'm sorry to say.

Wrong, you won't let yourself learn. For those who have not blinded themselves the evidence is more than ample. Again, when you are ready to learn I will gladly help you.