Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Unless we need a designer to account for the natural process of evolution....also remember that evolution is basically a natural process. so if evolution is true then we basically dont need a designer...
so if i will test about several genes\proteins and check their phylogeny, i will get the same tree by another several genes\proteins? is that your prediction?
I'm sure you have mountains of critically robust, replicable data for these assertions, and I look forward to your Nobel prize speech. Every single creationist before you has utterly, abysmally failed, but no... clearly, you are something special.
Nope, if anyone is ignoring evidence that would be you. The claim of a "change of kinds" is a false one brought up by creationists. You are still an ape, you are still a mammal, you are still a tetrapod, you are still a vertebrate, etc, ad so on.That’s because you choose to ignore those mountains of data.
Asian remains Asian despite all those mutations. African remains African despite all those mutations. Husky remains Husky despite all those mutations. Mastiff remains Mastiff despite all those mutations. Black bears remain black bears despite all those mutations. Cardinals remain Cardinals despite all those mutations. How many of the hundreds of thousands of animals do you need me to list? Every animal that exists as well as every fossil creature that existed.
Mountains of data falsifying your theory, but you can’t even see it, even if it’s right in front of your nose.
And so, POOF! An entire field of mathematics disappears right before our eyes.Prooving recursive iterations from one species to another must have a scientific mathematical equation to back it up with, that is based on the time linear history of fossil records.
The absense of scientific mathematical equations is evidence of a failed theory. Evolution Theory is a conspiracy theory, much like the flat earth conspiracy theory.
We must therefore reject the Theory based on the absense of scientific maths required to back it up.
We must therefore reject the Theory based on the absense of scientific maths required to back it up.
No, for reasons of differences in mutation rate, generation time, and fluctuations in how harsh natural selection is. That is, to mathematically determine how fast a specific lineage will evolve, all of these variables would have to remain constant, and they don't. So, in controlled experiments, one could do this, but not for populations in the wild, since we can't control for the variables. I can, however, mathematically determine approximately how many new mutations will enter the human population in a day, based on the number of people born and the known number of the typical range for new mutations per person born. About 300,000 people were born today, so that makes for approximately 15000000 mutations that entered the world by those people independent of the genomes of their parents. About 5% of mutations are beneficial, so that makes for about 750000 beneficial mutations that entered the human population today. Or, if you want to base it on an E. coli experiment in which 1/150 mutations were benign, that would be 100000 benign mutations. If you make the percentage of benign mutations 1% (a common claim on creationist websites), that'd make it 150000 new benign mutations for humanity today.Prooving recursive iterations from one species to another must have a scientific mathematical equation to back it up with, that is based on the time linear history of fossil records.
There are tons of models that use a combination of mathematical equations to help determine the rate of evolution; the process is too complex for just 1 equation alone to be sufficient for any of the processes, and thus are rarely brought up individually.The absense of scientific mathematical equations is evidence of a failed theory. Evolution Theory is a conspiracy theory, much like the flat earth conspiracy theory.
http://homepage.univie.ac.at/Reinhard.Buerger/Lisbon.pdfWe must therefore reject the Theory based on the absense of scientific maths required to back it up.
Why yes there is, because if they can interbreed, then they are not closely related species, but the same species, merely at the most subspecies. But you’d understand that if you followed the definition and stopped looking for excuses to ignore it.I'm curious, is there a definition of "species" anywhere that states that members of closely related but separate species can never interbreed?
No, I expect they came from one stock, just like all 100+ breeds of dogs came from wolves. Not that I expect an evolutionist to correctly be able to deduce from observation how new breeds, races, subspecies, whatever you care to name them on this day come into being....Tell me, did Arabs, Indians, Indonesians, Turks, Siberians, Chinese and Japanese evolve from a common Asian ancestor by a series of mutations, or they come from the mating of a 'proto-Asian' ancestor with a 'proto-Arab', 'proto-Indian, etc. ancestor? Where did the hypothetical 'proto-Arab', 'proto-Indian', etc. ancestor come from?
Oh we agree. Which is why most hide from the facts, it will destroy their belief system.No facts dont drive everyones opinions and human psychology bears this out. In some folks, facts are too painful to acknowledge, so they must manufacture their own personal reality (typically void of facts) to protect their beliefs. In other folks, it is too painful to have to deny facts, and play psychological gymnastics with themselves and they acknowledge facts.
Lastly, if established facts (that can be verified) drove the opinions of all, everyone would agree on most issues. Clearly, this is not the case.
You might want to read a textbook on the subject of evolution some time. You'll find there is actually quite a bit of math to be found within the ToE.
Shows you haven’t even read the Bible, or you would know mankind existed in profusion before the flood.Where did this wife come from?
Did she survive on Ark II - the one Gilgamesh made?
Was she a separate creation not mentioned in the bible?
At what point in this Odyssey of Gibberish did the mutation in SLC24A5 occur, contributing to the production of lighter (i.e, 'non-African') ? Dark skin ('African') is the wild type, after all (but Noah was not African... nor was Adam. Interesting...)?
No, I expect they came from one stock, just like all 100+ breeds of dogs came from wolves.
You might be an ape, but frankly I’ve never seen an ape evolve into anything at all, have you?Nope, if anyone is ignoring evidence that would be you. The claim of a "change of kinds" is a false one brought up by creationists. You are still an ape, you are still a mammal, you are still a tetrapod, you are still a vertebrate, etc, ad so on.
I admit Husky remains Husky
Nope, but through interbreeding that wolf led to that Peakanese. It’s your biologists that claim this....Woah, woah, woah...
You're telling me that one of these:
Gave birth to one of these?
And yet the very DNA testing you say you follow says precisely that. You just confuse the different breed that led from the wolf to the peakanese as being separate species when you look at different animals in the fossil record.Not sure what magical fantasy land sort of breeding you believe in, but it's pretty obvious from observing nature that wolves only give birth to other wolves. I've never seen a wolf give birth to the fluffy abomination pictured above.
Didn’t do your research to well did you, that’s why you have no citations to back up your claims.Absolutely. Huskies after all were one of the original created Dog Kinds. And after doing some more indepth research into the matter, have deduced that there are at least 13 different individual Dog Kinds from which all of the existing dog breeds originated.
Nope, but through interbreeding that wolf led to that Peakanese. It’s your biologists that claim this....
And yet the very DNA testing you say you follow says precisely that.
You just confuse the different breed that led from the wolf to the peakanese as being separate species when you look at different animals in the fossil record.
Your straw man can’t stand, just google where do dogs come from, maybe you might learn something, doubtful, but there is always hope.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?