Everyone has misconceptions and I'm tired of going round in circles with both of you...
Yes.
Bracketed comments and explanations are grammatically correct when separated from the text with parenthesis.
No they're not, you are reading your ideas into the text perverting both the bible and the scientific thought you claim to represent.
The Theistic Evolutionists believe that the genealogy refers to species, not individuals who would have lived an inordinately and unsubportedly excessive long life of 950 years in some cases.
Theistic evolutionists for the most part make no statements one way or another on endless genealogies.
The Theistic Evolution Bible believers say that a day is a thousand years to god, so he was actually referring to 950,000 years.
Where do we stop with this interpretation, did Joshua and the Israelites march around Jericho 7000 years?
That length of time corresponds with the species we understand to be the 22 links to modern man.
There are more than 22 links, whatever you mean by that, you fail to understand sorites paradox in your understanding of evolutionary theory.
?
You think I am not?
Give me your explanation of "in the beginning" if it does not refer to the big bang start of time we now calculate as 13.5 billion years ago.
I have given you my explanation before, again even though I am a Theistic Evolutionist, I accept that the creation account found in Genesis 1 is best placed 6000 years ago.
You have not refuted my evidence at all.
Haven't I? Well I think that's because your evidence seems to be smoke and mirrors, based entirely on an understanding of science and evolutionary theory.
Do I need to list all the changes, some of which were huge changes in thinking. I have spoken to sufficient examples. In fact it takes only one and the knuckle walking fiasco is sufficient to demonstrate my point.
I have said as have many other evolutionists both atheistic and theistic that change in theory does not invalidate it.
To refute me you will have to refute the notion that evolutionary thinking changes like the wind.
You are setting up to disprove evolutionary hypotheses rather than evolutionary theory. You bring up these ideas about chimps and humans as if the entirety of the theory rests on this, it does not, all you are doing is at most disproving a hypothesis, but you aren't even doing that! You barely understand the science you try to twaddle on about and you call us "wofflers"[sic] simply because you don't understand.
Re chimps humans, 1% difference supports evolution, 6% difference supports evolution, and 90% difference would still be made out to support evolution.
How do similarities in DNA prove creationism? If God created why would he make all his creatures similar?
Junk DNA was shoved in creationists faces and supports evolution and functional non coding dna also supports evolution.
Why wouldn't it? How does creationism deal with these phenomena?
Gradual change was not found so poofing from one kind into another in a very short space of time also supports evolution.
You seem to misunderstand punctuated equilibrium and gradualism, it doesn't need to be either or, it can quite happily be both and.
LUCA was undeniable proof of evolution and LUCAs death by HGT means nothing and does not falsify evolution
Mendellian inheritance was the only form of inheritance and hence mutations explain evolution and now HGT and epigentics plays a vital role in evolution and still proves evolution.
I don't know enough to comment on this sorry.
Indeed previous theories should not be falsified. If they are based on a correct assumption the initial theory should remain solid and new information just clarify and enhance. Good theories that have some basis on a true assumption become outdated but are not falsified continually like evos ones are.
If you are denying there has been substantial changes in evolutionary thinking then all you are presenting is your most humble ignorance of your own science.
Indeed you will have to deny much before we reach the end of this discussion.
Who is saying that? That would be a silly thing to say. We also make no assertions about our future understanding of any scientific field, unlike how it was in Newton's time, you know we don't actually use newtonian gravity theory that much anymore, it has been replaced for the most part by Einstein's theory of relativity. This change has been far more significant than anything seen in Biology over the past 150 years as far as I know.
Since god drove all men to extinct (gen 6) except Noah and the three racial stocks of Caucaians, negroids, and mongolians... the implication is that Neanderthals who disappeared exactly 40 thousand years ago were killed off by the flood of Modern homos.
You are so racist, so in contempt of God's writ and creation that I don't know where to begin, by your words you are misrepresenting science giving creationists more strawmen that they can burn. If you truly want to be a good witness to what theistic evolutionary and scientific thought says then please read up on these topics: (books I'd recommend are in brackets)
framework interpretation of Genesis (Allegorical Interpretations of Genesis - Augustine)
temple interpretation of Genesis 1 (The Lost world of Genesis One - Walton)
current cosmology (The Mind of God - Davies, The Fabric of the Cosmos - Greene)
evolutionary theology (Thank God for Evolution - Dowd)