The fact remains that neither you nor anyone else has ever produced actual scientific evidence for this I look forward to reading yours.
It is determined by the laws of gravity. These laws are tested in exactly the same way ALL scietntific laws are tested.Still the eclipse is determined by the mechanical movement of the solar system, not evolution,
Wrong again. The *theory of evolution* is a theory about biology. It is not a theory about geology or planetary science. Those other subjects *inform* the theory of evolution, but are not part of it. They are separate subjects.which by the way is not only biological, it is also geological and planetary.
Scientific laws make predictions that can be observed. They determine the 'mechanical' workings of the solar system (and all other systems). Gravity is the primary force that determines things like the timing of eclipses and the motions of the planets. It is still a testable theory and is tested *in detail* still.Wow you c an miss the point if you try, the no nay sayers was for the sun not coming up tomorrow, a pint to your we can predict the future based on a theory
here's a challenge. Make a prediction based on *your* ideas that differs from one that is made (and agreed by scientists to be made) from the theory of evolution. Then we can go and test and see which is correct.Pleas post the references you referred to but dont forget that have to be verifiable and repeatable to even begin to fit your model.
You DNA and protein example fit perfectly into the intelligent design model that is an undeniable fact. Yes my view point says that is the way it was designed to work by a creator, all your says is that is what evolution says, no parrot not facts no nothing really.
The whale example does not 'fit perfectly* into the intelligent design theory. An intelligent design would have similar structures at all levels for similar jobs. But the proteins for whales are NOT similar to those of fish. They are similar to those of hooved animals. The theory of evolution predicts this. It also predicts that the other proteins in whales will be more similar to those of hooved animals than those of fish.
You see, that is what descent with modification does: it takes the proteins and structures *that already exist* and modify them. But that means that they record the pattern of changes by looking at the pattern of similarities. Intelligent design would not predict this.
I am not a biologist. I am a mathematician and a physicist. If you want to discuss the Big Bang theory instead of evolution, I can go into deeper specifics. Of course, you will have to understand a bit of math to follow along.You can say as much as you like there is proof there are facts there are whatevers, but you still cannot produce them. Why do you not take up my first challenge, write a paper get it peer reviewed and then published putting your name to the irrevocable scientific proof for the theory of evolution.
Last words When and Where
But even the fact of evolution is rather simple to show: the species alive today are not the same as those alive 1 million years ago. And those were different than the species alive 10 million years ago. And those were different than those alive 20 million years ago. In each case, the species alive at some time are similar, but different than those alive at the previous time with more similar species in the same geographical locations. These are facts that your intelligent design theory cannot deal with intelligently.