Watch and consider IV

[pshun2404]

No worries, I use caps for emphasis, too.

I know what you object to. A lot of information gets lost when people speak in hyperbole during these discussions. All I wanted to establish is that the lines are not just drawn through assumption. They represent real data.

I have one more item to clear up before we get to interpretation, but it will have to wait till I get home, instead of on my phone.

Understood, but I am going to bed. I am tired after a wild grandchildren's birthday party all day and it is midnight here...take your time, I am getting a lot out of our discussion.

 

[46AND2]

Fwiw, I PARTIALLY agree with you, but you take it too far. If you'll allow me some patience, I'll show you why in good order.

 

[pshun2404]

And I thank you for your patience...please by all means....

 

[46AND2]

And I thank you for your patience...please by all means....

Sorry for the wait, had mandatory overtime over the weekend, and I've been exhausted. I'll get back to this in the next 24 hours...

 

[pshun2404]

Get some rest and take your time....

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Problem here is YOUR training to default to assumption based conclusions

I default to evidence based conclusions.

...shared familial genetic markers demonstrate descent that is scientifically verifiable our difference of opinion as to whether or not there is a God has nothing to do with it

Au contraire. It has everything to do with it.
Creationistic ideas are inherently religious.
Your objections to evolution has nothing to do with the science or the evidence, and everything with your religious beliefs.

This is why you place an arbitrary "limit" as to what genetic evidence can demonstrate in terms of common ancestry and bloodties. You are arbitrarily limiting it to just work within a species. Not because you have evidence of that, but just because your religious beliefs tell you that species don't share ancestry.

...all organisms demonstrate similar sequences.

And in a hierarchical pattern.
Just as we would expect from a collection of species that shares ancestry.

We can call these "markers" and interpret them according to the historical narrative believed

Scientific theories are not "beliefs" nore are they "believed"

(because it is what they were taught)

Or because they don't allow preconceived (faith based) beliefs to get in their way of rationally evaluating evidence...

OR we can look at them as similarities because we are LIVING or because we have faces, or legs, or similar for many other reasons.

Those reasons being ultimatly religious, right?

 

[pshun2404]

Our discussion (except for you) had nothing to do with religion. Go back and re-read the thread and consider the reasoning.