My apologies.. you did not mention any errors in your previous posts.
A few points:
1. All because they made an effort to eliminate contaminents does not mean they succeeded.
Nor does it mean they did not, when every single result was consistent except for those the lab reported as contaminated. Apparently they knew which ones were good samples and which were not, unlike you who chooses to throw out everything, simply because it disagrees with your religious beliefs of evolution.
2. This was not peer-reviewed research.
And yet no evolutionist in the real world is challenging these results by conducting their own studies. Only one group has attempted it, but sadly they got the exact same results, and chose NOT to publish their papers for that reason. Funny how that works isn't it. Evolutionists only seem to publish what seems to support their theory, unlike a true scientists which accepts the facts and alters their theory.
You mean publish papers that say a "paucity of evidence" instead of saying no evidence at all?
Yes you just make up stories when you lack evidence, and publish those.
From time to time evolutionists announce with great fanfare that they have gotten a colony of bacteria to eat something they could not eat before, or some other small variation. These changes are always below the family level on the diagram. If evolution were true, there would have been ancestors and transitional creatures between each genus, family, order, class, and phylum in the layers below the Cambrian Explosion. But there are no fossils for any of these. What to do? A team of evolutionists solved this problem using their most effective tool - storytelling. First they assumed evolution occurred. Then they estimated how fast it should have happened, and decided that the creatures in the Cambrian Explosion had been evolving for over 250 million years before any showed up in the rocks as fossils! "We estimate that the last common ancestor of all living animals arose nearly 800 million years ago and that the stem lineages leading to most extant phyla had evolved by the end of the Ediacaran (541 million years ago)." Yes, millions of generations of all kinds of creatures all over the world living, dying, evolving without leaving any trace of their existence. Not only that, "from the early Paleozoic onward there is little addition of new phyla and classes". "Little high-level morphological innovation occurred during the subsequent 500 million years". Their story was published in the prestigious journal Science, and was hailed as having solved a mystery challenging evolution theory all the way back to Darwin. --Erwin, Douglas H., Marc Laflamme, Sarah M. Tweedt, Erik A. Sperling, Davide Pisani, Kevin J. Peterson. 2011. The Cambrian Conundrum: Early Divergence and Later Ecological Success in the Early History of Animals. Science, Vol. 334, pp. 1091-1097.
Good story tho, too bad it lacks one shred of evidence to back it up, while the evidence does contradict it since no progenitors exist in the fossil record anywhere.
3. Papers presented at conferences like this are preliminary in nature.
And hence our challenge for evolutionists to test themselves. Which you can be sure has been done to save theory. Yet not even preliminary results from your evolutionists in over 5 years, they are strangely quiet on this matter.
4. These results need to be repeated in other labs in order for us to have any confidence in them.
Agreed, so why are they not doing it, since they claim the results to be incorrect? So far only one has been bold enough to try and did not get the results they wanted to see.
5. I find it disturbing that the video was cut off once questions started being asked at the end of the talk. Could it be that an audience member had a good point to make?
Could it be you are grasping at straws?
6. I find it funny that you guys cling to a single report like this and ignore the preponderance of the evidence, just because the former seems to support your dogma and the latter does not.
I find it funny how you ignore any evidence that doesn't fit your dogma, while claiming the evidence does, when the preponderance of evidence once again falsifies it.
Kind after kind, you have observed nothing else. EVER. You have not one shred of evidence that species evolve into other species, but you do have DNA data that shows that only what exists in the genome already becomes dominate or repressed, and nothing new is ever added.
Lack of transitory species.
Sudden appearance of full-blown animals in every single epoch.
Not one single progenitor to the pre-cambrian explosion (of all fully formed life). But "major transitions in biological evolution show the same pattern of sudden emergence of diverse forms at a new level of complexity." "The principal 'types' seem to appear rapidly and fully equipped with the signature features of the respective new level of biological organization. No intermediate 'grades' or intermediate forms between different types are detectable." Koonin, Eugene V. 20 August 2007. The Biological Big Bang model for the major transitions in evolution. Biology Direct, Vol. 2:21, pp. 1-17.
All fossils are of complete animals and plants, not works in progress "under construction". That is why we can give each distinct plant or animal a name. If evolution's continuous morphing were really going on, every fossil would show change underway throughout the creature, with parts in various stages of completion.
limits of variation shatter your theory.
Natural Limits to Variation, or Reversion to the Mean: Is Evolution Just Extrapolation by Another Name? - Evolution News & Views
The only evidence that backs evolution is Fairie Dust. That's why you use it.
