Evidence for Evolution & Evolution 101

[spurraider21]

Photo-Creation Magazine

[mouse]

Photo-Creation Magazine

Doesn't mean the photo is bogus I got it off Google images but your immature lame ass is worried about who you can label a creationist you end up looking desperate and foolish which further proves there is no more Evolution debate your side lost when DNA was discovered.

And the Original topic started knew that when he created the topic here we are 6 pages and your uneducated self hasn't responded with anything solid.

The sad part is I actually took you serious and wasted valuable time replying to you.

[spurraider21]

remember that time you brought up snail-to-human evolution and posted a picture that showed humans didnt come from snails

[RandomGuy]

It usually happens when you spend months on the www and can't find that proves humans Evolved from warm pools of liquid billions of years ago.

Its in the OP, not that you care.

How do you explain the fact that overall taxonomy and phylogeny match so perfectly with evidence predicted by evolutionary theory, vis a vis modern genetic evidence?

[RandomGuy]

my point is that you don't follow simple logic. your premise that we must have been "designed" requires a designer. yet you routinely avoid saying that there is a designer

Are you saying I don't have the right to do so?

You have the right to do so.

Just as you have the right to argue for the existence of 4 corned triangles, or square circles.

The internet is full of stupid non-sequiturs and people who are unable to form coherent thoughts.

Think away.

[Blake]

Doesn't mean the photo is bogus I got it off Google images but your immature lame ass is worried about who you can label a creationist you end up looking desperate and foolish which further proves there is no more Evolution debate your side lost when DNA was discovered.

And the Original topic started knew that when he created the topic here we are 6 pages and your uneducated self hasn't responded with anything solid.

The sad part is I actually took you serious and wasted valuable time replying to you.

Lol valuable time

[mouse]

How do you explain the fact that overall taxonomy and phylogeny match so perfectly with evidence predicted by evolutionary theory, vis a vis modern genetic evidence?

You ask a serious question worth answering and only two posts later you start to ridicule me and slip back into immature mode.

[RandomGuy]

You ask a serious question worth answering and only two posts later you start to ridicule me and slip back into immature mode.

Feel free to answer my serious question in your own words.

Copy pasta will merely get more immaturity on my part.

[RandomGuy]

Lines of evidence: The science of evolution

At the heart of evolutionary theory is the basic idea that life has existed for billions of years and has changed over time.

Overwhelming evidence supports this fact. Scientists continue to argue about details of evolution, but the question of whether life has a long history or not was answered in the affirmative at least two centuries ago.

The history of living things is do ented through multiple lines of evidence that converge to tell the story of life through time. In this section, we will explore the lines of evidence that are used to reconstruct this story.

These lines of evidence include:
Fossil evidence
logies
Distribution in time and space
Evidence by example

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolib...0_0_0/lines_01


Will start with fossil evidence:

[mouse]

New Research Debunks Tetrapod Walk Theory

A team of British-based scientists have produced a three-dimensional construction of the extinct, 360-million-year-old Ichthyostega, which they say debunks long held theories about how the creature moved on land. School children have long been taugh
Produced by Reuters, powered by NewsLook


http://archive.greatfallstribune.com...od-Walk-Theory

[RandomGuy]

New Research Debunks Tetrapod Walk Theory

A team of British-based scientists have produced a three-dimensional construction of the extinct, 360-million-year-old Ichthyostega, which they say debunks long held theories about how the creature moved on land. School children have long been taugh
Produced by Reuters, powered by NewsLook


http://archive.greatfallstribune.com...od-Walk-Theory

Cool. New evidence regarding this transitional species has refined what we knew, and corrected a misconception about one of the more interesting fossil species.

This is actually a very good example of the self-correcting, and ulative nature of scientific empirical methods.

Thanks.





Let me guess, you posted it, because it had the word "debunked" and "theory" in it. Unfortunately, the "theory" debunked was the theory that a certain species had limbs that were stronger than the new evidence strongly suggests they were.

Unfortunately for the short-attention span crowd, this doesn't say what you think it does.

Let me guess, you were going to disprove evolution, but you got....

[boutons_deux]

The Origin of Life And The Hidden Role of Quantum Criticality

Quantum criticality must have played a crucial role in the origin of life say researchers who have found its hidden signature in a wide range of important biomolecules

One of the great puzzles of biology is how the molecular machinery of life is so finely coordinated. Even the simplest cells are complex three dimensional biochemical factories in which a dazzling array of machines fill the shop floor.

These machines pump, push, copy, and compute in a dance of extraordinarily detailed complexity. Indeed, it is hard to imagine how the ordinary processes of conduction and electron transport allow this complexity to emerge given the losses that inevitably arise, even in much simpler circuits.

Today, Stuart Kauffmann at the University of Calgary in Canada and a few pals provide some extraordinary new insight into how all this might happen. These show that most biomolecules are quantum critical conductors; their electronic properties are precisely tuned to the transition point between a metal and an insulator.

In other words, biomolecules belong to an entirely new class of conductor that is not bound by the ordinary rules of electron transport, a discovery that has profound implications for our understanding of the nature of life and its origin.

https://medium.com/the-physics-arxiv...y-ca4707924552

[mouse]

Let me guess, you were going to disprove evolution, but you got....

Why would I try do disprove something that has never been proven in the first place?
I like how this man in the video talks abut the 300 scientists that signed a do ent saying Darwin theories are not legit reminds me of TlongII and others here at the Club who are always asking me what Scientists supports your theories it doesn't matter if there are 300 scientists your going to want 3,000

[Blake]

Why would I try do disprove something that has never been proven in the first place?
I like how this man in the video talks abut the 300 scientists that signed a do ent saying Darwin theories are not legit reminds me of TlongII and others here at the Club who are always asking me what Scientists supports your theories it doesn't matter if there are 300 scientists your going to want 3,000

mouse's war on Darwin

[mouse]

mouse's war on Darwin

Actually its a war on lies and stupidity.

[mouse]

The Origin of Life And The Hidden Role of Quantum Criticality

Quantum criticality must have played a crucial role in the origin of life say researchers who have found its hidden signature in a wide range of important biomolecules

One of the great puzzles of biology is how the molecular machinery of life is so finely coordinated. Even the simplest cells are complex three dimensional biochemical factories in which a dazzling array of machines fill the shop floor.

These machines pump, push, copy, and compute in a dance of extraordinarily detailed complexity. Indeed, it is hard to imagine how the ordinary processes of conduction and electron transport allow this complexity to emerge given the losses that inevitably arise, even in much simpler circuits.

Today, Stuart Kauffmann at the University of Calgary in Canada and a few pals provide some extraordinary new insight into how all this might happen. These show that most biomolecules are quantum critical conductors; their electronic properties are precisely tuned to the transition point between a metal and an insulator.

In other words, biomolecules belong to an entirely new class of conductor that is not bound by the ordinary rules of electron transport, a discovery that has profound implications for our understanding of the nature of life and its origin.

https://medium.com/the-physics-arxiv...y-ca4707924552

Interesting point of view on a topic that seems to never advance forward due to personal attacks on a persons religious beliefs.

so where do you stand on this issue.

[Blake]

Interesting point of view on a topic that seems to never advance forward due to personal attacks on a persons religious beliefs.

so where do you stand on this issue.

Give your summary of that issue

[mouse]

Give your summary of that issue

I haven't researched it enough to say online my opinion on the subject so your ridiculing of me will just have to wait a few days.

[Blake]

I haven't researched it enough to say online my opinion on the subject so your ridiculing of me will just have to wait a few days.

Then why'd you post it

[RandomGuy]

Then why'd you post it [mouse]?

Just a guess.

[phyzik]

Without even reading the thread, there is a mountain of evidence in favor of evolution vs any other "theory" in all of science, several times over any theological belief.

You can WISH (pray) as hard as you want for something to be true, it still doesn't make it truth in the eyes of hard facts.

[RandomGuy]

The real thing is nobody can "prove" anything. For everyone who believes in evolution, 10 don't! I am talking about the fish to man scenario.

So you really think you are the one who really has the answer? Everyone is wrong and you are right...right? So all we are doing is going around in circles. Those few atheists don't get it and all those believers can't prove anything,

(shrugs)

What I can do, and have done, is show you are pretty conclusively wrong.

You prove to be pretty consistently wrong about this topic, and laughably so.



I can see how being shown to be a moron, might conflict with your self-image as smart enough to tie your own shoes, which I sort of doubt. I would imagine a lot of sketchers in your wardrobe.

You haven't done anything but look like a total joke. The holes in the theory of evolution are a mile wide and all over the place. Only an idiot liKe you would ignore that.

Do you work at being stupid?

Meh, not falling for it, sorry.

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

Some things simply can't happen by chance. You could take a handfiul of rocks and everyday for one bilion years toss them and they will never end up in a perfect circle, never!

We are living on a planet perfectly set up for us to thrive. This could only come about by some Designer, Designers. And it's so damn obvious it's ridiculous.

The Sun is the perfect distance, we rotate at the perfect speed, we have the perfect seasons, then we have DNA which MUST need a Designer.

Only fools don't get it.

Dummy...but science says....

Did science see the cell phone in 1478?

Ish. Bad reasoning from start to finish.

Assertions without evidence and a basic argument from incredulity fallacy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance

We have discovered thousands and thousands of planets orbiting other stars. Planets are therefore common in our galaxy, and we have no reason to think this isn't the case in all of the billions of galaxies we can see.

It is therefore reasonable to conclude that the formation of planets is a naturalistic phenomenon.

Arguments from incredulity take the form:

1) P is too incredible (or: I cannot imagine how P could possibly be true); therefore P must be false.
or
2) I cannot imagine how P could possibly be false; therefore P must be true.

These arguments are similar to arguments from ignorance in that they too ignore and do not properly eliminate the possibility that something can be both incredible and still be true, or appear to be obvious and yet still be false.

Avante here actually does both forms:

[That we are the result of random natural processes] simply can't happen by chance, [therefore the argument that we are the result of random natural processes is false]

P= We are the result of random natural processes

[I cannot imagine how anything could happen without a designer "we... must have a Designer"], [so therefore, we have a Designer]

P=We have a Designer

Wishful, flawed thinking and provably so.

Quod Erat Demonstrandum

[RandomGuy]

Seems relevant to bump.

[RandomGuy]

Thinking about it, I don't believe you. If learning science was really your goal, you would be asking questions rather than trying to give everyone else the answers.

What questions should I be asking? How do you know I am not asking questions?

[pgardn]

Seems relevant to bump.

It is, but they don't want to get it.

In childhood, the fat guy down the chimney, Mr. Easter Bunny, The Tooth fairy ,were somewhat super heroes and a comfort. As adults some choose to want the truth.
But some don't.

No amount of them asking questions and science attempting to give the current view on the subject is gonna do it. But what is cool is others do lurk and read. And they might get into one of the most fascinating subjects in science. An educated public is a preferred in a democracy.

Some are going to get culled out and left behind as the knowledge of our world changes.