Science indicates evolution of species.

a reply to: Phage

So whenever you can actually prove that these supposed somethings actually happened be sure to let us know...
Because until you can... they haven’t...

originally posted by: Phage

Doesn't matter though. Once something happens, it happened. No matter what the odds.

You're replacing the assumption of "God did it", with "evolution did it". You assume because it happened, that evolution must have caused it to happen. It is pure assumption given the total lack of data demonstrating that it is possible. Evolution is infinitely less likely than a higher intelligence as the cause of our intelligible system.

The estimated odds of one functional group mutating succesfully is 1/10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000...
000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. Given the multitude of functional groups that are required per protein, this 1/10^64 probability would have to hit multiple times to form just one random protein. And what are the odds that random protein does anything, let alone a relevant new function? In the case of the electron transport chain, it would require not just a single protein, but multiple proteins also performing the same micromolecular mutant miracle. Not to mention the necessary co-factors, co-enzymes, chaperonins, etc, that would be required to organize it all.

originally posted by: cooperton

You're replacing the assumption of "God did it", with "evolution did it". You assume because it happened, that evolution must have caused it to happen. It is pure assumption given the total lack of data demonstrating that it is possible. Evolution is infinitely less likely than a higher intelligence as the cause of our intelligible system.

Striking post. They will argue though.

a reply to: 5StarOracle

Because until you can... they haven’t...

On the contrary. They did.

a reply to: Phage

And somehow we still don't know.

originally posted by: Out6of9Balance
a reply to: Out6of9Balance

Yea, wikipedia says it looks different.

Why do chromosomes merge? They say they merged but can they tell what merged it? And what was the cause of that? And the cause of that that?

I figure it begins with natural forces. But where did the natural forces appear from again? Not created by a sky daddy with a magic wand, isn't it?

Don't fall for the Chromosome #2 fusion myth. It's been refuted so many times now, they simply don't care, just like with their other so-called "evidence for evolution", they'll simply repeat it endlessly as is the case with all propagandistic lies and myths/false stories that become popular. Endless repetition...it works. A book of popular quotations lists this one among them: “If you tell a big enough lie and tell it often enough, many will believe it.” It qualifies as effective brainwashing propaganda, and with repetition it reaches the status of a slogan​—and slogans everywhere repeated are soon programmed into brains and tripped off tongues with little critical examination or skeptical dissection. Once a theory has been sloganized into community thinking, it no longer requires proof, and any who dissent are scorned. If such dissenters present rational refutation of the slogan’s validity, they are especially irritating and subjected to the only available response, namely, ridicule. By such intimidation and mental bullying, masses of people are herded into the evolutionists’ camp. They know nothing of the weaknesses and inadequacies of evolutionary theory or its unsound speculations and hypothesized impossibilities. So they are swept along by the repetitious mantras recited by evolution’s propagandizers. The theory becomes dogma, its preachers become arrogant, and dissenters reap disdainful abuse. The tactics work. They did in Jesus’ day; they do today. (John 7:45-49)

Here's an old video responding to the chromosome #2 fusion myth for example, the evidence discussed below demonstrates that the DNA coding in question cannot have been the result of a fusion of 2 other chromosomes of some mysterious unspecified apelike ancestor and that the actual evidence is misrepresented and twisted by evolutionists like Kenneth Miller (there is no evidence of a fusion ever having taken place in that region of coding, but people like Miller are very good at pretending there is by misrepresenting what actual fusion sites look like in known chromosomal fusions rather than imagined ones of the past that do not fit the bill):

They know most of their flock won't look into it or take this sort of evidence seriously; so they keep on using this myth and postdiction and talk about it as if it was an evolutionary prediction and therefore supposed evidence for evolution. Pretending to have found something that they predicted they would find, while in reality, they just told another evolutionary storyline that doesn't fit the facts and that leaves out anything inconvenient.

originally posted by: whereislogic

Once a theory has been sloganized into community thinking, it no longer requires proof, and any who dissent are scorned. If such dissenters present rational refutation of the slogan’s validity, they are especially irritating and subjected to the only available response, namely, ridicule. By such intimidation and mental bullying, masses of people are herded into the evolutionists’ camp. They know nothing of the weaknesses and inadequacies of evolutionary theory or its unsound speculations and hypothesized impossibilities.

Well said. Notice how phantom came, slung a couple insults, and then left when it came down to the empirical data. It's guerrilla warfare because there is no substance for them to protect.

Take for example the inconvenient snippet of 5 genes that are interrupting the theorized fusion site:



over 150,000 DNA units that dislocate the theorized fusion site, yet that is never mentioned in pop-sci blogs.

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: Out6of9Balance
a reply to: Gothmog

Adaption to the surrounding.

Beings are living for thousands of years in a surrounding that changes them.

Something guides that "adaptation"
Most mutations are "bad" (defective) mutations and are caused by some outside force.

Safe to say this person has zero credibility. "Most mutations are bad" is a very common creationist lie. Most mutations are neutral, and they are caused by copy errors, not an outside force. The level of ignorance is off the charts here.

Yep, the science denier squad is here is full force. LOL. Keep dreaming of your self fulfilling apocalypse, you sick twisted #s.

That your opinion matters matters not to those it doesn't matter to.

originally posted by: Barcs

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: Out6of9Balance
a reply to: Gothmog

Adaption to the surrounding.

Beings are living for thousands of years in a surrounding that changes them.

Something guides that "adaptation"
Most mutations are "bad" (defective) mutations and are caused by some outside force.

Safe to say this person has zero credibility. "Most mutations are bad" is a very common creationist lie. Most mutations are neutral, and they are caused by copy errors, not an outside force. The level of ignorance is off the charts here.

Yep, the science denier squad is here is full force. LOL. Keep dreaming of your self fulfilling apocalypse, you sick twisted #s.

"Just words , just speeches."
5th grade level at that .
Take that sort back to the alley with you.

originally posted by: Barcs

Safe to say this person has zero credibility. "Most mutations are bad" is a very common creationist lie. Most mutations are neutral, and they are caused by copy errors, not an outside force. The level of ignorance is off the charts here.

Yep, the science denier squad is here is full force. LOL. Keep dreaming of your self fulfilling apocalypse, you sick twisted #s.

Lots of barcing, no substance.

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: Barcs

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: Out6of9Balance
a reply to: Gothmog

Adaption to the surrounding.

Beings are living for thousands of years in a surrounding that changes them.

Something guides that "adaptation"
Most mutations are "bad" (defective) mutations and are caused by some outside force.

Safe to say this person has zero credibility. "Most mutations are bad" is a very common creationist lie. Most mutations are neutral, and they are caused by copy errors, not an outside force. The level of ignorance is off the charts here.

Yep, the science denier squad is here is full force. LOL. Keep dreaming of your self fulfilling apocalypse, you sick twisted #s.

"Just words , just speeches."
5th grade level at that .
Take that sort back to the alley with you.

Tell the truth next instead of lying and nobody will care. Everything I said was hard fact.

Lots of barcing, no substance.

I stated multiple confirmed facts refuting the other person's blatant lie, but I get you've grown to hate that kind of thing. You love lying and hate anybody that stands in your way. All those inconvenient facts getting in the way of your religious crusade LOL.

a reply to: Barcs

Calm down servant.

Question for the experts.

Can an immortal being evolve?

If Dracula lived for hundreds of millions of years with an indefinite lifespan, would he turn into a different species?

smart people who need to believe a god has to create life . These are the same people who only care that the car starts and that moon landings are fake .
Fact is they cant Understand how even a space ship can go to the moon so why would any one expect them to understand evolution is a fact .
At this poiint humans are just half a step a way from creating life from proteins once they do what will your reason be for a god to be nessery ?

I spent my youth praying to a god and guess what folks No god has saved a single person and the ones who clame otehr wise are so self centered to believe they are so much MORE special then a baby who mother kills it in wom or a baby who never gets to draw it first breath .

I will say as i always say The god are IMPOTENT ! Does not matter if a God did or did not create a THING they do NOTHING . people fear death because as THE BIBLE says Death is the end .

And they fear ending so need to convince them self they wont stop existing . thing is No one feared before they were born after they die is no different . Heck even going by the bible NO one is living unless god him self takes over the grave is just that a GRAVE and Not until judgment day would any one be raised them JUDGED them rekilled .
To either spend a entirety in torture heaven or torture hell .

Because all teh things you LOVE about life would NOT exists in heaven No boats no lights no motor cars not a single luxury .

The bibles idea of heaven is streets paved in gold and in heave a GREEN blade of grass is what would every one would desire . besides Gold ? why ? its WORTHLESS on earth even and has zero value to the dead .
Not even a drink of water will you have going by the bible Your heaven you get to sing prayes for trillions of years Never resting never stopping .

Excisting for EVER not a 100 years not a 1000 years not a million years not a trillion years FOREVER jsut singing ( and I cant SING . LOL

I'm just glad they opened the churches this week. Natural selection baby. All the ignorant science deniers get to meet up and spread disease to each other, and I get to see back and watch as they all get themselves killed over their ignorance making the human race stronger and smarter overall.

I'm curious how the human species CAN evolve, on a capitalistic society, seems that MANMADE premise is in direct conflict with the evolutionary aspect.

If you were trying to stunt the growth of a species, that would be one way, in my opinion.

This pandemic has highlighted this fact even more.

a reply to: Barcs

How boring.

originally posted by: Barcs
I'm just glad they opened the churches this week. Natural selection baby. All the ignorant science deniers get to meet up and spread disease to each other, and I get to see back and watch as they all get themselves killed over their ignorance making the human race stronger and smarter overall.

Yikes. They tried your philosophy with Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot, etc, and it just ended up in a bloody mess. I guess that's the consequence of believing you are the progeny of mutated apes.

originally posted by: Skyfox81

Can an immortal being evolve?

Evolution doesn't occur with mortal beings, so it would be even less relevant for immortal beings.

originally posted by: Tranceopticalinclined
I'm curious how the human species CAN evolve, on a capitalistic society, seems that MANMADE premise is in direct conflict with the evolutionary aspect.

Capitalism, formerly known as Babylon, is a deviation from the natural state of humankind. The consequence is confusion - which is where Babel gets its name. Many think biology came from randomness, but I disagree entirely. Biological life came from an intelligent source (hence the 'logical' in "biological"). The prototype code for humankind was an integration with nature. exemplified by Adam and Eve, Abraham and Sarah, John the Baptist, Buddha, Jesus and so on.

We have since fallen from this state of harmony and compromised it for a state of slavery and confusion. Most of us are indentured servants paying off loans our entire life. It is clear that we have steered in the wrong direction. our "evolution" resides not in mutant randomness, which has never been shown to be effective in a lab, but instead with returning to our prototypical coding as human beings. This ideal morality will open your eyes and render you a more lucid and loving human being, whereas an enthrallment with the system and its games will make you go mad.