Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
You interpret fossils to fit your worldview, and we interpret the fossils to fit ours.
I never said I didn't believe it. Can you tie this in to how it proves life evolved and was not created?
Why can't God create apes and humans with similar pelvises? Why don't you show us every pelvis from every ape and monkey? This picture is selective and is intended to be interpreted with your particular worldview in mind. You show us only what you want us to see. Similar bone structures don't prove evolution; that's just how you interpret it because you assume evolution beforehand.Really? Let's see if that holds up. Here is a picture of 4 pelvises. From left to right is Human, A. afarensis (i.e. Lucy), A. ramidus (another transitional), and P. troglodytes (chimp). Now, try to tell us with a straight face that the middle two pelvises look more like the chimp pelvis on the right than the human pelvis on the left.
View attachment 173072
I could line up car parts that look very similar too.Really? Let's see if that holds up. Here is a picture of 4 pelvises. From left to right is Human, A. afarensis (i.e. Lucy), A. ramidus (another transitional), and P. troglodytes (chimp). Now, try to tell us with a straight face that the middle two pelvises look more like the chimp pelvis on the right than the human pelvis on the left.
View attachment 173072
You're right, you can't. You can only post a long and convoluted post and reject my request for you to put it into simpler terms.I already did, but you refused to even read the post.
I can't open your eyes for you.
Maybe if it was better explained then I would understand it.
I could line up car parts that look very similar too.
Thank you, I now understand the argument. Has the scientific community proved that the reason these 'ancestors' have less ERV is because of evolution and not simply decay?There was nothing wrong with his explanation. You asked him to discuss one of the 29 topics in the reference he posted.
But here, I'll get to the main idea of it:
You have the same 200,000+ endogenous retroviruses (ERV) in your DNA as your parents, right down to being in the same location. How did this happen? Did both you and your parents independently obtain all these viruses, or did you inherit them from your parents? Some other method?
We also share 99.9+% of all these viruses with chimps, right down to being in the same location. How did this happen?
When you compare the relationship of the viruses to the "family tree" of apes which we had already come up with through other methods, we see that we share a progressively less percentage of the viruses, the more distantly related we are on the "family tree," which is exactly what we would expect to see if common ancestry is true.
We directly observe that retroviruses insert randomly across billions of base pairs.
We know that what we are studying are, in fact, retroviruses for several reasons, not the least of which being that we actually resurrected one.
Thank you, I now understand the argument. Has the scientific community proved that the reason these 'ancestors' have less ERV is because of evolution and not simply decay?
I should add that correlation does not equal causation. Just because we have the same amount of ERV as chimps doesn't necessarily mean that it is because of ancestry. Have they studied the ERV present in other species as well?
I elaborated what I meant in the rest of the post you decided not to post. Humans having the position of most intelligent animal is a shaky application, because what qualifies as intelligence isn't standardized, and some animals are better at certain cognitive tasks than humans. And before you mention something like IQ, that is a human exclusive measurement that cannot be applied correctly to any other species.If no comparison, how to you measure exaggeration?
Okay, but do they find these ERVs in other species? I can understand why evolutionists would hold to this as a piece of evidence, as it may be quite the correlation. But, aren't you ruling out the possibility that there is some other cause for the presence of these ERVs in apelike creatures? Why must evolution be the case? Why do humans have more ERVs than other primates, or 99.9% the same amount as chimps? Evolution is always assumed by these scientists, as there is no room for further questioning or even the possibility that evolution is false. Many say it is a scientific fact, so it need not be interpreted any other way.I didn't say merely the same number. They are the same viruses, in the same location of the genomes. We share them with chimps in the same way you share them with your parents.
Why can't God create apes and humans with similar pelvises? Why don't you show us every pelvis from every ape and monkey? This picture is selective and is intended to be interpreted with your particular worldview in mind. You show us only what you want us to see. Similar bone structures don't prove evolution; that's just how you interpret it because you assume evolution beforehand.
You're right, you can't. You can only post a long and convoluted post and reject my request for you to put it into simpler terms.
I see you can't understand that you are presenting selective evidence and then asking me to answer a question that in no way proves your worldview.I see that you can't answer a simple question.
Are the two pelvises in the middle of the picture more like the pelvis on the left or on the right?
The long post is in simple terms. You try to claim there is no evidence for evolution, yet you refuse to even look at the evidence. How is that an honest position?
There was nothing wrong with his explanation. You asked him to discuss one of the 29 topics in the reference he posted.
But here, I'll get to the main idea of it:
You have the same 200,000+ endogenous retroviruses (ERV) in your DNA as your parents, right down to being in the same location. How did this happen? Did both you and your parents independently obtain all these viruses, or did you inherit them from your parents? Some other method?
We also share 99.9+% of all these viruses with chimps, right down to being in the same location. How did this happen?
When you compare the relationship of the viruses to the "family tree" of apes which we had already come up with through other methods, we see that we share a progressively less percentage of the viruses, the more distantly related we are on the "family tree," which is exactly what we would expect to see if common ancestry is true.
We directly observe that retroviruses insert randomly across billions of base pairs.
We know that what we are studying are, in fact, retroviruses for several reasons, not the least of which being that we actually resurrected one.
You see, what reason would this deity have to make other animals resemble the creation that is supposed to be specially made it its image (humans)? The fact of the matter is, for the evidence to support evolution this strongly, if creationism were the reality, then YHWH is trolling us on purpose. Even if everything had 1 creator behind it, making all the lifeforms resemble each other like this, in apparent sequence in time as one gradually evolved into another, could not be a fluke. But YHWH has no motivation to have the creation appear not to be created at all, and to suggest the devil plants fossils would require that being to have free reign on wreaking havoc on the world to such an extent that it needn't bother.Why can't God create apes and humans with similar pelvises? Why don't you show us every pelvis from every ape and monkey? This picture is selective and is intended to be interpreted with your particular worldview in mind. You show us only what you want us to see. Similar bone structures don't prove evolution; that's just how you interpret it because you assume evolution beforehand.
Okay, but do they find these ERVs in other species? I can understand why evolutionists would hold to this as a piece of evidence, as it may be quite the correlation. But, aren't you ruling out the possibility that there is some other cause for the presence of these ERVs in apelike creatures?
Why must evolution be the case? Why do humans have more ERVs than other primates, or 99.9% the same amount as chimps?
Evolution is always assumed by these scientists, as there is no room for further questioning or even the possibility that evolution is false. Many say it is a scientific fact, so it need not be interpreted any other way.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?