Dinosaurs are fake and leads to atheism!

[Right Divider]

We should pivot back to evidence and see who dodges.

There is solid evidence that Chimpanzees and humans share a common ancestor:

Sharing a common ancestor

Humans did not evolve from an ape - we are apes, and our closest living relatives include chimpanzees and gorillas.

australian.museum

Continuing to make claims without actual evidence.
It is YOU that should pivot back to evidence and see who dodges.

 

[Idolater]

So would the Apostles be impeached in court then? Or not? I mean they are witnesses (not the only ones) of Christ's Resurrection. I'm not asking you if the uniform witness testimony provided by the Apostles (and other putative eye witnesses to the Resurrection ( = saw Him die and or dead + saw Him alive again)) is sufficient to prove, establish or demonstrate the Resurrection really happened. I'm just asking, Would any of the witnesses (Greek 'martyrs') be impeached in court?

Bump for @Skeeter

 

[Skeeter]

Also this: https://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/pe... DNA is,generation to generation, changed too.

A small DNA difference makes human red blood cells vulnerable to this (malaria) parasite, while chimp blood cells are resistant.

Why would an intelligent designer do that?

 

[Skeeter]

Continuing to make claims without actual evidence.
It is YOU that should pivot back to evidence and see who dodges.

Sounds like a dodge.

 

[Right Divider]

Sounds like a dodge.

Claims are made, but they do not have unequivocal evidence.

 

[Skeeter]

Questions for you to avoid dodging on:

Do you accept the forensic technique that can use degraded DNA to identify the family of the perpetrator?

Do you accept that DNA similarity between species reflect how related they are?

 

[Skeeter]

Claims are made, but they do not have unequivocal evidence.

Oh, so you admit there is evidence but reject it because its not perfect?

 

[Right Divider]

Oh, so you admit there is evidence but reject it because its not perfect?

For a supposed PhD, you surely cannot think straight.

NO, I'm not complaining about "imperfect evidence". My point, which you should have easily understood, was that the EVIDENCE is the same for TWO different interpretations. You interpret similarity as caused by common ancestry (which you have no actual support for), whereas I interpret the similarity as due to a common Designer and Creator.

 

[Skeeter]

For a supposed PhD, you surely cannot think straight.

NO, I'm not complaining about "imperfect evidence". My point, which you should have easily understood, was that the EVIDENCE is the same for TWO different interpretations. You interpret similarity as caused by common ancestry (which you have no actual support for), whereas I interpret the similarity as due to a common Designer and Creator.

Okay, in the interests of moving things along on the substance, we will pretend you answered the questions about DNA.

Next question: Why do you reject the idea that similar DNA between species reflects relatedness, but accept that similar DNA in humans reflects relatedness?

 

[Right Divider]

Okay, in the interests of moving things along on the substance, we will pretend you answered the questions about DNA.

There are MANY ways to compare DNA... different methods create different "trees of life". There is no clear linage as you would like to believe.

In some ways humans are more similar to chickens than to apes.

Next question: Why do you reject the idea that similar DNA between species reflects relatedness,

Some sort of actual evidence would be nice.

but accept that similar DNA in humans reflects relatedness?

LOL... PhD ... really?

YES, humans are much more similar to humans than to apes!

 

[Skeeter]

There are MANY ways to compare DNA... different methods create different "trees of life". There is no clear linage as you would like to believe.

In some ways humans are more similar to chickens than to apes.

Compare 99% with 60% and see if one is greater.

Some sort of actual evidence would be nice.

LOL... PhD ... really?

Just because you are a little slow on the uptake, doesn't mean I don't have a PhD.

YES, humans are much more similar to humans than to apes!

Read carefully. Human DNA can be compared to determine familial relationship in forensics. Why does similarity of DNA mean closer relationship in one arena but not in our wider family?

 

[Right Divider]

Compare 99% with 60% and see if one is greater.

Throwing out made up numbers is meaningless.

Just because you are a little slow on the uptake,

Fake news.

doesn't mean I don't have a PhD.

In? Gender studies? Tinker toys? Lip flapping?

Read carefully. Human DNA can be compared to determine familial relationship in forensics.

Indeed, they are ALL HUMANS.

Why does similarity of DNA mean closer relationship in one arena but not in our wider family?

Some actual evidence would be nice.

 

[Skeeter]

Throwing out made up numbers is meaningless.

You know the genome has been mapped for chickens, chimps, and humans, right? Shared DNA can readily be calculated.

In? Gender studies? Tinker toys? Lip flapping?

Everything, I would guess.

Indeed, they are ALL HUMANS.

And all living things are living AND related.

Some actual evidence would be nice.

Just answer the questions, you inartful dodger.

 

[Right Divider]

You know the genome has been mapped for chickens, chimps, and humans, right? Shared DNA can readily be calculated.

Fake claim. As I mentioned, there are MANY ways to compare DNA and they give vastly differing results.

Everything, I would guess.

Then nothing... got it.

And all living things are living AND related.

Their relatedness is NOT based on inheritance. The KINDS were created by God. THEY have a descendant relationship.

Just answer the questions, you inartful dodger.

Again, present some ACTUAL evidence.

 

[Skeeter]

Fake claim. As I mentioned, there are MANY ways to compare DNA and they give vastly differing results.

Then nothing... got it.

Their relatedness is NOT based on inheritance. The KINDS were created by God. THEY have a descendant relationship.

Again, present some ACTUAL evidence.

Why do you deny the field of DNA forensics?

What do you think of this?:



Show me another way DNA is compared.

 

[Right Divider]

Why do you deny the field of DNA forensics?

Nope... it works fairly well when you already KNOW that you are comparing TWO HUMANS.

What do you think of this?:

View attachment 4169

It's a cute picture that proves nothing. Going back to your favorite propaganda sites again?

Show me another way DNA is compared.

Do more research.

 

[Skeeter]

Nope... it works fairly well when you already KNOW that you are comparing TWO HUMANS.

Please explain why it does not work when comparing other living things then.

It's a cute picture that proves nothing. Going back to your favorite propaganda sites again?

Do more research.

So, I have to present your evidence as well? I think we found the dodger, Stripe!

 

[Stripe]

There is solid evidence that Chimpanzees and humans share a common ancestor:

Great.

Let us know when you actually have evidence instead of a fluffy article that does nothing but promises that there is some.

 

[ok doser]

Great.

Let us know when you actually have evidence instead of a fluffy article that does nothing but promises that there is some.

We should expect that chimpanzees are diverging into multiple evolutionary paths?

And humans are also diverging into multiple evolutionary paths?

Or does the imaginary past in evolutionary theory NOT predict the future?

Doesn't seem very sciencey to me

 

[Stripe]

Why would an intelligent designer do that?

Is this a serious argument?