proving evolution as just a "theory"

[Jimmy D]

A better question is do you understand what it means.

Are you going to use this pathetic deflection tactic every time someone asks a question? Maybe I don't know what is meant by your quote, will you explain it please? You said it.

"Gould's "punctuated equlibia, destroyed gradualism as a means of proving evolution."

 

[BradB]

My point, exactly. To insinuate that Traditonal Christians trust "religious rituals, religious prayers prayer beads and other religious rites" as an alternative to trusting Christ is a gratuitous insult. They know better than that.

Friend in Matthew 7:15 Jesus warned us “Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.” In Matthew 24:11 He warns “And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.” Note the use of the word many here. Jesus never exaggerated so I believe when He says many…He means a lot. This should make us sober and paying attention to the congregation we attend and think is following Christ. He goes on to say in verse 24 “For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.” The idea here is that there are always a core group in every congregation that are indeed saved and then there are the majority who are not and are being tossed to and fro by every wind and doctrine. Jesus is saying these deceivers are so good that they can fool even those who are saved into thinking they are of God. In 2 Corinthians 11:13-15 Paul warns us “For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.” Here we are warned that even the man of God we trust in our church to lead us and teach us can be false. That Satan’s ministers can make themselves look like my pastor or your priest. And friend they will not just come out and teach blatant heresy. No they will feed you a lie that has been covered in the skin of the truth. I recently left a church I attended for 10 years for this very reason. I loved those people and they were like family to me. But I recognized the lie being taught behind the pulpit because I took the time to familiarize myself with God’s word. When I confronted my pastor about it, all he had to say was that it was something he learned from a book he liked…not the Bible, and he admitted it was not orthodox teaching. He never recanted and so I left the church.

In 1 Timothy 6:20 God’s word warns us about false knowledge that is in opposition to God’s word. Some translations translate that word as false science. This means we must be diligent to recognize when the world’s knowledge stands in opposition to God’s word. We must study to show ourselves approved and be able to expose that so called false knowledge, not buckle under to it and try and bend God’s word to agree with it. God’s word says exactly what it means. When studying His word the best sense is the most obvious sense…any other sense is nonsense.

If I “insinuate” a large group may not be trusting in Christ alone it is only because that was what Jesus Himself “insinuated.” Familiarize yourself with Matthew 23 where Jesus gave us real good indicators of false religious leaders and false religious rituals, how they would look and act. They loved dressing differently in religious attire. They loved the way the people would show them special favor and honor. They loved the title of being called “Master” or “Father” by the people. But Jesus warns us to address no one on earth with these titles. He said the only spiritual father we should have is our Father in heaven and our only Master is Christ. I once went to an RC church and asked the priest why they blatantly disobey this command of Christ and call themselves Fathers, why do they set themselves up as mediators between men and God? His reply was “I guess we just aren’t perfect.” Make no mistake my friend God’s word tells us plainly that there is but one mediator between God and men and that is the man Christ Jesus. (1 Timothy 2:5) So contrary to your claim my brother, they do not know better. Many will be deceived Jesus says.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Your problem is you have no evidence or example a species of salamanders evolving into a different species.

Speciation is not the process of a species evolving into a "different" species.
It is the process of a species evolving into one or more "sub-species".

So if a salamander population speciates, the "new" species will just be a new type of salamander.

All descendants of species X will forever stay on the same branch, in the same lineage, of species X. They will always be a sub-group of that species.

All cats, lions, tigers,... = felines.
All humans, chimps, gorilla's,... = apes
All dogs, wolves,... = canines

All felines, apes, canines,... = mammals

All mammals = tetrapoda

All tetrapoda = vertebrates

All vertebrates = eukaryotes

And so on.

You need to learn to wrap your head around what the "gradual" part of a "gradual process" means. It seems like you do not get how, in evolution, EVERY creature ever born was of the SAME species as its direct parents.

At no point in history did a member of species X give birth to a member of species Y. It doesn't work that way.


Let's move away from the whole evolution bit, because in my experience creationists have to much emotional objections to have a rational and objective discussion on the subject. Instead, let's just focus on the nature of a gradual process of introducing small changes every generation and having them accumulate and what that inevitably results in.

Let's look at the development of languages.

I hope you are aware that all Roman languages (like French, Portugese, Spanish, Italian) derive from Latin, right?

So, the ancestors of french, portugese, spanish and italian people didn't speak those languages. Instead, they all spoke latin.

Now, consider this: do you think that at some point in history, a latin speaking mother raised a spanish speaking child?

I'll go ahead and assume that when it comes to languages, you understand that generation after generation, small changes are introduced and accumulate in the language.

When you understand the graduallity of this process, you can think about biology in the same manner. The principles of the process are the exact same.

I will ask you why all monkeys have not evolved into humans?

1. because populations evolve, not individuals

2. if multiple independent populations would evolve in the exact same way, evolution theory in its current form would be false

3. following your trail of thought, then in an evolutionary context, there should be just 1 species on the entire planet.

4. hilarious how you again expose how little you understand of the process of evolution.

You use that as an example of misunderstanding evolution, a concept even a cave man can understand, but can't explain HOW it is possible.

It's rather easy, actually.

You have population A. For some reason, it splits in 2 or more populations. Various potential reasons for that (none of them out of the ordinary): part of the popluation migrates away; geological changes splits the population (for example, formation of a river that cuts right through the habitat of the population), etc.

Now, you have population A1 and A2. They are genetically isolated from one another. So they each are on their own evolutionary path from that point on. Over time, they will gradually diverge fruther and further from one another.

Have you never wondered how come that we can instantly tell someone's ancestral geographic location, simply by seeing his/her face?

White caucasians have ancestry in Europe.
Dark caucasians have ancestry in the Middle east.
Black people have ancestry in Africa.
Asian people have ancestry in Asia.

The fact that we can pinpoint geographic locations based on nothing but facial features, is a direct result of what I explained above about populations splitting and becoming genetically isolated from one another - making sure every "sub-population" continues on its own evolutionary path and starts diverging from the other sub-populations.


From this knowledge, we can again make some predictions concerning the geographic distribution of species. And once more, all these predictions check out. It explains why we only find kangaroo's in Australia, for example.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Talk is cheap. How about some evidence.

Yawn. Do you have any response other than denial/handwaving/burden shifting/misrepresentation?

 

[DogmaHunter]

FYI I took and passed 3 college courses that discussed evolution.

I hope you didn't pay for those courses. If you did, I'ld ask for a refund. Because if after 3 "college courses" you still don't understand the gradual nature of the process, the implication of nested hierarchies, the idea that populations evolve instead of individuals, the fact that every species ever born was of the same species as its direct parents, the fact that speciation is a vertical process and not a horizontal one,....

Then I can only wonder what the content of those courses was..................

The basic doctrines of the TOE are so simple even a cave man with a 2 digit IQ can understand it.

And yet, it seems that your knowledge about it is extremely lacking.

 

[BradB]

Just FYI - Dr Gillen is both an Intelligent Design creation proponent and a young earth creationist, so its not surprising that he's attempting to stealthily insert ID concepts into his own books.

Thanks for the info. Since my intent was to try and find non IDists only we can strike his use of the term "highly specified" from my list. But that still leaves two others to contend with.

 

[DogmaHunter]

It is not what I say, it is what 2 of your respected evolutionist, Gould land Mayr, say---"appear suddenly not connected to their ancestors by intermediates. Gould's "punctuated equlibia, destroyed gradualism as a means of proving evolution.

False. PE is also a gradual process.

What is absurd and specifically scientifically absurd is thinking eating fish for any reason can cause a land animal to evolve into a sea creature.

That is indeed absurd. I guess it's a good thing then, that "eating fish" is not what evolution claims is the cause of land mammals evolving into sea dwelling mammals.

During such a transition period , which according to evolution would take hundred if not million of years, pakicetus would have entered an environment(the sea)hostile to its survival. Those legs would not have become fins over night.

Nobody claims it happened overnight.
Try some 50 million years, instead.

You don't get it do you? It is not what they eat or where thy eat it. It is that no diet is a mechanism for a change of species.

No "single" thing is.
In the end, change is regulated by natural selection, which works on selection pressures which take on many forms and are determined by everything in the environment: climate, habitat, geography, competing species, natural enemies, presence (or lack of) predators, available food sources (= diet), migration patterns, etc etc etc etc.

In the supposed transition from land to sea, pakicetus would be very vulnerable to land and to sea animals

Why?
There's a whole range of land animals that spend a great deal of their lives in water that you can go observe TODAY. Take hippo's for example.... Are they "very vulnerable to land and sea animals"? They are amongst the most ferocious creatures alive today, for crying out loud... I saw one on National Geographic battling an giant crockodile. The hippo won.

The only thing it would evolve into would be lunch for other predators.

Surely they probably were lunch for other predators. Most animals are. Living exclusively on land, in the sea or even high up in the trees does not change that.

Practically every animal on this planet, is seen as lunch by certain other animals.

What is a predator to species X, is prey to species Y.

 

[BradB]

Chasing down those cases of "highly specific" from the literature:

Cheng et all 1989

Instance 1:

Plasmid DNAs were isolated from 150 randomly picked transformants and their inserts were sorted by T-lane DNA sequencing. Based on the T-lane patterns, eight different groups of sequences could be categorized, and they were subsequently designated as CAI-CA8. Assuming the primer annealing is highly specific under our PCR conditions, we expected to be able to retrieve at least one of the three partial sequences corresponding to the documented yeast genesnamely, MSS116 (9), TIFJ, and TIF2 (8).
​

Instance 2:

In present day organisms, RNA helicases play a number of specialized roles. However, since the basic features of their enzymatic mechanism are highly specified for the destabilization of RNA helices, the basic structure of these enzymes is therefore highly conserved in evolution.
​

Guilinger et all 2017:

Instance 1:

For all TALENs tested, the targeted base pair at every position in both half-sites is preferred, with the sole exception of the base pair closest to the spacer for some ATM TALENs at the right-half site (Fig. 2C, 2D and Supplementary Fig. S3 through S8). The 5′ T recognized by the N-terminal domain is highly specified, and the 3′ DNA end (targeted by the C-terminal TALEN end) generally tolerates more mutations than the 5′ DNA end; both of these observations are consistent with previous reports.
​

Instance 2:

The in vitro selection results for 30 unique TALENs each challenged with 1012 closed related off-target sequences and subsequent analysis inform our understanding of TALEN specificity through four key findings: (i) TALENs are highly specific for their intended target base pair at 103 of the 104 positions profiled with specificity increasing near the Nterminal TALEN end of each TALE repeat array (corresponding to the 5′ end of the bound DNA); (ii) longer TALENs are more specific in a genomic context while shorter TALENs have higher specificity per nucleotide; (iii) TALE repeats each bind their respective base pairs relatively independently; and (iv) excess DNA-binding affinity leads to increased TALEN activity against off-target sites and therefore decreased specificity.

​

Neither of these references indicate anything like references to specalised complexity or other IDist language, and are more technical terms used as descriptive (rather than indicative) language.

The claim I was responding to was that the "term" doesn't exist in the biology literature. It clearly does. And what do you think they meant by the term here?

 

[DogmaHunter]

Gould, probably your most respected expert on fossils, with his invented "punctuated equlibria" destroyed gradualism. At least he was honest and admitted there are no intermediate fossils. Refute what he says and we can continue.

Once more.....

Punctuated Equilibrium, is a gradual process.
Yes, clearly, you have no idea what PE is all about.


Allow me to explain it in a simplistic fashion....

In evolution, there is something called a "local optimum". Which means that there is an "equilibrium", a balance, in the eco-system. That the populations in that habitat are as well adapted as can be, given the limits of potential biological change.

Natural selection works by selection pressures. Selection pressures are determined by the totality of the environment.

If the environment stays stable, then so do the selection pressures.
Unchanging selection pressures favor the status quo. At that point, not much change will happen, because -as said- the selection pressures will favor the status quo.

Now, if impactfull changes happen in the environment, then the selection pressures change.
Now, the "equilibrium" is broken. Now, the status quo is no longer favored. Natural selection will now push towards other directions. This results in a more rapid pace of evolutionary change as opposed to during periods of stability.

That change is still as gradual as ever. PE does not mean that a cow suddenly gave birth to a whale!

 

[Ophiolite]

The claim I was responding to was that the "term" doesn't exist in the biology literature. It clearly does. And what do you think they meant by the term here?

And the claim I was responding to was this one of yours [my emphasis]
"all the biological literature describes the code in DNA as highly specified."

I shall update you on my review of your claim when I have complete my study.

 

[Speedwell]

Friend in Matthew 7:15 Jesus warned us “Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.” In Matthew 24:11 He warns “And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.” Note the use of the word many here. Jesus never exaggerated so I believe when He says many…He means a lot. This should make us sober and paying attention to the congregation we attend and think is following Christ. He goes on to say in verse 24 “For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.” The idea here is that there are always a core group in every congregation that are indeed saved and then there are the majority who are not and are being tossed to and fro by every wind and doctrine. Jesus is saying these deceivers are so good that they can fool even those who are saved into thinking they are of God. In 2 Corinthians 11:13-15 Paul warns us “For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.” Here we are warned that even the man of God we trust in our church to lead us and teach us can be false. That Satan’s ministers can make themselves look like my pastor or your priest. And friend they will not just come out and teach blatant heresy. No they will feed you a lie that has been covered in the skin of the truth. I recently left a church I attended for 10 years for this very reason. I loved those people and they were like family to me. But I recognized the lie being taught behind the pulpit because I took the time to familiarize myself with God’s word. When I confronted my pastor about it, all he had to say was that it was something he learned from a book he liked…not the Bible, and he admitted it was not orthodox teaching. He never recanted and so I left the church.

In 1 Timothy 6:20 God’s word warns us about false knowledge that is in opposition to God’s word. Some translations translate that word as false science. This means we must be diligent to recognize when the world’s knowledge stands in opposition to God’s word. We must study to show ourselves approved and be able to expose that so called false knowledge, not buckle under to it and try and bend God’s word to agree with it. God’s word says exactly what it means. When studying His word the best sense is the most obvious sense…any other sense is nonsense.

If I “insinuate” a large group may not be trusting in Christ alone it is only because that was what Jesus Himself “insinuated.” Familiarize yourself with Matthew 23 where Jesus gave us real good indicators of false religious leaders and false religious rituals, how they would look and act. They loved dressing differently in religious attire. They loved the way the people would show them special favor and honor. They loved the title of being called “Master” or “Father” by the people. But Jesus warns us to address no one on earth with these titles. He said the only spiritual father we should have is our Father in heaven and our only Master is Christ. I once went to an RC church and asked the priest why they blatantly disobey this command of Christ and call themselves Fathers, why do they set themselves up as mediators between men and God? His reply was “I guess we just aren’t perfect.” Make no mistake my friend God’s word tells us plainly that there is but one mediator between God and men and that is the man Christ Jesus. (1 Timothy 2:5) So contrary to your claim my brother, they do not know better. Many will be deceived Jesus says.

Amazing. It appears that God really does harden peoples' hearts.

 

[Aman777]

So you seem to be calling into question the countless translators that have translated the Hebrew text into the English language for our convenience.

No, since they made these translations BEFORE the "increased knowledge" of the last days which unlocks God's scientific Truth in Genesis.

Dan 12:4 But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.

Are you trying to tell us that ancient Hebrews had the increased knowledge of the people of the last Days before Jesus returns? Spending their lives studying the meanings of ancient Hebrew words does NOT make a correct interpretation of Genesis. Here's an example:

Tell us WHEN Humans had dominion/rule over Angels as Gen 1:28 states.
Tell us WHEN ALL animals were vegetarians as Gen 1:30 states.
Tell us WHEN God looked upon His creation and said it was very good. Gen 1:31

You cannot explain since those verses are not fulfilled until AFTER Jesus returns. Amen?

 

[Aman777]

That guy on the left is my favorite. Do you have any explanation for this 1.9 million year old fossil, other than that he is transitional between ape-like creatures and humans?

Easy. He's a descendant of the sons of God (prehistoric people) who were made from Water on the 5th Day according to Gen 1:21...UNLESS you have a better Theory.

 

[Aman777]

Talk is cheap. How about some evidence.

It does no good to post actual scientific evidence to evolution worshipers. They run away and then ignore the scientific evidence that God told us that "every living creature that moveth" was created and brought forth from water as Gen 1:21 clearly states. They CANNOT explain HOW this scientific fact was written in Genesis more than 3k years ago so they run, hide, lie about refuting (proving wrong) the evidence and imply that people who understand this Truth are Nuts. Amen?

 

[TLK Valentine]

Easy. He's a descendant of the sons of God (prehistoric people) who were made from Water on the 5th Day according to Gen 1:21...UNLESS you have a better Theory.

I do... a MUCH better theory.

Evolution - Wikipedia

 

[Aman777]

I do... a MUCH better theory.

Evolution - Wikipedia

I see. You believe in the Magic of Mindless Nature to implant the highest intelligence on Earth, inside Ape like creatures. Tell us HOW long periods of time and magical mutations combined, just ONCE, and can NEVER be repeated, to change these mindless creatures, into reasoning Humans. I predict you will run away screaming and waving your hands above your "evolved" brain. God Bless you

 

[BradB]

And the claim I was responding to was this one of yours [my emphasis]
"all the biological literature describes the code in DNA as highly specified."

I shall update you on my review of your claim when I have complete my study.

Well obviously if you are going to take what I said in the wooden literal sense then you can easily show it to be wrong. The point is that the literature is replete with references to DNA as specified or highly specified. Even the two credited with discovering the DNA molecule, Crick and Watson, described it in this way. (see page 966) Or a study such as Genetic code supports targeted insertion of two amino acids by one codon. The point is we know that DNA uses specified base code sequences and arrangements as the blue prints to build the correct cells. These codes are in fact very specific and not unlike the code in a computer software program. They are actually much more sophisticated in many ways.

 

[BradB]

Amazing. It appears that God really does harden peoples' hearts.

I see it as... real love will tell the truth in the hopes of saving, rather than remaining silent in the hopes of being liked.

 

[bhsmte]

Friend in Matthew 7:15 Jesus warned us “Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.” In Matthew 24:11 He warns “And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.” Note the use of the word many here. Jesus never exaggerated so I believe when He says many…He means a lot. This should make us sober and paying attention to the congregation we attend and think is following Christ. He goes on to say in verse 24 “For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.” The idea here is that there are always a core group in every congregation that are indeed saved and then there are the majority who are not and are being tossed to and fro by every wind and doctrine. Jesus is saying these deceivers are so good that they can fool even those who are saved into thinking they are of God. In 2 Corinthians 11:13-15 Paul warns us “For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.” Here we are warned that even the man of God we trust in our church to lead us and teach us can be false. That Satan’s ministers can make themselves look like my pastor or your priest. And friend they will not just come out and teach blatant heresy. No they will feed you a lie that has been covered in the skin of the truth. I recently left a church I attended for 10 years for this very reason. I loved those people and they were like family to me. But I recognized the lie being taught behind the pulpit because I took the time to familiarize myself with God’s word. When I confronted my pastor about it, all he had to say was that it was something he learned from a book he liked…not the Bible, and he admitted it was not orthodox teaching. He never recanted and so I left the church.

In 1 Timothy 6:20 God’s word warns us about false knowledge that is in opposition to God’s word. Some translations translate that word as false science. This means we must be diligent to recognize when the world’s knowledge stands in opposition to God’s word. We must study to show ourselves approved and be able to expose that so called false knowledge, not buckle under to it and try and bend God’s word to agree with it. God’s word says exactly what it means. When studying His word the best sense is the most obvious sense…any other sense is nonsense.

If I “insinuate” a large group may not be trusting in Christ alone it is only because that was what Jesus Himself “insinuated.” Familiarize yourself with Matthew 23 where Jesus gave us real good indicators of false religious leaders and false religious rituals, how they would look and act. They loved dressing differently in religious attire. They loved the way the people would show them special favor and honor. They loved the title of being called “Master” or “Father” by the people. But Jesus warns us to address no one on earth with these titles. He said the only spiritual father we should have is our Father in heaven and our only Master is Christ. I once went to an RC church and asked the priest why they blatantly disobey this command of Christ and call themselves Fathers, why do they set themselves up as mediators between men and God? His reply was “I guess we just aren’t perfect.” Make no mistake my friend God’s word tells us plainly that there is but one mediator between God and men and that is the man Christ Jesus. (1 Timothy 2:5) So contrary to your claim my brother, they do not know better. Many will be deceived Jesus says.

Thisnis the science forum, not the scripture preaching forum.

 

[AnotherAtheist]

Your problem is you have no evidence or example a species of salamanders evolving into a different species.

There is plenty of evidence of salamanders speciating ('evolving into a different species' looks too much like the classic deliberate misunderstanding of evolution that whole species evolve into different whole species) as there is plenty of evidence of common descent for all life, let alone salamanders alone. http://www.stat.cmu.edu/~genovese/depot/archive/evidence-CD.pdf

There are also ring species for salamanders. Evolution: Library: Ring Species: Salamanders

Here is discussion of a salamander that speciated despite inbreeding. Salamanders formed new species despite interbreeding

This is a classic, crude example of accepting something by faith alone. I will ask you why all monkeys have not evolved into humans? They have had millions of years to do it. You use that as an example of misunderstanding evolution, a concept even a cave man can understand, but can't explain HOW it is possible.

Accepting evolution is the exact opposite of accepting something by faith alone. What else in the world is there that has more evidence than evolution? There's genetic evidence. Molecular evidence. Geographical distribution evidence. Fossils combined with geological evidence. The list goes on and how.

How is it that not all monkeys have evolved into humans? Try asking the real question of why no monkeys at all evolved into humans. Because none ever did.

Why wouldn't monkeys evolve in a direction that would make them more like humans? Because they occupy a different ecological niche than early ancestors of humans did. And therefore the selection pressures on them were different. And hence they evolved in different directions.

That's pretty easy to explain.