If there is "no evidence" for evolution...

[Kenny'sID]

You don't have a clear definition, that's what I've been saying.
People will give you links. You ignore them, saying "That's not evidence."
People will copy and paste articles for you to read. You ignore them, saying "That's not evidence."
Then you strut around all of these threads going "Oh, no one can show me evidence!"
It's a puerile game.

OK, it's clear you have nothing to back the claim, or you would have told me by now. Once again, I won't ask again but for the record, take note. And not only try to learn that claiming it does not make it true, but one should not claim it if they cannot back it up...not a direct accusation like that anyway because it leaves the opposition with nothing direct to defend and show you are wrong, among other obvious things that don't make you look good.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

OK, it's clear you have nothing to back the claim, or you would have told me by now. Once again, I won't ask again but for the record, take note. And not only try to learn that claiming it does not make it true, but one should not claim it if they cannot back it up...not a direct accusation like that anyway because it leaves the opposition with nothing direct to defend and show you are wrong, among other obvious things that don't make you look good.

The above rejection of evidence for evolution was written by a human with a coccyx, evidence of descent from a previous species with an actual tail.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Liked how you slipped right past the proof of the whopper you told. I think it's obvious to most you are making what you just said up....too.

Just to be clear on who is making stuff up please indicate which of these claims you support:

1. If you put your hand in fire it will get burned.
2. It is possible to put your hand in fire and not get burned.

 

[Kenny'sID]

The above rejection of evidence for evolution was written by a human with a coccyx, evidence of descent from a previous species with an actual tail.

I have hair too but that doen't make me an ape, or a dog, or a cat, nor does it mean I descended from such, or them me for that matter. Or does that mean that animals with tails descended from a full fledged human being? So many ways that could go.

Just to be clear on who is making stuff up please indicate which of these claims you support:

1. If you put your hand in fire it will get burned.
2. It is possible to put your hand in fire and not get burned.

I understand. When one misses the obvious like that, they have to try to save face, so you keep on repeating what I myself already said, and feel vindicated and all if it helps.

 

[xianghua]

No, we can't say the same for cars BECAUSE CARS CAN'T REPRODUCE! How are you not getting this?

why you ignoroed what i just said? again: even if they were able to reproduce like an animal it will not prove any evolution. do you think otherwise?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

why you ignoroed what i just said? again: even if they were able to reproduce like an animal it will not prove any evolution. do you think otherwise?

No, I'm not ignoring what is said because what you said is asinine. You can't use cars to try and disprove evolution because cars aren't biological. Only something biological would be able to disprove the theory of evolution. Your "thought experiment" is complete and utter bull.

 

[Aman777]

I've asked for proof and to explain why it's proof but as usual, not much of anything but excuses.

The main part of evolution, the part they haven't a clue about and seems to even fall short on excuses is how it started. The argument there is, of course, "it doesn't matter"...another convenient argument in a long line of them.

A bit like the "Science proves nothing" one of the most ridiculous comments I've aver heard, when that's just exactly what science is/does, proven explanation, while theory, is just explanation. But watch as they come in and try to argue with that...should prove entertaining.

If they didn't know where it came form, they would claim a rubber ball evolved over time, and given enough time, have a whole theory on how that happened and eventually, yep, you guessed it, start teaching the theory as fact. They would not even consider someone made it...

Or, some would assume someone made it, and for that very reason, that's how things get here, pretty simple concept. And a rubber ball is simple, but something like what we are today? Na, no maker. The more complicated the thing, the more simple it was to make, right down to it just happening with no effort at all...just the opposite of logical thinking.

The ball? someone made it, life? "Oh no, no, no one made that, it's too complicated, it must have just happened".

In my view, if they can't explain all of it, they don't have a chance in proving it at all, as that would actually prove they got no business to even bother claiming any of evolution. But though the most logical likelihood for the start of it, God, remains a straw man argument to them, it's still the most logical/likely scenario by far, even if one has no faith in God at all.

Anyway, I'm repeating myself.

It's a good example of Evol "speak". You know, change the meanings of words to suit themselves. Science never "proves" anything, so it leaves room for them to fail and correct their previously flawed consensus. Evols use this scientific concept to claim the abundance of "unproven evidence" or the consensus of other Evols, makes Theory better than Fact by changing the meaning of a Theory, which they revere as better than Fact. So study the Evol language which sounds a lot like Trumpism. Take all positions and then make up lies to explain them.

 

[Aman777]

The above rejection of evidence for evolution was written by a human with a coccyx, evidence of descent from a previous species with an actual tail.

False, since today's Humans inherited our coccyx from the sons of God (prehistoric people) Gen 6:4 when Noah's grandsons married and produced children with them. Cush, for example, married and produced Nimrod, Gen 10:10 the builder of the first Human cities on this planet of people who descended from Apes. Nimrod changed from prehistoric to Human in just one generation. NO magical evolution needed. It's plain old descent with modification within kinds.

Today's Humans (descendants of Adam) descended from the combination of the sons of God (prehistoric people) and the daughters of Adam/mankind. In the past 11k years, the population of Humans has gone from a few to more than 7 Billion. Our God is an awesome God. He has made many in order to have more Humans to populate His perfect Heaven. Jesus is Lord.

 

[eleos1954]

... then what have they been publishing in the Journal of Evolutionary Biology all these years?

(Not to mention other scientific journals like Evolution, Molecular Biology and Evolution, Journal of Molecular Evolution, Genome Biology and Evolution, and so on...)

Definition of Science

the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment.
i.e. material or physical

Spirit

the nonphysical part of a person that is the seat of emotions and character;

Science is important. Through science knowledge about many things are discovered and continue to be discovered. However, that does not mean scientists can factually explain everything nor are all their “explanations” fact … but in a lot of cases theory.

Carbon dating is being questioned and re-visited.

Point is … regarding “life” … one either believes we were divinely created … or evolved somehow. Some even believe the planet was “seeded” by Extraterrestrials.

All are plausible.

Life is so complex … I doubt scientifically we will ever fully understand it. But in the process of trying to understand it, we do discover new things.

So people choose what they believe and will continue to do so. Always have always will. That “fact” will never change.

So the debate goes on.

Spiritually - Biblically … eternal life is on the table, scientifically it is not.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

I understand. When one misses the obvious like that, they have to try to save face, so you keep on repeating what I myself already said, and feel vindicated and all if it helps.

You are an exceptionally dishonest and devious poster. Let me remind you what you really said, not what you wish you had said:

Scientific experiment: Put hand in fire, fire burns hand, I now have proof and it is no theory that when we put out hand in the fire it will get burned.

I provided evidence that this is not always the case. You then posted:

I can actually stick my hand in a fire for a short time and not burn it.

So the truth of the matter is that you only changed your claim after I refuted your initial statement and provided evidence.

 

[Kenny'sID]

You are an exceptionally dishonest and devious poster. Let me remind you what you really said, not what you wish you had said:

I provided evidence that this is not always the case. You then posted:

So the truth of the matter is that you only changed your claim after I refuted your initial statement and provided evidence.

We see that a lot around here, and nearly always coming from an atheist towards a Christian, but yeah, I'm a dishonest, scum of the earth Christian, and so embarrassed now . I won't get into the psychological, insecurity issues and all that go along with that general comment.

Seen this before, someone embarrasses themselves and then perpetually makes it worse by trying to get a leg up and make it all go away, while only making it much worse. All I can do is recommend you not make up things like you have tried it without protection, when the whole world could see that was a whopper.. You messed up now deal with it.

I won't report you for goading but someone else might.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

We see that a lot around here, and nearly always coming from an atheist towards a Christian, but yeah, I'm a dishonest, scum of the earth Christian, and so embarrassed now . I won't get into the psychological, insecurity issues and all that go along with that general comment.

Seen this before, someone embarrasses themselves and then perpetually makes it worse by trying to get a leg up and make it all go away, while only making it much worse. All I can do is recommend you not make up things like you have tried it without protection, when the whole world could see that was a whopper.. You messed up now deal with it.

I won't report you for goading but someone else might.

lol

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

False, since today's Humans inherited our coccyx from the sons of God (prehistoric people) Gen 6:4 when Noah's grandsons married and produced children with them. Cush, for example, married and produced Nimrod, Gen 10:10 the builder of the first Human cities on this planet of people who descended from Apes. Nimrod changed from prehistoric to Human in just one generation. NO magical evolution needed. It's plain old descent with modification within kinds.

Sheer nonsense.

Nimrod was an honest, God worshipping hunter and many false legends have arisen about him, that is not his fault.

Consider that other apes also have a coccyx. You can't blame Nimrod for the presence of the coccyx in a gorilla!

 

[DogmaHunter]

Right. Science gets to change the meanings of words to suit it's believers.

No. The other way round. It's more like "believers" who dishonestly use words while pretending that in scientific jargon, those words have specific meanings.

A good example is the FACT that Godless scientists changed "descent with modification within kinds" into the filthy word "evolution".

It means the exact same thing. Get over it.

So kiddos, join in the name changing business and do it in the anything goes world of changeable Science. Amen?

There's no name changing going on here at all.

 

[DogmaHunter]

no. i just said that this doesnt prove evolution and thats it.

Stop lying. I quoted what you said. It's right there.

but lets say for the sake of the argument that i did said it.

You DID say that. I quoted it. It's right there.

can you prove me wrong? can you show any calculation why it will be impossible for evolution to evolve a human from an ape for instance in only several generation? (say max 100 generation).

Even if you feel like you are just pretending that you said what you actually said, you still can't get it right.

This has nothing to do with the post you are replying to. That post, and your quote, was about how speciation is a vertical process where descendents don't evolve into "different kinds" (families).

As in: cats, will not speciate into dogs. They will speciate in sub-species of cats. Which will still be cats.

 

[DogmaHunter]

again: we can say the same for those cars:

they show a progression but it doesnt prove any evolution. even if they were able to reproduce like an animal. i see no difference from the whale case.

(image from Ferrari Evolution).

These cars don't reproduce with modification. So the analogy fails.

 

[DogmaHunter]

What did I say to insinuate a wrong definition of evidence?

For starters, you called it "subjective".

 

[DogmaHunter]

I have hair too but that doen't make me an ape, or a dog, or a cat,

But it does make you a mammal!
Only mammals have hair and none of them have feathers.

That would be a violation of the nested hierarchy, which is evidence of evolution/common ancestry again.

nor does it mean I descended from such, or them me for that matter.

The thousands of ERV's you share with primates on the other hand, do mean exactly that.
Another independent piece of evidence for common ancestry and nested hierarchies.

Or does that mean that animals with tails descended from a full fledged human being? So many ways that could go.

Nope. It can actually go only one way if you also take into account all other species with a coccyx or an actual tail.

It's not a matter of "subjectively looking at it", like you like to claim.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Point is … regarding “life” … one either believes we were divinely created … or evolved somehow. Some even believe the planet was “seeded” by Extraterrestrials.

All are plausible.

Nope. All are possible. And I can invent an infinite amount of such possibilities out of thin air.

Plausible things, however.... are possibilities that actually have demonstrable pathways to actually happen.

Of your list, there is only 1 "possibility" that is actually "plausible" and that is the possibility of evolution. It's the only thing backed by evidence. And lots of it!

Life is so complex … I doubt scientifically we will ever fully understand it. But in the process of trying to understand it, we do discover new things.

And every new discovery fits the model of evolution.
Gods and extra-terrestial intervention? They don't show up anywhere....

Except in 3000 year old religious books.

 

[xianghua]

Stop lying. I quoted what you said. It's right there.

incorrect. here is what i realy said:

"speciation is just variation of the same family.so its not evolution in terms of new kind of creature."

there is a different between saying that claim x isnt evidence for evolution and saying that if we will find evidence x evolution will be proven.

You DID say that. I quoted it. It's right there.

indeed its right there.