Can anyone explain how the moth got it's owl eyes?

[AV1611VET]

It's funny but this really did become what I thought it would be: just mud slinging and gish-galloping from Creationists without any understanding on the science of evolution.

Wow.

I don't understand the science of evolution.

Do you?

And if so, how did you get that understanding, when there are some who spend years and years and thousands and thousands of dollars to get their understanding?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Except for:

Science can take a hike then.

Wow.

I don't understand the science of evolution.

Do you?

And if so, how did you get that understanding, when there are some who spend years and years and thousands and thousands of dollars to get their understanding?

Shut up.

 

[JesusFollowerForever]

-There is no valid argument
-none of our " anti" folk have even the most
basic understanding of science
-they all get their "anti" chants from the
Triple S. (Same sorry sources)
- anyone with knowledge of science will
refrain from "anti" arguments, the which of
why being to avoid looking foolish.

Or dishonest.

Dishonest no, logical yes. No proof evolution exists, the classic, what came first the chicken or the egg?

I am not the only scientist ( 35 yrs experience in the best research labs in the world, with many published papers including Nature, plos one etc...) who knows evolution is not possible.

on a personal note, why do you believe evolution is possible?

 

[The IbanezerScrooge]

Can anyone explain what it took for a moth to gain owl eyes on ea wing? Owl are formidable predators recognized by would-be moth enemies.
Just wondering. View attachment 345574

perhaps you missed my question because i didn't quote or tag you, but i'm very much interested in the answer, please?

How does "Creation" explain how the moth got its eye spots? I mean specifically? And when?

 

[Astrid]

Dishonest no, logical yes. No proof evolution exists, the classic, what came first the chicken or the egg?

I am not the only scientist ( 35 yrs experience in the best research labs in the world, with many published papers including Nature, plos one etc...) who knows evolution is not possible.

on a personal note, why do you believe evolution is possible?

Your claim to be a scientist has no (zero)
credibility.
Your " unproven theory" bit is your first "tell".

As for your unnamed but supposedly real scientists who
" know" it's impossible, not one has datum point one
to disprove ToE.
If it were false it would be the easiest thing in the world
to disprove.

Your " chicken / egg" thing has an extremely simple
obvious answer, indicating you've next to no idea about
evolution.

Which actually is to your credit, not much,
but more than zero. You appear sincere
in your "impossible" belief, just grossly
ignorant in the subject matter

Here's impossible for you-

It's impossible for anyone with intellectual
integrity to be well informed and be a yec
or otherwise claim ToE is false.


To answer your q., there's many reasons.
Among them are:

- I don't start with conclusions ( see " integrity")
- the theory is elegant, logical, interesting and has
tremendous explanatory and predictive power
- ToE is consistent with all relevant data
- there is no contrary data
- there is no alternate explanation for life
being as it is

Oh- and I actually did put in in many long hours
of lab, lecture, library, field, and study

I know what I know and that includes knowing
what I don't.

I'd never present as an expert in a
post game show and start talking about
basketball or any other sport.
Self respect would be one reason.

Q for you. Why don't you show some?

 

[expos4ever]

It beggars credulity to claim to be a published scientist while also believing that the laws of thermodynamics make evolution impossible.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

It beggars credulity to claim to be a published scientist while also believing that the laws of thermodynamics make evolution impossible.

I think it might be because they might not be an actually published scientist because any scientists worth their salt would know that the second law of thermodynamics applies to closed systems, not open systems like earth.

 

[AV1611VET]

Shut up.

Make me.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Make me.

Sometimes I wish I could. Just, take away your computer or laptop for a bit.

 

[AV1611VET]

As for your unnamed but supposedly real scientists who "know" it's impossible, not one has datum point one to disprove ToE.

Like missing links?

 

[AV1611VET]

Sometimes I wish I could. Just, take away your computer or laptop for a bit.

There's someone coming who's going to do just that.

Unless they have the mark of his name on their foreheads or right hand.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

There's someone coming who's going to do just that.

Unless they have the mark of his name on their foreheads or right hand.

What, you don't like tattooed computer repairmen?

 

[Ophiolite]

I am not the only scientist ( 35 yrs experience in the best research labs in the world, with many published papers including Nature, plos one etc...) who knows evolution is not possible.

Two questions the answers to which would interest me greatly.

1. Which field of science are you expert in? I'm not asking for your speciality, e.g. carbonatite lavas of East Africa; or, generalities, e.g. geologist; but something in the middle, e.g. vulcanologist.
2. Since you know evolution is not possible how did you go about falsifying it?

 

[Astrid]

Two questions the answers to which would interest me greatly.

1. Which field of science are you expert in? I'm not asking for your speciality, e.g. carbonatite lavas of East Africa; or, generalities, e.g. geologist; but something in the middle, e.g. vulcanologist.
2. Since you know evolution is not possible how did you go about falsifying it?

Hey that's what i said! You, though, applied
to the task an economy of words, in contrast
to my post, in which quality it might well be
found to be sadly lacking.

 

[Ophiolite]

Hey that's what i said! You, though, applied
to the task an economy of words, in contrast
to my post, in which quality it might well be
found to be sadly lacking.

In a neat coincidence I had just posted this remark in another thread:

{The power of brevity} was brought home to me in the 1960s by a book review in the UK Sunday newspaper, The Observer. The book was called The Art of Brevity, the review read "Excellent."

I only occassionally manage to honour my intent in this regard, like adding this gratuitious sentence with a vocabulary that benefits from the Norman Conquest.

 

[Hans Blaster]

I am not the only scientist ( 35 yrs experience in the best research labs in the world, with many published papers including Nature, plos one etc...) who knows evolution is not possible.

You worked in a research lab since you were 10? (One of these things, 35 years of experience, or age 45 is not true.)

 

[trophy33]

what came first the chicken or the egg?

The egg of course. Even dinosaurs were born of eggs already. Chicken is a very recent animal, compared to the existence of eggs.

 

[JesusFollowerForever]

The egg of course. Even dinosaurs were born of eggs already. Chicken is a very recent animal, compared to the existence of eggs.

ok dino's... then who laid the dino egg if the egg came first?

 

[Hans Blaster]

ok dino's... then who laid the dino egg if the egg came first?

A dino laid a dino egg.

Egg laying has been part of our ancestral line from before the first quadrupeds and land animals.

 

[JesusFollowerForever]

A dino laid a dino egg.

Egg laying has been part of our ancestral line from before the first quadrupeds and land animals.

so the dino came first then where was it from an egg?