Where is this mountain of evidence for evolution?

[S.J.]

Invincible ignorance is not 'common sense'.

I guess you think you're being funny and clever with your 7th grade level remarks but the only thing you've managed to do is reinforce what I said in my last post and undermine any credibility your side may have had before you jumped in with your "support". I wonder how orogenicman feels about your "contributions" to this thread and to the theory of evolution in genral. If he is half as intelligent and serious as he claims to be, he probably agrees with me about you. With friends like you, who needs creationists?

 

[orogenicman]

Invincible ignorance is not 'common sense'.

I guess you think you're being funny and clever with your 7th grade level remarks but the only thing you've managed to do is reinforce what I said in my last post and undermine any credibility your side may have had before you jumped in with your "support". I wonder how orogenicman feels about your "contributions" to this thread and to the theory of evolution in genral. If he is half as intelligent and serious as he claims to be, he probably agrees with me about you. With friends like you, who needs creationists?

You're making this about me? Typical.

 

[S.J.]

Invincible ignorance is not 'common sense'.

I guess you think you're being funny and clever with your 7th grade level remarks but the only thing you've managed to do is reinforce what I said in my last post and undermine any credibility your side may have had before you jumped in with your "support". I wonder how orogenicman feels about your "contributions" to this thread and to the theory of evolution in genral. If he is half as intelligent and serious as he claims to be, he probably agrees with me about you. With friends like you, who needs creationists?

You're making this about me? Typical.

No, but you're the only one on that side who has made any attempt at a serious discussion, and even though you resorted to insults and personal attacks, you at least tried to make a case for your theory. I would think their behavior would be embarrassing to you if you were interested in a serious and adult discussion. Or maybe I'm giving you too much credit.

 

[cnm]

No, but you're the only one on that side who has made any attempt at a serious discussion

Wibble....what bullshit. Many have contributed to the discussion, with the exception of you. Not only do you whine with self pity but you lie a lot when you're not fixing yourself to your cross of martyrdom or warding off knowledge.

Invincible ignorance fallacy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invincible_ignorance_fallacy
Invincible ignorance fallacy - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

The invincible ignorance fallacy[1] is a deductive fallacy of circularity where the person in question simply refuses to believe the argument, ignoring any evidence given. It is not so much a fallacious tactic in argument as it is a refusal to argue in the proper sense of the word, the method instead being to make assertions with no consideration of objections.​

 

[S.J.]

No, but you're the only one on that side who has made any attempt at a serious discussion

Wibble....what bullshit. Many have contributed to the discussion, with the exception of you. Not only do you whine with self pity but you lie a lot when you're not fixing yourself to your cross of martyrdom or warding off knowledge.

Invincible ignorance fallacy
Invincible ignorance fallacy - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

The invincible ignorance fallacy[1] is a deductive fallacy of circularity where the person in question simply refuses to believe the argument, ignoring any evidence given. It is not so much a fallacious tactic in argument as it is a refusal to argue in the proper sense of the word, the method instead being to make assertions with no consideration of objections.​

There ya go, orogenicman. Need I say more? Do you really want to be aligned with this level of adolescence?

 

[cnm]

No discussion of the topic? I'm shocked, shocked I tell you.

Tell you what, how about if I present some more evidence for you to dismiss out of hand, will that make you feel better?

 

[Hollie]

After 98 pages, still no evidence of evolution has been posted. Fossils of extinct creatures similar to man is only evidence that they once existed, it's not evidence that they evolved. It is pure speculation and nothing more. They start with a preconceived notion, then start searching for evidence to validate it. They want to be right, so they jump to the conclusion that their findings support their preconceived notion, but as soon as someone using common sense questions their conclusion, instead of considering their point, they attack the person. This is what we have seen repeatedly throughout this entire thread and it's all we're ever going to see from them because they can't come to terms with the fact that they're not as "intelligent" as they think they are.

After 98 pages, it's quite evident that you religious extremists will choose to deny the facts that have been presented to you.

"Invincible ignorance" is the term cnm has used to describe your behavior and it's perfectly fitting.

 

[cnm]

Here ya go, knock yourself out, you should have warding off knowledge nailed third time around, it'll make you feel better...

Steven_R wrote

Ring species fit the bill nicely. You have populations of the same species that over time can no longer interbreed with other populations of the same species. Since one of the classic definitions of a species involves the ability to interbreed with others, (and neverminding the arbitrary nature of human creation of classification systems including species) and you have observed populations that no longer fit in that definition over time...

Ring species - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia​

 

[S.J.]

And the hits just keep on coming. Still waiting to hear if orogenicman will opt for defending his adolescent friends or save his credibility. He can't do both.

 

[Hollie]

And the hits just keep on coming. Still waiting to hear if orogenicman will opt for defending his adolescent friends or save his credibility. He can't do both.

Your promotion of ignorance is undeniable. Like the rest of the Flat Earth cabal, you're utterly incapable of refuting the evidence for biological evolution as the mechanism for the diversity of life on the planet.

Your behavior is really about your hurt feelings which results in your whining like a petulant child that anyone would challenge your appeals to fear and ignorance.

 

[cnm]

And the hits just keep on coming. Still waiting to hear if orogenicman will opt for defending his adolescent friends or save his credibility. He can't do both.

He doesn't have to do either. His credibility doesn't depend on what other people write but on what he writes; just as yours depends on what you ignore and what you whine about.

 

[Hollie]

And the hits just keep on coming. Still waiting to hear if orogenicman will opt for defending his adolescent friends or save his credibility. He can't do both.

He doesn't have to do either. His credibility doesn't depend on what other people write but on what he writes; just as yours depends on what you ignore and what you whine about.

It's interesting that the whiner is whining about having an "adult discussion" when he has been central among the whiners who consistently and ignorantly denied evidence has been presented for biological evolution in spite of the vast amount of evidence presented.

 

[Skull Pilot]

I haven't seen it. What I mean by evidence is factual Information that supports the theory. I've never seen any. So. Here is a definition of a fact.

fact

\ˈfakt\noun
: something that truly exists or happens : something that has actual existence

: a true piece of information

Full Definition
1
:a thing done: as

a obsolete :feat

b :crime <accessory after the fact>

c archaic :action
2
archaic :performance, doing
3
:the quality of being actual :actuality <a question of fact hinges on evidence>
4
a :something that has actual existence <space exploration is now a fact>

b :an actual occurrence <prove the fact of damage>
5
:a piece of information presented as having objective reality
— in fact

Now. Can someone show me one piece of factual evidence? Just one will do.

Show me factual evidence of a supreme being.

 

[cnm]

It's interesting that the whiner is whining about having an "adult discussion" when he has been central among the whiners who consistently and ignorantly denied evidence has been presented for biological evolution in spite of the vast amount of evidence presented.

Not to mention determining the bounds of Orogenicman's credibility while ignoring his own.

 

[eots]

evolution can not explain the origin.of life so they do not even try...the theory begins with the first living organism with no explanation how that could occur

 

[orogenicman]

evolution can not explain the origin.of life so they do not even try...the theory begins with the first living organism with no explanation how that could occur

The theory of evolution explains the origin of species, not the origin of life. You have been told this repeatedly, and so to continue this straw man whine of yours defines your insanity. Congratulations.

 

[orogenicman]

More evidence of evolution:

Human Evolution News -- ScienceDaily

<crickets chirping>

 

[orogenicman]

More evidence for evolution:

Why is a dolphin not a cat? Repurposing non-coding elements in genome gave rise to great 'mammalian radiation'

Why is a dolphin not a cat Repurposing non-coding elements in genome gave rise to great mammalian radiation -- ScienceDaily

Summary:
A study of gene regulation in 20 mammals provides new insights into how species diverged millions of years ago. The findings demonstrate how methods and tools for genetic analysis of humans and mice can be adapted to study non-model species, such as whales and Tasmanian devils.

Mammals all share a common ancestor, and they share a lot of the same genes. So what exactly makes a dolphin not a cat, and how did we all start to diverge from one another millions of years ago? Part of the answer lies in how -- and when -- genes are regulated. This latest research explores the evolution of gene regulation in 20 mammalian species, and provides deep insights into the 'mammalian radiation', a time of rapid morphological evolution that occurred shortly after the asteroid impact that caused the extinction of the dinosaurs.

Leveraging findings from a study comparing the genome sequences of 29 mammals, and with the help of conservation organisations such as the UK Cetacean Strandings Investigation Programme and the Copenhagen Zoo, the team were able to study and compare gene regulation in liver cells from 20 key species including the naked mole rat, human, Tasmanian devil, dolphin and sei whale.

"What we've shown is that evolution repurposes things that exist in all species, to make each species unique," explains Paul Flicek, head of Vertebrate Genomics at EMBL-EBI. "By looking at gene promoters and enhancers in many different mammals, we demonstrated that species-specific enhancers come from ancient DNA -- that evolution captures DNA that's been around for a long time, and uses it for gene regulation in specific tissues."

Evolution has two ways to turn changes in the genome into differences between species: it can change a protein sequence, or it can change the way promoters or enhancers control that protein's expression. Today's study also shows that in some cases evolution uses both strategies at once. When amino acid sequences evolve very quickly, important regulation changes occur at the same time: the protein-coding sequence and the corresponding regulatory sequence change synergistically.

Gathering the samples -- the experimental efforts were led by Diego Villar of CRUK CI -- took well over two years, and the experiments themselves produced a staggering volume of data. Analysing the results brought the team to a new frontier in bioinformatics.

"People spend a lot of time and money trying to understand human biology, so most of the tools we have are designed to study human genomes," explains Camille Berthelot of EMBL-EBI, who led the computational work. "The reference data we have for the less studied species, like the Sei whale or Tasmanian devil, are nothing like the pored-over datasets we have for the human genome. A lot of what we did involved benchmarking, and making sure the methods and algorithms were fit for this kind of comparison."

"What inspired this work was a desire to get on top of the mountain, look out and see what is going on in the landscape of molecular evolution across the breadth of mammalian space," says Duncan Odom of CRUK CI and Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute. "What's exciting about this study is that we now know we can start to answer questions about the functional genetics of many under-explored species -- questions we usually can ask only of humans and mice. We can use tools developed to study humans to understand the biology of all kinds of animals, whether they're blackbirds or elephants, and explore their relationship with one another. This research has given us new insights into mammalian evolution, and proven how powerful these methods can be."


Story Source:

The above story is based on materials provided by European Molecular Biology Laboratory. Note: Materials may be edited for content and length.

Journal Reference:

1. Diego Villar, Camille Berthelot, Sarah Aldridge, Tim F. Rayner, Margus Lukk, Miguel Pignatelli, Thomas J. Park, Robert Deaville, Jonathan T. Erichsen, Anna J. Jasinska, James M.A. Turner, Mads F. Bertelsen, Elizabeth P. Murchison, Paul Flicek, Duncan T. Odom. Enhancer Evolution across 20 Mammalian Species. Cell, 2015; 160 (3): 554 DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2015.01.006

<Crickets chirping>

 

[eots]

evolution can not explain the origin.of life so they do not even try...the theory begins with the first living organism with no explanation how that could occur

h

evolution can not explain the origin.of life so they do not even try...the theory begins with the first living organism with no explanation how that could occur

The theory of evolution explains the origin of species, not the origin of life. You have been told this repeatedly, and so to continue this straw man whine of yours defines your insanity. Congratulations.

how convenient...we will tell you how a single cell turns into an elephant..but not how a single cell came to be..

 

[cnm]

how convenient...we will tell you how a single cell turns into an elephant..but not how a single cell came to be..

How many times do you have to be told the theory of evolution doesn't explain that?


Have you got it yet?