Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Gracchus said:This process, called genetic accommodation [2], is part of the new science of evo-devo, which renders much of the classical "evolutionary synthesis" obsolete, and at the same time explains how such phenomena as punctuated equilibria can be integrated into a unified theory of evolutionary development. In particular, genetic accommodation and similar processes can explain how natural selection alone can produce both rapid and directional change in phenotypes over time, thereby making any resort to "intelligent design" unnecessary and irrelevant.
http://evolutionlist.blogspot.com/2006/06/random-mutation-and-natural-selection.html
Dang. I reckon you put your brand on a prairie dawg instead of steer, Supersport.
Edx said:Isnt this a like a classic kind of Creationist misquotation?
Well congrats! You've met your goal already!supersport said:My goal is to do nothing more than to dismantle the neodarwin new synthesis.
Cirbryn said:Well congrats! You've met your goal already!
Although ... I suppose you might have meant your goal was to do nothing less than dismantling the NeoDarwinian synthesis. Good luck with that one.
You seem to be suggesting that it's inappropriate to consider the source.supersport said:You know the theory of evolution is on the brink of utter collapse when an uneducated redneck hick from Texas like me can figure it out in just few months.
It must be that none of them are interested in a hands-down win of the Nobel prize or any of the fame and fortune which would go along with it. They're far more enticed by the promise of living in anonymous obscurity and pulling the wool over the eyes of the highly educated while only "Texas" "rednecks" are smart enough to see through their world-wide conspiracy.supersport said:The fact is, not only has this redneck figured out that neo-darwinism is false, but so has most of the scientific community. But I've noticed that the scientific community is playing a little game....it goes like this: "let's just keep this quiet and hope no one notices that the rug's been pulled out from under them and all the rules have changed.....Then, if/when people do start to notice, we'll say Oh, yea weve known that for a long time.
Yes, we should all abandon the scientists, the research, the demonstrations of how evolution actually proceeds in the lab and in the wild and instead go in search of nameless blogs to attain our knowledge.supersport said:Well the fact is random mutations have never had anything to with evolution. Even this dude in the following link, who seems to have dislike for Creationists/IDists admits as much. In the article, if you can look past the rhetoric and biased against IDists, youll see these quotes, which in my opinion are pretty telling coming from an evolutionist:
http://evolutionlist.blogspot.com/20...selection.html
Hence, the term "natural selection". Mutations are random. Which mutations persist and which are destined to fade from a species is based upon how those mutations affect the species ability to cope with the challenges of their environments. I'm fairly certain you won't succeed in refuting evolution by demonstrating how the mechanisms work to result in diverse species.supersport said:In particular, while it is true that any given mutation is random (as far as we can tell), a series of mutations which are then preserved as the result of natural selection aren't really random at all
The term "heresy" refers to religious beliefs, not to scientific demonstration.supersport said:However, subsequent field and laboratory investigations into the genetic and developmental control of such variable traits have shown the multiple allele/continuous variation model upon which the "modern synthesis" was based is, in fact, not the way most traits apparently evolve
This process, called genetic accommodation [2], is part of the new science of evo-devo, which renders much of the classical "evolutionary synthesis" obsolete
A decade ago such comments would have been heresy .(and they still are, really).
Which demonstrates the inability of the OP to distinguish between adaptation already encoded within the genetics of a species and evolution which encodes new traits.supersport said:In this next link, a scientist is attempting to show us something new. He has evolved different colors of the same worm based on temperature. While this is nice that its finally being shown in the lab, the fact is, the same thing is done in nature all the time. This stuff happens all over the globe. Look what this guy says:
People of many different religions, all over the world, subscribe to the Theory of Evolution. How do you classify Evolution as a religion when people who subscribe to evolution hold such a wide variety of religious beliefs?supersport said:well actually you're right...nothing will really disprove evolutoin because it is a religion that lives in peoples hearts. In order to change one's outlook, the heart needs to be changed first. S
Beastt said:People of many different religions, all over the world, subscribe to the Theory of Evolution. How do you classify Evolution as a religion when people who subscribe to evolution hold such a wide variety of religious beliefs?
supersport said:In fact, as far as I know, not ONE such experiment on natural selection has been tried. Of course I could be wrong about this, but if I am, I'd love to the see the link.
supersport said:(just like they're too chicken to experiment by moving animals to different locations in the world to see what would happen to their phenotypes.)
Neither of these concepts are born of blind faith. They are born of inconclusive evidence. It seems you have difficulty establishing the difference.supersport said:Good question....but I have a good answer:
Evolution is a religion because it's based on two concepts that require blind FAITH.
All you need to do is look to modern medicine. Evolution is utilized routinely to develope predicted outcomes and without the predictability of those outcomes, many facets of modern medicine would simply fail to be productive.supersport said:The first is random mutations. The second is natural selection. Neither one of these things can be seen, tested or proven.....
Well actually NS could be proven by controlled experiments, however scientists appear to be to chicken to try such a thing. In fact, as far as I know, not ONE such experiment has been tried. Of course I could be wrong about this, but if I am, I'd love to the see the link.
Desire is the basis for creation, not for evolution. Evolution is based upon the observation of evidence and the application of those observations to steer biological outcomes in accordance with the mechanisms observed. Creationism relies upon nothing more than the blind acceptance of the claims of a book which includes the sun and moon existing within the Earth's atmosphere.supersport said:The fact is, your theory is based on sheer speculation and a desire to not be created.
Which you've been unable to support because much of what you offered in support of your claims actually serves to refute your claims. It appears you are somewhat lacking in the knowledge necessary to present even a passable challenge to the concepts you're attempting to refute.supersport said:What you believe in is not science, it's Sesame Street make-believe.
To what are you referring as "the obvious"?supersport said:It's a fairytale for grownups who seek to deny the obvious.
The entire theory is built upon evidence. What lacks evidence to support itself is creationism. It has only the Bible. Evolution has the fossil record, ERVs, observed increases in allele frequency, observed speciation, (dozens of properly/fully documented accounts), and the accurate predictions established through the understanding of evolutionary mechanics.supersport said:There is not shred of evidence or truth to it. S
supersport said:Good question....but I have a good answer:
Evolution is a religion because it's based on two concepts that require blind FAITH. The first is random mutations. The second is natural selection. Neither one of these things can be seen, tested or proven.....
supersport said:Well actually NS could be proven by controlled experiments, however scientists appear to be too chicken to try such a thing. (just like they're too chicken to experiment by moving animals to different locations in the world to see what would happen to their phenotypes.) In fact, as far as I know, not ONE such experiment on natural selection has been tried. Of course I could be wrong about this, but if I am, I'd love to the see the link.
supersport said:The fact is, your theory is based on sheer speculation and a desire to not be created. What you believe in is not science, it's Sesame Street-style make-believe. It's a fairytale for grownups who seek to deny the obvious. There is not one shred of hard evidence or truth to it. S
Wait a second...you just got caught red-handed doing a classic creationist quote mine, and you're switching the subject to another classic - "evolution is a religion!!!1" - all under the thread title of evolutionists moving the goalposts? Don't you see the irony in that?supersport said:well actually you're right...nothing will really disprove evolutoin because it is a religion that lives in peoples hearts. In order to change one's outlook, the heart needs to be changed first. S
Given his self-proclaimed background, caution might dictate that we remind him to leave his "huntin' rifle" at home.notto said:Have you ever been to a zoo? That place down the block where they take animals from different locations all over the world and put them on display for years at a time.
I think there might be a few in Texas. You should go some time.
Yeah, I've gotta go with Poe's Law on this one.notto said:Why is it that polar bears in captivity all around the world look the same?
**Is the consensus Poe's law on this one?
Beastt said:Given his self-proclaimed background, caution might dictate that we remind him to leave his "huntin' rifle" at home.
.
supersport said:Good question....but I have a good answer:
Evolution is a religion because it's based on two concepts that require blind FAITH. The first is random mutations. The second is natural selection. Neither one of these things can be seen, tested or proven.....
Well actually NS could be proven by controlled experiments, however scientists appear to be too chicken to try such a thing. (just like they're too chicken to experiment by moving animals to different locations in the world to see what would happen to their phenotypes.) In fact, as far as I know, not ONE such experiment on natural selection has been tried. Of course I could be wrong about this, but if I am, I'd love to the see the link.
The fact is, your theory is based on sheer speculation and a desire to not be created.
What you believe in is not science, it's Sesame Street-style make-believe.
It's a fairytale for grownups who seek to deny the obvious. There is not one shred of hard evidence or truth to it. S
PromoterGene said:I almost have a hard time believing that you are serious. Are you meaning to tell us that random mutations have never been observed nor natural selection? You can simply go to a hospital to witness natural selection in action. Why do you think there are multiple antibiotics out there and an insistence on limiting their use? Where is your head?.
PromoterGene said:Somebody already mentioned zoos and America is not exactly a natural habitat for apes, but they've been moved here. Although you're right about scientists being too chicken to move exotic animals all over the world being that it could disrupt the delicate balance of the environment. Often other animals become endangered or extinct when a new predator arrives on unfamiliar land. This has happened many times before even when we didn't willingly bring animals along. Mosquitos weren't willing brought to the states, but they pose an annoyance and a threat to us and other animals when they hitched a ride.?.
If evolution is a religion, then everything is a religion, and nothing is a religion, and the word 'religion' itself, becomes meaningless.supersport said:...nothing will really disprove evolutoin because it is a religion that lives in peoples hearts.
supersport said:
cut and past of why I was banned at the infedel site:
You have been banned for the following reason:
None
Date the ban will be lifted: Never
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?