When Is An Evolution Scientist Ever Going To Admit The Other Side May Be Right?

[james bond]

No, there isn't. For example, how much bananas do you eat? If we came from monkeys, then we'd all be eating a lot of bananas.

Wow dude. You're fucking brilliant. You should take this observation to the scientists.

It's true. Not only does my OP show we are not genetically related, we do not have the behavioral patterns. Monkeys have to remain in cages in civilization for the most part or left in the jungle wild. That is easily demonstrable. Humans can remain free until they commit a crime. Innocent before being proved guilty.

You're losing the argument badly. Have you had your banana yet haha?

 

[james bond]

Neither can prove squat.

I'm saying the evos can't prove anything. It's not a fact. The fact is they have no evidence. OTOH, the creationists have our solar system and the Earth in just the right place, so we can survive. We see intelligence behind the design of the natural world everywhere. We can see such things didn't happen randomly, so it's evidence for a creator.

 

[Turtlesoup]

The facts are, neither side can prove their side.

Evolution has an overwhelming amount of evidence to support it.

Adaptation has a lot of evidence. Actual evolution not so much.

Thats a lie..........

the ancestors of yorkies are wolves

 

[james bond]

You do know scientist work from empirical evidence and observation don't you?

Not the atheist scientists. What empirical evidence and observation are you referring to?

So far, I've presented the genetic and behavioral evidence that we didn't evolve from monkeys.

When the Almighty comes down and announces to all, "Yup, I created the heavens and the Universe," I'll believe it.

That's fine. It may be too late then and you get sent to the lake of fire.

 

[james bond]

I noticed the ICR article (predictably) included “The Bible clearly states that humans were created uniquely in the image of God.”

We see that in much of our literature.

Soytin-lee. Nyuck, nyuck, nyuck.

Proof positive. The universe, earth, and everything in it is here and it says so in the "book." How can one book answer all the questions we have today?

 

[pknopp]

The facts are, neither side can prove their side.

Evolution has an overwhelming amount of evidence to support it.

Adaptation has a lot of evidence. Actual evolution not so much.

Thats a lie..........

the ancestors of yorkies are wolves

The ancestors of wolves are wolves. Has something ever adapted to their environment? Absolutely. When the fruit on the ground was hard to get only those with the longer necks could reach it so we got a giraffe. All the same the giraffe is still the same animal it was to start with but with a longer neck.

 

[Rye Catcher]

If apes and humans are too different, then they cannot possibly be related. Darwin just had a hypothesis. He wasn't able to back it up with real science and evidence. Furthermore, we still have apes and all are not bipedal.

3-D Human Genome Radically Different from Chimp
"All plant and animal genomes studied so far exhibit complex and distinct three-dimensional (3-D) structures in their chromosome configurations depending on the type of cell (e.g., heart, liver, brain, etc.). Given the incredible variability among genome configurations within a single type of creature, let alone that which exists between creatures (e.g., human vs. chimpanzee), this area of evolutionary comparison has been difficult for secular researchers. Now a new study published in Trends in Genetics evaluates research in this emerging field that shows the human 3-D genome is distinctly unique to humans, confirming previous research that showed it is as different compared to chimp as it is to mouse."

3-D Human Genome Radically Different from Chimp

All plant and animal genomes studied so far exhibit complex and distinct three-dimensional (3-D) structures in their chromosome configurations depending on the type of cell (e.g., heart, liver, brain, etc.). Given the incredible variability among genome configurations within a single type of...

www.icr.org

DNA and the genome support Darwin's hypothesis; there is no scientific support for Adam and Eve.

Genetics

humanorigins.si.edu

 

[Manonthestreet]

If apes and humans are too different, then they cannot possibly be related. Darwin just had a hypothesis. He wasn't able to back it up with real science and evidence. Furthermore, we still have apes and all are not bipedal.

3-D Human Genome Radically Different from Chimp
"All plant and animal genomes studied so far exhibit complex and distinct three-dimensional (3-D) structures in their chromosome configurations depending on the type of cell (e.g., heart, liver, brain, etc.). Given the incredible variability among genome configurations within a single type of creature, let alone that which exists between creatures (e.g., human vs. chimpanzee), this area of evolutionary comparison has been difficult for secular researchers. Now a new study published in Trends in Genetics evaluates research in this emerging field that shows the human 3-D genome is distinctly unique to humans, confirming previous research that showed it is as different compared to chimp as it is to mouse."

3-D Human Genome Radically Different from Chimp

All plant and animal genomes studied so far exhibit complex and distinct three-dimensional (3-D) structures in their chromosome configurations depending on the type of cell (e.g., heart, liver, brain, etc.). Given the incredible variability among genome configurations within a single type of...

www.icr.org

"the other side MAY be right?"

You mean you don't know?

You do know scientist work from empirical evidence and observation don't you?

When the Almighty comes down and announces to all, "Yup, I created the heavens and the Universe," I'll believe it.

He came down once and walked among men, when he comes again you will believe too late

 

[james bond]

If apes and humans are too different, then they cannot possibly be related. Darwin just had a hypothesis. He wasn't able to back it up with real science and evidence. Furthermore, we still have apes and all are not bipedal.

3-D Human Genome Radically Different from Chimp
"All plant and animal genomes studied so far exhibit complex and distinct three-dimensional (3-D) structures in their chromosome configurations depending on the type of cell (e.g., heart, liver, brain, etc.). Given the incredible variability among genome configurations within a single type of creature, let alone that which exists between creatures (e.g., human vs. chimpanzee), this area of evolutionary comparison has been difficult for secular researchers. Now a new study published in Trends in Genetics evaluates research in this emerging field that shows the human 3-D genome is distinctly unique to humans, confirming previous research that showed it is as different compared to chimp as it is to mouse."

3-D Human Genome Radically Different from Chimp

All plant and animal genomes studied so far exhibit complex and distinct three-dimensional (3-D) structures in their chromosome configurations depending on the type of cell (e.g., heart, liver, brain, etc.). Given the incredible variability among genome configurations within a single type of...

www.icr.org

DNA and the genome support Darwin's hypothesis; there is no scientific support for Adam and Eve.

Genetics

humanorigins.si.edu

Are you into biology?

Yes, but that was BEFORE the finding of 3-D study of the human genome (actually looking at a 3-dimensional structure).

"All plant and animal genomes studied so far exhibit complex and distinct three-dimensional (3-D) structures in their chromosome configurations depending on the type of cell (e.g., heart, liver, brain, etc.). Given the incredible variability among genome configurations within a single type of creature, let alone that which exists between creatures (e.g., human vs. chimpanzee), this area of evolutionary comparison has been difficult for secular researchers. Now a new study published in Trends in Genetics evaluates research in this emerging field that shows the human 3-D genome is distinctly unique to humans, confirming previous research that showed it is as different compared to chimp as it is to mouse.1

One of the best ways to empirically understand the 3-D configuration of chromosomes in the nucleus of the cell is to define topologically associating domains (TADs) in the DNA sequence. TADs are characterized as regions whose DNA sequences preferentially contact and interact with each other in association with specific cell types and biological functions. TADs were first discovered in 2012 using newly developed chromosome conformation analysis techniques.2 In mammals, the median TAD length is about 900,000 DNA letters (bases) long—a sizeable stretch of DNA that typically contains multiple genes and many regulatory switches and control features.3

One important aspect of 3-D genome structure has to do with the epigenetic modification of proteins called histones that the DNA is wrapped around. A 2011 study showed that a specific type of histone modification had only about a 70% overlap or similarity between humans and chimps.4 Remarkably, another study in 2012 showed that humans had about a 70% similarity for the same feature with mice.5 In other words, humans were as different to mice as they were to chimps for this particular genome conformation metric "

 

[Astrostar]

Only when you and yours prov

If apes and humans are too different, then they cannot possibly be related. Darwin just had a hypothesis. He wasn't able to back it up with real science and evidence. Furthermore, we still have apes and all are not bipedal.

3-D Human Genome Radically Different from Chimp
"All plant and animal genomes studied so far exhibit complex and distinct three-dimensional (3-D) structures in their chromosome configurations depending on the type of cell (e.g., heart, liver, brain, etc.). Given the incredible variability among genome configurations within a single type of creature, let alone that which exists between creatures (e.g., human vs. chimpanzee), this area of evolutionary comparison has been difficult for secular researchers. Now a new study published in Trends in Genetics evaluates research in this emerging field that shows the human 3-D genome is distinctly unique to humans, confirming previous research that showed it is as different compared to chimp as it is to mouse."

3-D Human Genome Radically Different from Chimp

All plant and animal genomes studied so far exhibit complex and distinct three-dimensional (3-D) structures in their chromosome configurations depending on the type of cell (e.g., heart, liver, brain, etc.). Given the incredible variability among genome configurations within a single type of...

www.icr.org

Only when you and yours provide EVIDENCE that there was/is a "god." It's the same as with Trump's"election fraud;" you just can't spout

If apes and humans are too different, then they cannot possibly be related. Darwin just had a hypothesis. He wasn't able to back it up with real science and evidence. Furthermore, we still have apes and all are not bipedal.

3-D Human Genome Radically Different from Chimp
"All plant and animal genomes studied so far exhibit complex and distinct three-dimensional (3-D) structures in their chromosome configurations depending on the type of cell (e.g., heart, liver, brain, etc.). Given the incredible variability among genome configurations within a single type of creature, let alone that which exists between creatures (e.g., human vs. chimpanzee), this area of evolutionary comparison has been difficult for secular researchers. Now a new study published in Trends in Genetics evaluates research in this emerging field that shows the human 3-D genome is distinctly unique to humans, confirming previous research that showed it is as different compared to chimp as it is to mouse."

3-D Human Genome Radically Different from Chimp

All plant and animal genomes studied so far exhibit complex and distinct three-dimensional (3-D) structures in their chromosome configurations depending on the type of cell (e.g., heart, liver, brain, etc.). Given the incredible variability among genome configurations within a single type of...

www.icr.org

When you come up with EVIDENCE that a "god" exists. Merely spouting religious clap trap isn't enough. It's just like Trump and his "election fraud." He has no evidence, merely bull crap that, according to Goebbels, if spouted enough, becomes fact (to the stupid.)

 

[james bond]

Only when you and yours provide EVIDENCE that there was/is a "god." It's the same as with Trump's"election fraud;" you just can't spout

You're just avoiding the topic. Evolution cannot prove squat. It's just a scientific argument based on circular reasoning and long time.

OTOH, the evidence for creation is plentiful. Besides the at least 30% difference found between the ape and human genone, the fact that the Earth, universe, and everything in it is here. We are the only intelligent living beings on the planet. No where else.

 

[Hollie]

I find it funny that creationists find evolution so far-fetched while believing people just popped out of thin air.

The facts are, neither side can prove their side.

The creationists have science backing up their side. For example, Dr. Louis Pasteur proved only life begets life by his swan neck experiment.

ID creationers do not have science “backing up” their side. ID creationers do no research and do not publish in peer reviewed science journals because supernaturalism is not subject to science investigation.

Pasteur never showed that life begets other life. It was explained to you earlier. What Pasteur's experiment showed was that life does not currently spontaneously arise in complex form from non-life in nature.

 

[james bond]

The ancestors of wolves are wolves. Has something ever adapted to their environment? Absolutely. When the fruit on the ground was hard to get only those with the longer necks could reach it so we got a giraffe. All the same the giraffe is still the same animal it was to start with but with a longer neck.

This is what I mean. We can see the changes from one change in species to another. We can't see that with apes to humans such as no monkeys are bipedal. Macroevolution is basically a hypothesis or best guess and that's it.

 

[Hollie]

I noticed the ICR article (predictably) included “The Bible clearly states that humans were created uniquely in the image of God.”

We see that in much of our literature.

Soytin-lee. Nyuck, nyuck, nyuck.

Proof positive. The universe, earth, and everything in it is here and it says so in the "book." How can one book answer all the questions we have today?

Your claim that the Bible is true because it’s what you want to believe is not an argument.

The Bible does not answer all the questions we have today. Such a statement is really quite disturbing.

 

[pknopp]

The ancestors of wolves are wolves. Has something ever adapted to their environment? Absolutely. When the fruit on the ground was hard to get only those with the longer necks could reach it so we got a giraffe. All the same the giraffe is still the same animal it was to start with but with a longer neck.

This is what I mean. We can see the changes from one change in species to another. We can't see that with apes to humans such as no monkeys are bipedal. Macroevolution is basically a hypothesis or best guess and that's it.

That's fine and I made the argument so I will not argue with you but you aren't going to have a better time proving that which you condemn.

 

[konradv]

The facts are, neither side can prove their side.

Evolution has an overwhelming amount of evidence to support it.

Adaptation has a lot of evidence. Actual evolution not so much.

What’s the difference?

 

[pknopp]

The facts are, neither side can prove their side.

Evolution has an overwhelming amount of evidence to support it.

Adaptation has a lot of evidence. Actual evolution not so much.

What’s the difference?

I explained that already. Read further.

 

[Hollie]

The ancestors of wolves are wolves. Has something ever adapted to their environment? Absolutely. When the fruit on the ground was hard to get only those with the longer necks could reach it so we got a giraffe. All the same the giraffe is still the same animal it was to start with but with a longer neck.

This is what I mean. We can see the changes from one change in species to another. We can't see that with apes to humans such as no monkeys are bipedal. Macroevolution is basically a hypothesis or best guess and that's it.

The fossil record of ape-like ancestors to humans is really quite well documented. What does the Bible explain about bipedalism? You wrote earlier, “How can one book answer all the questions we have today?” suggesting the Bible is the only book one needs to read.

Identify where the Bible contains the word “bipedal” and identify where the Bible addresses bipedalism.

Lacking a science vocabulary, you confuse terms you don’t understand. Macroevolution, (you confuse that term with speciation), is well documented with many examples provided to you previously.

 

[Wyatt earp]

At most we will find new information that changes our understanding of evolution. They'll never say creationism might be right because it's not. We weren't made out of dust by God.

Ashes to ashes dust to dust

 

[Wyatt earp]

The facts are, neither side can prove their side.

Evolution has an overwhelming amount of evidence to support it.

Adaptation has a lot of evidence. Actual evolution not so much.

What’s the difference?

I explained that already. Read further.

you never explain shit.