Evolution, a thread for carico so he can stop talking about it in other threads!

Evolution:

Is a change in allele frequency or simply put descent with modification


EVIDENCE:

-Endogenous retroviral remnants (ERV)
-Fused chromosomal evidence
-Phylogeny
-Neanderthal mtDNA
-Geographic Fossil relativity
-Fossil chronology
-Biological vestiges
-Physiology of Extant Fauna
-Transitional morphology
-Observed speciation





and what evidence is there against evolutionary biology?

There's evidence of little people in the world, namely dwarfs and midgets. By your "reasoning' that make "Lord of the Rings" true. :rollinglaugh: Sorry, but until you know why humans can't breed giraffes as descendants you'll never know why imaginary animals can't breed human descendants. :rollinglaugh:

There's evidence of little people in the world, namely dwarfs and midgets. By your "reasoning' that make "Lord of the Rings" true. :rollinglaugh: Sorry, but until you know why humans can't breed giraffes as descendants you'll never know why imaginary animals can't breed human descendants. :rollinglaugh:

bump...

Because, like all creationists, you miss the target (and your speed is WAY off). If you can't understand genetics, and its apparent you do not, you won't grasp the concept... only make up wild ideas that are in fact totally stupid.

I'd love you to show me where anyone thinks such a jump is possible.

Strawmen, you seem to rely on them.

Evolution:

Is a change in allele frequency or simply put descent with modification


EVIDENCE:

-Endogenous retroviral remnants (ERV)
-Fused chromosomal evidence
-Phylogeny
-Neanderthal mtDNA
-Geographic Fossil relativity
-Fossil chronology
-Biological vestiges
-Physiology of Extant Fauna
-Transitional morphology
-Observed speciation





and what evidence is there against evolutionary biology?

Sorry but one cannot prove that one species can turn into another without actually seeing it happen. So looking at an elephant and claiming it used to be a giraffe is called illogical speculation, not science.

Interpreting fossils is as subjective as interpreting contemporary artwork.

Since there's no way to tell where the skulls and bones they call Neanderthals came from, then their "DNA" could be a mixture of the DNA of many animal and human bones. But one thing is certain; I saw a documentary on the History Channel called "Clash of the Cavemen." No, it wasn't produced by Stephen Spielberg, it was called a "factual documentary" about a Neanderthal woman who was abducted. :eek: Now how anyone knew whether or not a neanderthal woman was abducted is anybody's guess. But since the imagination is considered evidence in science, then this story fit right in.

In the "documentary" scientists said they were surprised that the found NO Neanderthal DNA in humans. Unfortunately, for the world, the only ones who were surprised were scientists. But those of us who understand the birds and bees sense weren't surprised at all.

So all you do is blindly believe anything you read in a science book without ever questioning or challenging it. that's called being brainwashed.

Do you know why humans can't breed; giraffes, monkeys, lions tigers or bears as descendants? :eek: Obviously not. :rollinglaugh:

If you did, you'd understand why it's genetically impossible for monkeys, apes and especially imaginary animals to breed human descendants either.

So it's you who doesn't understand genetics. Unbelievable. But knowledge and logic have never been a specialty of atheists. :rolleyes:

Sorry but one cannot prove that one species can turn into another without actually seeing it happen. So looking at an elephant and claiming it used to be a giraffe is called illogical speculation, not science.

Show me the text where it says an elephant used to be a giraffe?

Such as the Kew Primrose or the Pacific Robin?

These were observed, by the way.

Looking at an elephant and saying it was a giraffe is proof that you don't know what you are talking about. Let me spell it out for you: Modern species are not going to produce other modern species.

Your scientific knowledge borderlines a twelve-year-old. Are you twelve years old?

That was as much a hypothetical as a human used to be...:dunno::rollinglaugh:

Because they don't even share an order? Could it be that?



So why does our number two chromosome contain the genetic code found in two of the chromosomes in the great apes? Why does it contain vestigal telomeres and centromere, showing that it was at one time two separate chromosomes?

Why, given this information, do humans have 23 chromosomes and the great apes have 24?

Do + The + Math.

Technically and genetically, a human and great ape could produce an offspring. It would be sterile because the chromosomes offered by both parents don't line up properly. Such things are commonplace... ever heard of a mule? Same concept, same outcome, same reason. Donkeys have 62 pairs, horses have 64. They still produce offspring because (drumroll, please!) they are of common descent. Perhaps you're familiar with the liger? Again, same thing.

You're losing this one. Badly.



Seeing that you completely missed the target, the lack of knowledge falls on you. Sorry, Charlie... try again.

Because they don't even share an order? Could it be that?



So why does our number two chromosome contain the genetic code found in two of the chromosomes in the great apes? Why does it contain vestigal telomeres and centromere, showing that it was at one time two separate chromosomes?

Why, given this information, do humans have 23 chromosomes and the great apes have 24?

Do + The + Math.

Technically and genetically, a human and great ape could produce an offspring. It would be sterile because the chromosomes offered by both parents don't line up properly. Such things are commonplace... ever heard of a mule? Same concept, same outcome, same reason. Donkeys have 62 pairs, horses have 64. They still produce offspring because (drumroll, please!) they are of common descent. Perhaps you're familiar with the liger? Again, same thing.

You're losing this one. Badly.



Seeing that you completely missed the target, the lack of knowledge falls on you. Sorry, Charlie... try again.