proving evolution as just a "theory"

[Justatruthseeker]

Only problem here is, that both husky's and mastiff's aren't natural species to begin with.

Neither are genetically altered peas, fruit flies or E. coli, yet that don’t seem to bother you. Your conflicted, I understand.

 

[tas8831]

Apparently you didn’t even read your own evolutionists supporters post about inbreeding characteristics and reduction in genetic variability, or you would know how it came about.....

That you both then can’t grasp what you claim to understand.........

i think I will call you the "Dodge King".

So which of Noah's sons or daughters-in-law was Asian?

How did this Asian meet up with a middle eastern man/woman in these ancient times?

How did the Asian "allies" get repressed, then somehow later down the line, post-flood, when Asia was finally habitable again, did people from Ararat migrate there, mate, and have just their 'Asia' "allies" recombine to produce Asians from a middle eastern/Asian amalgam, since after all you claim with such confidence that 'And will never change an Asian into any other race..'


Evidence for this magical genetic assertion.

 

[tas8831]

Neither are genetically altered peas, fruit flies or E. coli, yet that don’t seem to bother you. Your conflicted, I understand.

You always seem to have 'an answer', yet these are never actual ANSWERS.

So which of Noah's sons or daughters-in-law was Asian?

How did this Asian meet up with a middle eastern man/woman in these ancient times?

How did the Asian "allies" get repressed, then somehow later down the line, post-flood, when Asia was finally habitable again, did people from Ararat migrate there, mate, and have just their 'Asia' "allies" recombine to produce Asians from a middle eastern/Asian amalgam, since after all you claim with such confidence that 'And will never change an Asian into any other race..'


Evidence for this magical genetic assertion.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

The different artificial dog breeds are not the same as different species.
But don't let intellectual honesty get in your way.

Neither are genetically altered peas, fruit flies, E. coli, every lab experiment performed. That doesn’t seem to bother your intellectual honesty.......

As I said, unless it contradicts your fundamentalist religious beliefs.
It's clear that you go to great lengths in order to protect your beliefs.

Like you go to great length to insinuate intellectual dishonesty, yet seem to support artificial changes in the laboratory as not intellectual dishonesty?

From repeating the same PRATT's over and over again to insisting on arguing strawmanned versions of evolution.

You mean like actual empirical observation that Asian remains Asian and African remains African, and only through interbreeding does a new variant race exist, versus your fantasy of change?

When you find yourself arguing against scientific theories that form the backbone of entire fields of science on which there is consensus among the scientific community, just to push your religious beliefs... then I don't know what to call that, if not "fundamentalist".

Evolution theory doesn’t form the backbone of any science.

Evolution is studied by biologists and geneticists. Science has no high priests.

But it's hilarious that you speak of priests and their perceived authority, as if it is a bad thing. It's rather ironic.

I disagree with my priests interpretations. But then I have a mind capable of self thought and rationalization, unlike some who accept their high priests words without any.

 

[ruthiesea]

Only problem here is, that both husky's and mastiff's aren't natural species to begin with.

There seems to be a problem with confusing apples with oranges. Both huskys and mastiffs are Canis lupus familiaris, the same species and sub species. They are decended from Canis lupus, the wolf. Both dogs and wolves are the same genus and species, with dogs being a sub species of C. lupus.

 

[gaara4158]

Oh I did, perhaps you didn’t?

“to the hypothesized intermediates”

Hypothesized
Hypothesized
Hypothesized

Get it?

And? The intermediates don’t need to be proven. You have the prove them impossible. We talked about this, remember?

 

[ruthiesea]

Evolution theory doesn’t form the backbone of any science.

Of course it does. It is the backbone of our understanding of biology. Some evolutionary concepts, such as change over time, are used in physics, geology, astronomy, etc.

 

[rjs330]

Because nobody cares to do so. The existence of a "designer" is an unfalsifiable proposition so cannot be ruled out using science.

Therefore science is unreliable in this case. Science is not the only answer.

 

[rjs330]

You're not actually explaining how any of those things are evidence of common design. You haven't even bothered to define what common design is.

Instead of just saying "How about the fact that all things are made of common materials", you need to provide a proper explanation. This means defining a scientific model including providing a base definition for what common design is, defining any constraints associated with the model, and subsequent hypotheses (predictions) and then testing of those hypotheses.

And consequently, you'd be able to respond with, "Common materials are evidence of common design because..." and then you continue with an actual explanation detailing how and why common materials are evidence for common design.

It's kind of like when you have a test in school and a teacher asks you to show your work. I'm asking you to show your work. You get no points for one liners.

In fact all you've really done so far is confirm that if life was specially created, that it was created to look like it evolved.

Look I'm not looking to write a doctoral thesis which is seeming what you want me to do. I'm merely pointing out the obvious. If you want more you'll have to look elsewhere. I gave you some very good examples of common design. Evolution science won't pursue that thought because to do so indicates there must be a designer and that starts down the road of who or what the designer might be and we'll, you know that can't be falsified etc. So it stays in a very comfortable realm of scientific theorybrather than to start dabbling in a "designer".

 

[Justatruthseeker]

You always seem to have 'an answer', yet these are never actual ANSWERS.

So which of Noah's sons or daughters-in-law was Asian?

How did this Asian meet up with a middle eastern man/woman in these ancient times?

How did the Asian "allies" get repressed, then somehow later down the line, post-flood, when Asia was finally habitable again, did people from Ararat migrate there, mate, and have just their 'Asia' "allies" recombine to produce Asians from a middle eastern/Asian amalgam, since after all you claim with such confidence that 'And will never change an Asian into any other race..'


Evidence for this magical genetic assertion.

I always have an answer to evolutionary PR because evolution is easily shown to be false.

Neither was your response about Huskies and Mastiffs not being natural any answer, especially while accepting unnatural laboratory alterations and claiming they support you natural belief.... it’s actual hypocritical and downright dishonest......

Haven’t a clue, but the Chinese do have a written history that says Noah himself was their originator.

The difference is that unlike evolutionists I don’t make up common ancestors that don’t exist or hypothetical intermediaries and claim fact. I just say I don’t know, but all myths have a grain of truth, it’s how they became myths. So perhaps ask the Chinese?

https://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j19_2/j19_2_96-108.pdf

Some believe otherwise.

Out of which of Noah’s three sons did the Chinese race come from?

Which common ancestor became both chimp and human?

Ahh, you don’t know, but that’s ok when it comes to your beliefs, right, just not mine?

 

[pitabread]

Look I'm not looking to write a doctoral thesis which is seeming what you want me to do.

I'm hardly asking for a thesis on the subject. But it would be nice if you could post a little more than just one liners.

If you want more you'll have to look elsewhere. I gave you some very good examples of common design.

If you can't explain why an example is evidence for 'common design', then it's clearly not a good example.

 

[Speedwell]

Therefore science is unreliable in this case. Science is not the only answer.

Right. Unfalsifiable propositions are not the business of science. However, the shoe is on the other foot as regards ID proponents. They want to advance the existence of a "designer" as a falsifiable proposition.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Of course it does. It is the backbone of our understanding of biology. Some evolutionary concepts, such as change over time, are used in physics, geology, astronomy, etc.

Change over time has nothing to do with evolution exclusively.

Why I believe an Asian that mates with an African will make the variant Afro-Asian, in the time of nine months, and need no evolution theory at all.

Why I believe a Husky that mates with a Mastiff will make the variant Chinook, in the time of about 28 weeks, and need no evolution at all.

Why I believe if you take a million black rabbits and place them near the Arctic circle those that survive will in time become fat white rabbits. Notice the key word rabbits.

You simply confuse what that change consists of because they incorrectly label subspecies in the fossil record as separate species.

Please stop confusing change within the Kind as proving evolution of one Kind into another. Observational evidence shows you Asian always remains Asian, they do not evolve into the Afro-Asian, neither does the African. As observational evidence shows you neither Husky or Mastiff evolve into the Chinook. Asian remains Asian, African, African, Husky, Husky and Mastiff Mastiff. And such is why every fossil found remains the same from the oldest one found to the youngest one found. You just confuse how that change in new form in the fossil record happened because you ignore the observational evidence of how it happens.

Astronomy? You mean those who add 96% Fairie Dust once one leaves the solar system, to a theory known to be 99% correct in the solar system, then claim that unproven 96% Fairie Dust as fact? I can see why you’d accept so much garbage in your evolutionary belief system, Fairie Dust equates to fact in your mind.

For those of you that can’t see signatures.

Fairie Dust - Fabricated Ad-hoc Inventions Repeatedly Invoked in Effort to Defend Untenable Scientific Theory.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

And? The intermediates don’t need to be proven. You have the prove them impossible. We talked about this, remember?

No sorry, you claim them as true, the burden is on you to support your hypothesis.

I’ve proven them false. See the post above. You like others simply refuse to accept how that change actually occurs. You hypothesize intermediaries when none exist because like the Asian to Afro-Asian, none exist. Like the Husky to Chinook, none exist.

Now if you want to propose that your intermediaries are like those between wolf to Husky, all the same Kind, brought about by mating and not evolution, just mistakenly classified and interpreted, I’ll give it serious consideration, since I already believe that.

 

[USincognito]

False since the word "evolution" is nothing more than descent with modification within His and Their kinds, in a population over time. Our prehistoric ancestors (Their kinds) are the people who inherited the ERVs from Chimps and they were NOT Humans. Only the descendants of Adam (His kinds) are Humans. Not knowing this leaves you in outer darkness concerning the origin of Humans. Amen?

You didn't answer my questions. Care to try again?

 

[PsychoSarah]

No sorry, you claim them as true, the burden is on you to support your hypothesis.

I’ve proven them false. See the post above. You like others simply refuse to accept how that change actually occurs. You hypothesize intermediaries when none exist because like the Asian to Afro-Asian, none exist. Like the Husky to Chinook, none exist.

Now if you want to propose that your intermediaries are like those between wolf to Husky, all the same Kind, brought about by mating and not evolution, just mistakenly classified and interpreted, I’ll give it serious consideration, since I already believe that.

You are the reason why I am taking pictures and measuring every generation in my evolution experiment. Nit-picky nit-picky nit-picky

 

[Justatruthseeker]

There seems to be a problem with confusing apples with oranges. Both huskys and mastiffs are Canis lupus familiaris, the same species and sub species. They are decended from Canis lupus, the wolf. Both dogs and wolves are the same genus and species, with dogs being a sub species of C. lupus.

Yah but you can’t get them to see that. Nor can you get them to see that they have simply incorrectly labeled subspecies in the fossil record as separate species to support their mistaken belief.

They ignore that Husky mates with Mastiff and produces the Chinook. That just like every fossil found remains the same, so Husky remains Husky and Mastiff remains Mastiff. That just like every new form in the fossil record it comes into existence suddenly, fully formed, just like the Chinook.

But they refuse to be reasonable and scientific and apply the observational evidence of how new forms appear to the fossil record, despite the fossil record matching observation perfectly......

 

[Justatruthseeker]

You are the reason why I am taking pictures and measuring every generation in my evolution experiment. Nit-picky nit-picky nit-picky

And when you die, Asian will still be Asian, African will still be African.....

 

[PsychoSarah]

And when you die, Asian will still be Asian, African will still be African.....

and yet, you are unwilling to just participate in my experiment and vote for 2 traits you want to see. Where is your sense of adventure?

 

[gaara4158]

No sorry, you claim them as true, the burden is on you to support your hypothesis.

I’ve proven them false. See the post above. You like others simply refuse to accept how that change actually occurs. You hypothesize intermediaries when none exist because like the Asian to Afro-Asian, none exist. Like the Husky to Chinook, none exist.

Now if you want to propose that your intermediaries are like those between wolf to Husky, all the same Kind, brought about by mating and not evolution, just mistakenly classified and interpreted, I’ll give it serious consideration, since I already believe that.

Man, you are disappointing. I’m going to have to explain this again. YOU are claiming irreducible complexity exists in biology. That means YOU have to provide an example of something that cannot have evolved from simpler predecessors. To do that, YOU have to prove every hypothesized model of stepwise evolution wrong. I understand this is confusing, but please try to keep up. I didn’t bring up the flagellum. I didn’t claim the evolution of the flagellum definitely evolved in a certain way. I am responding skeptically to the claim that it COULDN’T have evolved stepwise by providing a hypothesized model of its stepwise evolution, diagrams and all.

If you want to advance your argument, refer to the aforementioned diagrams and prove them impossible. Otherwise you need to abandon this line of argumentation, as you have many others with me.