Incorrect Assumptions of Past Similarities

[Bungle_Bear]

My guess, he thought it made sense when he thought of it. Humans have incredible imaginations.

It sounds plausible, and many illiterates would accept it at face value.

Funny how he is incapable of supporting the assertion.

 

[Astrophile]

You don’t get from simple to complex with neutral or deleterious mutations.

You should know who, it’s What you believe in isn’t it? Simple to complex????

It’s how you get from apelike to human remember, beneficial mutations, not neutral....

Are apes really simpler than humans? How do you define simplicity and complexity?

 

[HitchSlap]

It sounds plausible, and many illiterates would accept it at face value.

Funny how he is incapable of supporting the assertion.

If we had a nickel for every unsupported assertion...

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Evolutionists.

You don’t get from simple to complex with neutral or deleterious mutations.

It’s ok. I understand your need to not answer anything by replying with a question. Standard avoidance tactic 101.

You should know who, it’s What you believe in isn’t it? Simple to complex????

It’s how you get from apelike to human remember, beneficial mutations, not neutral....

Sad you all have to avoid your own beliefs....

This from 2012:

https://phys.org/news/2012-09-evolution-meant-simpler-complex.html

Now you've been shown your error, please don't repeat it.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

If we had a nickel for every unsupported assertion...

The "evolutionists" would be comfortably rich, the creationists would be complaining about unfair distribution of wealth.

 

[HitchSlap]

The "evolutionists" would be comfortably rich, the creationists would be complaining about unfair distribution of wealth.

Are you suggesting that socialism is at the heart of creationism?

 

[Justatruthseeker]

It is so cute that the creationist thinks that phylogenetics is premised on beneficial mutations...

Pity that so many creationists do not understand a very basic genetics fact - that there is no 1-to-1 relationship between mutations (good, bad or indifferent) and morphology.

Poor things... They try so hard.

Standard reply to those in the bubble that always seem to fail to support their bald faced claims.

“When people have actual reasons for disagreeing with you, they offer those reasons without hesitation. Strangers on social media will cheerfully check your facts, your logic, and your assumptions. But when you start seeing ad hominem attacks that offer no reasons at all, that might be a sign that people in the mass hysteria bubble don’t understand what is wrong with your point of view except that it sounds more sensible than their own.”

 

[Justatruthseeker]

The "evolutionists" would be comfortably rich, the creationists would be complaining about unfair distribution of wealth.

Agreed, the evolutionists would indeed be rich if they had a nickel for every unsupported assumption.

Disagreed, the creationist would simply still be complaining about those unsupported assumptions...... while claiming them as truth.... we already know they get paid for unsupported assumptions so nothing would have changed financially, just better pay is all.....

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Are apes really simpler than humans? How do you define simplicity and complexity?

Hey, I’m not the one that says we evolved from apelike creatures and developed intelligence while they didn’t.

What, gonna abandon the theories claim from simple to more complex now?

Oh my bad, that only happened hundreds of millions of years ago....

 

[Justatruthseeker]

This from 2012:

https://phys.org/news/2012-09-evolution-meant-simpler-complex.html

Now you've been shown your error, please don't repeat it.

Why and to think someone was complaining that our using one passage for breathing and eating was sub-optimal. Although I tried to explain to them that one passage instead of two was actually more optimal.

Notice how it’s a new view, which means it was not the standard view, nor is it yet the standard view.

And let’s not forget the word “suggests” as in we may have to admit all our pasts views were wrong, but maybe we can fudge it so it doesn’t sound that way. Just a suggestion....

How have I been shown my error? This is a suggestion from one biologist which has not replaced current belief......

But it would fit my view that animals degrade over time due to damage to the genome from mutation. So I am glad to see evolutionists finally coming around to the correct line of thought.... at least one of them...

“appear to contradict the common perception of evolution – that creatures have advanced by becoming genetically more complex over time.”

Notice it never contradicted my belief, just evolutionary belief. I never said I believe in simple to complex, just that evolution did.

I have held the stance from day one that we are actually becoming less than we were. Remember, creationists believe all life was created complex at the start.... and is degrading because of mutations.... so it’s nice to see evolutionists finally accepting creationist views and getting closer to the truth...

 

[Gene2memE]

Due to a conversation with one of the evolutionary public relations bots here on CE earlier, who instead of being able to assert any science to defend his beliefs could do nothing but resort to ad-hominem attacks,

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Care to show he didn’t???? Or just more bald faced claims?

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Agreed, the evolutionists would indeed be rich if they had a nickel for every unsupported assumption.

Disagreed, the creationist would simply still be complaining about those unsupported assumptions...... while claiming them as truth.... we already know they get paid for unsupported assumptions so nothing would have changed financially, just better pay is all.....

Cha-ching

 

[Bungle_Bear]

I never said I believe in simple to complex, just that evolution did.

No, you said evolution teaches simple to complex and we all must believe it. Notice how, when I show that not to be the case, you head off down a different tack so you don't have to admit you got it wrong? Again?

 

[Job 33:6]

No, you said evolution teaches simple to complex and we all must believe it. Notice how, when I show that not to be the case, you head off down a different tack so you don't have to admit you got it wrong? Again?

I have seen him do this before. I suspect there may be mental issues at play.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

I have seen him do this before. I suspect there may be mental issues at play.

We see it in practically every thread he posts in. I wouldn't say mental issues, but there certainly seem to be some integrity issues.

 

[Jimmy D]

As evolutionists fully admit and understand, the vast majority of mutations are neutral,

In reality they can not account for change without incorrectly assuming that the vast majority of mutations were all beneficial and induced change, ignoring the reality that they were instead neutral and effected no change

There's something wrong here.....

 

[Job 33:6]

There's something wrong here.....

LOL

 

[Skreeper]

Hey, I’m not the one that says we evolved from apelike creatures and developed intelligence while they didn’t.

Are you seriously suggesting that apes don't have intelligence?

 

[Bugeyedcreepy]

Hey, I’m not the one that says we evolved from apelike creatures and developed intelligence while they didn’t.

Are you seriously suggesting that apes don't have intelligence?

...Or that we aren't still Apes right now?