+- +-

+-User

Welcome, Guest.
Please login or register.
 
 
 
Forgot your password?

+-Stats ezBlock

Members
Total Members: 46
Latest: Tony Ryan
New This Month: 0
New This Week: 0
New Today: 0
Stats
Total Posts: 12385
Total Topics: 257
Most Online Today: 3
Most Online Ever: 137
(April 21, 2019, 04:54:01 am)
Users Online
Members: 0
Guests: 0
Total: 0

Author Topic: Darwin  (Read 7268 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24083
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Renwable Revolution
Re: Darwin
« Reply #60 on: January 24, 2015, 07:02:01 pm »
Quote from: Joseph McCafferty link=topic=4011.msg65072#msg65072
There's only one evolutionary model, and that's natural selection. Now you've made a few similar posts, trying to say there are gaps in the evidence for natural selection. Now even if there are gaps between the evidence, then it follows that there is evidence between the gaps. With the contradictory hypothesis of an intelligent designer, there is only a gap. From when it was first proposed until now, there is just a long gap with no evidence.

There are many evolutionary models, but you're right that they all RELY on RANDOM mutations and natural selection to work. I have not been talking about "gaps in the evidence", if by that you mean the fossil record. AG has that topic well covered and your only response was something like, "if we didn't have the fossil record, we could still use modern science to 'discover' Darwinian evolution".

That's why I have been talking about microbial genomics (a topic which you brought up as evidence supporting SET or GUT or whatever you want to call it), and the fact that modern science has NOT been able to explain the origin of eukaryotic cells with genomic studies. I also mentioned the statistical (IM)probability that random genetic mutations would lead to new speciation over time, something we have not observed, directly or indirectly, a single example of in higher order species.

So far you are not produced ANY scientific evidence which supports SET, only loose analogies and thought experiments. The genomic similarities between species is obviously, by itself, not any evidence of a common ancestor. Rather it is easily explained in terms of a designer who uses common templates in his creative process.
This poor man cried, and the Lord heard him, and saved him out of all his troubles.. -- Psalm 34:6

 

+-Recent Topics

Doomstead Diner Daily by Surly1
June 24, 2019, 06:27:38 am

Global Warming is WITH US by AGelbert
June 24, 2019, 12:09:49 am

The Big Picture of Renewable Energy Growth by AGelbert
June 23, 2019, 06:28:48 pm

U.S. History & Politics, Climate Change, Trump Impeachment & Standing Rock: CONTEXT by AGelbert
June 23, 2019, 05:11:37 pm

Fossil Fuel Profits Getting Eaten Alive by Renewable Energy! by AGelbert
June 23, 2019, 04:03:37 pm

Electric Vehicles by AGelbert
June 23, 2019, 03:58:34 pm

Profiles in Courage by AGelbert
June 23, 2019, 01:06:59 pm

Key Historical Events ...THAT YOU MAY HAVE NEVER HEARD OF by AGelbert
June 22, 2019, 10:03:08 pm

DRUGS - HISTORY - USE AND ABUSE - DOCTOR AND PATIENT MISTAKES by AGelbert
June 22, 2019, 02:03:45 pm

Money by AGelbert
June 22, 2019, 01:39:29 pm