evolution, the facts that inform the theory'?

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
Lol.. it is a childish deflection.

Eh? Why childish?
The OP is asking for people to explain why some people call the theory of evolution settled science. Some elements obviously are but the whole theory has many holes in it. I don't assert the entire theory is settled, just that it's the best one in town right now.
In my opinion the OP is trying to make a lame point that because the theory doesn't answer everything then God did it obviously.
I think that mindset is childish, certainly as a form of debate.
What, are you a creationist or something? I haven't gone over your posting history.

What I find amusing is that most people swallow the evolution cool aid without thinking about it ---- because it was "verified by the scientific community." Here is a possible monkey wrench in the theory........why have Koreans and Japanese changed so drastically in the last 50 years......are they evolving? What I am referencing is a simple example of what I call "adaptation to outside/environmental stimulus" --- from 1960 onwards, the quality and quantity of food/vitamins/healthcare increased exponentially in those countries and caused a huge increase in height/proportional weight as compared to previous generations. everysuccessive generation is getting slightly larger and taller. Is that evolution of the human species into a higher order or is it adaptation to the environment ----- and there is a difference, if you take the time to think it through. Does evolution work backwards? Why is evolution always progressing and never regressing? Adaptation can and does work backwards......so why do we as a species just accept what Darwin said. Why is the left always pushing evolution?

a reply to: TzarChasm

Or even better still answer my question with some science

You know, the question owed in the op

You know the question I asked, answer it without the trolling, the waste of comments, you know, with real science

Go do whatever, it's clear the answers are not coming from you TC, just trolling deflection

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: CornishCeltGuy

No one says science has all the answers..

It is a fake rebuttal..


You say :science has figured out that specific part..


He says: I can’t believe your saying science has figured everything out!


Lol.. it is a childish deflection.

Childish deflection, like how I didn't answer the question

Oh no wait, I asked the question, the question you havnt answered
Refuse to even discuss

On the upside, the more you comment the more you draw attention to the fact you can't answer the question

The more you have to turn this into a religious issue as opposed to how science is lacking answers

Why bring religion up, it's a strawman.
I am questioning science, why do you hate science, because it's above you?

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: TzarChasm

Or even better still answer my question with some science

You know, the question owed in the op

You know,,without the trolling, the waste of comments, you know,,science

the way you ask your questions is more educational than any answer we could give you.

a reply to: Sauvignon

What I find amusing is those who defend the science with nothing

Nearly a dozen pages and no answers
You would think the average evolutionist would work out that they are doing more harm than good for their cause and leave it alone

No beneficial mutations, no increase of information, nothing and they are still talking like they have science on their side

It beggars belief

I have no doubt a peer reviewed journal article is on its way 😆😆😆😆😆😆😆

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: TzarChasm

Or even better still answer my question with some science

You know, the question owed in the op

You know,,without the trolling, the waste of comments, you know,,science

the way you ask your questions is more educational than any answer we could give you.

Except you can't give me an answer😆😄😁😜😂😝😄😆😂😱😱😱

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: TzarChasm

Or even better still answer my question with some science

You know, the question owed in the op

You know,,without the trolling, the waste of comments, you know,,science

the way you ask your questions is more educational than any answer we could give you.

Except you can't give me an answer😆😄😁😜😂😝😄😆😂😱😱😱

your refusal to read is not my failure to write. yet you come here to bait us and we continue to bite. perhaps we really are fools. i think you might better inform us if you shifted focus and made a thread about how you explain your own theory of everything. tell the forum in detail why your ideas are superior and the evidence behind your claims. you havent even tried to do that yet. consider this a challenge...or a dare?

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: TzarChasm

Or even better still answer my question with some science

You know, the question owed in the op

You know,,without the trolling, the waste of comments, you know,,science

the way you ask your questions is more educational than any answer we could give you.

Except you can't give me an answer😆😄😁😜😂😝😄😆😂😱😱😱

your refusal to read is not my failure to write. yet you come here to bait us and we continue to bite. perhaps we really are fools.

You havnt answered any questions, not one😆😱😂😂😂
Ak offered a dumb experiment showing bacteria losing information as proof of evolution😅😆😬😆😂, Ak proved against evolution
You have freed nothing 😄😝😅😀😬😂😆😂

a reply to: Raggedyman

i edited my post. threw in a challenge for you to have fun with...if you have the nerve.

a reply to: TzarChasm

No TC I have no interest in derailing this thread any more than the trolls have already tried
It's about the question in the op, not your question or any about anything else but the evidence requested

Why not go do your own thread
I will be happy to,say what I believe and why

This thread is about
Evolution, the facts that inform the theory
It's about science

originally posted by: Raggedyman
Evolution, the facts that inform the theory
It's about science

I'll leave you to it then and say search it yourself.
It's as lame as me starting a thread like "Global warming, what facts inform the theory?" or "Intelligent design/creator god what facts inform the faith?"
Pathetic really, and childlike, trying to prove some point that because the theory has gaps in knowledge that obviously god did it.
lame, and I've said enough here, the theory of evolution is the best one in town right now, and has loads more supporting evidence than the zero evidence to support creator god claims.

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: TzarChasm

No TC I have no interest in derailing this thread any more than the trolls have already tried
It's about the question in the op, not your question or any about anything else but the evidence requested

Why not go do your own thread
I will be happy to,say what I believe and why

This thread is about
Evolution, the facts that inform the theory
It's about science

i was just inviting you to make a thread that isnt a transparent ploy to bait well informed members into smacking their head on a brick wall over and over. its your turn to impress us with your infallible theories of how life developed into the spectrum we see today and how the universe was born. dont spare us any details, we want to know exactly how you figured everything out. we double dog dare ya. or is that too much to ask?

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: TzarChasm

Or even better still answer my question with some science

You know, the question owed in the op

You know,,without the trolling, the waste of comments, you know,,science

the way you ask your questions is more educational than any answer we could give you.

Except you can't give me an answer😆😄😁😜😂😝😄😆😂😱😱😱

your refusal to read is not my failure to write. yet you come here to bait us and we continue to bite. perhaps we really are fools.

You havnt answered any questions, not one😆😱😂😂😂
Ak offered a dumb experiment showing bacteria losing information as proof of evolution😅😆😬😆😂, Ak proved against evolution
You have freed nothing 😄😝😅😀😬😂😆😂

No... I offered an experiment in which the bacteria GAINED.. Resistance to antibiotic

Nothing was lost except you... Talking bout cars engines and elephants

Gesus

originally posted by: MrConspiracy
It always makes me smile when people use Evolution as a tool to explain life.

I think it's a pretty solid theory. But it answers so little. No point arguing about it.

It's probably partly... maybe mostly true - but the question of where life began is far too vast and incomprehensible.

Also.

Aliens. And I'm not even kidding.

Using evolution to explain the origin of life on earth as a fools errand. Abiogenesis/Panspermia etc... are biochemical processes that, while potentially possible, are purely hypothetical. Anyone who claims that they are anywhere in the realm of having enough supporting data to be Scientific Theories is deluding themselves. Someday we may have the answer to that important question but the origin of life has no bearing on whether or not life evolves. They are 2 very separate concepts and studied by very different disciplines.

a reply to: Raggedyman

No Parkinson's was not a metaphor. You thought you had a point, and as usual did NOT understand what you were typing.

There is no drama in what I type. You generate it, because you are here to troll. Not be open and honest.

Fact - The fossil record shows a clear progression of species over time
Fact - DNA allows us to figure out who is related to who, even across species
Fact - Different species have shared anatomy and physiology
Fact - Adaption happens and is observable
Fact - Small adaptions accumulate, leading to great variance in isolated groups
Fact - Some species have hip bones, but don't have legs (many other examples of things like this)

Fact - there is only one scientific theory that addresses all these issues
Fact - there has never been an alternative theory that better explains all these facts

This is just a few facts off the top of my head that support and form the basis of modern evolutionary theory... by no means exhaustive.

If all of evolution is finalised and wrong as you seem to be suggesting... please suggest another theory or model that fits all the facts. (I won't hold my breath).

originally posted by: Sauvignon
What I find amusing is that most people swallow the evolution cool aid without thinking about it ---- because it was "verified by the scientific community."

That's a pretty narrow way to view things. You do realize that many people actually have backgrounds in the various scientific disciplines that study Evolution don't you? OnATS for example, there are geneticists, Archaeologists, Biologists, Paleoanthropologists, people that work in bioinformatics and on and on. People don't just take the word of others because of some perceived authority. They put in the time and effort to study it first hand.

Here is a possible monkey wrench in the theory........why have Koreans and Japanese changed so drastically in the last 50 years......are they evolving? What I am referencing is a simple example of what I call "adaptation to outside/environmental stimulus" --- from 1960 onwards, the quality and quantity of food/vitamins/healthcare increased exponentially in those countries and caused a huge increase in height/proportional weight as compared to previous generations. everysuccessive generation is getting slightly larger and taller. Is that evolution of the human species into a higher order or is it adaptation to the environment ----- and there is a difference, if you take the time to think it through.

There is no "evolution into a higher order", but to answer the query, it is neither. A better point of comparison would be North Korea and South Korea as opposed to Korea and Japan. It all boils down to nutrition and access to quality medical care. South Korea has excellent medical care and an abundance of food. The North Koreans on the other hand, are severely malnourished, lack access to food, often are forced to eat food that we wouldn't, have substandard medical care, are riddled with intestinal parasites and are significantly shorter than their Southern counterparts.

In N. Korea, the military gets access to rations before the general populace. If we look at the recent defector who started a shooting match across the DMZ as he tried to make his way to the S. Korean side of the border, the general populace must be suffering horribly because his health was atrocious. He was 5 inches shorter than the average South Korean male of similar age, teeth were rotting out and he had intestinal parasite up to a meter long.And those are the guys getting better rations than the farmers and laborers in the North. Then there are the people suffering horribly because they were forced to work on the clean up crews with no protective gear at sites where nuclear weapons were being tested.

Again... none of that is evolution or adaptation. It is nothing more than the horror of living under the rule of an autocratic madman who literally sips on champagne and cognac while his people drop dead in droves.

Does evolution work backwards? Why is evolution always progressing and never regressing?

It does neither. Evolution doesn't have a direction. The idea that it progresses is a holdover from "survival of the fittest" which is an anachronistic idea that ceased to exist over 75 years ago when Darwinian evolution that were independently verifiable were folded into the Modern Evolutionary Synthesis that combined the biological aspects and fossil/geological record with the new field of genetics thanks to Watson and Crick discovering the double helix of DNA

Adaptation can and does work backwards......

No, it really doesn't. Organisms adapt to their ecological niche. There isn't a direction.

so why do we as a species just accept what Darwin said.

As I mentioned above, we don't. Darwin was spot on about a lot of things and expanded on his initial observations in the 1870's when he published 'The descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex' Besides, Darwin collaborated with Alfred Russel Wallace and published their joint work as On the Tendency of Species to Form Varieties; and on the Perpetuation of Varieties and Species by Means of Natural Selection' when Wallace sent Darwin an essay showing that they both had very similar hypothesis regarding Evolution.


[ quote]Why is the left always pushing evolution?

How exactly is the Left pushing Evolution? I didn't realize that the MES was a partisan talking point in American politics. One could just as easily ask "Why are Evangelical Christians in America joining up with radical Muslims in an effort to Combat Ideas that are Anathema to Their God"?

a reply to: Raggedyman

Hah, using an link to this garbage pile to backup your scientific discussion is really funny.

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: Raggedyman

Evidently evolution has so much solid evidence that evolution doesn't need any more evidence, no I don't get that either

Theres a stack of threads that show things you clearly "don't get"... but as for your question

Sure... We like more evidence, to stack upon the pile...

Plus the fact that we can observe it happening... not that its actually needed

Obviously you've seen this... but i figured we should add a few of your excuses to deny the theory to the first page

Oh come on Ak, that proves nothing more than adaptation.
The word mutant gives it away, those bacteria did not evolve, what they did is mutate, they didn't evolve, they actually lost information
Again, those bacteria lost information, they de evolved, check the research
You are a scientific imbecile, I am sorry, as rude as that sounds, that is a fitting statement, you have no idea of what you have linked, go study the outcome of the experiment
It was not evolution, the bacteria lost information, the bacteria got worse and became weaker

How sad you don't know what you are talking about, no wonder people are so gullible, they believe anything

And having said all that, I don't think you are capable of understanding what I said or the experiment and even sadder, you won't investigate the experiment either

Being that mutations are the "raw materials for evolution" you're kind of shooting down your own argument. Good work bud.

Mutations Are the Raw Materials for Evolution