As I said. You can not produce order from disorder.

It's amazing how you atheist pukes at you tube have buried this old video and made it evidently impossible to post the original video.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gg0GkLmVTz4&feature=youtu.be#dialog

[

How in H E double toothpicks did we end up with dogs from the wolves that hung around camp then?

Geno

...without an input of energy from an external source.

You guys know it all I see, without the common decency to watch the video first. Real geniuses, I see.

Like your puke atheist buds at you tube. You are afraid to have the truth upset your applecare.
It's amazing, you cant pull this up under You Tube buy posting the title and producer.

The satanists tentacles run deep, but, there can be no Satan without God.

Come on, man up, chickens. Why not watch the 12 min video then try to dispute the evidence. You're too gutless, that's why.

Which by the way is probably how we were were able to finally sit around the campfire, make tools, plan the next day, and then get a decent night's sleep.

You atheists are all alike. You tout "scientific evidence". Then, when presented with contrary scientific evidence, you turn and run, knowing you dont have the intelligence to refute real science.

Couldn't even watch the whole video. Now that evolution has been debunked how does that explain the Neanderthal DNA that showed up in my DNA analysis ?

You're a dumbassed neanderthal.

You couldnt watch 12 min? Or didnt want to? Or want to hold on to your stupid views? Or it was too deep for you to understand?

Then there is the aspect of time. Like billions of years. Change is inevitable.

ok, as long as it's scientific, I guess we have to go along....

Then there is the aspect of time, my time.

A 12 minute video that likely could be condensed into a couple of paragraphs I could read through quickly.

Is there a transcript of the video available?

I have to go to town to visit some friends, no time for a 12 min vid.

Geno

Hell of a great refuting argument, chicken. I guess it proves how interested you are in the truth. Why lie, just say you're afraid to have your indoctrination shaken?

I think God created evolution. He made the ball and started it rolling. Then it followed the laws of science, which He created.

And I thank Him for it, every day. And for beer, and boobs.





P

LMAO!! Thanks for the laugh! You got me, thought you were serious for a sec.

I have always been lost on why those that believe GAF about those that don't. I am happy for those that believe, my youngest son being one. It is important for him and his fiance and we, mutually, do not discuss religion...

We are hearing about the Corona virus because a new new version evolved from the existing versions. That new version has much more virulent effects and can be transmitted between humans.

This is evolution in action and can be observed almost in real time, because viruses have very short generation times and can therefore evolve quickly. You can deny if you wish, but if you get infected with this new evolutionary strain you are likely to be very sick.

Someone will probably say: "But this is a virus, I'm not talking about viruses." It's true that evolution is much harder to observe directly in organisms with longer generation times because change tends to take much longer, but the principles are exactly the same.

Nothing has been debunked. Evolution is a reality.

Thanks Ed. I posted that for believers to see scientific evidence Darwins theory is scientifically wrong.

I dont care what unbelievers think, but I refute those with the 5 year olds smart remarks and scoffs who are too gutless to even watch before offering their low IQ responses.

Thanks, take care and God bless.

Let me know when you get a pic of the first flying unicorn.

I think evolution and creation both happened.
So .......with that settled, why even worry about it?

Proly best to think about the future

You are confusing gross misrepresentation of evidence with actual evidence. The two are not the same.

Hmmmm...yet another jX video.
Anything like all his silly Jfk or waffling miracle claim stuff?

Here's another hard hitting video from Doc's source:



So Doc,

Do you also agree with his theory that the Earth is flat?????

You ever see a jigsaw puzzle?

Odin says evolution is solid science.

So, which one of you geniuses want to explain how DNA can mutate to a higher life form exactly the same in 2 different individuals of the opposite sex in near proximity to each other so they can successfully mate and thus propagate their new species into a viable geographically expanding new life form?

Valsdad? DBT?

Change yes, new species, No.

So, you too, didnt watch the video? Unreal.

So, how many millions of years have humans lived near the north and south poles?

And why haven't those with heavy body hair expanded to fill the far north with furred folks?

No matter how convincing your perfectly crafted sales pitch is doc, the mere prospect of spending eternity in the same place as you is a deal breaker.

Holy crap, you weren't joking.

I'd suggest that you actually study the subject using reliable academic textbooks or websites on biology and evolution rather than creationist sources and their misleading videos.

Mutations happen, many if not most are not beneficial, but some are. If a mutation happens to be beneficial or adaptive, it gets past on. Which in turn alters the genetic makeup of the group to a degree, a change. Accrue enough changes, that group becomes a new species.


DNA Basics

''In one respect the basic structure of DNA resembles that of proteins: both are made of linear chains of varying subunits. Apart from this common feature, DNA structure is quite different from that of proteins. The subunits in DNA are called nucleotides or bases, and the sequence of these nucleotides contains the genetic information specifying the sequence of amino acids in each protein made by the organism. Whereas 20 different amino acids comprise the subunits of proteins, there are only four different nucleotide bases in DNA, generally abbreviated A, T, G and C. According to the "genetic code" deduced by scientists in the 1960s, each amino acid is specified by one or more triplets of nucleotides; for example, the sequence GCG specifies the amino acid alanine. Since there are 64 different triplets (each called a codon) and only 20 amino acids to specify, some amino acids are represented by more than one triplet (e.g. ATA, ATC and ATT all code for the amino acid isoleucine); and three triplets -- TAA, TAG and TGA -- represent "stop codons" that mark the end of the gene sequence that can be used to specify amino acid sequence.


[Linked Image]


Figure 1. DNA Basics. The central oval represents a cell, within which lies the nucleus. Inside the nucleus, most of the DNA exists as a double helix. The oval at upper left shows an expanded view of the DNA, in which the helices have been drawn "untwisted" to reveal similarity to a ladder. The genetic information is stored in the sequences of nucleotide bases (A, T, G or C) that form the rungs of the ladder. Each rung is formed by a pair of nucleotide bases touching each other, one base attached to one strand backbone, and the other attached to the other strand backbone. An "A" nucleotide always pairs with a "T," and a "G" always pairs with a "C." In order to synthesize a protein, the cell reads the genetic information of the gene for that protein by "transcribing" a molecule of RNA from the gene. For transcription, the strands of the DNA double helix must partially separate so that the bases that form RNA can assemble according to the rules of complementary basepairing. The expanded view at upper right shows the two major differences between RNA and DNA: the RNA backbone strand has a slightly different chemical structure (represented by the dashed line), and a slightly modified form of "T" known as "U" is found in RNA. The transcribed strand of RNA acts as a "messenger" that carries the genetic information from storage in the nucleus to the protein manufacturing modules (represented in the figure by double grey ovals) in the cytoplasm. The expanded view at lower left shows that the sequence of RNA bases is read so that each triplet of bases specifies an amino acid (aa1, aa2, etc.) in the protein. The protein folds into a functional three-dimensional structure that depends on the linear sequence of amino acids.

DNA contains two linear chains in a double-stranded structure that resembles a twisted ladder--the famous "double helix." The vertical beams of the ladder represent a uniform backbone chain which contains no sequence information. As shown in Figure 1 above, the information is stored in the "rungs" of the ladder, which are formed from a pair of nucleotide bases, each sticking out from one vertical backbone strand and touching the base from the opposite strand to form a "rung." The base G on one strand always contacts a base C on the opposite strand; similarly an A always contacts a T. Thus a string of Ts on one strand can "basepair" or "anneal" with a strand containing a string of As to form a double-stranded structure. The sequence of nucleotide bases in one strand is said to be "complementary" to the sequence of the other strand. For any one gene the triplets of bases encoding amino acid sequence are on only one strand. Some genes are encoded on one strand, while other genes lie on the other strand. In most mammalian genes the DNA coding for amino acid sequences is interrupted by segments of apparently meaningless DNA ("introns"). Intron sequences need to be removed before the sequence is used to assemble amino acids; this removal, or splicing, does not occur in the DNA molecule, but in the next stage of information transfer.

In order for a cell to produce a particular protein whose amino acid sequence is encoded in a gene, the sequence information in the DNA must first be copied or "transcribed" into a single-stranded molecule called ribonucleic acid (RNA), as shown above in Figure 1. This initial transcript of RNA undergoes several structural alterations, known collectively as "processing," before it is used to assemble amino acids. These processing steps include the "splicing" out of unnecessary intron segments from the RNA and the addition of nucleotides at one end--the "poly(A) tail"--which promote proper functioning of the RNA in the cell. It is the "processed" RNA that participates directly in the assembly of amino acids into proteins. The transcription of a gene into an RNA copy is very tightly controlled, in part by highly specific regulatory sequences known as promoters that for most genes occur in the DNA just outside the transcribed region but close to the position where the transcription into RNA should start.

When a cell divides, the entire sequence of its DNA must be duplicated into two faithful copies of the original; one copy goes to each of the "daughter" cells created by the division. Occasionally, errors occur in this copying mechanism, creating "mutations" in the DNA sequence. There are several types of mutations, including substitutions of one or a few nucleotides, deletions of nucleotides, duplication of segments of DNA or insertion of extraneous DNA segments into an unrelated DNA sequence. Such changes can occur in most cells in the body--liver, skin, muscle, etc.--without being transmitted to offspring when the organism reproduces. However, when mutations occur in the egg or sperm or, more generally in "germline cells" (i.e., the egg or sperm plus their embryological precursors), they can be passed on to future generations. Often, mutations are inconsequential: e.g. they may fall outside a gene, or if within a gene they may not change the amino acid encoded. Many genetic differences between closely related species are thought to represent such random inconsequential mutations. Sometimes, however, mutations critically damage the function of a gene. Indeed, such mutations are the cause of genetic diseases like cystic fibrosis, sickle cell anemia, phenylketonuria, and hundreds of others, as well as many genetic aberrations studied in laboratory animals. When molecular geneticists examine the DNA of patients with such well-characterized diseases, they can almost always find the defective gene and identify the mutation that inactivated it, since it is rare for such genetic disease to be caused by a deletion that removes an entire gene. Mutations causing genetic diseases and malformations are generally so detrimental to the organism's survival and reproductive success that in the wild--i.e. in the absence of modern medical science--they would tend to be "weeded out" by the pressure of natural selection. Rarely, mutations can be beneficial to an organism: these rare cases form the basis for evolutionary adaptations that improve the "fitness" of an organism to its environment.''

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability

Hahahaha. Tell me this when your wife drops a mutant. YGBSM. Millions of possible mutations but many are advances in life forms. Hahaha. YGBSM.

Now, tell me about those that result in a new, advanced species. Then tell me about another one occurring in the same location of the opposite sex at the approximate same time frame that can result in propagation of the the new species.

You stupid fughk. You're too stupid to see that the scheme of things is obviously against the odds of such an impossible possibility.

And all this time I thought you were smart. Hahaha, you had me and others fooled with your high faluten BS.

Dumbass.

Hell of a good policy.


I dont discuss politics with my sister.

Doesn't mean we cant talk about other things!

It's clear who the Dumbass is. Cheers.

You must be mistaken, mighty jaguar does get confused.

Mighty jaguar knows all, sees all, posts all.

that is all.

No, come on tell me how 2 like genetic mutations of the opposite sex in the same time and location result in the successful propagation of a more advanced life form.

Hey, you have the scientific brain. Inform us how that idiotic dream happens?

You cant, can you, smart guy?

Once again, you are arguing from your personal incredulity, which is logically fallacious.

So Doc, do you also swallow the author Flat Earth Theory he espouses in his other video I posted?

Just tell me, AS,

Now, tell me about those genetic DNA mutations that result in a new, advanced species. Then tell me about another exactly the same as that one occurring in the same location with the opposite sex at the approximate same time frame that can result in propagation of the the new species.

Come on, AS. Give us the low down on the astronomical odds, when life is designed against such an occurrence.

Doc,

Each new born human has 50 to 100 DNA mutations that do not appear in the sequence of either parent. Over millions of generations these variances can stack until the descendants are very different from their ancestors.

It's just a matter of small cumulative changes of great expanses of time.

So, I'm interested in when you figure we are going to sprout wings and become a new species?

Let's devise a plan, my grandson and your granddaughter? Is it a go? Wings and a high IQ new species?

Allright,, sounds good. PM me with the winglets location.

I don't think it would sink in no matter how many times it's explained. Dr Jag simply doesn't want to know.

I give it 6 million years, give or take a million

Well, that's a pos cop out.
Come on, fill everyone else in, genius.

Now, tell me about those genetic DNA mutations that result in a new, advanced species. Then tell me about another exactly the same as that one occurring in the same location with the opposite sex at the approximate same time frame that can result in propagation of the the new species.

Your suckers like Valsdad are waiting.

The same way chi mpanzee DNA showed up in your DNA analysis.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2012/06/bonobos-join-[bleep]-closest-human-relatives

Now go shave your forehead.

"The theory of evolution does not try to explain the genesis of life, only how life changed after its beginning."

Yep., and how amoebas became humans and how from amoebas other species became extant.

Amoebas became lions and humans and dolphins and redfish.

Darwin came up with this ridiculous BS in 1859. Since then the idea has been psychologically indoctrinated into the retards quite successfully.

Doc,

How old do you think the earth is?

I expect millions of years.

Now, how do you think life started?

Millions, but not billions?

Well, at least you've made it out of the thousands.

Jag, Dr Jag, right?

Last I heard they taught stuff in college like Mendelian genetics and such. You went to college, right?

Last time I studied any sort of genetics, if I'm not mistaken I think I learned that it doesn't take two of the exact mutations to occur in different members of the same species for change to occur. The change can be passed on by one individual. The change doesn't even have to occur in species that reproduce sexually, therefor no need to have two individuals of the same species have the same mutation and live in the same area so as to be near enough to reproduce.

Given enough time, is hard to believe significant changes could occur so as to produce a distinct new species? Not for me at least.

As to watching your video, as I said, I'd read a transcript if one existed. I'm not going to watch 12 minutes to find the truth. "truth" was passed on to me in Parochial School. "truth" was passed on to me in HS and University. "truth" was passed on to me in the school of hard knocks too. Ms Jarret tried to pass the "truth" about Geometry to me in HS, required me to do homework every night and if not turned in 2 points off the quiz score every Friday, said quizzes comprising a large portion of the final grade. I did no homework and lost 10 points every Friday. I also didn't follow her lectures during class, as she was usually going over the homework from the night before. During class I read the next chapter in the Geometry book. I passed the class with a B+ if I recall, because the best I could get was a B every Friday, under her "truth" going at her speed. In "truth" I got an A in the class. Other folks "truth" sometimes is too slow for me to follow. It's like that with a lot of videos.

Jag, some of us are concerned you're starting to go a bit overboard at times. I'm hoping that some of it is fueled by Demon Rum. If so, you may want to pray to the "truth" for some help.

Best wishes for a calm evening.

Geno

Here is a line of reasoning I picked up years ago, not sure where, but it stuck with me.

In nature, we regularly observe distributions. Take grains of sand on a beach, the weight of ducks in a flock, etc. We measure them and find variations around a mean. Graph the data and we see the famous Bell Curve. In some cases we see a Poisson distribution. But in general, we see variations that are predictable.

Now let us consider the relative intelligence of the critters on the earth. Some exhibit little intelligence, like amoebas, slugs, and the like. Then we see a progression to insects, amphibians, reptiles, mammals, and primates. Then 30 standard deviations away we find a critter that is different from all the other critters. This critter builds nuclear power plants and goes into outer space; The premise that this critter is a result of the random mutations of other critters doesn't pass the laugh test. Were it so, that great gulf between this critter and the other critters would be littered with other species exhibiting levels of intelligence filling the gap. Anyone who hand waves this away doesn't understand science. The only way of explaining this is that something outside of the observable system added un-natural intelligence to mankind.

But there were numerous species bridging that gap. We even carry DNA from a couple of such species which interbred with humans.

So, wheres your new species to tout? Yes, and I passed genetics and comparative anatomy and organic chemistry in flying colors. In fact, I was accepted to a graduate school doctorate program a year before getting my batchelors degree.

When I went to graduate with a drs degree the university was in a quandary as I had no BS degree. They ended up having to give me an honorary BS degree or something like that.

I gave you a serious scientific video to see, yet your time was too valuable to perchance learn anything new, yet here you are an hour later trying to give me the 3rd degree.

Why don't you grow the guts to watch the video and then confront me legitimately in a scientific disagreement over what it shows and I agree with? Are you too afraid Vals dad led Val astray with BS?

AS I mentioned earlier, I went to visit friends. They are more important than your video, which you are vehemently decrying as the "Truth".

Transcript please so I can see if I want to use my time to watch the rest of the show.

Geno

It's from a flat earther.....and neither scientific nor serious.

Would a transcript I could quickly scan for pertinent items point that out? Or would it lead me to the "Truth"?

Asking for a friend.

Geno

Yea, it would be very obvious rather quickly.

Thanks, no time for a video.

Gotta go catch an English Premier League soccer game now.

I know, I know, how unAmerican.

Maybe I'll watch a HOCKEY game instead, I think I've got one of those in the DVR.

The "truth" will have to wait.

Geno

If you passed biology you should know that it doesn't take the same mutation in both individuals to pass on a beneficial trait. I suspect that you were not paying attention in class.

You obviously have zero understanding of the nature of genetic variability, dominant versus recessive genes, and how "sports" pass on their differences. To help I would suggest you investigate S J Gould's " Punctuated Equilibrium" theory.

The video is absolutely a joke. Simply because the idiot makes a statement does not prove a single thing. There is nothing remotely scientific about that garbage. There is zero proof given and a total joke.

Seems somebody is wrapped a tad too tight.

But, but, but! Everything should arise as whole cloth, fully formed and proved!

The Anunnaki created humans for slaves in the gold mines 450000 years ago.

Love it

Another hilarious thread on the Fire.

If you go look at the videos the man that posted this on Youtube has on his channel you'd plainly see he is just making fun of crazy conspiracy theorist.

He has everything from "the hoax moon landing" to "flat earther" stuff.

It was a joke Jag, it was a joke!

It was intended to be viewed as a comedy for the humor involved, but leave it to the Fire to waste 7 pages attempting to debunk it.

LOL...........

I'm sure you run a tight ship at the Sunglass Hut but I think the seminary was your true calling.

I didn't watch the video, but what you say doesn't surprise me.

It's every bit as compelling as an UNZ link.

imagine your first visit to the fire and see a thread called "evolution scientifically debunked" on the first page

I think the first thread as I was trying to sign up was something like “Why I’m Leaving The Fire”...😎

The answer is simple....




















Aliens

Time is not the hero. Entropy shows things deteriorate over time. Recently I saw something on T.V. that said something to the effect if sperm count continues to fall off at its present rate humans will be extinct in 2,000 years.

Evolution is contrary to the God of the Bible. He started everything as "very good". According to the "Genetic Entropy and the mystery of the genome" mutations are accumulating so fast if one traces them back he can only go about 6,000 - 7,000 years to get to NO mutations. All mutations have been shown to be harmful, or at best neutral. God says death is the last enemy and will be eliminated and restore everything to its original order. That means the fossil didn't exist until after Noah's Flood.

This. Loads of residual energy from the big bang out there.

TRH, where did the stuff come from that went "bang "?

who created the creator is what I want to know.

They taught me dimocraps good, Rs bad.

They are teaching kids now that diversity gives us strength.

As time goes on, science proves the existence of a Creator. Of course, many dont like that type progress as it clashes with their previous teaching. You're a case in point.

So, do you think Trump is crazy for being a believer in God and the Bible?

Do you believe we have no inalienable rights as espoused by the framers of our constitution?

Back in those days, one had to profess a faith in the Creator to run for office. Then along came Darwin with his ideas which are scientifically WRONG.

Its amazing how people claim the IQ high ground but are too chicken to look at science which disagrees with Darwin.

those things might be related

You're asking the wrong guy if you expect to stump me on that. Answer: ultimately, God. I'm not an atheist. Far from it. I'm a believing Christian. God is the creator of all things, either directly, or indirectly. Genesis says that God commanded that the waters and the earth bring forth all living creatures, and the waters and the earth obeyed the command. Science too says that the waters and the earth brought forth all living creatures, but doesn't speculate about God, since that's beyond the scope of science.

That's what separates him from creation, i.e., he's uncreated.

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

2 The same was in the beginning with God.

3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

Thanks, TRH.

who/what created God? would that be in line with believing in creation?

When there was a beginning, it was God.

on whose timeline? mans?

Ok. Let us know when you find out what there was before the beginning.

Time is another of God's creations. He exists both within and without time. Before he created it, time didn't exist. To God, all of time is laid out before him like a tapestry, from beginning to end. It's all the present, to him. Past and future only has meaning to created beings.

That's not for us to understand.

Exactly. Too many cant grasp their spirit God made living forever, yet some want to play Gus.

Those aliens couldn't hit the broad side of a barn.

The 'universe' could just be an expanding bubble within an infinite multiverse of bubble universe with different physics, some able to support life, others not ....nobody knows.

To say that the universe had to be created but the creator is eternal is setting your own rules and begging the question.

my point here is that when it comes to God there are concepts that man can't explain and as TRH conveniently types, not for man *to* understand, so to be absolute in anything related to God seems misdirected to me.

you have beliefs, not facts - as we all do.

God gives facts and inconvenient truths.

Those who have a relationship with him know HE exists just as well as those who know you, know you exist.

But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. 2 Peter 3:8

“For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,” declares the Lord.

“As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.”
Isaiah 55:8-9

all quotes by men in regards to God, alot like here now.

Sounds like special pleading to me.

We are saved by grace through FAITH, something the scoffers, mockers, and atheists will never understand.

Yep.

Okay. So what? No one claims that faith is the result of scientific proof.

In regards to the opening statement, two words, Poppycock, balderdash.

In other words, be it logical or not, someone can believe whatever they like.

Jag, serious question. Do you really believe that anyone who accepts evolution is an atheist?

Winner winner chicken dinner

DBT,

Yes, after all we live in America................one can believe ANYTHING...............without fear of being pilloried, put in the stocks, subjected to the rack, or burned with hot irons until they recant.................at least I think we can.

Jag,

I believe there's something out there,that belief doesn't conflict with my understanding of evolution as a couple of others here have pointed out. My understanding of evolution (science, pretty well documented in some folks' world) does conflict with a book written and passed down before "science" was even cogently expressed as an idea. Folks back then observed flies on mud and concluded they were spouted from the dirt. And other now proven silly ideas.

That "something" I believe is out there...................not sure where/when it became a "HE". Pretty sure it was just the language of the times used to express that idea, just as in many cases in most Latin languages the male pronoun "el" (il in Italian") is used when identifying something gender neutral. "He" was good term for many, for a long long time, but for me it doesn't necessarily mean that what I believe is out there has a dick and balls. "Something" saved me from a miserable life and allowed me to get to Medicare age (which was a very unlikely possibility at one time) , please don't tell me it was some All Powerful Dude.

I've got to put together a Costco order, use an Amazon gift card for a drill battery, and do a few other things. I'm not gonna have time to watch the "fun" video today either I think, then there's maybe a recycling run to town, the bank, maybe lunch with some friends, or maybe a I just take a nap so I can stay up late and watch hockey.

Take care and try not to get so worked up.

OH, are you sure Trump is a "believer"? Hopefully he's matured and his non-believer actions like grabbing a handful of puzzy when he wants are all in the past.

Geno

I saw the errors immediately, but sadly there are many seeing agreement with their positions only. So it must be true.

This thread entertains me...

Your question demonstrates a profound misunderstanding. Evolution occurs at the population level.

The “serious scientific video” presented in the OP is a cesspool of ignorance, fallacies, unsupported assertions and even a quote mine from Darwin. So let’s pull on our rubber boots and wade on in.

For the sake of clarity there follows a definition of evolution as understood by scientists, but not necessarily by those who obtained degrees in Truthology from Christian Tech.

Evolution (ToE): Unless otherwise specified, the scientific context always refers to an explanation of biodiversity via population mechanics; summarily defined as ‘descent with inherent [genetic] modification’: Paraphrased for clarity, it is a process of varying allele frequencies among reproductive populations; leading to (usually subtle) changes in the morphological or physiological composition of descendant subsets. When compiled over successive generations, these can expand biodiversity when continuing variation between genetically-isolated groups eventually lead to one or more descendant branches increasingly distinct from their ancestors or cousins. (Aron Ra)



Law [of nature]: A general statement in science which is always true under a given set of circumstances. (Aron Ra)

So, of course evolution is not a law. It is both a fact and a theory.

Fact: A point of data which is either not in dispute, or is indisputable in that it is objectively verifiable. (Aron Ra)

Google: “observed instances of speciation” and you can find hundreds of peer-reviewed papers.



Correct. A scientific theory can never become a law because laws are included within theories.

Theory: A body of knowledge including all known facts, hypotheses, and natural laws relevant to a particular field of study. A proposed explanation of a set of related facts or a given phenomenon. (Aron Ra)



Correct. And no sane scientist believes that the ToE makes such an absurd assertion. The author has neglected to quote any scientist, paper or textbook. This is a common Creationist lie lifted from Ray Comfort videos.



Natural selection is the recognition that members of a population that are well-suited to their environment have greater reproductive success, on average, than those that are not so well-suited. The author gives no clue of the nature of a “DNA limit” or what it has to do with natural selection. And, unusually for a scientific argument, gave no citation.



Vacuous drivel. Since DNA is not a species, of course, it cannot be changed into another species.



Citation needed. Who said the coelacanth had half-formed (whatever that means) legs and primitive lungs. How does its existence prove evolution wrong? The modern coelacanth is in the same taxonomic Order as the various fossil species but not even in the same taxonomic Family. To show the distance in this relationship in a way the author might understand: dogs, cats, bears, seals and weasels are in the same taxonomic Order.

“A transitional fossil is one that looks like it’s from an organism intermediate between two lineages, meaning it has some characteristics of lineage A, some characteristics of lineage B, and probably some characteristics part way between the two.
Transitional fossils can occur between groups of any taxonomic level, such as between species, between orders, etc. Ideally, the transitional fossil should be found stratigraphically between the first occurrence of the ancestral lineage and the first occurrence of the descendent lineage...”
-Quoted from the Young Earth Creationist website, WasDarwinRight.com.



Another assertion extracted from the seventh planet. If he could demonstrate any such thing he is guaranteed a Nobel Prize. Guess he doesn’t need a million bucks.



If the author uses Ben Stein’s material he should give him credit. Maybe they can get together and discuss their vapid misunderstanding of abiogenesis (look it up).



The Second Law says that in a closed system, one from which matter and energy cannot enter or exit, the amount of energy available to do work cannot increase. Perhaps the author exists in a closed system where knowledge and understanding cannot enter.



Another assertion without evidence or explanation.



There are no chromosomes in DNA. Chromosomes are composed of DNA.

Ever hear of polyploidy?
“Polyploidy
J.S. Heslop-Harrison, in Encyclopedia of Genetics, 2001
Polyploidy in Evolution
Polyploidy, involving the presence of multiple copies of identical or similar chromosome sets in one species, is an important feature of species evolution in the plant, animal, and fungal kingdoms. Polyploidy is widely considered to be an enabling force in evolution. Because chromosome sets are duplicated in polyploids, heterozygosity may be fixed, and random mutation or factors modulating gene expression may be buffered (unlike a diploid), so new genes and gene functions may evolve, leaving the original function in the other chromosome set.
Polyploidy is seen in many angiosperm plant species, and the related diploid species can be readily identified. More than 50% of all plants are obvious polyploids, while detailed studies are showing that many other species are crypto- or paleopolyploids.”

And it’s not just plants, as you can find with a 5 minute internet search.
Bedbugs have 29-47 chromosomes
domestic sheep 52-53
Asian wild ass 51-52
Equis hemionus kulan 54-55
Donkeys 62
Horses 64
Mules 63
There are many more examples.

The author of the video kindly presented in the OP is clearly full of beans and has no clue about science. He has merely repeated Creationist claims that have already been refuted thousands of times and provided nothing in the way of evidence.

Nicely done.

That's good wswolf.

only a few hundred posts since 2009...................perhaps you'd consider joining our "discussions" more frequently?

Geno

If only logic and fact could pierce that void...

HAHAHAHAHA HOLY CRAP I almost missed this masterpiece...

Jag finds another ridiculous video... posts it thinking it supports his claim.... doesnt realize his video source is satire..

Then goes on a multi post rant about everyone who disagrees with him being democraps, stupid idiots and how he is way smarter than him.

Please lord, I pray to you... give dr jagoff the power to quit being so dumb and dysfunctional. He is taking this internet forum stuff way too seriously. Hes also clearly abusing some substance, otherwise if he was in fact a medical doctor of some sort as he claims, he really couldnt be this stupid.

Lord I ask of you to cure him of his issues.... as he has made it clear they wont evolve out of him anytime soon.


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAGAGAGA seriously man, your great entertainment... not only the grumpiest [bleep] Ive ever seen on the net, the most outspoken moron at that too!

It is entertaining in a way. Poor Jag.

Good post, Wolf.

In logic this is called "elephant hurling". You through a lot out and hope something sticks.

If you're going to ridicule someone for intelligence, you could at least use "you're" instead of "your" in "you great entertainment". You're entertaining to me.

Still waiting for someone to explain how the first bird that was born as a DNA defect and of one sex happened to be across the pond of another with the same DNA defect changing making it a bird but of the opposite sex so they could propagate.

How many more thousands of years will be required for eskimos to be covered in long hair?

Thanks for that.... however am I the one ridiculing people for intelligence here or is it Dr Jagoff? The evidence is overwhelming that its not I...

You don't accept explanations. You were given a thorough explanation and you ignored everthing that was said...only to ask more silly questions.

This doesn't fool anyone.

Transitions don't occur like that. First of all, "bird" is an arbitrary designation we apply to a fossilized animal when it bears a sufficient number of traits like what we know as modern birds. You can draw the line at different points in the fossil record, and many do, between "dinosaur" and "bird." That's because dinosaurs didn't really transition into something other than dinosaurs. It's just that a certain type of dinosaur is designated "bird" at the point in the fossil record when it is similar enough to what we know today as birds to be called that, and, as I said, different schools of thought differ as to what that point is.

Birds as we know them are actually just what's left of the dinosaurs. Most all of the categories of dinosaur became extinct, apart from what we know as birds.

Also genetic variations aren't defects. Each successive generation of any animal shows variation from previous generations. When the environment places a set of pressures on a species, this favors certain of those variations and disfavors others, causing gradual shift, eventually leading to changes such that we would characterize them as a different subspecies or a different species.

Jag, you are aware, I assume, that wings (bat, pterosaurs, or bird) are supported by a framework of finger bones, right? The bone structure of wings are adaptations of finger bones. Wings are arms (forelimbs) that are specialized for flight. Some, even today, still bear claws. In some birds, those claws are only present when immature, and disappear later, after they feather out and begin flying.

Your meaning, here is unclear, but if I understand it correctly, it is a mistake to describe a mutation as “a DNA defect”. Having taken a genetics class you should know that not all mutations are negative. Some have a positive effect (with respect to reproductive success) and the majority have no effect at all. Are you not aware that every human zygote has, on average, 129 mutations?


It is not necessary that a mutation be present in both parents. A mutation can be passed to from one parent to the offspring. If the mutation is beneficial or neutral it could spread through the population over generations.

This has been explained but apparently you missed it. The definition of evolution, repeated below in hope that you will read it this time, makes it clear if you bother to understand it.

Evolution: Unless otherwise specified, the scientific context always refers to an explanation of biodiversity via population mechanics; summarily defined as ‘descent with inherent [genetic] modification’: Paraphrased for clarity, it is a process of varying allele frequencies among reproductive populations; leading to (usually subtle) changes in the morphological or physiological composition of descendant subsets. When compiled over successive generations, these can expand biodiversity when continuing variation between genetically-isolated groups eventually lead to one or more descendant branches increasingly distinct from their ancestors or cousins.

Evolution is a gradual process. The average characteristics of a population change over generations. Two birds cannot produce offspring that are not of their species. Every bird is a slightly modified version of its parents.

The concept you seem to be missing is gradual change in populations over generations.


At what point does the blue population become the red population?

OK, Sport, I turned on your video. Some foreignor who had no scientific credentials (or at least claimed none) bloviated that dogs can be made to evolve. Thus proving evolution can happen. Dumbth!

Then he said if evolution were true Eskimos woud have fur. Ever hear of Eskimos wearing clothes? Duh!

Then he said that if evolution were true, people in the tropics would have shiny skin to deflect the sun. In point of fact, dark skin is necessary in the tropics to deflect UV radiation. Duh! Duh!

No point in watching any further.

Are you really as dumb as the things you post, Jag?

OIf you saw it on TV it must be true!

Did the TV tell you that snakes can talk?

Did the TV tell you that you can get striped goats by making goats look at striped poles while copulating?

Did the TV provide any evidence for Noah's non-esistent flood, lifted from the myth of Gilgamesh?

The whole book of Genesis is ridiculous. It's only purpose is to make intelligent people laugh at it and turn away from the true message of Christianity. Genesis had nothing to do with God. It was made up by stone age illiterates.

Again you show foolish faith in what cannot be known. What good was half a wing for any of the creatures you mention. They couldn't fly and they couldn't run. So what would happen to them? They wouldn't make it past the first day before being eaten by a complete predator.

If you don't mind tell us your favorite ten "positive" mutations.

You are conflating change in a kind with microbes to men. It is an attempted trick I see often. Dogs, or wolves, never become cats, or rats or anything else but canines.

Science requires no faith. It depends on evidence, of which there is a massive quantity supporting the theory of evolution, to include the evolution of non-avian dinosaurs (specifically, theropods) into avian dinosaurs, i.e., what we ordinarily refer to as birds. It's all there waiting for you to strip the scales from your eyes and just take a look.

You are certainly showing your ignorance of Christianity! Without the sin of Adam there is no curse. Without the sin of Adam there is no need for Jesus to be our Savior.

Things can be known or understood through studying the evidence. The evidence as it stands supports natural evolution, not special creation.

Please, I beg you, go google or use a dictionary and find the meaning of the word “irony”.

Pretty please.

The word 'foolish' appears to be used a lot by defenders of faith.

That video is from a flatearther. Do you all believe in a flat earth?

The story of creation in Genesis debunked in much less time.

Man wrote, edited, and published the bible. Man that is imperfect. Man that sins. Most importantly, man with free will.

And you didn't even have to watch some crazy youtube video, but yeah, youtube videos are totally legit.

Why couldnt God leave good enough alone?

ie; dont cast lucifer down to earth and put the serpent
in the garden to target Eve.

Refrain from such and avoid killing your own son
And condemning all of mankind... Win/Win.

Theres a reason Bible called them the wise men
That visited Jesus,
To differentiate them from all the babbling sheep
nonsense Christian jX types.

You'll never be able to understand.......and neither will the rest of the fools here


Isaiah 55:8-9 (ESV)

8
For my thoughts are not your thoughts,
neither are your ways my ways, declares the Lord.
9
For as the heavens are higher than the earth,
so are my ways higher than your ways
and my thoughts than your thoughts.

And there would have been no death.

Duh, uh, y id dat, JG?

I am well aware of Isaiah you quote.

GOD CAN HAVE IT ANY WAY HE LIKES,.. RIGHT?

So it didnt have to be that narrative, unless God
wanted it that way ie: it was not compulsory.

He could easily have totally canned lucifer
Thus sparing his son and Adam and Eve
and mankind from such interelated fates.

https://www.princeton.edu/news/2020...ry-african-populations-and-describes-its


Debunked huh...

Satire versus Princeton...

Jag versus scientific community

There's the mention of 'fools' again. Must be feature of being Christian to call anyone who dares question the faith a 'fool'

As for the quote....it is the bible that describes the things that God values, thou shall not kill, etc, and it is the Bible that describes God doing the very same things, killing and tormenting people for no real reason.

Apparently, as simple as it is, that is an inconvenient truth. Maybe truth is only for 'fools.'

Fool is the term God uses for those that don't believe. It fits pretty well too. If you have a problem with it take it up with Him. Since God spoke the universe and life into existence, He can make the rules.

Maybe not ten off the top of my head, but here are a few.

All humans were once lactose intolerant. At several different places, several different mutations (new genes) have occurred. Each of which gave a specific population of humans the ability to consume milk into adulthood, and gave that population a distinct edge in competition for survival.

Further back in history, another mutation occurred in a gene which caused growth in a specific lobe of the brain responsible for verbal communication, and coincided with language development in the species.

And even further back in history, a prior mutation occurred which gave growth to a different lobe of the brain which controls artistic expression and coincided with the appearance of cave paintings.

Sounds like a line Obama or Hillary would use to shame all of us deplorables. "Don't even try to understand. My ways are beyond your comprehension. Trust me, I do all of this for your own good"
ETA to correct quote name

So, how long you figure until they find the missing link. And dont be bringing up Obama.

Rich, I think the rhea, the ostrich, the cassowary, the emu, heck even the dodo disprove such thought.

Nobody can take it up with him, he hides himself so well that it's like he doesn't exist at all. Meanwhile it's Christians like you that calls anyone who dares to question a fool as a means of defense. It has nothing to do with God.

Grin, that is funny!

Missing link?

Many, many missing links have been found. Every few years another missing link is found.

Each discovery brings the puzzle closer to completion, though many pieces are yet to be found.

No intelligent person would claim the fields of archeology or anthropology to be complete yet. But we are a heck of a lot closer than we were 100 years ago.

Christians dont even believe other christians
They play a constant game of oneupmanship
Thinking that their own personal imagination
as being superior.

This captures them perfectly...

https://images.app.goo.gl/m5Yqx5yg2LkwG3A76

True.

laffin’

Every time they find one, your sort asks where the missing link between that one and modern man is. It's an unwinnable game by those rules.

This oviraptor was unable to fly but used its "half wings" to protect a larger clutch of eggs than would be possible with smaller wings increasing its reproductive success.

Ostriches use their "half wings" to protect their chicks from heat stroke as well as enabling them to cover a larger clutch of eggs or young in a nest.

Some years ago the University of Montana Zoology Department filmed experiments with immature grouse that were not yet able to fly (they had "half wings"). The grouse were chased up a steeply inclined sheet of plywood. When their "half wings" were bound to their sides they made little progress ascending the plywood. Freed from bindings, flapping their "half wings" while running enabled them to ascent the plywood with alacrity. Obviously their "half wings" would increase their chances of escaping from predators. Unfortunately I was unable to find a copy of this video.

When I was about 8 years old, living in Missoula, we kept a few ducks in a pen in the back yard. The ducks had their flight feathers clipped so they could not fly. Occasionally a duck would escape the pen and with a combination of flapping its"half wings" and running could easily out-distance anyone chasing it. It could only be caught by cornering it somehow.

Ringman, will you now agree that a half wing can confer a benefit on its possessor?

I don't know that I could pick a favorite but here are some to add to those kindly provided by Idaho Shooter;

1 - Apolipoprotein AI-Milano – removes cholesterol from cell walls
2 - Increased bone density
3- Malaria resistance – a variant of hemoglobin, named HbC provided up to 93% resistance
4- Tetrachromatic vision
Reference for 1-4: https://bigthink.com/daylight-atheism/evolution-is-still-happening-beneficial-mutations-in-humans

Numbers 5 an 6 below are from: https://www.pnas.org/content/113/10/2554#ref-3
as are links to 16 peer-reviewed papers on the very subject you asked for.

5- people who have particular mutations in a gene called SLC30A8 (Solute carrier family 30, member 8) are 65% less likely to get diabetes, even when they have risk factors like obesity (1)

6 - One percent of Northern Europeans are now known to carry a mutation in a gene called CCR-5 that renders a cellular receptor defective and confers total immunity from HIV infection(2)

Flannick J, et al., Go-T2D Consortium, T2D-GENES Consortium
(2014) Loss-of-function mutations in SLC30A8 protect against type 2 diabetes. Nat Genet 46(4):357–363

Liu R, et al.
(1996) Homozygous defect in HIV-1 coreceptor accounts for resistance of some multiply-exposed individuals to HIV-1 infection. Cell 86(3):367–377

Levine ME,
Crimmins EM
(2015) A genetic network associated with stress resistance, longevity, and cancer in humans. J Gerontol Ser A, in press

Freudenberg-Hua Y, et al.
(2014) Disease variants in genomes of 44 centenarians. Mol Genet Genomic Med 2(5):438–450
.
Johnston JJ, et al.
(2015) Individualized iterative phenotyping for genome-wide analysis of loss-of-function mutations. Am J Hum Genet 96(6):913–925

Barzilai N, et al.
(2010) Genetic studies reveal the role of the endocrine and metabolic systems in aging. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 95(10):4493–4500

Schechter CB,
Barzilai N,
Crandall JP,
Atzmon G
(2010) Cholesteryl ester transfer protein (CETP) genotype and reduced CETP levels associated with decreased prevalence of hypertension. Mayo Clin Proc 85(6):522–526

Stitziel NO, et al., Myocardial Infarction Genetics Consortium Investigators
(2014) Inactivating mutations in NPC1L1 and protection from coronary heart disease. N Engl J Med 371(22):2072–2082

Côté M, et al.
(2011) Small molecule inhibitors reveal Niemann-Pick C1 is essential for Ebola virus infection. Nature 477(7364):344–348

Hsu T-H,
Spindler KR
(2012) Identifying host factors that regulate viral infection. PLoS Pathogens 8(7):e1002772

Band G,
Rockett KA,
Spencer CC,
Kwiatkowski DP, Malaria Genomic Epidemiology Network
(2015) A novel locus of resistance to severe malaria in a region of ancient balancing selection. Nature 526(7572):253–257

Mead S, et al.
(2009) A novel protective prion protein variant that colocalizes with kuru exposure. N Engl J Med 361(21):2056–2065
.
Asante EA, et al.
(2015) A naturally occurring variant of the human prion protein completely prevents prion disease. Nature 522(7557):478–481

Iqbal S, et al.
(2015) Serum- glucocorticoid-inducible kinase 1 confers protection in cell-based and in in vivo neurotoxin models via the c-Jun N-terminal kinase signaling pathway. Mol Cell Biol 35(11):1992–2006

Cannon CP, et al., IMPROVE-IT Investigators
(2015) Ezetimibe added to statin therapy after acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med 372(25):2387–2397

Friend SH,
Schadt EE
(2014) Translational genomics. Clues from the resilient. Science 344(6187):970–972
Gudbjartsson DF, et al.
(2015) Large-scale whole-genome sequencing of the Icelandic population. Nat Genet 47(5):435–444

Ringman, do you just rely on the logical fallacy of False Dichotomy, thinking that flinging poo at the theory of evolution will somehow support you view? If you have positive evidence for any of your claims please be so kind as to present it.

Either Ringman or JTX will be along shortly to tell us that it's a trap set by Lucifer.

Actually, it's worse then that. The also as for the "missing link" between it and the ancestor as well. You didn't find a missing link, you created two more!

Exactly.

wswolf,

good to see you're still around. You need to get with the program around here though.

To wit:



You are referencing University experiments here, most likely conducted by "scientists", those dreaded evil minions of the Dark Lord, ol' Mr Pointy Tail himself.

They are personae non gratae around here, especially the ones from the halls of Academia.

Please refrain from referencing such in the future, some find it upsetting.

Geno

Additionally, can there be such a thing as a "Montana Scientist", after all, Scientist only come from the most liberal places such as Berkeley and Boulder.

Yes, but haven't you heard? Are you sheltered there?

Liberals, even the scientist kind, are moving to MT every hour, droves of them (good MT word there) selling their high equity places in NY and SF and moving to places like Bozeman and Billings. I don't think they've reached the High Line yet............Jim might kick them out..............unless they can help him figure out how to raise better wheat so he gets a higher price from the Japanese. Sam O would like them to figure out how to keep sticky fingers off his truck tools. Those two guys have no use for a scientist studying short winged grouse and sheets of plywood. (really, how stupid is that?)

Geno

Sorry about that. I'll try to restrain myself from mentioning any facts, systematically gathered by highly trained experts who care about what is true.
After all, we shouldn't have any blasphemy interfering with our freedom of thought around here!

Careful that you are not called a fool. It'll probably happen if you keep using logic and reason.

If even a fool figure it out...???

I've been known to tell fellow posters to stop using logic and reason.

It don't fly well around these parts.

Geno

Yep.

Maybe logic and reason will catch on and become the next 6.5 Creedmore.

We can only hope.

Yeah,

you just keep on thinking that fella.

Geno

I should like to point out "Boulder," "Berkeley," and "Bend over" alliterate. Beautifully...

Politics aside Berkeley has a primer on evolution that clearly presents the basics. I wish the science deniers would read it so that they could get a clue about what they are arguing against.

primer on evolution

Amusingly, I was once severely chastised on this forum for mentioning the Berkeley evolution primer because Angela Davis once worked for UCLA. Apparently her previous employment at UCLA somehow rendered invalid anything produced by the Berkeley Biology Dept.

Imagine if she'd ever shot a 6.5 Creedmore. That would really invalidate her opinions.

If I was real smart, I wouldnt live in Berkeley

https://www.cityofberkeley.info/ready/earthquake/Berkeley/

Reagan was once a high mucky muck in some actors' union I heard.

That should take him off the Campfire Darlin' list by that reasoning, right?

Geno

I remember Lancelot Link had a rock band called the Evolution Revolution!

The problem with evolution is it happened before film. No slow motion capture of the events.

It wasn't televised from the beginning.

Even had it been, there's those folks that don't believe in space travel and moon landings. Those are pretty well documented.

Evolution Revolution. Cool name for a band!

Geno

Before he became a Republican, kind of like Trump? Some of us believe in forgiveness. It's a blessing, thank God.

We all know, Reagan was a liberal! He would be skinned alive by the fire if he was above ground today.