Why no evidence FOR creation/ID?

[Jimmy D]

Taken together, genomic data for both the alleged fusion and cryptic centromere sites refute the concept of fusion in a human-chimpanzee common ancestor.

How so?

 

[Waggles]

I do not believe any of that.

Your feelings and assertions and anecdotes do not impress me

When it comes to Darwinism, likewise!!

 

[Waggles]

In the end; evolution is the religion of the spiritually dead.

 

[lesliedellow]

In the end; evolution is the religion of the spiritually dead.

In the end; creationism is the religion of the intellectually dead.

 

[sfs]

In the end; evolution is the religion of the spiritually dead.

I've got a religion, and evolution isn't it. Evolution is, however, an indispensable model for understanding and predicting genetic data. If you have an alternative model that can do as well, I'm all ears.

 

[Steve Petersen]

I'm all ears.

Would that be a useful mutation?

 

[sfs]

Would that be a useful mutation?

Only if it made me more likely to reproduce -- something I'm kind of skeptical about. Maybe it will prove to be a popular look, though.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Any supernatural power is a non repeatable event
and by definition outside of the realms of science.

Then how could you ever conclude it occured?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

No one claims it did. Readers all through time claim it is fiction.

Ancient Greeks would disagree.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

That is only one factor. It really depends on the reputation of the person
making the determination. Some people have a clear agenda when evaluating.

Smells like a combination of the argument from authority and the argument from popularity.

This is not how claims are evaluated.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

It's impossible for Creationists to predict the creationist model
not knowing the conditions before and during.

You must know the conditions previous, and during an event
to make predictions.

And what exactly must be known to even conclude that the event überhaupt happened, in the first place?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Becasue it was a mature creation, ready for it's intended purpose.
As God always does.

How do you know?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

If I'm not mistaken wouldn't a good argument or evidence against evolution point to creationism?

No.

What other option would there be? Is there a third party?

Take your pick:

List of creation myths - Wikipedia

You may add to that list any other unfalsifiable / unsupportable idea that your brain can dream up.

Its either creationism or evolution, right?

Why? And what do you mean by "creationism"? Are you talking then about just "genesis"? If yes, which denomination's version thereof? And why genesis? Why not any of the other cultural creation myths from that list I provided?

Or what scientologists have to say, concerning our inner immortal Thetans?
How have you ruled all of them out?

I hope that by now you see how it is problematic to try and "support" an idea, by merely trying to "rule out" alternatives...

For starters, the list of candidate models is potentially infinite - really only limited by your human imagination. Ruling one out, does nothing for all the others.

You actually require positive evidence FOR your idea of choice.

If creationism is outside the realms of our science then science can neither prove or disprove it.

Which renders it utterly meaningless and irrelevant.

You disagree? Then think about how meaningfull or relevant to you my claim is that an undetectable inter-dimensional dragon is standing behind you, ready to take a bite.

therefor to make an argument for creationism would be to argue against evolution because evolution is in the realms of science.

Not really. Biological evolution could be the means of how your god of choice created things.
And that claim would be equally unfalsifiable and unsupportable.

That's the thing about unfalsifiable ideas.... they are infinite in number. Which is exactly why they are worthless.

 

[AV1611VET]

How do you know?

The fact that you're asking this shows it.

We wouldn't be here if Adam had nothing to eat.

As Adam Clarke put it:

It appears that God created every thing, not only perfect as it respects its nature, but also in a state of maturity, so that every vegetable production appeared at once in full growth; and this was necessary that man, when he came into being, might find every thing ready for his use.

 

[lesliedellow]

That's the thing about unfalsifiable ideas.... they are infinite in number. Which is exactly why they are worthless.

Worthless to who? They self evidently not worthless to an awful lot of people.

 

[USincognito]

Never said i was the author and the source was cited earlier and repeated on the same page. #192. If i reference an article, {From the previous link.} i am not always going to keep posting the same link over and over. Esp when the link is available on the same page. It is not my problem you guys cannot make a case for your faith. You don't know how.

Debunking the Debunkers | Answers in Genesis

In 2013, it was shown that the alleged interstitial telomeric repeat site of the human chromosome 2 fusion corresponding to chimpanzee chromosomes 2A and 2B of a hypothetical common ancestor was actually a second promoter in the DDX11L2 long noncoding RNA gene. Additional ENCODE related data are provided in this report that not only debunk evolutionary criticism and obfuscation in response to this discovery, but solidify the original finding. New data come from epigenetic-modifications, transcription factor binding, and transcription start site information. It is also shown that the alleged cryptic centromere site, which is very short in length compared to a normal centromere, is completely situated inside the actively expressed protein coding gene ANKRD30BL—encoding both exon and intron regions. Other factors refuting this region as a cryptic centromere are also discussed. Taken together, genomic data for both the alleged fusion and cryptic centromere sites refute the concept of fusion in a human-chimpanzee common ancestor.

---------------------------------------------------------

What Tompkins doesn't tell you is that his results were from a buggy version of BLAST and that he's the only one to get those results.

 

[USincognito]

In the end; evolution is the religion of the spiritually dead.

For whom is plate tectonics the religion?
What about germ theory of disease?
Dynamo theory?
Relativity?

 

[USincognito]

A third problem with the hypothesis of a chromosomal fusion in human ancestry lies in the complete absence of humans with 48 chromosomes. If it were true that a chromosomal split occurred in human evolution, then two distinct human groups would have been generated: one containing 48 chromosomes which were not altered by any genetic change, and a second containing 46 chromosomes including the fusion of chromosome 2

Didn't I, at the very least, explain to you how population genetics works in the past few days?

 

[tas8831]

Always with the excuses.

And your excuse for 1. engaging in the burden shifting fallacy and 2. not providing any evidence for creationism?

 

[USincognito]

Nothing has changed since the Piltdown Man Hoax ... it still continues with another fraud 'Lucy'

You're under the impression that AL-288-1 is the only Au. afarensis specimen, aren't you?