Why is evolution right?

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#328 Oct 5, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't Duh me lovey. You have a long way to go before you can make any sense of what TOE has to guess at with the latest flavour of the month. You are only confusing yourself.
Tiktaalik has been knocked off its pedastal with a variety of tetrapod footprints being found dated to 400mya, on the heels of the Devonian.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v463/n72...
I did not say TOE makes no predictions. I said a crystal ball also gets it right sometimes.eg the huge difference in the human/chimp Y chromosome was not predicted, punctuated equilibrium was not predicted...
Stop right there. Darwin himself - while not using that term - predicted it.

"The periods during which species have undergone modification, though long as measured in years, have probably been short in comparison with the periods during which they retain the same form." Charles Darwin, Origin of Species , 4th edition (1866)

Nice try.

Level 5

Since: Apr 12

Jinan, China

#329 Oct 5, 2012
MazHere wrote
“I ridicule TOE from a point of understanding. You are obviously ridiculing creationism from a point of having no idea about me or creationism, it appears.”

Sorry. I didn’t know what your position was, so I had to ask.
If that offended you, I humbly apologize.

If “having an idea about creationism” entails knowing that the dinosaurs went extinct before the Deluge, then I guess Duane Gish has no idea about creationism.
Because in one of his books, he says that they went extinct AFTER the Deluge.

I’ll try to read your mind more carefully next time.

Level 5

Since: Apr 12

Jinan, China

#330 Oct 5, 2012
MazHere wrote:
"The ignorance of evolutionists is further demonstrated in their inability to distinguish mankind from other apes. They will struggle and struggle, although a child can do it easily."

This is the third time that he or she wrote that,
but we Evolutionists are kinda slow, so I'm not sure everybody got that.

So I'll be helpful and repeat it ten more times:

The ignorance of evolutionists is further demonstrated in their inability to distinguish mankind from other apes. They will struggle and struggle, although a child can do it easily.

The ignorance of evolutionists is further demonstrated in their inability to distinguish mankind from other apes. They will struggle and struggle, although a child can do it easily.

The ignorance of evolutionists is further demonstrated in their inability to distinguish mankind from other apes. They will struggle and struggle, although a child can do it easily.

The ignorance of evolutionists is further demonstrated in their inability to distinguish mankind from other apes. They will struggle and struggle, although a child can do it easily.

The ignorance of evolutionists is further demonstrated in their inability to distinguish mankind from other apes. They will struggle and struggle, although a child can do it easily.

The ignorance of evolutionists is further demonstrated in their inability to distinguish mankind from other apes. They will struggle and struggle, although a child can do it easily.

The ignorance of evolutionists is further demonstrated in their inability to distinguish mankind from other apes. They will struggle and struggle, although a child can do it easily.

The ignorance of evolutionists is further demonstrated in their inability to distinguish mankind from other apes. They will struggle and struggle, although a child can do it easily.

The ignorance of evolutionists is further demonstrated in their inability to distinguish mankind from other apes. They will struggle and struggle, although a child can do it easily.

The ignorance of evolutionists is further demonstrated in their inability to distinguish mankind from other apes. They will struggle and struggle, although a child can do it easily.

Level 5

Since: Apr 12

Jinan, China

#331 Oct 5, 2012
MazHere wrote:
"Tiktaalik has been knocked off its pedastal with a variety of tetrapod footprints being found dated to 400mya, on the heels of the Devonian."

The talkorigins site recognizes that finding, and is making adjustments accordingly.
The scientific field is self-correcting, it looks like.

MaxHere wrote:
"TOE has nothing of substance to offer. That is why I prefer to remain a creationist."

So everyone has a choice:
Shall we follow a science textbook which tries to get everything as accurate as possible, but might be contradicted by next year's science textbook?
Or shall we follow a scripture which stays the same year after year no matter what?
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#332 Oct 5, 2012
Thomas Robertson wrote:
MazHere wrote
“I ridicule TOE from a point of understanding. You are obviously ridiculing creationism from a point of having no idea about me or creationism, it appears.”
Sorry. I didn’t know what your position was, so I had to ask.
If that offended you, I humbly apologize.
If “having an idea about creationism” entails knowing that the dinosaurs went extinct before the Deluge, then I guess Duane Gish has no idea about creationism.
Because in one of his books, he says that they went extinct AFTER the Deluge.
I’ll try to read your mind more carefully next time.
What is there to understand about creationism anyway?(shrug)

"Evilushun iz rong cuz Goddidit with magic cuz teh Bible iz troo cuz teh Bible sez so!"

So the OEC's and YEC's contradict each other over the details. So what? Their own inconsistency has always been the creationist's problem, not ours.

"HA HA, STUPID EVO'S GOT FISH TO AMPHIBIAN TRANSITION WRONG BY 17 MILLION YEARS HA HA HA!!!"

Well big deal, it was only us who correctly predicted such a thing would be found in the first place and the fundies can't tell if the Earth is 6,000 years old or 4.5 billion.
MIDutch

Sterling Heights, MI

#333 Oct 5, 2012
Thomas Robertson wrote:
MazHere wrote:So everyone has a choice:
Shall we follow a science textbook which tries to get everything as accurate as possible, but might be contradicted by next year's science textbook?
Or shall we follow a scripture which stays the same year after year no matter what?
And who's followers have been spreading the same LIES for over 200+ years.
MIDutch

Sterling Heights, MI

#334 Oct 5, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
No my dear, the dinosaurs were wiped out before Noah.
Noah and his sons, Ham, Sham and Curly, and their wives, who were so unimportant that they didn't merit having any names, were fictional characters in a bronze age, goat herder FAIRY TALE. They NEVER existed. They were NOT real.

So, any discusion about whether dinosaurs went extinct before or after "Noah" is ... idiotic.

Level 5

Since: Apr 12

Jinan, China

#335 Oct 5, 2012
In 1883, William Henry Flower suggested a connection between the ungulates and the whale on account of the vestigial organs.

For a full century, the world ignored Flower’s suggestion.

In 1985, Goodman, Czelusniak, & Beeber compiled a chart of 46 mammal species, thereby finding the ungulates to be the whale’s closest relative.

In 1868, Thomas Huxley observed the Archaeopteryx and suggested that it was an intermediate between the theropod dinosaur and the modern bird.

For a full century, Huxley’s theory was neglected, as was the Archie exhibit itself.

In 1969, John H. Ostrum discovered the first Deinonychus specimen, in which he found 22 points of similarity with the Archaeopteryx.

That’s a mighty powerful crystal ball, wouldn’t you say?

Level 7

Since: Sep 07

Los Angeles, CA

#337 Oct 5, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
God created bacteria. Bacteria has survived virtually unchanged for 3,500 million years. Bacteria is a complex factory of reproduction.
Antibiotic resistance supports TOE around about as much as mankinds ability to gain immunity in ones lifetime, gain epigenetic changes, gain germ point mutations over out lifetime, in fact we evolve and adapt during our lifetime. Evolutionists do not call this 'evolution' because they would look silly. What do you think?
If bacteria are unchanged for 3,500 million years, then we shouldn't need new antibiotics.

Penicillin should work just as good now as it did the first time it was used.

It doesn't.

Your claim that this is the same thing as a human gaining immunity to chicken pox completely misunderstands the issue.

If you are immune to chicken pox and have a child, that child is not immune to chicken pox. They need to get it or get a vaccine in order to be immune.

You didn't "evolve" an immunity. You weren't immune at birth. You didn't pass on an immunity to your child.

You _developed_ an immunity. Your child will need to _develop_ an immunity.

In the case of bacteria that is NOT what is happening. Individual bacteria do not live long enough to develop immunity. They don't have an immune system which changes. They are either resistant or not resistant to whatever danger there is.

In the case of penicillin, bacteria was completely unprepared. That's why it was such a fantastic medicine.

The only way an individual bacteria can survive penicillin is if it has a mutation which makes it resistant.

Then, when penicillin is used, all the bacteria that is NOT resistant dies. The ones that are resistant live and reproduce.

The next generation and subsequent generations all carry the genes for resistance.

That's evolution.

Level 7

Since: Sep 07

Los Angeles, CA

#338 Oct 5, 2012
MazHere wrote:
Tiktaalik has been knocked off its pedastal with a variety of tetrapod footprints being found dated to 400mya, on the heels of the Devonian.
That would be a valid argument if what people were saying is: Tiktaalik is the one and only transitional species between fish and amphibians"

NO ONE is saying that. It's ONE of them. It's a great one.

Were there others? ABSOLUTELY.

You pointing out that there were others isn't a means by which you can win this argument since Creationism requires that NONE exist.

There should be NO transitional species in Creationism, not a whole bunch spanning hundreds of millions of years.
the huge difference in the human/chimp Y chromosome was not predicted
Yes, prior to the discovery of DNA, we had no idea there was a difference in the chromosomes.

Of course, prior to the discovery of DNA, you guys were predicting that humans and chimps had literally nothing in common since "chimps are made of creation magic and humans are made of magic clay".
You say Tiktaalick was predicted and now it is a dud
In what way is it a dud?

ToE predicted:
There should be a lifeform with both fish and amphibian characteristics.

Creationism predicted:
There should be NO life forms with both fish and amphibian characteristics, there are different kinds and each animal is only after it's own kind.

ToE wins.

ToE predicted:
This life form should exist within this time period and in this location.

Creationism predicted:
No such thing should exist at that time period.

ToE wins.

Side note: MORE THAN HALF of he Creationists predicted that NOTHING should exist during that time period because the Earth is only 6000 years old.

If you want to play the "One scientist made one bad prediction" game, then you have to accept that Creationists believe the Earth is 6000 years old.

Fair?
"In other words, trees show no predictable response to climate change, and respond individually rather than as communities of species.
Wow! You are just getting it all mixed up.

Living trees responding to climate change has NOTHING to do with evolution. Evolution does not effect the tree which ALREADY lives.

Evolution is about how well the random differences in the various acorns will play out over time.

The "community" of trees aren't going to respond in sync. Those acorns which result in trees which are better adapted to survive a hotter drier climate will survive and reproduce other trees which are similarly adapted.

It will take GENERATIONS for it to effect the "community".

And since trees don't grow particularly fast and the environment is changing very rapidly in comparison, trees are going to have trouble keeping up.
has examined insects (Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, vol 10, p 247). Both studies show that most species remain unchanged for hundreds of thousands of years, perhaps longer, and across several ice ages.
Insects which fit a niche aren't going to change unless their niche changes. So, if a termite eats dead trees and there are dead trees in the area during the ice age, there's no reason for the termites to change.
TOE has nothing of substance to offer. That is why I prefer to remain a creationist.
Name ONE thing of substance which is offered by Creationism.

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Australia

#339 Oct 5, 2012
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Uh, yeah, the fish-phibian fossil was falsified because we found foot-prints that shifted the period of transition by a mere 17m years - which were uh, made by another fish-phibian.
<quoted text>
Uhuh, and tell us again how all the coelecanths are the same, and all the trilobites are the same. Except they ain't. Tell us again that evolution claims all mutation rates are constant for all species. Except they ain't. Tell us again how PE falsifies evolution. Except it doesn't. Tell us again that all the biologists who you cite in SUPPORT of your position DO actually support your position. Except they don't.
<quoted text>
And quite obviously you do because you're an educated scientist who has falsified evolution. It's just that the rest of the world doesn't know it yet. It's just a coincidence that the dumb-as-a-post creationists were right all along even though they don't have a clue what they're talking about.
<quoted text>
You are claiming science you disagree with on theological grounds along with research done by people who don't know what they're doing falsifies evolution therefore Goddidit with magic. Words cannot express the absolute dumbosity of your claims and hypocritical stance here, hence you have just caused a kitten sacrifice.
Listen buddy.

I have spoken to you on another thread about the data that supports creation. There is no point presenting it again here because you will do exactly the same thing as on the other thread, run down the path to evasion.

You have aves, cetacia in a mess.

You have bird footprints dated to 212mya that better support Genesis than TOE, the same for the Michagan whale bones found in strata 290mya.

TOE is virtually unfalsifiable. Whilst you lot can handwave any creature into existence out of thin air you are not better a target for your own ridicule.

Indeed if you evos split abiogenesis out and away from evolutionary theory, then so can I. Neither of us 'know' how life began or was created. I have a theory of coalescence of matter based on research that finds energy produces matter. God is energy etc. This is a theory and is no more far fetched that expecting deal elements to organize themselves into complex factories of reproduction.

I simply assert that in my view the weight of the data better aligns with creationism and that the interpretations I present of the data could not possibly be worse than the 150 years of instability and change you have to offer.

To suggest that you know evolution is right is a misrepresentation. You have nowhere near the level of credible and stable substantiation for that claim to be justified. It is that simple.

No matter what you say mountians of misrepresentations. 150 years of instability, and changing flavours of the month do not amount to substantial and robust evidence such that you can claim evolution is fact and not still theoretical.
BuzzinFr0g

Honolulu, HI

#340 Oct 5, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
God created bacteria. Bacteria has survived virtually unchanged for 3,500 million years. Bacteria is a complex factory of reproduction.
Antibiotic resistance supports TOE around about as much as mankinds ability to gain immunity in ones lifetime, gain epigenetic changes, gain germ point mutations over out lifetime, in fact we evolve and adapt during our lifetime. Evolutionists do not call this 'evolution' because they would look silly. What do you think?
A Bacterium doesn't garner antibiotic resistance so it's not like epigenetic changes, developing immunity, etc. A population of bacteria, which reproduce incredibly fast and therefore generate an enormous amount of genetic variation (via mutation) in a relatively short amount of time, can produce resistant bacterium. These bacterium then persist and can thrive in an antibiotic environment. If no such beneficial mutation occurs, then the colony or even the entire species may face extinction. Millions of strains and species of bacteria have gone extinct.

Level 7

Since: Sep 07

Los Angeles, CA

#341 Oct 5, 2012
MazHere wrote:
TOE is virtually unfalsifiable. Whilst you lot can handwave any creature into existence out of thin air you are not better a target for your own ridicule.
Find a fossil of any mammal in a pre-cambrian deposit. Boom, falsified.

Take 100 rabbits of varying color. Kill all the ones that aren't black. Allow the remaining ones to breed. Repeat.

If, after three generations, there are more non-black rabbits than black rabbits. Falsified.

Take an empty box into a church. Have the congregation pray around it. Open the box. If it contains a giraffe, falsified.

EASY to come up with ways to falsify evolution

Level 5

Since: Apr 12

Jinan, China

#342 Oct 5, 2012
MazHere, I'm curious about what your stand is.
Did God create fish AND tiktaaliks AND amphibians AND Ahlbergian tetrapods as separate kinds?

And how did Shubin happen to find what he was looking for at the place where he looked? Was he just lucky?

Level 5

Since: Apr 12

Jinan, China

#343 Oct 5, 2012
Hello, Dude!
The Dude wrote:
Uh, yeah, the fish-phibian fossil was falsified because we found foot-prints that shifted the period of transition by a mere 17m years - which were uh, made by another fish-phibian.
I somehow missed this.
I got the impression that the talkorigins editors recognized this finding and were making a paradigm shift.
I didn't know about the footprints.
Could you please explain this, and maybe give me a link?

Thanks!

Thomas Robertson

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Australia

#344 Oct 6, 2012
MIDutch wrote:
<quoted text>
Noah and his sons, Ham, Sham and Curly, and their wives, who were so unimportant that they didn't merit having any names, were fictional characters in a bronze age, goat herder FAIRY TALE. They NEVER existed. They were NOT real.
So, any discusion about whether dinosaurs went extinct before or after "Noah" is ... idiotic.
So my saying the dinos went extinct before Noah is why it is a fairy tale.

I think having basilosaurus predating Indohyus is also proof of an evolutionary fairy tale but evolutionists do not seem to mind contradiction at all.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/...

Now instead of tetrapods taking 15 million years to 'evolve' they did it virtually overnight in 4my.

This is despite the fact that pakecetus is dated as recently as 49-53mya, and ambulocetus natans and Indohyus being dated to around 49mya as well.

This appears to be a real 'DAH' moment for evos.

Well done you evolutionists!
MIDutch

Waterford, MI

#345 Oct 6, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
So my saying the dinos went extinct before Noah is why it is a fairy tale.
No, Noah and his big wooden barge is a FAIRY TALE because ... it's a FAIRY TALE.

And a poorly written one at that.

Heck, even 4 year olds wouldn't believe it if their mommies and daddies didn't TELL them to believe it

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#346 Oct 6, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
So my saying the dinos went extinct before Noah is why it is a fairy tale.
I think having basilosaurus predating Indohyus is also proof of an evolutionary fairy tale but evolutionists do not seem to mind contradiction at all.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/...
Now instead of tetrapods taking 15 million years to 'evolve' they did it virtually overnight in 4my.
This is despite the fact that pakecetus is dated as recently as 49-53mya, and ambulocetus natans and Indohyus being dated to around 49mya as well.
This appears to be a real 'DAH' moment for evos.
Well done you evolutionists!
Maz, Indohyus is a possible ancestor of the whale. And the fact that indohyus can be found after basilosaurus appeared is not a problem. Your claim would be similar to claiming there couldn't be any Europeans since Americans are descended from Europeans. Populations evolve, individuals don't. So one population of Indohyus may have evolved to become whales where another population may have remained landbound.

It is not at "DAH" (and that is supposed to be "DOH") moment for evolutionists. It is a DOH moment for creatards.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#347 Oct 6, 2012
You also complained about finding bird footprints much earlier than we find birds. That is because we don't find bird footprints before we find birds, we find birdlike footprints. The ancestors of birds would have moved and walked very similarly to today's birds, on the ground. They already had birdlike feet for millions of years. We have fossils of the critters and if you examine the feet they are very similar to bird feet. The footprints would have been almost impossible to tell apart.

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Australia

#348 Oct 6, 2012
Thomas Robertson wrote:
Hello, Dude!
<quoted text>
I somehow missed this.
I got the impression that the talkorigins editors recognized this finding and were making a paradigm shift.
I didn't know about the footprints.
Could you please explain this, and maybe give me a link?
Thanks!
Thomas Robertson
I just lost an entire reply for some reason.

Anyway, here is a link.

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v463/n72...

Tiktaalik is obviously not the transitional form.

The footprints did not have tail drag marks. They say this is because the tail was floated in water. I contest this also by reasoning if there was deep water the footprints would not have survived.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Evolution Debate Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 2 min Blitzking 210,270
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 3 min scientia potentia... 20,367
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 19 min It aint necessari... 152,334
Hillary, a taco stand on every corner 21 min Demon Finder 7
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 2 hr Into The Night 45,575
Science News (Sep '13) 18 hr Voyeur 3,629
America evolving into lockdown on purpose Sep 25 Dogen 68
More from around the web