Creation vs. Evolution

[Jose Fly]

Basically, iouae is saying "Teach me evolutionary biology, but on my terms only".

I think I understand how he could have gone through a university-level course and come out as ignorant as he went in.

 

[iouae]

No, it's how the word is defined in biology. You're just not understanding it.

Everyone believes what you wrote, therefore its worthless as a def.

Where is proof macro-evolution occurs changing kind to another kind?

That is the crux.

 

[Jose Fly]

Everyone believes what you wrote, therefore its worthless as a def.

Huh? A definition is worthless if everyone agrees on it?

Where is proof macro-evolution occurs changing kind to another kind?

That is the crux.

Can't do that until you give a useful definition of "kind".

 

[iouae]

"Evolution" is defined as a change in allele frequencies in populations over time.

Everyone believes this Captain Obvious.

 

[iouae]

Basically, iouae is saying "Teach me evolutionary biology, but on my terms only".

I think I understand how he could have gone through a university-level course and come out as ignorant as he went in.

You don't seem to know the difference between genetical drift and evolution, as the articles pointed out. Who needs the education?
To you everything proves evolution, even the birth of every child

All you evolutionists believe is what everyone knows to be true on a micro scale. On a macro scale - prove it.

 

[Greg Jennings]

The chart is very pretty, but can you read any of the writing so we can discuss the animals?

I cannot read the writing on that chart, no. But there are few animals on it that I don't know by their appearance. So shoot

 

[Jose Fly]

Everyone believes this Captain Obvious.

So? Again, your "If people believe it, it's not a valid definition" line of thought is just bizarre.

All you evolutionists believe is what everyone knows to be true on a micro scale. On a macro scale - prove it.

So, do we agree then that populations evolve?

 

[Greg Jennings]

However....science indicates our universe was designed. Science indicates that life can't come from non life. Science indicates that the best explanation of the evidence is that in the beginning, God created.

Yeah I've heard you say all of this before, 6. Now, can you back it with more than empty words this time?

 

[Greg Jennings]

I do not believe evolution because this supposed/theoretical order of evolution (tree of life)...

...does not match the actual fossil record.

http://www.genesisnet.info/bilder/bild_186_en
http://www.holtz.org/Library/Images/Slideshows/Gallery/Science/TreeOfLife2.jpg

So based on that, you believe that all vertebrates share a common ancestor, and that all invertebrates share a different common ancestor? That's possible.

 

[iouae]

I cannot read the writing on that chart, no. But there are few animals on it that I don't know by their appearance. So shoot

Same as to Alwight - why are the advanced critters at the top of the tree of life, found in the Cambrian? Why are nearly all the Phyla found there. Where was the time to evolve through all the supposed stages, up the Phyla from Protozoa to Cordata? All appear simultaneously in lower Cambrian rock. Completely the opposite of what is taught at Uni, and what T.O.L shows. Comment?

 

[Greg Jennings]

Can you post a really big copy of that chart that we can display (using the

Spoiler

…

option)?

Unfortunately, no. It's a nice chart, but I got it off of google images so that explains the lack in clarity

 

[Greg Jennings]

Arthropods and fish - very complex, high on the tree of life (TOL), found early Cambrian e.g. Trilobites.

Flatworms, low on TOL, found late in fossil record.

Not sure where you got your info, but it's wrong according to the third paragraph of this paper, which says they existed pre-Cambrian
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1999/03/990322062150.htm

Flatworms predate all animals with bilateral synmetry. That includes fish

 

[iouae]

So based on that, you believe that all vertebrates share a common ancestor, and that all invertebrates share a different common ancestor? That's possible.

I believe they share a common Maker. And a common birthday.

 

[iouae]

Not sure where you got your info, but it's wrong according to the third paragraph of this paper, which says they existed pre-Cambrian
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1999/03/990322062150.htm

Flatworms predate all animals with bilateral synmetry. That includes fish

I think I saw the paper you referred to. I don't believe it. No Platyhelminthes phylum fossils mentioned in the Phylum site I mentioned.

 

[Greg Jennings]

Same as to Alwight - why are the advanced critters at the top of the tree of life, found in the Cambrian? Why are nearly all the Phyla found there. Where was the time to evolve through all the supposed stages, up the Phyla from Protozoa to Cordata? All appear simultaneously in lower Cambrian rock. Completely the opposite of what is taught at Uni, and what T.O.L shows. Comment?

There are no mammals in the Cambrian. Or reptiles, or birds, or amphibians, or even fish. The most advanced creatures were giant Arthropoda species. So I have no clue what you mean by "the advanced critters at the top of the Cambrian."

See the category 'Cambrian life' at this link:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambrian_explosion

 

[Greg Jennings]

I think I saw the paper you referred to. I don't believe it. No Platyhelminthes phylum fossils mentioned in the Phylum site I mentioned.

Post your site here. Let's see how it stacks up to a scientific publication

 

[Greg Jennings]

I believe they share a common Maker.

Perhaps

And a common birthday.

Not a snowball's chance in Hell

 

[iouae]

Post your site here. Let's see how it stacks up to a scientific publication

Its a bit technical but have a look at how many Phyla simultaneously appeared in the Cambrian. Open this page and click on the list at the top of the page ...
http://prehistoricearth.wikia.com/wi...dit&section=24

If they were in Pre-cambrian, why no mention here in Cambrian complete list of Phyla?

 

[Greg Jennings]

Its a bit technical but have a look at how many Phyla simultaneously appeared in the Cambrian. Open this page and click on the list at the top of the page ...
http://prehistoricearth.wikia.com/wi...dit&section=24

If they were in Pre-cambrian, why no mention here in Cambrian complete list of Phyla?

I'm getting "ERROR 404"

The link doesn't work. But even if it did, do you really think Wikipedia is more reliable than a scientific publication?

 

[iouae]

Perhaps

Not a snowball's chance in Hell

Address the Trilobite and Cordata issue.
No evolution could rush through all those stages from Protozoa to these instantly.