Questions For Darwinists

[rjw]

How come we don't observe any new animals evolving?

How come abiogenesis has never been observed in nature or the laboratory?

How come we don't observe spontaneous generation of life?

Since you claim that you:-

I only accept things which have been observed.

then when did you observe this -

The Dark Lord Satan has clouded their vision my friend.

If you don't believe this, then why write it? If you do believe it then when did you observe it?

If you believe it, but did not observe it, then at the very least we do not have to address your questions, but we could be correct nevertheless - these things happen even though we do not directly observe them?



Regards, Roland

 

[Agonaces of Susa]

then when did you observe this -

I haven't observed any new animals evolve in my lifetime and I haven't observed any animals that have evolved in the historical record.

Cyanobacteria is still the same cyanobacteria it was 3.6 billion years ago.

No evolution.

If you believe it, but did not observe it, then at the very least we do not have to address your questions, but we could be correct nevertheless - these things happen even though we do not directly observe them?

I do observe it.

I see their vision is clouded and I know the source of this deception.

None other than the Dark Lord himself.

 

[rjw]

No evolution.

Why does every animal have to evolve?

I do observe it.

This is in the same sense you observe evolution, even though you deny that you do?

I see their vision is clouded and I know the source of this deception.

Begging the question.

None other than the Dark Lord himself.

Since you can observe all this, then you can show us too? It's a pretty useless observation if only you can see it.



Regards, Roland

 

[laconicstudent]

I haven't observed any new animals evolve in my lifetime and I haven't observed any animals that have evolved in the historical record.

Cyobacteria is still the same cyanobacteria it was 3.6 billion years ago.

No evolution.

Others of us have observed Evolution though. I believe this claim has been sourced repeatedly.

I do observe it.

I see their vision is clouded and I know the source of this deception.

Of course it is.

None other than the Dark Lord himself.

Which one? There's two that I'm aware of.

Sauron and Voldemort have both been referred to as "Dark Lord", although in the case of the latter, only the Death Eaters used that title. Everyone else used his name or "He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named".

 

[Agonaces of Susa]

Why does every animal have to evolve?

Either you believe animals evolve or you don't.

I don't.

Therefore I say none of them have to evolve because DNA makes evolution a physical impossibility.

 

[rjw]

Either you believe animals evolve or you don't.

I believe it rains. Therefore it must rain all the time, everywhere?

Do you believe it rains, even though it does not rain all the time, everywhere?

Therefore I say none of them have to evolve because DNA makes evolution a physical impossibility.

Is this in the same sense that you see the Dark Lord cloud people's eyes? ...

None other than the Dark Lord himself.

Since you can observe all this, then you can show us too? It's a pretty useless observation if only you can see it.


Regards, Roland

 

[laconicstudent]

Therefore I say none of them have to evolve because DNA makes evolution a physical impossibility.

Citation please. And actually, a more accurate statement would be that DNA Polymerase and exonuclease prevent evolution.... um, except that they still fail.

 

[Agonaces of Susa]

I believe it rains. Therefore it must rain all the time, everywhere?

Do you believe it rains, even though it does not rain all the time, everywhere?

Well argued and I concede your point but that's not the analogy.

The analogy would be, does it rain on the Earth yes or no?

 

[Agonaces of Susa]

Citation please. And actually, a more accurate statement would be that DNA Polymerase and exonuclease prevent evolution.... um, except that they still fail.

I do not need to source the fact that cats do not give birth to dogs and the olive trees did not evolve from humans. And velociraptors never magically evolved wings and flew off into the sunset.

 

[rjw]

Well argued and I concede your point but that's not the analogy.

Thank you.

The analogy would be, does it rain on the Earth yes or no?

Only when I observe it in the present - otherwise it does not? (That is, evidence for it having rained, does not count?)



Regards, Roland

 

[laconicstudent]

I do not need to source the fact that cats do not give birth to dogs and the olive trees did not evolve from humans. And velociraptors never magically evolved wings and flew off into the sunset.

Of course they didn't. Good thing the Theory of Evolution never makes that ridiculous claim.

 

[Agonaces of Susa]

Of course they didn't. Good thing the Theory of Evolution never makes that ridiculous claim.

Evolution makes the absurd claim that birds evolved from dinosaurs.

I can assure you that the velociraptor never magically evolved wings and flew off into the sunset.

The reality of course is that birds descended from birds.

 

[laconicstudent]

Evolution makes the absurd claim that birds evolved from dinosaurs.

Ahhhh yes they did. Which isn't the same thing as dogs birthing cats, now is it?

I can assure you that the velociraptor never magically evolved wings and flew off into the sunset.

Not in a single generation.

The reality of course is that birds descended from birds.

...which evolved from saurians a few million years ago, yes.

 

[rjw]

Thank you.

Only when I observe it in the present - otherwise it does not? (That is, evidence for it having rained, does not count?)



Regards, Roland

The above is a rhetorical question to you AoS.



Regards, Roland

 

[Agonaces of Susa]

Ahhhh yes they did. Which isn't the same thing as dogs birthing cats, now is it?

They are analogous.

Not in a single generation.

I agree. Not in a single generation!

I guess we're all happy then.

...which evolved from saurians a few million years ago, yes.

Not in a single generation did birds evolve from dinosaurs. Birds descended from birds in every generation.

 

[Meshach]

They are analogous.


I agree. Not in a single generation!

I guess we're all happy then.


Not in a single generation did birds evolve from dinosaurs. Birds descended from birds in every generation.

I heard this was true but neither I nor the person who told me this was there. So its all speculation and assumptions, like most of the theory.
So back in the day when lizards were transforming into birds and developing wings these sounds could be heard through out the land.


thump, thump, thump, thump, thump.....THUMP
thump, thump, thump, thump, thump.....THUMP
thump, thump, thump, thump, thump.....THUMP
thump, thump, thump, thump, thump..............



The quieter thump's that were heard was the lizard's running along fallen tree trunks and stuff with their back legs while their front legs were transforming into wings and the last big THUMP was it hitting the ground for the wings were not quite ready for flight. Some millions of years later, finally fully transformed and developed wings due to mindless natural selection (Because somehow mindless natural selection knew the lizard must fly. Amazing isn't it?) the lizard took flight and became a bird and the last big THUMP was never heard again. So the tale goes.

 

[Naraoia]

An excellent question.

Since Darwinists reject observation and the scientific method I don't think that they would expect evolution to be observed.

Evolution =/= the appearance of new genera. Now, please answer my question.

The tuatara, allegedly the fastest evolving animal on Earth,

Allegedly by whom?

hasn't evolved a single cell in over 200 million years. Since the allegedly fastest evolving animal hasn't changed in the last 200 million years no other animal has either. The allegedly fastest evolving animal on Earth is called a living fossil because it hasn't evolved at all.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it looks like that paragraph doesn't contain a single correct statement.

(1) What does "evolved a single cell" even mean?

(2) Sphenodontinae, the subfamily to which tuataras belong, appears in the Early Jurassic according to Palaeos. The base of the Jurassic is currently dated to 201.6 Mya. They'd have to appear pretty damn close to that base for your claim to have a chance of being shown true. Not to mention that Mesozoic sphenodontines are still classified in many different genera - none of which is Sphenodon. If they haven't changed at all, why are they not lumped together with living tuataras?

(3) Who on earth said that the tuatara was the fastest-evolving animal on earth?

(4) Living fossils are not called living fossils because they haven't evolved at all, but because they seemingly evolved more slowly than other lineages. (I say "seemingly" because morphological conservatism doesn't have to reflect an overall slow rate of evolution)

Similarly, cyanobacteria and archaea have not evolved a single cell in over 3.6 billion years.

Plenty of other things have. What's that have to do with anything?

They are natural selection.

Which I stated quite clearly, together with the reason I mentioned them anyway.

Aka undirected mutation.

If you really think that genetic drift = mutation, I suppose I'm wasting my time talking to you.

Aka natural selection.

It appears that you either don't know what natural selection is, or you are being contrary for the hell of it.

 

[SithDoughnut]

They are analogous.

This shows how little you understand about evolution. A dinosaur with a slightly different mutation giving birth to another dinosaur with a slightly different mutation and so on for hundreds of generations, each generation becoming more successful over other dinosaurs until eventually a creature was born that is the ancestor (or possibly even just one of many) of birds as we know them today, is not the same as a dog giving birth to a cat.

Please read up on a subject if you intend to denounce it.

I agree. Not in a single generation!

Ah, so you agree that large scale evolutionary change happens over multiple generations then?

Not in a single generation did birds evolve from dinosaurs. Birds descended from birds in every generation.

Yet dinosaurs are genetically similar to birds, yet not to other species. Curious how such a link obviously cannot mean that they are in any way related.

 

[FreezBee]

I heard this was true but neither I nor the person who told me this was there. So its all speculation and assumptions, like most of the theory.
So back in the day when lizards were transforming into birds and developing wings these sounds could be heard through out the land.


thump, thump, thump, thump, thump.....THUMP
thump, thump, thump, thump, thump.....THUMP
thump, thump, thump, thump, thump.....THUMP
thump, thump, thump, thump, thump..............



The quieter thump's that were heard was the lizard's running along fallen tree trunks and stuff with their back legs while their front legs were transforming into wings and the last big THUMP was it hitting the ground for the wings were not quite ready for flight. Some millions of years later, finally fully transformed and developed wings due to mindless natural selection (Because somehow mindless natural selection knew the lizard must fly. Amazing isn't it?) the lizard took flight and became a bird and the last big THUMP was never heard again. So the tale goes.

So the tale goes among creationists, but what do they know?

Archaeopteryx had claws on its wings, so possibly it climbed in trees and might have used it wings to glide from tree to tree rather than actually fly.

As fror non-climbing early birds, they might at first have used their wings for display -- to appear bigger and possibly thereby scare off a would-be predator.


- FreezBee

 

[Meshach]

So the tale goes among creationists, but what do they know?

Archaeopteryx had claws on its wings, so possibly it climbed in trees and might have used it wings to glide from tree to tree rather than actually fly.

As fror non-climbing early birds, they might at first have used their wings for display -- to appear bigger and possibly thereby scare off a would-be predator.


- FreezBee

Might of, assuptions and speculation. Just like my story.