Don't tell me there's no proof for evolution

We should engage in more scientific-philosophical discussions. We learn new things every day.

Its good that you ak questions but I suggest that you try to be more objective.
Im facinated s to what expeeiments youve conducted>

Brachial ttchments for muculture are easily seen with bit more understqnding. Its nothing you can make up from a point of complete ignorance. A good field effort or looking at fossils in a bone collection will provide much of wht you dont undertand.
Still, tell me about your experiments.
My spelling errors are related to my typing mostly one handed. I consistently missplace "a" and "q". However with techy words (like melqmine or melanin), I would try to get em right.
I think, from reading your past contributions, it is mostly a matter of mere ignorance.

The principles of stratigraphy are quite a bit more rigorously determined. One doesnt extract any fossils until the stratigrphy is at least isolated. But I believe thats over yer head, since Im sure you had some earth science class as a kid in which you were exposed to what geo-chronometry is about and the many methods available.

Maybe, Cameron can learn from the following: https://sciencing.com/rock-likely-contain-fossils-8117908.html

My mining clients dont wanna hire a complete idiot, because in applied geology, hundreds of millions and billions of dollars are usually at stake. Ive had a very successful career in this area and I work for percentage fees in field exploration. Ive made a damn good living and Id do over in a flash(its a lotta fun).

Lets say Ive got 40 years experience in applied geo-science including paleo, strat, geophysics and applied chemistry and Ive served as a forensic witness in many classic. What do you have? I, unlike you, dont make believe Im an expert at everything, but Ive got several stqffers and partners who are recognized experts in paleo and evo/devo.

Are you usually this obtuse? I never got into the "hair fur" discussion except tp explain about tavistic trits . You were poo pooing the entire concept that traits could disappear and reappear > I gave severl examples which apparently you just
1had no idea what I was talking about or
2you just try to deny real science.

When a species displays a wide enough variability (like the B. betularia) there are enough native traits to be favored and a population leaning toward the "favored: trait, . B. betularia gives an example of how natural selection goews. The fact that the entire events driving the appearances of one or another trait took place in less than 2 centuries where several favored traits became dominant all due to industril pollution in the atmosphere.

I know you science deniers love to pick on the species from a point of complete submission to your religious leaders ideas. Methods of nat selection are an anathema to your ways of "thinking". Unfortunate because most Christian religious cults seek their god s a transcendent being who doesnt screw with the universe. We o have many geo scientists who are also deeply religious, so theyve found a way to put their god in a closet till the end of their week at the project site

At this point in this discussion, who cares about your sh*t with misspelling?

Just vomit and clarify what is the muscle in the leg that humans lost in the past and was recovered later.

Explain how humans lived without that muscle in their legs. What was affected when they didn't have that muscle?

It is clear that you never asked these questions and that you just accept any crap others tell you.

Well, you started with a propagation of stupid ideas of missing muscles that were recovered later.

Now, you have no other option but to defend your story.

I don't care about your misspellings, don't look for excuses, vomit, bark, say something.

I dont believe anyone except you have been barking. What leg muscle are you even howling about?? Has anyone even mentioned a leg muscle??

try some education perhaps then youll be worth talking to. Right now youre just an arrogant asshole who is stuck in the dark ages and believes in alchemy and "creation science".

I asked you for something about experiments that you conducted to convince you of your worldview??

Ill bet youre just lying again

apparently you do since you began open criticism of my spelling in order to hide your foopah with melamine.
Look up atavistic traits

You can clean your butt with those principles.

The main question is if those fossils were found in the same area, the latter ones over the older ones, so you compared them that way.

If the answer from you is that you collected fossils from different areas and different level of layers of dirt, your "atavism" calendar is pure crap.

Look at our present time.

The greyhound is a dog breed in UK. It is said that comes from Saluki, the breed found in Egypt.

That is not a big issue, we have two different breeds of dogs living in our current time. Both breeds are very similar (of course if we buy the story that one is the "original" one and the another a descendant with different characteristics).

Lets go to one of the structures which are not similar at all.

The greyhound has the scapula spine bone which attaches the spine with the shoulder bones.

On the other hand, the Saluki is similar to a cheetah, because lacks of bone-to-bone attachments of the shoulder with the rest of the bone structure, and the attachment is found to be just by ligaments and muscles.

The point I am giving you, is that 100,000 years from now the greyhound breed survived in a changed world where upheavals turned down many islands and lands and cause the rising up of new lands.

Layers from earth after UK was under ground 20,000 years before Egypt 50,000 years before the digging, the archeologist will assume "evolutionary steps" where this breed of dog found under ground in UK had a bone to bone attachment, that was lost later on according to the digging in Egypt, but thousands of years later, at the time of the digging, the same breed has "recovered again" the bone to bone attachment.

Reality in this example is that Greyhound and Saluki are physically very similar, this is with bone structure with the exception of the way of attachment to the spine.

There weren't any losing and gaining of characteristics on the same species or breed, just two different breeds with very similar bone structure, living at the same time but getting extincted in different eras.

As you can see, no evolutionary steps happened, and less the ridiculous idea of losing and regaining characteristics like fur first , later hair, later no hair, later hair again... or dark and light color peppermint months...

Your evolutionary studies suck.

You are lots of theoretical stuff but no reasoning at all.

Your brain is just a recorder machine repeating and repeating what others told you.

I don't see any review from your part but repetition of what you have learned without asking questions to your teacher.

Use orogenesis and explain Ayers Rock from Australia.

Where is your Off button?

You repeat and repeat what others told you like a recording machine.

Before you continue with that silly "favorable changes in bacteria", explain with clear English (don't worry about your spelling) what happens exactly to a bacterium when is exposed to antibiotics and survives becomes later on immune to the antibiotics.

In your expertise, explain what happens. How bacteria becomes resisting the antibiotics. Because something happens.

And I can assure you that there are not a single evolutionary step.

Go ahead, vomit, bark, say something.

OK, now is not in the leg.

Then, where the heck was the missing muscle?

as I said, wvery mucle has an attachment scar on the bones to which they are attached.
The internet has answers for all our questions. What you need to do is learn what some of those questions are, thats a sign of an educated person.

Im not going to move one jot while you parade that "Christian with four aces" attitude. Its obvious, by your pre adolescent questions , you have not a clue of what your trying to fake your way around.
In contrast
We have several other religious folks here who have more scholarly interests in these many subjects and can maintain their arguments without being so smart assed and ignorant about everything.

Im getting rather bored with your inability to discuss anything intelligently.

Quote cameronleon:

Nobody in this thread ever claimed that humans ever lost their hair over most of their body. Nobody except an ideologue such as yourself would ever make such a statement, since even a child can see that we have fine hair over almost all our body surfaces.

This illustrates how your ability to ignore the reality in front of your face apparently began back in elementary school, and continues on today in intensified form. It is amplified by your continued belief that if you say an untrue statement over and over, it must eventually be accepted as truth. Hence, we can look forward with confidence to several further posts by yourself claiming that someone in this thread said that humans "lost their hair".

It's easy to find scientific resources on body hair. Here's one of many. https://www.sciencealert.com/watch-why-do-we-have-body-hair

This topic clarifies to religious people that when questions are asked in specific to evolutionists about their claims, this dudes can't answer with proper explanation what they stand for.

A little pressure on them and they just disassemble themselves and their great back ups are exposed as frauds after frauds.

We see a poster claimed that humans lost a muscle and recovered it back, perhaps because some deceiver scientist wrote such a fairy tell in the journal, but when asking how this human survived with the lack of this muscle, or where was the muscle in question located, his intervention in this topic lost energy.

Same as well, when one questions what happened with bacteria to "apparently" became more "resistant" to antibiotics, which is a sure case of degeneration and not so of "evolution", the "expert" in this theory can't provide the answer.

And these are just simple questions to which these defenders of evolution can't answer because they lack of knowledge. They just repeat and repeat what their brains have been brainwashed to say. They can't go further than writing what they find online about evolution, they are incapable to think and give opinions of their own.

In reality, there is no proof for evolution.

sez you. Youve been spouting bullshit and half awake crap since you started. As I said a few weeks ago,'"In order to learn, you must be able to formulate proper questions". You've done absotutely nothing in this end.

I've no idea where you get your crappy ideas but I know that they're not from evidence based science.

More like you're a believer of Ken Ham or Steve Austen, Mike Behe,"dr" Demski and their gang of science denying bullshit purveyors.

This member is a conservative operative in the political threads, and based on it's poor English, I doubt that it's an American. I suspect it may be a Russian operative. It supports all politically conservative narratives and this is just another case of the same. You were right earlier to say that there is no point in continuing a discussion with it.

Ive given several examples of atavistic traits that have reoccurred as acts of micro evolution. You seem to like to spread lies based upon your exceeding dimness and you love to alter whats been said by others so you wont look like the complete fool you are. You practice "Quote mining" nd "concept rejoggering".
Thats just crummy debate on your behalf .

Explain what you exemplify as "degeneration" Einstein. You must realize that evolution is NOT anagenic(or in youre case perhaps not since you probably consider Alley Oop to be a technical treatise). it merely renders the creature More fit to an environment. Many examples of free living males displaying "sexual polymorphism", to have the males "degenerate" (I say evolve) into fully parasitic forms that hve "Lost" their digestive systems and limbs(yet the bugs, ostracods, and even fish and molluscs) forms that "live off " the female through life after having metamorphosed into the adult form that STILL RETAINS THE FULL GENIC COMPLIMENT OF A FREE-LIVING FORM( appropriate genes are jut shut off).

When you deny this stuff, as youve denied all other factual information, you will adequately display your choice to live the life of an intellectual saprophyte , thriving on the useless unevidenced mythology of several Fundamental religions.

As I said before, you are, at least, good for entertainment