Evidence of Common Descent (LOTS, across the sciences)

[abu afak]

I'm not surprised that you haven't looked at the evidence I've provided. Ignoring evidence is the hallmark of the dedicated Darwinist.

You lie hourly.
You're a sociopath.
You haven't presented any 'design/ER' evidence and you can't show it to us now.. Of Course.

`

the OCD troll 'ding' is now on ignore due to endless stalking and gratuitous harassment of my threads/posts in Environment with repeat and already answered baits.
Recently even following me down here to the Sci section where he doesn't post, to do the same. ie,
NO post of mine goes unmolested/uncovered by his Trolling.
Look at his 50/60/70, and counting, vengeful out of control/No content snippets. Obsessed Mad Dog even taking third party swipes as well as nonsense one-line 'replies.'
Juvenile last-worder GOT to have his grudge sated.
`

 

[ding]

I'm not surprised that you haven't looked at the evidence I've provided. Ignoring evidence is the hallmark of the dedicated Darwinist.

It's a religion.

 

[abu afak]

Reason is slowly winning over indoctrination.
Just the literalists, the Stupid, and the conspiracists are holding on to Creationism/ID.

`

 

[Seymour Flops]

View attachment 597406

Reason is slowly winning over indoctrination.
Just the literalists, the Stupid, and the conspiracists are holding on to Creationism/ID.

`

Do you think that is a bragging point?

According to the graph you posted moments ago, less than a third (32%) of all adults in the U.S. believe in Evolution due to natural processes. Some smaller number than that believe in the Darwin model you insist is fact.

So 68% of adults in the U.S. believe that Humans existed in present form since the beginning, that a supreme being guided evolution or don't know. You claim that as a victory for your propagandists?

You say your side is "winning?" How do you get that? What evidence do you have that the polls are shifting in favor of your Rube Goldberg model of speciation?

 

[abu afak]

Do you think that is a bragging point?

According to the graph you posted moments ago, less than a third (32%) of all adults in the U.S. believe in Evolution due to natural processes. Some smaller number than that believe in the Darwin model you insist is fact.

So 68% of adults in the U.S. believe that Humans existed in present form since the beginning, that a supreme being guided evolution or don't know. You claim that as a victory for your propagandists?

You say your side is "winning?" How do you get that? What evidence do you have that the polls are shifting in favor of your Rube Goldberg model of speciation?

I think you should start a thread "Evidence for my design idea"/laugher because all you do now is bash Evo AND Science in general (No less!) you say don't disagree with evo!! But you're just another anti-sci religionist.
You have No point to make.
"Great Science Hoaxes" (and many more) is about bashing science not adjusting evo.

You are a Wildly partisan anti-science religionist/conspiracist, not a serious evo adjuster.

You're a FRAUD
`

 

[Seymour Flops]

I think you should start a thread "Evidence for my design idea"/laugher because all you do now is bash Evo AND Science in general (No less!) you say don't disagree with evo!! But you're just another anti-sci religionist.
You have No point to make.
"Great Science Hoaxes" (and many more) is about bashing science not adjusting evo.

You are a Wildly partisan anti-science religionist/conspiracist, not a serious evo adjuster.

You're a FRAUD
`

You start that thread and I'll happily jump on it.

Why do you use the "reply" button for a post like that? You replied to nothing I said about less than a third of U.S. adults agreeing with your preposterous scheme for evolution. Why did you not just start the thread you suggested? Must you have my validation for everything you do?

The overwhelming majority of U.S. Adults can plainly see that there is design in life on Earth. That's why I say I have no need to convince people about design in life. The overwhelming majority are already convinced by what they see with their own eyes.

It is only a small but very vocal minority that continues to push the highly unlikely Darwinian model. Not small enough to fairly call them a "cult," I suppose, but significantly smaller than those who think for themselves.

 

[Hollie]

You start that thread and I'll happily jump on it.

Why do you use the "reply" button for a post like that? You replied to nothing I said about less than a third of U.S. adults agreeing with your preposterous scheme for evolution. Why did you not just start the thread you suggested? Must you have my validation for everything you do?

The overwhelming majority of U.S. Adults can plainly see that there is design in life on Earth. That's why I say I have no need to convince people about design in life. The overwhelming majority are already convinced by what they see with their own eyes.

It is only a small but very vocal minority that continues to push the highly unlikely Darwinian model. Not small enough to fairly call them a "cult," I suppose, but significantly smaller than those who think for themselves.

Actually, the overwhelming majority of Americans do not plainly see your gods design on the planet.

More of your unsupported, nonsensical claims

 

[abu afak]

[]You start that thread and I'll happily jump on it.[/]

What?
It's Your theme/Credo and you want ME to start a thread on your 'Design'/ER' laugher?
because, and as I said..
You HAVE NO EVIDENCE for it and have Lied 10 times in just the last day about having presented it.

Actually you did start your own thread on it with a Dawkins quote, because that quote-MINING was all you had.
It's that empty.

Your other threads try and Trash science because you... HAVE NO EVIDENCE.

The overwhelming majority of U.S. Adults can plainly see that there is design in life on Earth. That's why I say I have no need to convince people about design in life. The overwhelming majority are already convinced by what they see with their own eyes.

argumentum ad populum

Science/truth isn't a poll... Unless it's a poll of experts on the topic at hand, then it's called a scientific consensus.

It is only a small but very vocal minority that continues to push the highly unlikely Darwinian model. Not small enough to fairly call them a "cult," I suppose, but significantly smaller than those who think for themselves.

The VAST majority of science and esp Biologists believe in Evolution.
Indeed, it is the very basis of Modern Biology.

You're a FRAUD
A routine religionist/ConspiracYst.

`

 

[Grumblenuts]

argumentum ad populum

He doesn't even have that.

Evolution now accepted by majority of Americans

The level of public acceptance of evolution in the United States is now solidly above the halfway mark, according to a new study based on a series of national public opinion surveys conducted over the last 35 years.

www.sciencedaily.com

 

[Seymour Flops]

argumentum ad populum

Science/truth isn't a poll... Unless it's a poll of experts on the topic at hand, then it's called a scientific consensus.

Are you serious?

It was YOU who posted the poll!

The VAST majority of science and esp Biologists believe in Evolution.
Indeed, it is the very basis of Modern Biology.

You're a FRAUD
A routine religionist/ConspiracYst.

`

I hope you have that on a cheat sheet you cut and paste from.

 

[Seymour Flops]

He doesn't even have that.

Evolution now accepted by majority of Americans

The level of public acceptance of evolution in the United States is now solidly above the halfway mark, according to a new study based on a series of national public opinion surveys conducted over the last 35 years.

www.sciencedaily.com

You callin' abu afak a liar?

He posted a poll with completely different result.

 

[abu afak]

Seymour Flops said:
I'm not trying to force people to believe as I do.

Believe in spontaneous abiogenesis, and designer-less design all you like. I'm fine with that.

You're the one who screams in all-caps when challenged to provide evidence.

See even now you lie with False premises.

1. We don't know how the first spark started.
You (low IQ) claim because we don't know it must be god/design.
God of the Gaps
Let me explain your reasoning to YOU!
You would have claimed the Fire and Lightning gods too because we just didn't know/know yet.
that is NOT evidence of god, and we eventually found out why
Poof!
Got it yet?

2. There is NO evidence of "Design" to claim I'm denying a Designer about!!!!
What do you claim is designed specifically?
You have presented NO EVIDENCE of design.
-0-
One man's (corrected) Mis-speak is NOT Evidence!!! Pathetic!
Astonishing how stupid you are.
(no insult intended but debate is difficult with two digit IQers who don't understand their every word is an empty claim.)
`

 

[Grumblenuts]

You callin' abu afak a liar?

He posted a poll with completely different result.

I'm clearly not calling abu a liar. Are you guilty of argumentum ad populum?

 

[Seymour Flops]

I'm clearly not calling abu a liar. Are you guilty of argumentum ad populum?

No, I countered Abu's argumentum ad populum.

 

[abu afak]

The only evidence for evolution is the theory itself. Science is unable to document how the theory actually works.

Evidence of common descent - Wikipedia​

​

Contents​

• 1 Evidence from comparative physiology and biochemistry
  • 1.1 Genetics
  • 1.2 Specific examples from comparative physiology and biochemistry
• 2 Evidence from comparative anatomy
  • 2.1 Atavisms
  • 2.2 Evolutionary developmental biology and embryonic development
  • 2.3 Homologous structures and divergent (adaptive) evolution
  • 2.4 Nested hierarchies and classification
  • 2.5 Vestigial structures
  • 2.6 Specific examples from comparative anatomy
• 3 Evidence from paleontology
  • 3.1 Fossil record
  • 3.2 Limitations
  • 3.3 Specific examples from paleontology
• 4 Evidence from biogeography
  • 4.1 Continental distribution
  • 4.2 Island biogeography
  • 4.3 Ring species
  • 4.4 Specific examples from biogeography
• 5 Evidence from selection
  • 5.1 Artificial selection and experimental evolution
  • 5.2 Invertebrates
  • 5.3 Microbes
  • 5.4 Plants and fungi
  • 5.5 Vertebrates
• 6 Evidence from speciation
  • 6.1 Fossils
  • 6.2 Invertebrates
  • 6.3 Plants
  • 6.4 Vertebrates
• 7 Evidence from coloration
  • 7.1 Mimicry and aposematism
  • 7.2 Camouflage
• 8 Evidence from behavior
• 9 Evidence from mathematical modeling and simulation
• 10 See also
• 11 References
• 12 Sources
• 13 External links

`

 

[Seymour Flops]

​

Evidence of common descent - Wikipedia​

Contents​

• 1 Evidence from comparative physiology and biochemistry
  • 1.1 Genetics
  • 1.2 Specific examples from comparative physiology and biochemistry
• 2 Evidence from comparative anatomy
  • 2.1 Atavisms
  • 2.2 Evolutionary developmental biology and embryonic development
  • 2.3 Homologous structures and divergent (adaptive) evolution
  • 2.4 Nested hierarchies and classification
  • 2.5 Vestigial structures
  • 2.6 Specific examples from comparative anatomy
• 3 Evidence from paleontology
  • 3.1 Fossil record
  • 3.2 Limitations
  • 3.3 Specific examples from paleontology
• 4 Evidence from biogeography
  • 4.1 Continental distribution
  • 4.2 Island biogeography
  • 4.3 Ring species
  • 4.4 Specific examples from biogeography
• 5 Evidence from selection
  • 5.1 Artificial selection and experimental evolution
  • 5.2 Invertebrates
  • 5.3 Microbes
  • 5.4 Plants and fungi
  • 5.5 Vertebrates
• 6 Evidence from speciation
  • 6.1 Fossils
  • 6.2 Invertebrates
  • 6.3 Plants
  • 6.4 Vertebrates
• 7 Evidence from coloration
  • 7.1 Mimicry and aposematism
  • 7.2 Camouflage
• 8 Evidence from behavior
• 9 Evidence from mathematical modeling and simulation
• 10 See also
• 11 References
• 12 Sources
• 13 External links

`

I'm kinda new to this message board.

Is there really no limit to the number of times a poster can post the same spam?

 

[Hollie]

I'm kinda new to this message board.

Is there really no limit to the number of times a poster can post the same spam?

Wow, the primary spammer in the science forum asking that question?

 

[abu afak]

I'm kinda new to this message board.

Is there really no limit to the number of times a poster can post the same spam?

In RESPONSE to an idiotic Evo denier who Ignored the OP, I repeated it for him.
It worked.
Always glad to help out.
`

 

[Seymour Flops]

In RESPONSE to an idiotic Evo denier who Ignored the OP, I repeated it for him.
It worked.
Always glad to help out.
`

uh-huh . . .

 

[abu afak]

The overwhelming majority of U.S. Adults can plainly see that there is design in life on Earth. That's why I say I have no need to convince people about design in life. The overwhelming majority are already convinced by what they see with their own eyes.

It is only a small but very vocal minority that continues to push the highly unlikely Darwinian model. Not small enough to fairly call them a "cult," I suppose, but significantly smaller than those who think for themselves.

You have no link for that claim.. and it's hardly evidence even if true.
It's 100% argumentum ad populum
the term I taught you two days ago.

97% of Scientists/Biologists believing in Evolution is Not ad populum nor argument from authority since they are Experts on the topic. And in fact USE evolution in their work
Evolution the very basis for much of Modern Biology.

Evolution has overwhelming Evidence, design/designER/god None.

`