Facts To Prove The Theory Of Evolution

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

No, disagreeing with you on how good the evidence is, or even what constitutes evidence, is not "pooping on a board". I will admit in hindsight that I probably shouldn't have made the wisecrack that "my work here is done", or should have at least put a smiley face after it to indicate that I wasn't really serious.

Except that every time you are presented evidence, you just flat out ignore what is given or just consider it worthless and act like you think you know something that you clearly do not.

 

[Chesterton]

Except that every time you are presented evidence, you just flat out ignore what is given or just consider it worthless and act like you think you know something that you clearly do not.

Again, if you read the thread title, I'm not asking for evidence, I'm asking for proof, and obviously this was prompted by the other thread where someone was asking for disproof. It cuts both ways.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Again, if you read the thread title, I'm not asking for evidence, I'm asking for proof, and obviously this was prompted by the other thread where someone was asking for disproof. It cuts both ways.

Just because both you don't have a great grasp of the scientific language does not mean that there is no evidence for evolution, as has been told and shown to you repeatedly. It's not on us that you've flat out ignored it and rejected it time and again.

 

[BCP1928]

Again, if you read the thread title, I'm not asking for evidence, I'm asking for proof, and obviously this was prompted by the other thread where someone was asking for disproof. It cuts both ways.

The theory of evolution will never be "proven" as absolute truth. So in that sense, no evidence we show you, however compelling, will ever "prove" the theory of evolution.

 

[Chesterton]

Just because both you and estrid don't have a great grasp of the scientific language does not mean that there is no evidence for evolution, as has been told and shown to you repeatedly. It's not on us that you've flat out ignored it and rejected it time and again.

I never said there was no evidence. It depends on how you choose to interpret evidence. There are millions of people in New York City. A man in the city was murdered with a knife. I know a guy in the city named John who owns a knife. Is that evidence that John is the murderer? You can make your evaluation, I'll make mine.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I never said there was no evidence. It depends on how you choose to interpret evidence. There are millions of people in New York City. A man in the city was murdered with a knife. I know a guy in the city named John who owns a knife. Is that evidence that John is the murderer? You can make your evaluation, I'll make mine.

And yet you've never presented any arguments for your 'interpretations' of the evidence. You've just flat out ignored and rejected what has been shown to you. Dismissal of evidence is not interpreting evidence.

 

[BCP1928]

I never said there was no evidence. It depends on how you choose to interpret evidence. There are millions of people in New York City. A man in the city was murdered with a knife. I know a guy in the city named John who owns a knife. Is that evidence that John is the murderer? You can make your evaluation, I'll make mine.

I certainly wouldn't accuse John on that evidence alone, primarily because there are so many other plausible suspects. However, if there were no other plausible suspects, then John begins to look good for it.

 

[Chesterton]

Actually they have.

Are you aware of paternity tests? The exact same principle can be used for comparative genetic comparisons between extant species and this can indicate a pattern of relatedness.

Fossil and structural analysis demonstrates the same tree pattern of relatedness that is consistent with evolution and inconsistent with a common designer.

Okay, just for the fun of it, let's use the word "designer" loosely as a metaphor. If natural selection is the "designer" then you're saying that evolution is inconsistent with itself.

Ah, then you didn't understand the book.

Darwin describes new species forming via inherited variation and it's trivial to infer that separated groups with some form of inherited variation would have different sets of traits in the population over generations.

Now Darwin didn't know the method or mechanism of the inheritance or the variation, but his research demonstrated that it existed.

Later scientists would be able to demonstrate genetics for inheritance and mutation as a driver of variation.

I think you're confused. I said nothing about abiogenesis or creation.

 

[BCP1928]

Okay, just for the fun of it, let's use the word "designer" loosely as a metaphor. If natural selection is the "designer" then you're saying that evolution is inconsistent with itself.

If you use it "loosely" that way then natural selection as "designer" produces results consistent with its actions. But that metaphor is so weak that it amounts to the logical fallacy of equivocation.

 

[Larniavc]

Being told I'm a pooping pigeon is.

Fair point.

 

[Larniavc]

I'm asking for proof,

You been told that you have been told this several times several times that science cannot prove things are true. That you keep ignoring this and anything else you are presented with is hard to fathom.

 

[Chesterton]

You been told that you have been told this several times several times that science cannot prove things are true. That you keep ignoring this and anything else you are presented with is hard to fathom.

I'm definitely not ignoring it, I'm enjoying it. My work here is ... never mind.

 

[BeyondET]

Go check a reference on the ions in the synapse transmission. You won't find any gold.

Where ever there is blood, there is gold to help facilitate the transmittal of the electrical signaling throughout the body.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Where ever there is blood, there is gold to help facilitate the transmittal of the electrical signaling throughout the body.

[citation needed]

(Do you think blood, and not nerves, are the pathway for signal transmission?)

 

[BeyondET]

[citation needed]

(Do you think blood, and not nerves, are the pathway for signal transmission?)

Yes there's gold in them there blood hills.

Your blood is gold! Learn about components of blood and symptoms and treatment of blood disorders | Medicover Genetics

An adult human body contains approximately 5 liters of blood, which contains different metals such as iron, chromium, and zinc, as well as about 0.2 milligrams...

medicover-genetics.com

 

[Larniavc]

Where ever there is blood, there is gold to help facilitate the transmittal of the electrical signaling throughout the body.

Why is gold a problem?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Yes there's gold in them there blood hills.

Your blood is gold! Learn about components of blood and symptoms and treatment of blood disorders | Medicover Genetics

An adult human body contains approximately 5 liters of blood, which contains different metals such as iron, chromium, and zinc, as well as about 0.2 milligrams...

medicover-genetics.com

And that's 0.2 milligrams, so 4.3994e-5 gallons of gold in the blood. That is... I don't even know how you'd visualise that. That's almost worthless.

 

[BeyondET]

Why is gold a problem?

It's not, it actually helps fighting diseases

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

It's not, it actually helps fighting diseases

Okay, citation on that please.

 

[BeyondET]

And that's 0.2 milligrams, so 4.3994e-5 gallons of gold in the blood. That is... I don't even know how you'd visualise that. That's almost worthless.

It's not for sell and the humanbody doesn't need much like copper.