Don´t remain tied, Darwin has lied

Too believe that two different species can interbreed is pretty far out in left field, considering that they evolved complety independent of one another.

Even diverging spices as closely related as lions and tiger rarely breed successfully.

 

I agree that we were never Apes.

Evolutionists Do.

Ok Grnm.. since this is all imagination anyway - you might feel better knowing the theory supposed we came from 'Ape Creatures', which became modern Apes and Humans.

 

Im not sure what you mean by 'Related'?
IF you mean that all life has certain fundemental bio-chemical characteristics then we can call say there is a 'Relation' i suppose.

Please explain how to demonstrate this bio-chemical relation and why that indicates evolution occured?

Yes, Radiated Tadpols can be observed having 'Scrambled' information.
Evolution which adds new information through/by mutation has never been observed. By 'Never' i mean it has been attempt over and over and NEVER observed.

If by 'Adaptations' you mean the loss or trade of already existing genetic information - then Yes.

If you mean the addition of new genetic information (as Evolutionists theorize) - then any accredited scientist can 'Imagine' all they want - it doesnt make it happen because they 'dont deny it'.

There is no 'offer' to be 'considered', however there most certainly is a basic and historic explanation which suggests an Intelligent Designer made it so.
This may not be your 'Choice' or 'Belief' but it certainly does offer an explanation.

Your last statement was not even Valid.
There are zero peice of evidence backing up your last Opinion.
It does not even attempt to explain the observed facts.

[Just thought you would enjoy the same kind of outright denouncement you give out ]

 

You just did when you described it as a 'Signature'.
Well Said.

The final conclusion of this quote also says it all - Its a Testament to the Miracle of Life.

Indeed!

Sadly, No they dont.
They simply accept the Official State Creationist Story and the Decree's of its High Priests.

 

Brockton,

Evolution theory does NOT suppose that we came from "ape creature".
This is some of the misinformation perpetuated by creationist fanatics.
--------------
Why must you believers misrepresent science instead of proving your case for a magic man in the sky? Is it simply that your convictions lack any form of substaniation?

You clearly have little understanding of science; is that also true of your belief system?

What's your alternative to Evolutionary adaptation? You argue petty details against science, yet expect us to accept your grandiose statements of magical creation, without providing a single detail to back it up. Hypocrisy?

Although the details of the mechanics of the evolutionary process are still up for debate, NO reputable scientist denies the FACT of biological evolutionary adaptation.

 

Brocktoon,
"You just did when you described it as a 'Signature'.
Well Said."

Non-sequitor.

"The final conclusion of this quote also says it all - Its a Testament to the Miracle of Life."

Word play- it works on the sunday school mind, but not on any one with the slightest degree of sophistication.
Hitting the lottery is a miracle- in other words, a low probability event.

 

Yes, Evolutionist do imagine that humans 'evolved' from an "Ape Creature" which evolved from some soup.

Since there is no actual 'Ape Creature' and the theory can simply change whenever the imagineers desire it to - Its not possible to ever 'Pin them down'.

In anycase - Most Evolutionist believed the Soup morphed into an "Ape Creature' somewhere before turning into a Human Being.

If you have new information Geckopelli - Please make it available to us.

[Remember that just 10 years ago it was 'Scientific Fact' humans evolved from 'Lucy' who was a Giant 'Gibbon-Human'... but now that is dismissed. So it hard to keep up on what they Evolutionists are imagining this week??]

 

"Im not sure what you mean by 'Related'?
IF you mean that all life has certain fundemental bio-chemical characteristics then we can call say there is a 'Relation' i suppose.

Please explain how to demonstrate this bio-chemical relation and why that indicates evolution occured?"

As simple as possible:
Of the two possible forms of a particular amino acids, only one type occurs in life on earth.
This type is no more probable than the other type; had life forms come in to being independently, animals containing both the d and l forms would exist. They do not.
This is because that intial spark of life is a low probability event. It was simply chance that one formed life before the other.

Had a god created all life independently, the rules of reality, which he would also have created, would have produced approximately equal numbers of d and l supported life forms.

"Yes, Radiated Tadpols can be observed having 'Scrambled' information.
Evolution which adds new information through/by mutation has never been observed. By 'Never' i mean it has been attempt over and over and NEVER observed."

This is a self-contridictory statement. Mutations ARE an alteration in the genetic program- "new" information, if you must call it that.


"If you mean the addition of new genetic information (as Evolutionists theorize) - then any accredited scientist can 'Imagine' all they want - it doesnt make it happen because they 'dont deny it'."

Again, you misrepresent evolution theory. The genetic program is altered by evironmental pressures; "new" is your word.


"There is no 'offer' to be 'considered', however there most certainly is a basic and historic explanation which suggests an Intelligent Designer made it so.
This may not be your 'Choice' or 'Belief' but it certainly does offer an explanation."

And the stork offers an explanation for the existence of babies.
But like creationism, it lacks any evidence what so ever.


"Your last statement was not even Valid.
There are zero peice of evidence backing up your last Opinion.
It does not even attempt to explain the observed facts."

Creationism is not a theory. The are zero pieces of evidence to back it up. It's not even a hypothesis, because it does not attempt to explain the observed facts.
-Of course this is valid. Point out a hole-if you can.

And I will contiune to denounce attempts to misrepresent science in the name of religious fanatacism.

 

Interesting Speculation on your part.

What is more interesting is your uncalled for opinion that this is 'simply chance'.

If anything, you are making a good argument for Intelligent Design and in particular efficient design.

Sorry but im a little confused.
You stated that only one exists on this planet?

Please clarify?

Im not sure how you understand 'Contradictions' but maybe its worth defining 'New Information' first.

A great example would be taking this sentence as an example of what a Tadpoles Genetic information might look like.

Now here is the effects of mutation:

A garet exple woulamd be tag tnkintehis see asof wha an exaple t a Tdpaoles Gec infornetiation might olok li.ke

This is to say there is no 'Novel' information added.
Existing information is being 'mixed' into different combinations.

Further to that... some information is being lost.

The problem with calling 'Scrambled information' "New" information is that it goes nowhere in helping the evolutionists story.

Evolutionists really dont care if its 'Mixed' or 'New combinations' - for their purposes they need 'Novel' and 'Added' information.

This has NEVER been observed and (so far) there is no known way it can happen.

Loss or Gain of already existing genetic information is refered to as 'Natural Selection' by ALL scientists, including Evolutionists.

"New" genetic information is also a word already used by Evolutionists and Creationists and ID'ers.

Its required to 'Evolve' in the fashion Evolutionists suppose.

It IS their theory that NEW information is being added.

Please forward that to the Scientists at the exciting new http://www.intelligentdesignnetwork.org/

[Fair warning.. they are Scientists, so they will probably ask you to demonstrate your Stork Theory ]

Your theory that Creationism is not a theory is not a valid theory.
You have zero pieces of evidence to back up your claim.
Your claim does not even attempt to explain the observed facts about Creationism.
This is a valid description of your statement.
Point our a hole in it if you can?

You have misrepresented Evolutionist Science several times in this thread, however i am happy to deounce religious fanatisism right along with you.

Lets agree that Religious Fanatics are on their own and neither of us having any interest in them.
Whether they proclaim Creationism, Evolutionism or Intelligent Design movements.

 

I think that all our veggies, fruits, and farm animals are examples of species changing over time due to genetic traits that are favored being carried on, and unfavorable ones being left behind.

Cauliflower, Broccoli, Brussel Sprouts, and Cabbage are all human selected and genetically changed versions of one original plant.
This seems to me like a supportive piece of information to accept that survival in the wild would also do the same. Therefore, over time, natural selection would do exactly what farmers do so we can have carrots that are chewable, and cows that give gallons of milk a day.

 

Well we could go with a theory from South Park...we are all mix of creatures from seperate planets across the universe, sent to live together and have their lives taped for a bunch of aliens entertainment across space. Reality TV...gotta love it...(actually, I hate it, but I do love South Park). Anyone seen that episode? It's genius =P

 

I want to see it, sounds great.
I really like the one where Jesus and Satan meet in the ring on pay per view.
That show has some very funny moments.
I like the Canadian show, Trailer Park Boys better though. To me, its the funniest thing since Python.

 

Finally BlackGuard and I can agree on something - Trailer Park Boys are great.
I wouldnt not compare them to Python.. but they are pretty good
You Reveeny looking MuthaFucka

BTW.. 'Natural Selection' of either Vegetable or Animals has nothing to do with Evolutionism other than being something that happens in nature (Like Eating, Breathing or Mating).
In other words, Evolutionists must guess Natural Selection happens WHILE their theory allegedly happened - but its NOT their mechanism.

 

Just as Brocktoon says, what does this really have to do with evolution, did you know that the waves near the seashore can sometimes swallow a couple of stones and then throw them up in the a correct order with the smallest stones being up front while the biggest being at the back. The point here being, these rocks find a symmetrical order in natur, my question is can they build sand castles?

You explain to us a simple process which is not so diffucult, but can it explain the extremly complex systems which we are composed of. Everything in nature screeeaaams design, everything is so perfectly fixed for live to survive, how could the eye evolve, how could the complex system of blood congealing evolve from nothing even though this system is like a huge casade system? These and a few other question are enlightened in Darwins Black Box by Michael Behe, a book which is said to be the straw that broke the camels back. I´ve read that book and I say that you have to be either extremly stupid to still believe in evolution or in complete denial and in love of the neo darwinistic orthodoxy.

Little knowledge of science makes one an atheist, much knowledge of science makes one a believe in God.

 

Natural selection is the process by which evolution occurs. Mutations occur, making a species better or worse suited to survive, thus natural selection determines the advancement of a species in a certain direction.

If you guys are still denying evolution I must say that you are blatently and actively blinding yourself and I question your intellgence. Active ignorance. The evidence for evolution is overwhelming. I suggest if you wish to continue your futile attempt to reach the afterlife that you begin to claim that God set up the initial conditions for evolution or that he created the Big Bang. Because you cannot simply cite some rediculously incredulous book and think it will convince people of your ignorant preachings.

cabdirazzaq it is common sense that smaller stones [being less massive] will settle towards the shoreline and the larger stones farther back.

Because you cannot understand the nature and process by which species and bodily systems evolve does not invalidate them. "The eye is really complicated so that must mean that this completely plausible thing called 'evolution' is wrong and my idea of a God must be right, even though I have to suspend rationality to make it sound credible." it is bullshit. No other way to put it. It does not evolve from nothing. It happens of hundreds of thousands of years from the initial amino acids that formed from elemental chemicals in the massive bodies of water. Perhaps when seeking answers concerning evolutionary biology you should consult a Biologist and not an internet forum....

Meh, why do I bother... I wonder when/if life [of any sort] is discovered somewhere other than earth what your argument will be. What about the fossilized bacteria on Mars? I don't recall what was determined about those.

 

Brocktoon

The fact of the existence of the two forms of amino acids and the equal probability of spontaneous formation are matters of biochemistry that can be reproduced upon demand. Your ignorance on the subject is not surprising; it's hard science of which few lay people have knowledge.
But I've expounded on cellaur biological evolution (as well as many other science subjects beyond the casual knowledge of most) enough times on the web site.
If you are not afraid to approach truth, by all means study the matter. It's legitiment science, accesible to anyone, but not to be understood without a firm foundation of knowledge.

"Sorry but im a little confused.
You stated that only one exists on this planet?

Please clarify?"

Again-study. Learn why the chemical properties involved require the same probability of formation.

Simple: Once life A has established itself, it kills any life B that comes along late.

"Im not sure how you understand 'Contradictions' but maybe its worth defining 'New Information' first.

This is a word game, and not in the least scientific. The structure of english grammar has zero to do with genetic evolution. It's a non-sequitor analogy.

New genes- a gene that contains infor mation that it did not contain before.

Gotta go-but I'll be back!

 

(con't)
"This has NEVER been observed and (so far) there is no known way it can happen."

Are you a new person?
Are your children new? Or exactly like everyone else's?

Arguments by analogy do not hold up in science, you see.

New spieces are discover at a tremendous rate- perhaps they've only recenrly evolved.

"It IS their theory that NEW information is being added."

See above.

"You have misrepresented Evolutionist Science "

I see you recognize the percarious position you are in.
It is quite clear that my knowledge and understanding of the subject far exceeds your own. Until you free yourself of the chains of dogmatic belief, it will always be thus.

"Lets agree that Religious Fanatics are on their own and neither of us having any interest in them."

You, sir, ARE a religious fanatic, for you preach blind obidience to domga and denial of observed reality. Magical creation, indeed!
It is the misrepresentation of science by religious fanatics that brings me to this forum.

And science is a study, not a religion.

 

Science is the only religion where the followers make up the scripture, and they all have a slightly different take on it.

 

Natural Selection is not the mechanism Evolutionists are looking for.

To see who is 'Ignorant' about this or not - I suggest you write a thesis suggesting Natural Selection is the mechanism for Evolutionism.

Then present it to an Evolutionist Commitee...

.. When they are finished LAUGHING THEIR ARSES OFF at your paper... they will then ask you if you were either a) Frozen in a Glacier for the last 100 years OR you are the most ignorant human being on earth.

EVOLUTIONISTS DO NOT BELIEVE NATURAL SELECTION IS THE WAY EVOLUTION HAPPENED.

In fact,, its a PROBLEM to Evolutionists trying to justify their IMAGINATIVE idea that new genetics appeared spontaneously.