Top 10 Myths About Evolution

[Bugeyedcreepy]

It's never yielded anything useful. I know you confuse antibiotics as an evolutionary invention, but the people that invented all the drugs that led to modern medicine were actually believers in creation....

I was thinking more along the lines of vaccines, but since you mention it, testing antibiotics (and for that matter, any drug) used to be tested on animals that most genetically matched us the closest on the area of our genome that the drug affected. Why would that be a thing if we didn't share thes genomic sequences so closely with other life forms?

There are theists that believe the Pope that started the inquisition's were christian too.

...and where was God through all that & why wouldn't God set anyone straight?

How many times must this be answered before you all accept the truth?


PHENOTYPIC AND GENETIC EFFECTS OF HYBRIDIZATION IN DARWIN'S FINCHES. - PubMed - NCBI

"Hybridization increased additive genetic and environmental variances, increased heritabilities to a moderate extent, and generally strengthened phenotypic and genetic correlations. New additive genetic variance introduced by hybridization is estimated to be two to three orders of magnitude greater than that introduced by mutation."

It's your confusion in which you believe the opposite is true, when the truth from examining animals in nature found that mating was two to three orders of magnitude greater than mutation at producing new genetic variances.

Sure, hybridisation is one of the many mechanisms of Evolution, nobody says otherwise. Now, where did all these variations of Darwin's finches for your hybridisation hypothesis come from? Did they all come from the same mainland warbler-finch species?

Your comical view that mutation is required is even more laughable, since mating has a two to three times greater magnitude affect at creating new genetic variance than what you apply to mutation....

But being an evolution fanatic I understand you can never admit that truth to yourself...

If you have evidence that stands up to scrutiny, I'll change my position. Unfortunately for you, Evolution is a well-established practically applicable science being used in every facet of our modern day lives. Lucky for you that you still benefit from it even if you don't understand or accept it.

Perhaps you can help me understand your point of view better - which of Adam and Eve's descendants mated with which other of Adam and Eve's descendants to get Africans? Same with Asians too? Same with American Indians, Aboriginals, Eskimos, Latinos, Anglo-Saxons, etc.

 

[pitabread]

It's never yielded anything useful.

Oh, the lies that creationists tell themselves...

I suppose unless you think that gene annotation, drug discovery, pathogen tracking among other applications of the Toe don't qualify as "useful"... What especially amazes me is you've been given examples of applied evolution in the past, yet you're still stuck in blatant denial.

The good news is that no matter how much you bury your head in the sand, you still get to enjoy any benefits derived from application of the ToE.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Oh, the lies that creationists tell themselves...

I suppose unless you think that gene annotation, drug discovery, pathogen tracking among other applications of the Toe don't qualify as "useful"... What especially amazes me is you've been given examples of applied evolution in the past, yet you're still stuck in blatant denial.

The good news is that no matter how much you bury your head in the sand, you still get to enjoy any benefits derived from application of the ToE.

And there's a huge difference between science and fundamental Christianity. You can rail against science, deny it all you want but still enjoy its benefits and advantages. Yet if you deny or rail against fundamental Christianity, apparently not only will you be denied its benefits and advantages you will be actively punished for all eternity.

Which seems a more reasonable, inclusive, forgiving and loving approach?

 

[Justatruthseeker]

It seems that you never ‘see’ anything that might contradict your claims but I’ve said my piece on the matter.

Hopefully any lurkers will be able to discern who’s misrepresenting Koonin’s words.

Yes, hopefully any lurkers will be able to see who's misrepresenting his words.

You who claim HGT is unimportant besides his telling you it is prevalent.

"However, somewhat paradoxically, the very process of building phylogenies with molecules revealed the extent of horizontal gene transfer (HGT), and thereby threatened the TOL concept in regard to its core ideas of a unique ever-bifurcating branching pattern. "

and has led to trajectories of individual genes that are irreconcilably different and incompatible with your ever-bifurcating branching pattern of the Tree of Life...

or "“The genomic revolution [has]… effectively overturned the central metaphor of evolutionary biology, the Tree of Life, by showing that evolutionary trajectories of individual genes are irreconcilably different."

I'd pretend he didn't just say what he just said too if I was in your shoes.....

And I'll leave it at that since nothing matters in your world that contradicts your views.

 

[Jimmy D]

You who claim HGT is unimportant besides his telling you it is prevalent

What gives you the idea that I think ‘HGT is unimportant?

I’ve expressed no opinion on the importance of HGT, whatever you mean by that.

Your tilting at windmills.

Again.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

What gives you the idea that I think ‘HGT is unimportant?

I’ve expressed no opinion on the importance of HGT, whatever you mean by that.

Your tilting at windmills.

Again.

If you say so, but why get worked up over it then?

"It's nothing to get worked up about and I wonder why you posted it."

If you understand its importance why would you wonder why I posted it?

Hmm, must have not been important then even if it is prevalent and overturned the ToL.