Evolution Denies - Please Refute this

[ikester7579]

1. When the general public takes over the use of a term that has a specific meaning in the jargon of a discipline, whether it is "unatural" (παρα φυσις) in Classical Greek philosophy or "black hole" in astronomy, or even when translating popular words from one language to another such as "teacher" (rabbi in Hebrew or sensei in Japanese) it often broadens in meaning, narrows in meaning or changes meaning altogether. Whe scientists speak of a "Theory" they are talking about what is popularly called a law. What is popularly called the Law of Gravity is more properly called the Theory of Gravity. What is popularly called a theory is more properly called a thesis, an hypothesis, or a proposition. So the statement "If evolution were ... a law and not just a theory" becomes "If evolution were a theory and not just an hypothesis. And guess what? It is a theory -- a "law."
2. No, evolution is not presented as an "absolute" law, But guess what. There are no scientific laws (theories) that are presented as absolute. Laws (theories) are derived inductively, and as such can always be refined or even falsified. Every single scientific law. Even the ones that are taken for granted in the Bible. A law (theory) can have a high degree of certainty, to the point that it is essentially absolute, but it is never considered absolute.
3. Presumably it can be split again. I don't know. Certainly there is no reason I know of why it couldn't. But then, I don't know the energy required to do that splitting, nor do I know of any way we can target the seam where the two parts of the doubled telemere in the middle of the Chromosome join. But even if we could, it would not turn the child born with the re-split chromosomes into a chimpanzee. Because, first, we did not evolve from chimps. Both chimps and we evolved, in separate lines, from a common, less specialized ancestor. And second during that period of separate, independent evolution we each underwent many other mutations away from the common ancestor.

All I see here are cop put explanations with no real scientific substance. They can fuse one of the chromosomes in a chimp to see if he turns into a human. But because that would be absolute evidence of their claim, if it failed it would do a whole lot of damage. So it's better to make an assumption then sell it as so type of absolute proof of what can never be proven.

 

[ikester7579]

the irony.

Sorry to burst you bubble fantasy that all Christians and creationists were raised in a family that forced it upon them. But I did not start out that way I actually at one time believed in evolution. After all, it was the only think taught as truth in school. So the irony is on you for thinking it all happens this way when it's far from the truth.

 

[ikester7579]

Face-palm.

Nobody claims that any single mutation "caused chimps to turn human". Your question clearly reveals that you have no idea how evolution operates and you actually think that the theory of evolution implies that chimps "turned into humans". Sheesh. I know that evolution-denial always depends upon straw-man arguments but this one is pathetic.

You've gone so far off the rails that I seriously doubt that you will ever find your way back to the tracks.

Next!

And the irony even though you would never admit it. Is that your supposed debunk of what I said actually made my point for me.

 

[ikester7579]

Evolution is accepted as fact because of all the predictions that it has made that have been found true, and due to all of the tess that it has been put through trying to disprove it. This is a common tactic that people use, when they are unable to refute a statement - they instead try to discredit it.

Could you make this list of formal challenges to disproving evolution? I mean if it has been Challenged so many time to try and discredit it there should be thousands of recorded attempts. Care to list them? Care to leave a link to a site that made a list of the formal scientific attempts?

The information in the video is explained well enough, and gives a detailed explanation as to why we have one less chromosome than chimps and the other great apes.

Did Kenneth Miller or anyone else see the chromosome fuse itself during the evolution process to evolve a chimp into a human? Empirical evidence is not predicted evidence as you and everyone else is trying to present it as. Empirical evidence is: Observable: How many people observed this fusion? None. And repeatable: How many observed this repeating itself? None. So what does a "prediction" really do to make this anymore of a fact? nothing.

Please show something as a credible, testible alternative to this position, or shoe some proof that this position is incorrect.

Read replay just before this one.

[quoteI have yet to see anything of substance other than the usual hand waving and undermining attempts, which have failed miserably.[/quote]

It's easy to recognize something that you did as well.

 

[ikester7579]

This loaded question proves you don't know what the ToE actaully says. Your opinions on the subject are worthless.

Loaded question comment = a cop out for not being able to address the question.

 

[ikester7579]

Evolution =/= non-Christian

That is, "does not equal". Many Christians trust the evidence for the theory of Evolution.

Does majority view change God's truth?

Is God going to say on judgment day: Since thousands of you decided that I used evolution to create I will agree with you and call my own word a lie as well as you all did? Not going to happen. In fact when did God give us a vote on what's true and what's not? Can you provide a verse that says we have a vote in this?

 

[ikester7579]

Yes, his question was very revealing of his knowledge-level.

But many young earth creationist leaders teach their followers that strawman caricatures are far easier to refute that the real thing. Unfortunately, once the choir goes into the real world and deals with people who actually know something about the science and the meaning of the words, the choir's lack of basic information discredits them immediately.

What I find ironic about this comment is that it shows who you are more worried about as to what they think. Is it God? Nope not even mentioned here. Ironic that you claim to be a believer and God was not even included in that comment. But I guess science has a tendency to do that when science is put before God and therefore becomes your god.

 

[loktai]

Nobody has ever claimed a Chimp became a human, why do you keep coming back to that point?

If they could fuse the chromosome in a chimp in a lab, and then let those chimps have offspring, the end result is not likely to be human because we DID NOT EVOLVE FORM CHIMPS.

You are still yet to refute the information in the video, all you have done so far is to continue asking questions to avoid giving any answers. Probably because you have none.

 

[AECellini]

building up a straw man of evolution so you can rip it apart.

 

[Eight Foot Manchild]

Loaded question comment = a cop out for not being able to address the question.

Actually, it's a statement of fact. Your question demonstrates that you have not the slightest clue what the ToE actually is.

You don't know what you're talking about. There is nothing to address here.

 

[verysincere]

What I find ironic about this comment is that it shows who you are more worried about as to what they think. Is it God? Nope not even mentioned here. Ironic that you claim to be a believer and God was not even included in that comment. But I guess science has a tendency to do that when science is put before God and therefore becomes your god.

Interesting. More dodge and weave. He can't address the issues so he goes for the ol' "you're not a believe because you didn't mention God enough while talking about science!"

Do you have any plans to deal with the evidence presented? It is OK to simply say, "I don't know the answer to that question" or "I don't understand this topic."

Oh, I can play the piety card too. Here goes: "He's not spiritual because he's like a Pharisee who focuses on being noticed for talking about God and doing public deads instead of praying in his closet." Yes, not very substantive, is it?!

 

[ikester7579]

Nobody has ever claimed a Chimp became a human, why do you keep coming back to that point?

If they could fuse the chromosome in a chimp in a lab, and then let those chimps have offspring, the end result is not likely to be human because we DID NOT EVOLVE FORM CHIMPS.

You are still yet to refute the information in the video, all you have done so far is to continue asking questions to avoid giving any answers. Probably because you have none.

Really? Then why make the comparisons?

Let's see:
1) Chimps and humans have a thumb.
2) Chimps and humans have one number different in chromosomes.
3) The reason humans have one less chromosome than chimps is because ours fused.
4) Chimps are 98% human.

I was taught that in science class when I went to school and you can ask anyone who went in my generation and you will find they were taught the same thing (humans evolved from chimps). The reason it's been totally switched to common ancestor is because the idea we came from chimps turned a lot of people off and jokes were made which reflected badly on evolution. So to stop that all evolutionist have to go into denial mode. But nice try you cannot change what I was taught by denial.

And the way evolutionists use the comparisons does not support your claims.

 

[ikester7579]

Interesting. More dodge and weave. He can't address the issues so he goes for the ol' "you're not a believe because you didn't mention God enough while talking about science!"

Do you have any plans to deal with the evidence presented? It is OK to simply say, "I don't know the answer to that question" or "I don't understand this topic."

Oh, I can play the piety card too. Here goes: "He's not spiritual because he's like a Pharisee who focuses on being noticed for talking about God and doing public deads instead of praying in his closet." Yet, not very substantive, is it?!

Still no God? You know the atheist most biggest fear is being put in a position of lying about their belief in God then having to prove it by making positive comments about God. Seems to fit here. When you should be willing to prove it instead you become offended. My how we dig the hole bigger and bigger

 

[Eight Foot Manchild]

I was taught that in science class when I went to school and you can ask anyone who went in my generation and you will find they were taught the same thing.

No one on this board is responsible for your terrible education, and none of us should be expected to accommodate it. This has zero bearing on reality.

The reason it's been totally switched to common ancestor is because the idea we came from chimps turned a lot of people off and jokes were made which reflected badly on evolution. So to stop that all evolutionist have to go into denial mode.

I dare you to substantiate this assertion. Cite a single primary scientific source that says 'chimps turned into humans'. If this was in fact the scientific consensus at one time, this should be very easy for you to do.

So let's see it.

 

[verysincere]

My how we dig the hole bigger and bigger

Indeed. But you should change the "we" to "I" because you are the one doing all of the digging. You are working alone.

 

[verysincere]

No one on this board is responsible for your terrible education, and none of us should be expected to accommodate it. This has zero bearing on reality.

I dare you to substantiate this assertion. Cite a single primary scientific source that says 'chimps turned into humans'. If this was in fact the scientific consensus at one time, this should be very easy for you to do.

So let's see it.

In the course of my research on "creation science" and young earth creationism, I've collected a number of biology textbooks from the public schools of the 1950's and 1960's (where The Theory of Evolution was usually dodged entirely) as well as those used by home schoolers and Christian private schools. The ONLY textbooks which claimed that evolution theory speaks of chimps turning into humans were the CHRISTIAN HOME-SCHOOLING TEXTBOOKS. So perhaps Ikester was home-schooled or attended a Christian private school.

 

[Split Rock]

Really? Then why make the comparisons?

Let's see:
1) Chimps and humans have a thumb.

Yes, all apes do.

2) Chimps and humans have one number different in chromosomes.

Yes and the prediction was that there would be a human chromosme that showed signs of resulting from a fusion of two chromosomes that are separate in other apes.

3) The reason humans have one less chromosome than chimps is because ours fused.

Correct. That was the hypothesis, and it was discovered to be true based on the homology of the chromosome.

4) Chimps are 98% human.

Depending on what you are comparing, yes.

I was taught that in science class when I went to school and you can ask anyone who went in my generation and you will find they were taught the same thing (humans evolved from chimps).

If you were taught that you were taught wrong. I sure wasn't taught that.

The reason it's been totally switched to common ancestor is because the idea we came from chimps turned a lot of people off and jokes were made which reflected badly on evolution. So to stop that all evolutionist have to go into denial mode. But nice try you cannot change what I was taught by denial.

I guess I can't change your faulty, biased memory.

 

[verysincere]

Originally Posted by ikester7579
I was taught that in science class when I went to school and you can ask anyone who went in my generation and you will find they were taught the same thing (humans evolved from chimps).

If you were taught that you were taught wrong. I sure wasn't taught that.
I guess I can't change your faulty, biased memory.

Ikester doesn't identify "my generation" so it is difficult to assess his claim---although I've not been able to find any such "humans evolved from chimps" nonsense in my collection of 20th century biology textbooks. I attended U.S. public schools in the 1940's and 1950's and NEVER read about humans-from-chimps. My wife attended similar schools in the 1960's and 1970's and asserts likewise. My daughter recalls nothing of the sort from her public school textbooks. So I would like to know what "generation" he's talking about!

I think Ikester has manufactured yet another straw-man.

 

[ikester7579]

No one on this board is responsible for your terrible education, and none of us should be expected to accommodate it. This has zero bearing on reality.

It's an example of how science had it wrong and you are in denial of it. Not my problem but go ahead and try to make it sound that way to cover up for it. It seems it's the one thing you are good at.

I dare you to substantiate this assertion. Cite a single primary scientific source that says 'chimps turned into humans'. If this was in fact the scientific consensus at one time, this should be very easy for you to do.

So let's see it.

Easy: Life Science Log :: Newly discovered gene could help to explain human evolution, says scientists
New brain gene gives us edge over apes, study suggests
New Gene Discovered That Explains How Humans Are Distinct From Apes
Gene could help explain how humans evolved from chimpanzees : Evolution & Natural Selection • Rational Skepticism Forum
Gene in human brains may have brought language and tool use - UPI.com

You should really do your research before you set yourself up to fail like that.

 

[ikester7579]

Indeed. But you should change the "we" to "I" because you are the one doing all of the digging. You are working alone.

Those who have truth often work alone. Majority views do not change real reality but nice try.