Gorilla Genome

[Split Rock]

See above. Also, this is incorrect. In almost no place do the fossils line up as needed. Remember the horse evolution sequence? Small problem, "modern" horses are found in layers that predate the "ancient" horse. Remember tiktalik? Oops! Modern foot prints were found in layers dated older than tiktalik. And on and on and on...

.

The horse series is actually a very good example of evolution in the fossil record. All you have to understand is that horse evolution, like any other example, is not a ladder, but a bush. Not all horse species evolved in the direction of Equus; some remained browsers and continued to live in the forest. These species lived at the same time as ones that ate grass and lived on the growing plains. There are no modern horses that predate the earliest primitive horses, however. Since you hate talk origins, here is a different website: chem.tufts.edu/science/evolution/HorseEvolution.htm

Tiktaalik and other "fishapods" are all only found in Devonian strata. They all predate reptiles and mammals. Yes some tracks were found in earlier strata, but it is not clear what made them, since no fossils of the creatures have been found. Funny how you guys all cite that and ignore the 14 or so known fishapod species, all from the Devonian, and all predating the earliest reptiles and mammals. See: Devonian Times - Front Page

 

[Papias]

Spiderbyte, on post 28 it was pointed out that you ignore evidence, even when shown.

Then on post 31 you claim you haven't been shown evidence.

On post #37 you are shown 29 different lines of evidence, supported by experts in a dozen different fields, endorsed by the Smithsonian, the American Academies of Science, the geological society, and other top societies of experts, and you reply, in post 39 (drum roll please........)

Oh Lord....more talkorigins blather...

Wow, thanks for confirming that you ignore evidence. Epic fail.

Would not Christ be honored by the attention to His creation, instead of your continued denials of it?

In Jesus' name-

Papias

 

[BL2KTN]

Few, if any exist, and none in the nice neat order evolutionists need to "prove" evolution. The only place the fossil record is in the correct order, is in textbooks.

So do you think the 99% of scientists that accept evolution are purposefully lying to the public? If so, why?

See above. Also, this is incorrect. In almost no place do the fossils line up as needed. Remember the horse evolution sequence? Small problem, "modern" horses are found in layers that predate the "ancient" horse. Remember tiktalik? Oops! Modern foot prints were found in layers dated older than tiktalik. And on and on and on...

I believe Bill Nye offered in his debate with Ken Hamm that if even one fossil could be shown out of place, he would take it and it would make the news the next day. If you have found fossils that are not in the correct place, have you contacted him? Or are you just believing nonsense on the internet that conforms with what you want to be true?

Oy, how many times are we going to go over this? Gimme a minute and I'll post a link to a thread here that shows your statement is incorrect. There's too much information to rehash it all here.

I.e. it's over my head but I'll link you to something I don't understand and can't evaluate (but it says it supports me). And then... no link lol.

 

[Split Rock]

This is funny! Speak without knowledge and all you do is prove your ignorance! Lol! Like I haven't dealt with this subject for years or anything! It's always the same. Here's a brief summary of my experience for you:
Evolutionist:"THERE'S A MOUNTAIN OF EVIDENCE!" Creationist:"Ok, can you show us this mountain?" Evolutionist:"YOUR JUST ANTI-SCIENCE!" Creationist:"I just asked for the evidence." Evolutionist:"YOU JUST CAN SEE IT CAUSE YOU HATE SCIENCE! WE UNDERSTAND IT AND YOU CREOTARDS ARE JUST STUPID!"
Creationist:"Ok so still waiting for that evidence..." Evolutionist:"YOU STUPID <explicitive> <explicitive> CREOTARD!"
Creationist:"I see..."

Let's look at you here:
Evolutionist:"THERE'S A MOUNTAIN OF EVIDENCE!"
Creationist:"Ok, can you show us this mountain?"
Evolutionist:" There is plenty of evidence on this website:"
Creationist: "THAT'S TALK ORIGINS , I DON'T WANT TO SEE THAT!!!!!! WHERE'S THE EVIDENCE???!!!!''

 

[mark kennedy]

The real issue is that we are children playing with a
toybox full of blocks as we study DNA.

We barely can describe the color of the blocks at this stage.
Much less the implications of the patterns we can discern.

Patterns emerge, the most important are the amino acid triplet codons.

There there are the RNA based regulatory genes. With the Gorilla Genome what you want to pay particular attention to are the brain related genes. All you are going to get from Darwinians is disinformation, the actual science is neither difficult nor inaccessible. Brain related genes do not respond well to mutations, Darwinians will talk about anything else but that because it proves their a priori assumption of common ancestry of humans and apes false, due to sheer statistical impossibility.

Grace and peace,
Mark

 

[Split Rock]

The real issue is that we are children playing with a
toybox full of blocks as we study DNA.

We barely can describe the color of the blocks at this stage.
Much less the implications of the patterns we can discern.

The old creationist, "If we don't know everything. then we don't know anything" canard we so often see here.

 

[lasthero]

Let's look at you here:
Evolutionist:"THERE'S A MOUNTAIN OF EVIDENCE!"
Creationist:"Ok, can you show us this mountain?"
Evolutionist:" There is plenty of evidence on this website:"
Creationist: "THAT'S TALK ORIGINS , I DON'T WANT TO SEE THAT!!!!!! WHERE'S THE EVIDENCE???!!!!''

Like I said before: you miss a lot of things when you refuse to look.

 

[BL2KTN]

There there are the RNA based regulatory genes. With the Gorilla Genome what you want to pay particular attention to are the brain related genes. All you are going to get from Darwinians is disinformation, the actual science is neither difficult nor inaccessible. Brain related genes do not respond well to mutations, Darwinians will talk about anything else but that because it proves their a priori assumption of common ancestry of humans and apes false, due to sheer statistical impossibility.

Why do you think the genes affecting nervous system development demonstrate design?

 

[SpyderByte]

Spiderbyte, on post 28 it was pointed out that you ignore evidence, even when shown.

Then on post 31 you claim you haven't been shown evidence.

On post #37 you are shown 29 different lines of evidence, supported by experts in a dozen different fields, endorsed by the Smithsonian, the American Academies of Science, the geological society, and other top societies of experts, and you reply, in post 39 (drum roll please........)

Wow, thanks for confirming that you ignore evidence. Epic fail.

Would not Christ be honored by the attention to His creation, instead of your continued denials of it?

In Jesus' name-

Papias

Thank you for reminding me why I quit posting here pap. I had forgotten your m.o. Throw out a talkorigins link, and then hammer away with the personal attacks. See ya! I certainly don't have time for that type of childish nonsense!

 

[lasthero]

Thank you for reminding me why I quit posting here pap. I had forgotten your m.o. Throw out a talkorigins link, and then hammer away with the personal attacks. See ya! I certainly don't have time for that type of childish nonsense!

As I recall, the reason you left had nothing to do with Papais or talkorigins. You felt like creationists were being bullied on a Christian site, then threw up your arms and left.

http://www.christianforums.com/t7806438-11/#post65072372

I have a good memory for nonsense.

 

[selfinflikted]

[deleted because, content]

 

[Split Rock]

As I recall, the reason you left had nothing to do with Papais or talkorigins. You felt like creationists weren't being bullied on a Christian site, then threw up your arms and left.

http://www.christianforums.com/t7806438-11/#post65072372

I have a good memory for nonsense.

don't you mean were being bullied?

 

[Split Rock]

Thank you for reminding me why I quit posting here pap. I had forgotten your m.o. Throw out a talkorigins link, and then hammer away with the personal attacks. See ya! I certainly don't have time for that type of childish nonsense!

What personal attacks?

Are you leaving already?

So long, and thanks for all the fish!

 

[lasthero]

What personal attacks?

Are you leaving already?

So long, and thanks for all the fish!

Let's go over the order, here.

Spyder says that copious amounts of evidence are never presented to creationists.

A copious amount of evidence is presented.

Spyder dismisses this evidence out of hand, without even attempting to address it.

Papias points out how hypocritical of him this is.

Spyder then says that this is a personal attack instead of a rather objective representation of reality, and that he should leave.

During this entire exchange, SpyderByte presents not one shred of actual data to support anything he says. He references a few things, but doesn't even provide links to things supporting his claim, and does nothing to rebute the counters to his counters. And all this coming from a guy who complained about evolutionists resorting to name calling and never presenting anything.

Wow.

 

[mark kennedy]

Thank you for reminding me why I quit posting here pap. I had forgotten your m.o. Throw out a talkorigins link, and then hammer away with the personal attacks. See ya! I certainly don't have time for that type of childish nonsense!

Which is what happens to the vast majority of Creationists. The petty insults get tiresome and they leave, truth is, probably the best way of dealing with it.

Grace and peace,
Mark

 

[selfinflikted]

If by "petty insults" you really mean "shown how you are wrong" then yes, I totally agree.

 

[BL2KTN]

Which is what happens to the vast majority of Creationists. The petty insults get tiresome and they leave, truth is, probably the best way of dealing with it.

 

[mark kennedy]

The old creationist, "If we don't know everything. then we don't know anything" canard we so often see here.

Same old Darwinian tactic, ignore the science in favor of fallacious ad hominem attacks.

Patterns emerge, the most important are the amino acid triplet codons.

There there are the RNA based regulatory genes. With the Gorilla Genome what you want to pay particular attention to are the brain related genes. All you are going to get from Darwinians is disinformation, the actual science is neither difficult nor inaccessible. Brain related genes do not respond well to mutations, Darwinians will talk about anything else but that because it proves their a priori assumption of common ancestry of humans and apes false, due to sheer statistical impossibility.

It's interesting to note that none of the Darwinian commentary is on the comparison of the Gorilla and Human genomes. Then, when an actual scientific line of evidence is introduced it gets buried in fallacious rhetoric.

Predictable...

Have a nice day
Mark

 

[mark kennedy]

If by "petty insults" you really mean "shown how you are wrong" then yes, I totally agree.

It means resorting to fallacious ad hominem attacks because you have nothing else. It's an argument that never happened and you guys always end up scraping the bottom of the barrel with them because you can't form an actual argument.

Prime example

Have a nice day
Mark

 

[BL2KTN]

There there are the RNA based regulatory genes. With the Gorilla Genome what you want to pay particular attention to are the brain related genes. All you are going to get from Darwinians is disinformation, the actual science is neither difficult nor inaccessible. Brain related genes do not respond well to mutations, Darwinians will talk about anything else but that because it proves their a priori assumption of common ancestry of humans and apes false, due to sheer statistical impossibility.

I don't see anything here but word salad. Basically it says, "Here is chart. Pay attention to chart. People I disagree with not like chart. Chart easy to read. Brain genes not respond well to mutations, but I not explain why I think this or how chart show it. People I disagree with wrong."

Explain the chart. What does the chart mean. Why do you think it shows design?