Darwin's Illusion

[YoursTrue]

Crocobanana?

Is it your understanding that the theory of evolution claims that present life evolved from a mating of plants and animals? Can you show us where this is argued in any science?

I'm surprised you mentioned that, because -- I'll ask you a question to see if we can understand one another to an extent: do you think or believe that there were different starters for life on the earth? By that I mean was there one start for plants with cell structure burgeoning, and perhaps another for animals? Let's start there for the moment, if you will. thank you.

 

[YoursTrue]

Is it your understanding that the theory of evolution claims that present life evolved from a mating of plants and animals? Can you show us where this is argued in any science?

Again, I am surprised at your question. So let me try to understand -- according to the chart of life per evolution, doesn't it all start with a few cells? Please notice and give your opinion of the diagrams here:
Diagram Phylogenetic tree - Bing images

 

[YoursTrue]

The claim, among many that are turned out and regularly abandoned here is that everything, or every living thing anyway--good grief I don't want to get that nonsense started as a thing--has consciousness and chooses its evolution. Something like that. I asked about the experiments that show that fungi have consciousness. I'm going to keep asking until the experiments and evidence are provided. I think that creationists and...others should be held to the same responsibilities we meet.

Not everyone who promotes an opinion or two agrees.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Again, I am surprised at your question. So let me try to understand -- according to the chart of life per evolution, doesn't it all start with a few cells? Please notice and give your opinion of the diagrams here:
Diagram Phylogenetic tree - Bing images

Your post demonstrated that you have no understanding of biology or evolution. The split that led to plants and animals occurred long before there were plants or animals. Can you understand that?

 

[YoursTrue]

OK, so back to the phylogenetic tree:
Phylogenetic tree - Wikipedia
"a branching diagram or a tree showing the evolutionary relationships among various biological species or other entities based upon similarities and differences in their physical or genetic characteristics. All life on Earth is part of a single phylogenetic tree, indicating common ancestry."
A single phylogenetic tree. Indicating "common ancestry."
At least that's what the first part of the description says there.

 

[YoursTrue]

Your post demonstrated that you have no understanding of biology or evolution. The split that led to plants and animals occurred long before there were plants or animals. Can you understand that?

Nope, lol. Can you? I mean maybe that's what it says or claims -- can you understand about that split and "common ancestry"? (Does anyone...beyond -- that horrible word -- conjecture...)

 

[YoursTrue]

Your post demonstrated that you have no understanding of biology or evolution. The split that led to plants and animals occurred long before there were plants or animals. Can you understand that?

Yup. But I'm really beginning to think it's all truly an illusionary concept of a construct. I'm getting finished with my discussion. I may say more and ask questions, also I truly thank you and @Dan From Smithville for such a nice discussion.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Nope, lol. Can you? I mean maybe that's what it says or claims -- can you understand about that split and "common ancestry"? (Does anyone...beyond -- that horrible word -- conjecture...)

And there you go once again telling the whole world that it is okay if they accuse you of being a child abuser without evidence.

Just because you cannot understand a concept does not make it conjecture.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yup. But I'm really beginning to think it's all truly an illusionary concept of a construct. I'm getting finished with my discussion. I may say more and ask questions, also I truly thank you and @Dan From Smithville for such a nice discussion.

Seriously? You think that it is a conspiracy by hundreds of thousands of researchers. Or maybe, just maybe, you only have the understanding of a 12 year old when it comes to evolution.

 

[YoursTrue]

Seriously? You think that it is a conspiracy by hundreds of thousands of researchers. Or maybe, just maybe, you only have the understanding of a 12 year old when it comes to evolution.

No, I don't think it's a conspiracy*. I think it's an effort for some to show/prove (yes I know not prove but it sure seems that way, because if it's not a sure thing, then, um ...it sure is a popular concept as if it's RIGHT) that life came about first by accident, then by "natural selection." On branches stemming from a common source. OK, that's it, have a good night.

 

[YoursTrue]

And there you go once again telling the whole world that it is okay if they accuse you of being a child abuser without evidence.

Just because you cannot understand a concept does not make it conjecture.

Talk about strawmen.

 

[YoursTrue]

@Subduction Zone - so where's the 'evidence" of the phylogenetic tree?

 

[YoursTrue]

Oh, and another question -- (@Subduction Zone) -- Please explain how you view the following: "Genetic defects in the flippases are likely to be the cause of a lot more illnesses than we realise today. Basic scientific understanding is the first step on the way to being better equipped for diagnosing and treating these illnesses,” says Vestergaard." (cause of a lot more illnesses than we realize"? -- evoluition? did that? caused more illnesses than is realized? Or are not mutations part of - inherent in the concept of evolution?)
Mystery solved: why a Turkish family walks on all fours (sciencenordic.com)

 

[YoursTrue]

Good night. Finally maybe. I hope so.

 

[YoursTrue]

Seriously? You think that it is a conspiracy by hundreds of thousands of researchers. Or maybe, just maybe, you only have the understanding of a 12 year old when it comes to evolution.

Maybe -- but here's another question -- is there a purpose to evolution?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I'm surprised you mentioned that, because -- I'll ask you a question to see if we can understand one another to an extent: do you think or believe that there were different starters for life on the earth? By that I mean was there one start for plants with cell structure burgeoning, and perhaps another for animals? Let's start there for the moment, if you will. thank you.

You are the one that mentioned interbreeding between plants and animals. Now you say you are surprised I mention it. That doesn't make any sense.

It is possible that life started more than one time. Plants and animals are not known to have different life origins. All indications are that animals and plants share a common ancestry. While I recognize that it is difficult for you to understand and that you don't want that to be the case, that you harbor those feelings is not evidence it didn't happen that way. The shared biological chemistry, basic cellular architecture, physiology and genetics support the relationship.

I have no idea where you intend to go with this. That plants and animals are very different branches of the tree, doesn't mean they do not share the same roots.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Again, I am surprised at your question. So let me try to understand -- according to the chart of life per evolution, doesn't it all start with a few cells? Please notice and give your opinion of the diagrams here:
Diagram Phylogenetic tree - Bing images

Why does it surprise you to get questions about a subject you raised? Again, that makes little sense.

At some point in the very remote past, living things originated on this planet. I have no idea how many cells resulted. Are you claiming that it required a certain minimum number and you know that early living things did not achieve that minimum needed to evolve?

Again, do you think that the theory of evolution claims that plants and animals interbred?

I've your questions. Why do you not answer mine. Just straight forward answers to the point.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Not everyone who promotes an opinion or two agrees.

Some are just making claims and running away without ever supporting those claims. Without explanation and support there is nothing to agree or disagree with other than to point out the fallacious and erroneous nature of many of those claims.

If you really object to the science, I recommend you take time off from posting and get a couple of basic biology texts or some science-based popular account. Learn what is being said from science. This would help us all by giving you a basis for rational questions that are to the point and based on what is known.

Meandering around asking seemingly uneducated questions and making statements that make little sense isn't helping you.

I would recommend that to a lot of people on this thread. A lot of people on this forum that reject this science purely on ideological, religious reasons for that matter.

A number of us have years of education and actual experience in biology or other sciences that have a difficult time understanding the strange questions and convoluted points that get made while not appearing to be connected to anything or only loosely connected to reality.

Maybe just a high school level basic biology text to start.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

OK, so back to the phylogenetic tree:
Phylogenetic tree - Wikipedia
"a branching diagram or a tree showing the evolutionary relationships among various biological species or other entities based upon similarities and differences in their physical or genetic characteristics. All life on Earth is part of a single phylogenetic tree, indicating common ancestry."
A single phylogenetic tree. Indicating "common ancestry."
At least that's what the first part of the description says there.

That is the consensus opinion based on the evidence. It doesn't rule out multiple origins. It just indicates that the lines of descent for living things that exist now had a common ancestry.

Are you attacking the metaphor? The common ancestry? Are you saying that modern life had multiple origins? What?

We know you don't like it, because you find it difficult to understand and incredible. But that doesn't falsify the theory.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Yup. But I'm really beginning to think it's all truly an illusionary concept of a construct. I'm getting finished with my discussion. I may say more and ask questions, also I truly thank you and @Dan From Smithville for such a nice discussion.

I suspect that your conclusion is the result of personal ignorance of the subject as well as bias to see it as failed. Please find some basic biology texts or reputable online sources and do some studying. Then come on back.