The Lie of Evolution

[Paul of Eugene OR]

If the stars only appears once in a while, then you can't have a science. It is a science because you can repeatedly observe the stars, or can you?

Science is about repetition, it's not about whether you can put them to lab or not. You are twisting my words.

Strange objection. We can repeatedly observe the stars with more and better equipment. We can repeatedly observe the fossils and dig up more fossils. We can repeatedly analyze DNA and analyze more and more species. Evolution keeps passing all the tests.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

No, science doesn't work that way. For example, fossil can be anything like I said. It can be a result of repeated interbreeding. It can also be that nature does have the ability to select, such that a species can change along with time, however this may not be how they are brought to its current state from a single cell organism. It thus remains a speculation (i.e., not science) to conclude that nature can drive single cell organism to a fully grown species.

The nested hierarchy of traits establishes common ancestry.

 

[Hawkins]

The nested hierarchy of traits establishes common ancestry.

Why do you have to assume that interbreeding does exist? Do you know that tiger interbreeds with lion to give Liger. Now tell me how do fit common ancestry for liger and its offspring couple million years later?

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Why do you have to assume that interbreeding does exist?

What has interbreeding got to do with what we are talking about?

 

[Hawkins]

Huh? Interbreeding does exist. Where did that come from?

Why do you have to assume that interbreeding does exist? Do you know that tiger interbreeds with lion to give Liger. Now tell me how do you fit common ancestry for liger and its offspring couple million years later, if the three of them keep mating with each other all the times back and forth?

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Why do you have to assume that interbreeding does exist? Do you know that tiger interbreeds with lion to give Liger. Now tell me how do you fit common ancestry for liger and its offspring couple million years later, if the three of them keep mating with each other all the times?

You don't appear to understand the theory of evolution when you post stuff like this. There was once a line of cat predators that diverged into the separate lines of lion and tiger. They haven't diverged enough to prevent the interbreeding you describe. But such inbreeding is so rare as to not matter and over time - eons - tigers and lions will further diverge. So, given that, please more clearly specify your objection to the evolutionist understanding of this situation.

 

[Hawkins]

You don't appear to understand the theory of evolution when you post stuff like this. There was once a line of cat predators that diverged into the separate lines of lion and tiger. They haven't diverged enough to prevent the interbreeding you describe. But such inbreeding is so rare as to not matter and over time - eons - tigers and lions will further diverge. So, given that, please more clearly specify your objection to the evolutionist understanding of this situation.

You don't seem to get my point. You can't go back to verify that only tiger and lion can interbreed. Basically anything can interbreed with one another as long as the genes allow. There's no common ancestor can be defined since then. That's the point.

To put it another way, common ancestry is based on the assumption that interbreeding doesn't generally exist. Thus you can conclude that a genetic pattern of similarity is coming from evolution.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

You don't seem to get my point. You can't go back to verify that only tiger and lion can interbreed. Basically anything can interbreed with one another as long as the genes allow. There's no common ancestor can be defined since then. That's the point.

To put it another way, common ancestry is based on the assumption that interbreeding doesn't generally exist. Thus you can conclude that a genetic pattern of similarity is coming from evolution.

I'm not following that logic. What's the fixation on tigers and lions interbreeding? I have no idea whether or not, for example, leopards can or cannot interbreed with either tigers or lions. Evolution theory presents a long term scenario where species diverge to the point where they cannot interbreed any more. So are you attempting to say that inability to interbreed between frogs and mice proves they don't have, way back, a common ancestry? Please note that scientists reject the criterion of interbreeding as the limit for possible common ancestry. However, interbreeding, when it can occur, is strong evidence FOR common ancestry, is it not? Tigers and Lions last had a common ancestral species about 7 million years ago, give or take a few million.