The evolution of the eye

[shunyadragon]

So your argument is "You cannot accurately predict what dogs and cats will evolve to be, therefore no populations evolve ever"? Do you honestly think that makes any sense at all?

no he does not!!!!

 

[shunyadragon]

So your argument is "You cannot accurately predict what dogs and cats will evolve to be, therefore no populations evolve ever"? Do you honestly think that makes any sense at all?

He accurately predicted what dogs, cats and whales would evolve into?

The science of evolution by the nature of the science does not predict the future.
Of course not! Domestic dogs and cats are domestic animals not subject natural evolution selective processes.

Humans of the millennia have selected characteristics of domestic dogs for their own purposes from wolves. They have selected for size, temperament, and intelligence. It is possible under human selective efforts dogs may become more intelligent, faster for racing, but these are human efforts and not natural selective pressures. They are now considered separate sub-species?, and likely will become a distinctly separate species from wolves.

The current trend concerning whales it is likely that most will go extinct.

 

[ChristineM]

I simply asked for predictions as to what dogs and cats will evolve into next. All of your BS is just that, BS.

Surely you know. You should be able to tell by their slowly ever changing DNA. Right? Wrong. What a stupid theory macro-evolution is.

Clairvoyance is a delusion of the the gullible and you are asking for a precognitive solution to bolster your misunderstanding of evolution. Says such a lot about your understanding of evidence. I.e. observation of what has happened. Not what you wish were to come

You never once mentioned dogs or cats in any post to me. So i guess you also expect i am endowed with clairvoyance

You have no idea what is going to happen tomorrow and yet you expect me to know the outcome of around 120 mutations per birth over thousands of generations in millions of years? Wow, you creationists don't want proof much from evolution when you have none whatsoever for god magic.

Btw my links are valid university comment and all you can do is shout BS... How sad.

 

[omega2xx]

Do you remotely understand Methodological Naturalism and process of falsification? Apparently not. You are probably more qualified to perform brain surgery.

Anyone who thinks science doesn't prove/disprove things is not a true scientists.

Real science has PROVED there is more than one blood type. Can you falsify that?

It is not my view it is 99% of all the scientists of the world in the fields of geology, biology, chemistry and physics that support the science of evolution and an earth billions of years old.

Evidently a degree in geology doe snot teach that all dating methods are based on several assumptions that make the dates unreliable. Besides the age of the earth doesn't not affect the proven laws of real science. Times before man was on earth to witness the unscientific speculations of fundamentalist evolutionist are necessary to give the faithful hope they have not believed in vain.

Still tragically true!

Don't worry, you can overcome it by learning what real evidence is.

Totally untrue! Can you cite genetics scientists that support this foolish garbage. While you are at how about a couple of genetic scientists that supports your Creationist view.

Not necessary until you can provide the genetic evidence that causes the leg of a land animal to become the fin of a sea animal I you want to call any belief garbage, start with the evolution doctrine of whale evolution .

It is laughable to believe a dog-like animal wading in the ocean eating fish is the cause of it evolving into a whale. That goes against another of the TOE's basic doctrines of "natural selection." Those are accepted by faith alone and take more faith in Darwin and his evangelists, than it does o believe in an omnipotent Creator.

This is an example of the applied technology of the basic sciences. and not the process of methodological naturalism and falsification that determined the science of human physiology.

Irrelevant until you can explain, scientifically of course, how a leg became a fin, and you can't. You accept it by faith alone.

This reflects an ongoing self-imposed ignorance of science based on your religious agenda and not science.

Not is your statement amusing, it is false. All of you evos have tried to make what I believe is based on my religion, but I never bring my religion into a discussion of science. It is your self-imposed ignorance of real science that is your problem

]Please cite the genetic scientists from peer reviewed science journals to support your foolish notions. You have failed to answer the question:[

Please provide the scientific, genetic evidence that causes the leg of a land animal to become the fin of a sea animal. I ask you first.

How can you prove the Aristotelian (Ptolemaic system) astronomy described in Genesis?

Of course. The Creator of our universe is omnipotent. Can you falsify that?

Still waiting . . . !!!!!!!

Me to.

 

[DavidFirth]

The truth is that macro-evolution does not happen. There. That's not so bad, is it? You can't prove it ever happened, you only suppose that it did.

You looks at bones and fossils and say, "Well, this obviously was the fossil of an ape-like creature that evolved into a man-like creature." That's not evolution. That's guessing. And it's wrong.

 

[shunyadragon]

Cannot respond due to bad formatting. Regardless, a review of your response found it ridiculous beyond belief.

 

[shunyadragon]

The truth is that macro-evolution does not happen. There. That's not so bad, is it? You can't prove it ever happened, you only suppose that it did.

You looks at bones and fossils and say, "Well, this obviously was the fossil of an ape-like creature that evolved into a man-like creature." That's not evolution. That's guessing. And it's wrong.

Unbelievable self-imposed ignorance based on a religious agenda grounded in mythology.

 

[omega2xx]

Cannot respond due to bad formatting. Regardless, a review of your response found it ridiculous beyond belief.

Sorry about the formatting. I revert to the formatting in another forum I have been in for about 25 years. Old habits are hard to forget.

It is amusing that you call what I believe ridiculous and believe a dog-like land animal can become a whale by wading in the the ocean eating fish.

That is so absurd even a cave man with a low 2 digit IQ would not believe it. Besides, it is genetically impossible, and you can't show genetically how it could happen. Those who try to explain it with mutations, don't understand mutations.

 

[ChristineM]

The truth is that macro-evolution does not happen. There. That's not so bad, is it? You can't prove it ever happened, you only suppose that it did.

You looks at bones and fossils and say, "Well, this obviously was the fossil of an ape-like creature that evolved into a man-like creature." That's not evolution. That's guessing. And it's wrong.

Nonsense. Micro and macro evolution are observed, measured and evidenced in many different fields.

So taking your distorted example of paleontology, you look at several thousand bones from different periods in earth history and note the micro changes between generations that become macro changes over epochs. No guessing involved but if you need to misrepresent facts to bolster your bronze age faith, That says more for the fragility of your faith than any opponent ever could.

 

[ChristineM]

Sorry about the formatting. I revert to the formatting in another forum I have been in for about 25 years. Old habits are hard to forget.

It is amusing that you call what I believe ridiculous and believe a dog-like land animal can become a whale by wading in the the ocean eating fish.

That is so absurd even a cave man with a low 2 digit IQ would not believe it. Besides, it is genetically impossible, and you can't show genetically how it could happen. Those who try to explain it with mutations, don't understand mutations.

Genetically impossible?
The evolution of whales

Im thinking you need to inform the biologists and geneticists at berkeley university

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Im thinking you need to inform the biologists and geneticists at berkeley university

She/he has far better things to do than waste time on those ignorant pawns of Satan.

 

[DavidFirth]

Nonsense. Micro and macro evolution are observed, measured and evidenced in many different fields.

Present concrete evidence that macro-evolution has occurred. Good luck.

 

[Revoltingest]

Present concrete evidence that macro-evolution has occurred. Good luck.

We evolutionists are a very polite & deferential bunch. As Johnny come lately folk
(the TOE being far younger than the Bible), we're allowing theists to go first in
presenting evidence for their divine entity who created all the flora & fauna.

 

[ChristineM]

She/he has far better things to do than waste time on those ignorant pawns of Satan.

So you are saying his ignorance is contagious?

 

[Revoltingest]

That is so absurd even a cave man with a low 2 digit IQ would not believe it.

Anti-cavemanite!

 

[ChristineM]

Present concrete evidence that macro-evolution has occurred. Good luck.

You? Not enough evidence for you?

Macroevolution

29+ Evidences for Macroevolution: The Scientific Case for Common Descent

THE EVOLUTION LIST: Macroevolution: Examples and Evidence

Evidence of Evolution: Fossil Evidence of Macroevolution - Windows to the Universe

And some heavy stuff just in case the general reading above isctoo much for you

An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie

And about 12000 more papers

scholar evidence of macroevolution - Google Scholar


Edit
P.s.

Ignore the error, the link still opens correctly

 

[DavidFirth]

You? Not enough evidence for you?

Macroevolution

29+ Evidences for Macroevolution: The Scientific Case for Common Descent

THE EVOLUTION LIST: Macroevolution: Examples and Evidence

Evidence of Evolution: Fossil Evidence of Macroevolution - Windows to the Universe

And some heavy stuff just in case the general reading above isctoo much for you

An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie

And about 12000 more papers

scholar evidence of macroevolution - Google Scholar


Edit
P.s.

Ignore the error, the link still opens correctly

None of that is concrete evidence. The truth is that concrete evidence does not exist. All of the evidence presented is assumption based on yet even more and more assumptions.

Can you prove it happened? No. Then you "think" it happened. I "think" it didn't happen. See how that works?

 

[Revoltingest]

Can you prove it happened? No. Then you "think" it happened. I "think" it didn't happen. See how that works?

What you say here is exactly right.
And it also applies to creationism/ID.
But there is one big difference.
It is possible to disprove the TOE by experimentation.
Creationism/ID is non-disprovable, making it "nicht einmal falsch".

 

[ChristineM]

None of that is concrete evidence. The truth is that concrete evidence does not exist. All of the evidence presented is assumption based on yet even more and more assumptions.

Can you prove it happened? No. Then you "think" it happened. I "think" it didn't happen. See how that works?

Luckily science does not have to convince you of its evidence. The proof convinces people far more qualified than you.

 

[DavidFirth]

What you say here is exactly right.
And it also applies to creationism/ID.
But there is one big difference.
It is possible to disprove the TOE by experimentation.
Creationism/ID is non-disprovable, making it "nicht einmal falsch".

Thank you. I agree.

I think it should also be possible to prove TOE by showing exactly how and why the DNA changes over time. Since this has been a problem for the TOE it gives me serious doubts about it as a viable theory. It also cannot predict future mutations so that is a problem also.