How much longer?

[Subduction Zone]

Too bad justlook, you failed today's lesson on evidence.

We will start all over tomorrow. It is amazing how scary the thought of evidence is for creationists.

 

[justlookinla]

Too bad justlook, you failed today's lesson on evidence.

We will start all over tomorrow. It is amazing how scary the thought of evidence is for creationists.

You once again demonstrated you have no evidence to subject to the scientific method for verification.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You once again demonstrated you have no evidence to subject to the scientific method for verification.

Wrong. That is a logic fail on your part.

Perhaps we can work on your logic skills after you learn what evidence is.

 

[justlookinla]

Wrong. That is a logic fail on your part.

Perhaps we can work on your logic skills after you learn what evidence is.

Perhaps you can offer evidence and subject it to the scientific method to find if it passes the test.

 

[mickiio]

It's impossible to subject evidence to the scientific method when you've offered absolutely no evidence.

Nope. They prefer grandstanding.

WHO is whispering these topics in your ear?

Wow. How unbelievably false a claim.

Where are you getting your understanding about natural selection???

How are you getting yours?

Do you think he'd read my copy of "The Greatest Show on Earth" If I sent it to him?

You mean she. But that doesn't surprise me, you haven't had a good understanding of much on the thread anyways, figures you can't read my profile either.

You need to remember there are two aspects of evolution. Yes, random mutations are chaotic, but natural selection is the opposite. Random mutation allows change to the genome, both good and bad. Natural selection will cull the bad changes. And you do not understand how fossils form. They are exceedingly rare. I can count the number of T-Rex fossils found on the fingers of one hand. You also don't seem to understand how mutations work at all. One mutation does not create a new species. All it does is to change the genome slightly of one individual at a time. The poor mutations are less likely to reproduce, the good mutations are more likely to reproduce.

At least you FINIALLY gave something of subsistence we can discuss. And what do they "reproduce" with after their "said" mutation...pray tell?

You, as most creationists, should be asking questions. Not making incredibly bad arguments.

No I'm not going to bow to the monkey.

 

[justlookinla]

At least you FINIALLY gave something of subsistence we can discuss. And what do they "reproduce" with after their "said" mutation...pray tell?

Great question. The answer, if forthcoming, will be interesting.

 

[mickiio]

Great question. The answer, if forthcoming, will be interesting.

Doubtful. All this so called "evidence" they claim.....I haven't seen much of it.

 

[JonFromMinnesota]

Reference please.

They've been provided to you on countless occasions. You don't even bother to look at them. You simply don't desire to learn anything. I don't know if the evidence terrifies you or what.

Sure I do. I've posted graphics in an attempt to make it simple for you.

Yet you've demonstrated you have no idea how it works.

Here, i'll show you.

1. Make an observation- It appears that the diversity of life is related.

2. Ask a question (s)- Is all life on earth related? If so, HOW did this happen?

3. Make a hypothesis- All living things on earth are related. This is a process of evolution by random mutations and natural selection.

4. Conduct an experiment:
A. Comparative anatomy conclusion- "Organisms that are closely related to one another share many anatomical similarities" http://www.evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/lines/IIBcomparative.shtml

B. Embryology conclusion- "Rathke looked at the development of frogs, salamanders, fish, birds, and mammals, and emphasized the similarities in the development of all these vertebrate groups. During his 40 years of embryological research, he described for the first time the vertebrate pharyngeal arches , which become the gill apparatus of fish but become the mammalian jaws and ears" http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK9974/

C. Evolutionary genetics- Four evolutionary forces (mutation, random genetic drift, natural selection, and gene flow) acting within and among populations cause micro-evolutionary change and these processes are sufficient to account for macro-evolutionary patterns, which arise in the longer term from the collective action of these forces. That is, given very long periods of time, the micro-evolutionary forces will eventually give rise to the macro-evolutionary patterns that characterize the higher taxonomic groups. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/evolutionary-genetics/

D. DNA- "A mutation is a change in DNA, the hereditary material of life. An organism's DNA affects how it looks, how it behaves, and its physiology. So a change in an organism's DNA can cause changes in all aspects of its life." http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/evolutionary-genetics/
An example of the results of a genetic mutation would be the bipedal hips in Australopithecus

We can also see evidence of similarities between chimpanzees and humans in human chromosome #2
"All great apes apart from man have 24 pairs of chromosomes. There is therefore a hypothesis that the common ancestor of all great apes had 24 pairs of chromosomes and that the fusion of two of the ancestor's chromosomes created chromosome 2 in humans. The evidence for this hypothesis is very strong."
The analogous chromosomes (2p and 2q) in the non-human great apes can be shown, when laid end to end, to create an identical banding structure to the human chromosome 2 http://www.evolutionpages.com/chromosome_2.htm

E. The fossil record. If what we know from above is true, we will see transitional fossils in the fossil record. A prediction was made for the Tiktaalik fossil. The prediction was confirmed accurate. http://tiktaalik.uchicago.edu/meetTik.html
There is also a massive transitional fossil record: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_transitional_fossils

F. Analyze your data and draw conclusions: After studying the evidence closely, it is determined that all life on earth is related. This happened by natural selection over millions of years and generations. Desirable traits are selected by natural selection based on the environment a population lives in.

G. Report your results. Was your hypothesis correct? Yes

[/QUOTE]

 

[YSN-1990]

Please do explain how only humans seemed to evolve? Why are chimpanzees for example still the same as they were millions of years ago?

 

[justlookinla]

They've been provided to you on countless occasions. You don't even bother to look at them. You simply don't desire to learn anything. I don't know if the evidence terrifies you or what.

Where? When? You've made a claim, prove it. Reference them.

Yet you've demonstrated you have no idea how it works.

Here, i'll show you.

1. Make an observation- It appears that the diversity of life is related.

2. Ask a question (s)- Is all life on earth related? If so, HOW did this happen?

3. Make a hypothesis- All living things on earth are related. This is a process of evolution by random mutations and natural selection.

4. Conduct an experiment:
A. Comparative anatomy conclusion- "Organisms that are closely related to one another share many anatomical similarities" http://www.evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/lines/IIBcomparative.shtml

B. Embryology conclusion- "Rathke looked at the development of frogs, salamanders, fish, birds, and mammals, and emphasized the similarities in the development of all these vertebrate groups. During his 40 years of embryological research, he described for the first time the vertebrate pharyngeal arches , which become the gill apparatus of fish but become the mammalian jaws and ears" http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK9974/

C. Evolutionary genetics- Four evolutionary forces (mutation, random genetic drift, natural selection, and gene flow) acting within and among populations cause micro-evolutionary change and these processes are sufficient to account for macro-evolutionary patterns, which arise in the longer term from the collective action of these forces. That is, given very long periods of time, the micro-evolutionary forces will eventually give rise to the macro-evolutionary patterns that characterize the higher taxonomic groups. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/evolutionary-genetics/

D. DNA- "A mutation is a change in DNA, the hereditary material of life. An organism's DNA affects how it looks, how it behaves, and its physiology. So a change in an organism's DNA can cause changes in all aspects of its life." http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/evolutionary-genetics/
An example of the results of a genetic mutation would be the bipedal hips in Australopithecus

We can also see evidence of similarities between chimpanzees and humans in human chromosome #2
"All great apes apart from man have 24 pairs of chromosomes. There is therefore a hypothesis that the common ancestor of all great apes had 24 pairs of chromosomes and that the fusion of two of the ancestor's chromosomes created chromosome 2 in humans. The evidence for this hypothesis is very strong."
The analogous chromosomes (2p and 2q) in the non-human great apes can be shown, when laid end to end, to create an identical banding structure to the human chromosome 2 http://www.evolutionpages.com/chromosome_2.htm

E. The fossil record. If what we know from above is true, we will see transitional fossils in the fossil record. A prediction was made for the Tiktaalik fossil. The prediction was confirmed accurate. http://tiktaalik.uchicago.edu/meetTik.html
There is also a massive transitional fossil record: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_transitional_fossils

F. Analyze your data and draw conclusions: After studying the evidence closely, it is determined that all life on earth is related. This happened by natural selection over millions of years and generations. Desirable traits are selected by natural selection based on the environment a population lives in.

G. Report your results. Was your hypothesis correct? Yes

And you once again fail to address the issue and attempt to change the issue to common descent. You've attempted this several times and continue to try to introduce an off topic issue....didn't work then and it's not working now.

The issue is about the HOW, the process, promoted by Darwinist evolution which produced pine trees and humans from an alleged single life form (unknown) of long ago. You, nor anyone else, has offered evidence for the HOW, the process, which can be subjected to the scientific method. That's because there's no evidence for the particular evolutionary view, only a series of guesses and suppositions concerning the HOW, the process.

 

[JonFromMinnesota]

And you once again fail to address the issue and attempt to change the issue to common descent. You've attempted this several times and continue to try to introduce an off topic issue....didn't work then and it's not working now.

Common descent is part of the evidence for the how. You don't seem to grasp this very, very simple concept.

The issue is about the HOW, the process, promoted by Darwinist evolution which produced pine trees and humans from an alleged single life form (unknown) of long ago. You, nor anyone else, has offered evidence for the HOW, the process, which can be subjected to the scientific method. That's because there's no evidence for the particular evolutionary view, only a series of guesses and suppositions concerning the HOW, the process.

The evidence was provided for you. Address the evidence specifically. You're nothing but a time waster and goal post mover. Address the evidence that was provided to you. It is laid out simply for you to address. Go through it one by one and describe why you think what is being presented is not evidence.

That's because there's no evidence for the particular evolutionary view, only a series of guesses and suppositions concerning the HOW, the process.

Address the evidence that was provided to you. Address why you think they are guesses and not confirmed with evidence. Go one by one. I laid it out for you using the scientific method. If you disagree with this, explain why and how by addressing the quotations and links provided to you. Demonstrate that you read and understood them and offer your rebuttal. Your efforts at doing this thus far have been futile. Show me you can construct an argument against the sources provided for you without using your ad-nauseam response.

 

[YSN-1990]

How do creationists think everything got here? by magic?

Well believing that everything just happened by accident is just as stupid. What are the odds, that only one planet out of billions contains life? Or that exactly every thing that is needed to live is here aswell?

 

[JonFromMinnesota]

Please do explain how only humans seemed to evolve? Why are chimpanzees for example still the same as they were millions of years ago?

Humans aren't the only ones that evolved. Everything evolved. Evolution doesn't stop either. It's ongoing. It doesn't have a specific goal in mind.

Chimpanzees haven't been the same for millions of years. Chimpanzees and humans share a common ancestor and we both branched off into different environments. Natural selection took it's course.

Here is a good link to learn about human evolution: http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-fossils/species

 

[JonFromMinnesota]

Well believing that everything just happened by accident is just as stupid.

Well first, evolution makes no claims for the origins of life. It explains the origin of species. Also, evolution is not an accident. It's a natural process. The only thing random about it is genetic mutations. Natural selection is not random.

What are the odds, that only one planet out of billions contains life?

How do you know Earth is the only planet that harbors life? There are 100s of billions of galaxies, all containing trillions of stars, those stars have planets. It is estimated that the probability of you being born is roughly 1 in 400 trillion. But it happened right? People are born every day.

Or that exactly every thing that is needed to live is here aswell?

Earth is a pretty harsh place if you think about it. 70 percent is covered in water, which you can't live under. You can't live at extremely high altitudes, there are microorganisms that cause deadly disease, predators that can kill us, natural disasters, etc. It seems perfect, because we are adapted to our environment.

 

[Jimmy D]

You once again demonstrated you have no evidence to subject to the scientific method for verification.

Perhaps you can offer evidence and subject it to the scientific method to find if it passes the test.

Here, i'll show you.

1. Make an observation- It appears that the diversity of life is related.

2. Ask a question (s)- Is all life on earth related? If so, HOW did this happen?

3. Make a hypothesis- All living things on earth are related. This is a process of evolution by random mutations and natural selection.

4. Conduct an experiment:
A. Comparative anatomy conclusion- "Organisms that are closely related to one another share many anatomical similarities" http://www.evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/lines/IIBcomparative.shtml

B. Embryology conclusion- "Rathke looked at the development of frogs, salamanders, fish, birds, and mammals, and emphasized the similarities in the development of all these vertebrate groups. During his 40 years of embryological research, he described for the first time the vertebrate pharyngeal arches , which become the gill apparatus of fish but become the mammalian jaws and ears" http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK9974/

C. Evolutionary genetics- Four evolutionary forces (mutation, random genetic drift, natural selection, and gene flow) acting within and among populations cause micro-evolutionary change and these processes are sufficient to account for macro-evolutionary patterns, which arise in the longer term from the collective action of these forces. That is, given very long periods of time, the micro-evolutionary forces will eventually give rise to the macro-evolutionary patterns that characterize the higher taxonomic groups. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/evolutionary-genetics/

D. DNA- "A mutation is a change in DNA, the hereditary material of life. An organism's DNA affects how it looks, how it behaves, and its physiology. So a change in an organism's DNA can cause changes in all aspects of its life." http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/evolutionary-genetics/
An example of the results of a genetic mutation would be the bipedal hips in Australopithecus

We can also see evidence of similarities between chimpanzees and humans in human chromosome #2
"All great apes apart from man have 24 pairs of chromosomes. There is therefore a hypothesis that the common ancestor of all great apes had 24 pairs of chromosomes and that the fusion of two of the ancestor's chromosomes created chromosome 2 in humans. The evidence for this hypothesis is very strong."
The analogous chromosomes (2p and 2q) in the non-human great apes can be shown, when laid end to end, to create an identical banding structure to the human chromosome 2 http://www.evolutionpages.com/chromosome_2.htm

E. The fossil record. If what we know from above is true, we will see transitional fossils in the fossil record. A prediction was made for the Tiktaalik fossil. The prediction was confirmed accurate. http://tiktaalik.uchicago.edu/meetTik.html
There is also a massive transitional fossil record: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_transitional_fossils

F. Analyze your data and draw conclusions: After studying the evidence closely, it is determined that all life on earth is related. This happened by natural selection over millions of years and generations. Desirable traits are selected by natural selection based on the environment a population lives in.

G. Report your results. Was your hypothesis correct? Yes

How does this not answer your question, what specifically do you object to in this post? I don't know what you're trying to achieve with your constant goal post moving and evasion.

And you once again fail to address the issue and attempt to change the issue to common descent. You've attempted this several times and continue to try to introduce an off topic issue....didn't work then and it's not working now.

The issue is about the HOW, the process, promoted by Darwinist evolution which produced pine trees and humans from an alleged single life form (unknown) of long ago. You, nor anyone else, has offered evidence for the HOW, the process, which can be subjected to the scientific method. That's because there's no evidence for the particular evolutionary view, only a series of guesses and suppositions concerning the HOW, the process.

If you don't think that the explanations of how two life forms came from a common ancestor is concerned with common descent you are either completely ignorant of the topic you're attempting to discuss (I use that term loosely) or dishonest.

 

[YSN-1990]

Humans aren't the only ones that evolved. Everything evolved. Evolution doesn't stop either. It's ongoing. It doesn't have a specific goal in mind.

Chimpanzees haven't been the same for millions of years. Chimpanzees and humans share a common ancestor and we both branched off into different environments. Natural selection took it's course.

Here is a good link to learn about human evolution: http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-fossils/species

Well i know how how evolution works. Can u name some major differences between chimps now and millions of years ago?
The difference between our latest 'ancestor' and us is huge even tho we are just 70.000-90.000 years apart...

 

[Jimmy D]

Doubtful. All this so called "evidence" they claim.....I haven't seen much of it.

Here's some mickiio, would you care to address it?

 

[JonFromMinnesota]

Well i know how how evolution works. Can u name some major differences between chimps now and millions of years ago?
The difference between our latest 'ancestor' and us is huge even tho we are just 70.000-90.000 years apart...

You'd have to study early primates.
http://anthro.palomar.edu/earlyprimates/early_2.htm

I also highly recommend Dr. Shubins 3 part documentary "Your Inner Fish" It's available on Netflix streaming. Part 3 goes over primates.

 

[JonFromMinnesota]

If you don't think that the explanations of how two life forms came from a common ancestor is concerned with common descent you are either completely ignorant of the topic you're attempting to discuss (I use that term loosely) or dishonest.

No matter how much verifiable evidence you present to him, he'll reject it outright without addressing it. You'll just get a lot of goal post moving and pigeon chess.

 

[AV1611VET]

Wrong.

Do you realize yet that a fossil found and identified in a particular stratum is a piece of empirical evidence yet?

Empirical evidence of what? death?

No argument there.