Why Evolution is False and is the biggest fairy tales EVER in our human history

[FA_Q2]

Bullshit! The evidence is readily consistent with common design.

And yet....

Nothing is posted. No process. No barriers that would prevent mutation from changing body plans. Not even a definition of what a kind is.

You cannot even set up a viable 'orchard' that makes any sense. However, we have genetic evidence in common ancestry. We have fused genes with humans and apes. We have identified retro viral insertions that match ape and human DNA perfectly with the predictions of common ancestry. We have a continual taxonomic history for hundreds of current species. We have speciation happening right now. We have examples of novel abilities being developed in micro organisms that did not and have never existed before. We can identify the mutations that are required for these novel abilities. And we have a LOT more.

All you have is a declaration that common design is true because....

A declaration is not evidence. A claim shows nothing. Particularly when you cannot even define the words you try to use.

 

[BreezeWood]

the uniformity of the bb event within the universe is proof of the metaphysical forces used for its creation and its cyclical recurrence. and a heavenly presence responsible for evolutionary physiology and its spiritual content.

 

[FA_Q2]

the uniformity of the bb event within the universe is proof of the metaphysical forces used for its creation and its cyclical recurrence. and a heavenly presence responsible for evolutionary physiology and its spiritual content.

You keep demanding the bb is cyclical.

This is a claim that has not been shown.

 

[Hollie]

The existence of the Universe is the evidence of God's existence, you drooling 'tard of a mindless, terminally stupid lunatic.

Well, no it's not. What you must remember about your musings is that such notions require some sort of physical support. Without evidence, without even a framework of ideas, there is no reason to take claims to supernaturalism seriously. The problem shared by the hyper-religious is that their musings don't even have the luxury of being nonsensical since "... because I say so'', fails to present any scientifically relevant explanation or defendable hypothesis

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Bullshit! The evidence is readily consistent with common design.

Evidence of common design? Where?

 

[BreezeWood]

You keep demanding the bb is cyclical.

This is a claim that has not been shown.

nor has it been disproven - the boomerang theory.

the trajectory of matter expelled at a finite angle in a vacuum will all return to their origin at the same time without ever changing direction to recompact into energy till the next moment of singularity reoccurs.

 

[Ringtone]

And yet....

Nothing is posted. No process. No barriers that would prevent mutation from changing body plans. Not even a definition of what a kind is.

You cannot even set up a viable 'orchard' that makes any sense. However, we have genetic evidence in common ancestry. We have fused genes with humans and apes. We have identified retro viral insertions that match ape and human DNA perfectly with the predictions of common ancestry. We have a continual taxonomic history for hundreds of current species. We have speciation happening right now. We have examples of novel abilities being developed in micro organisms that did not and have never existed before. We can identify the mutations that are required for these novel abilities. And we have a LOT more.

All you have is a declaration that common design is true because....

A declaration is not evidence. A claim shows nothing. Particularly when you cannot even define the words you try to use.

One thing at a time. . . .

We have fused genes with humans and apes.

Actually, the fused-looking chromosome is specific to humans, so it does not directly connect with the great apes. Therefore, it cannot be empirical evidence for a common link between Homo sapiens and the great apes. The only genetic “link” between humans and the apes is our close DNA sequence similarity.

See link: Of Apes and Men: Chromosome 2 in Humans and the Chimpanzee - Apologetics Press.

 

[FA_Q2]

nor has it been disproven - the boomerang theory.

the trajectory of matter expelled at a finite angle in a vacuum will all return to their origin at the same time without ever changing direction to recompact into energy till the next moment of singularity reoccurs.

It does not need to be 'disproven' as the claim needs to be justified, not the other way around.

And all recent observations actually do show it to be false. Furthermore, your version of this idea, that the universe has a spherical geometry, has absolutely zero evidence behind it. None. Indeed, your version of it has been disproven by the observed fact that the expansion of space is accelerating. That negates the possibility of anything returning to its origin point as the space it has to continue moving in is expanding faster than it is possible to travel.

 

[FA_Q2]

One thing at a time. . . .

We have fused genes with humans and apes.

Actually, the fused-looking chromosome is specific to humans, so it does not directly connect with the great apes. Therefore, it cannot be empirical evidence for a common link between Homo sapiens and the great apes. The only genetic “link” between humans and the apes is our close DNA sequence similarity.

See link: Of Apes and Men: Chromosome 2 in Humans and the Chimpanzee - Apologetics Press.

"In order for this fusion event to demonstrate common ancestry with the chimpanzee, there would have to be some link between the fusion event and the great apes. But no such link exists. The fused-looking chromosome is specific to humans, so it does not directly connect with the great apes."

Is a direct lie.

The Origin of the Human Species: a Chromosome Fusion? | OpenMind

Perhaps a chromosome fusion is in the origin of the human species. Manuel Rejón poses this thesis explaining the process in his article.

www.bbvaopenmind.com

"However, it was not until after the 1970s that molecular techniques allowing direct analysis of DNA on chromosomes arrived, before which in-depth characterization of the chromosome rearrangement that distinguishes us from the large apes was not possible. Thus, it was seen that more or less in the center of our chromosome 2 there were telomeric and subtelomeric DNA sequences (normally present at only one end of chromosomes, but not in internal areas) (2). This made it clear that the fusion of the two chromosomes had been complete, that is, from one end to the other. Nowadays, the availability of human genome and the genome of large apes has revealed how the genetic content of our chromosome 2 corresponds to the sum of the two chromosomes of our ape ancestors."

It does show ancestry because the genetic sequence MATCH with ape chromosomes. A match that makes no sense whatsoever in a creationist view. Particularly when you factor in the telomers that exist in the middle of the chromosome where they DO NOT BELONG. Since telomers mark the endpoints of chromosomes their existence in the middle shows it was a fusion and the match with a set of chromosomes that are in apes marks the ancestry.

Further, the genetic sequence is expected to only be in humans, I am not sure why your source would make any other claim unless they think that DNA must totally match for ancestry to be established. That is nonsensical as then we would not be talking about ancestry, we would be talking about the same species.

" However, the probability that this mutation would occur simultaneously in multiple individuals is so staggeringly low that we can assume its impossibility."
Which is why no one has ever made that claim. Ever.

So why does your source go into impossibilities that are irrelevant?

Because it wants to make this claim:
"This alignment is dependent on the near-identical structure and sequence of chromosomal pairs. If an individual carries a mutation such as a chromosomal fusion, then he or she will often be unable to produce gametes, because meiosis will fail to occur properly due to improper alignment of the now non-identical chromosome pairs."
Which, again, is dishonest. That CAN be the case but it is not necessarily the case as we well know:

B chromosome - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Is just one example of a type of chromosomal matchup that many species has where they have different numbers of chromosomes within a single breeding population. Indeed, species that have differing number of chromosomes are not rare.

Then:
A third problem with the hypothesis of a chromosomal fusion in human ancestry lies in the complete absence of humans with 48 chromosomes. If it were true that a chromosomal split occurred in human evolution, then two distinct human groups would have been generated: one containing 48 chromosomes which were not altered by any genetic change, and a second containing 46 chromosomes including the fusion of chromosome 2 (Figure 2). The problem is, however, that no humans have 48 chromosomes. The only possible historical explanation is that an entire population of 48-chromosome humans became extinct and was replaced by a 46-chromosome human race. For this scenario to have occurred, a very strong positive selection must have favored the diploid number of 46 over that of 48 (Bowers, 2003)."
Hey, they said something true. Because we lack a 48 chromosome human it must mean there is a selection bias for the 46 chromosome pair. Then they go onto this falsehood:

"Unfortunately for evolutionists, the paradox is that the same selection would be expected for the other apes as well. Apes, however, maintained a chromosome number of 48"
Which is BS conjecture. For this statement to be true apes would have had to have the same mutation. This is EXTREMEMLY unlikely in evolution, 2 populations are unlikely to have the exact same mutations on a large scale like this AND it assumes the same selection pressures existed for early humans as existed for other ape populations. Another non-starter as the adaptations would be population specific.

Of course we are left with the FACT that none of this is shown to be evidence of creation. Just complaints about evolution that are based in a fundamental mischaracterization of chromosomal changes and trying to make them out as always detrimental though we know that to be false. They TRY and make this 'evidence' for creation by going right back to the old reliable:

"The only remaining explanation for the similarity of human chromosome 2 to chromosomes 2A and 2B in the chimpanzee is that God created mankind with 46 chromosomes including a second chromosome with the visible characteristics that we see today. "

God did it. I could equally state leprechauns did it. The argument is IDENTICAL and also has the exact same amount of evidence for it.

And the cherry on top:
"Atheists have asked why God would purposefully create a human chromosome that “looks” like the fusion of two chromosomes. At this stage of understanding, we do not know. Recall God’s words: “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, declares the Lord. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts”

Yup, the cherry on top is that God made it to look like evolution for no discernable reason.

 

[BreezeWood]

It does not need to be 'disproven' as the claim needs to be justified, not the other way around.

And all recent observations actually do show it to be false. Furthermore, your version of this idea, that the universe has a spherical geometry, has absolutely zero evidence behind it. None. Indeed, your version of it has been disproven by the observed fact that the expansion of space is accelerating. That negates the possibility of anything returning to its origin point as the space it has to continue moving in is expanding faster than it is possible to travel.

the bb event has a spherical geometry, the universe is constant and boundless - till the apex matter is moving further apart with altering dynamics at such a time there will begin the reconvergence process with mirror dynamics back to their origin.

 

[FA_Q2]

the bb event has a spherical geometry, the universe is constant and boundless - till the apex matter is moving further apart with altering dynamics at such a time there will begin the reconvergence process with mirror dynamics back to their origin.

Because you say so.

 

[Woodznutz]

What appears to have been created? What is the standard for ''appearance''? Is something very big an appearance of supernatural design for religionists?

The standard would be a careful and honest examination.

While standing on the beach, a ship sailing away appears to fall off the edge of the earth. The appearance is that the earth must be flat.

Actually, when viewed through a telescope it is apparent that the earth is round. Also the curve of the earth can be see when viewed from a great height.

 

[BreezeWood]

the bb event has a spherical geometry, the universe is constant and boundless - till the apex matter is moving further apart with altering dynamics at such a time there will begin the reconvergence process with mirror dynamics back to their origin.

Because you say so.

well Q, ...

lets settle the matter - go-fund-me - enough money to launch a handgrande into outerspace to an unoccupied region and pull the pin - if the boomerang theory is correct, eventually the shrapnel will return and reconstitute the grande to its original form. by the finite angle of the shrapnels trajectory.

 

[Ringtone]

"In order for this fusion event to demonstrate common ancestry with the chimpanzee, there would have to be some link between the fusion event and the great apes. But no such link exists. The fused-looking chromosome is specific to humans, so it does not directly connect with the great apes."

Is a direct lie.

The Origin of the Human Species: a Chromosome Fusion? | OpenMind

Perhaps a chromosome fusion is in the origin of the human species. Manuel Rejón poses this thesis explaining the process in his article.

www.bbvaopenmind.com

"However, it was not until after the 1970s that molecular techniques allowing direct analysis of DNA on chromosomes arrived, before which in-depth characterization of the chromosome rearrangement that distinguishes us from the large apes was not possible. Thus, it was seen that more or less in the center of our chromosome 2 there were telomeric and subtelomeric DNA sequences (normally present at only one end of chromosomes, but not in internal areas) (2). This made it clear that the fusion of the two chromosomes had been complete, that is, from one end to the other. Nowadays, the availability of human genome and the genome of large apes has revealed how the genetic content of our chromosome 2 corresponds to the sum of the two chromosomes of our ape ancestors."

It does show ancestry because the genetic sequence MATCH with ape chromosomes. A match that makes no sense whatsoever in a creationist view. Particularly when you factor in the telomers that exist in the middle of the chromosome where they DO NOT BELONG. Since telomers mark the endpoints of chromosomes their existence in the middle shows it was a fusion and the match with a set of chromosomes that are in apes marks the ancestry.

Further, the genetic sequence is expected to only be in humans, I am not sure why your source would make any other claim unless they think that DNA must totally match for ancestry to be established. That is nonsensical as then we would not be talking about ancestry, we would be talking about the same species.

" However, the probability that this mutation would occur simultaneously in multiple individuals is so staggeringly low that we can assume its impossibility."
Which is why no one has ever made that claim. Ever.

So why does your source go into impossibilities that are irrelevant?

Because it wants to make this claim:
"This alignment is dependent on the near-identical structure and sequence of chromosomal pairs. If an individual carries a mutation such as a chromosomal fusion, then he or she will often be unable to produce gametes, because meiosis will fail to occur properly due to improper alignment of the now non-identical chromosome pairs."
Which, again, is dishonest. That CAN be the case but it is not necessarily the case as we well know:

B chromosome - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Is just one example of a type of chromosomal matchup that many species has where they have different numbers of chromosomes within a single breeding population. Indeed, species that have differing number of chromosomes are not rare.

Then:
A third problem with the hypothesis of a chromosomal fusion in human ancestry lies in the complete absence of humans with 48 chromosomes. If it were true that a chromosomal split occurred in human evolution, then two distinct human groups would have been generated: one containing 48 chromosomes which were not altered by any genetic change, and a second containing 46 chromosomes including the fusion of chromosome 2 (Figure 2). The problem is, however, that no humans have 48 chromosomes. The only possible historical explanation is that an entire population of 48-chromosome humans became extinct and was replaced by a 46-chromosome human race. For this scenario to have occurred, a very strong positive selection must have favored the diploid number of 46 over that of 48 (Bowers, 2003)."
Hey, they said something true. Because we lack a 48 chromosome human it must mean there is a selection bias for the 46 chromosome pair. Then they go onto this falsehood:

"Unfortunately for evolutionists, the paradox is that the same selection would be expected for the other apes as well. Apes, however, maintained a chromosome number of 48"
Which is BS conjecture. For this statement to be true apes would have had to have the same mutation. This is EXTREMEMLY unlikely in evolution, 2 populations are unlikely to have the exact same mutations on a large scale like this AND it assumes the same selection pressures existed for early humans as existed for other ape populations. Another non-starter as the adaptations would be population specific.

Of course we are left with the FACT that none of this is shown to be evidence of creation. Just complaints about evolution that are based in a fundamental mischaracterization of chromosomal changes and trying to make them out as always detrimental though we know that to be false. They TRY and make this 'evidence' for creation by going right back to the old reliable:

"The only remaining explanation for the similarity of human chromosome 2 to chromosomes 2A and 2B in the chimpanzee is that God created mankind with 46 chromosomes including a second chromosome with the visible characteristics that we see today. "

God did it. I could equally state leprechauns did it. The argument is IDENTICAL and also has the exact same amount of evidence for it.

And the cherry on top:
"Atheists have asked why God would purposefully create a human chromosome that “looks” like the fusion of two chromosomes. At this stage of understanding, we do not know. Recall God’s words: “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, declares the Lord. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts”

Yup, the cherry on top is that God made it to look like evolution for no discernable reason.

You do not understand the article I posted.

 

[FA_Q2]

well Q, ...

lets settle the matter - go-fund-me - enough money to launch a handgrande into outerspace to an unoccupied region and pull the pin - if the boomerang theory is correct, eventually the shrapnel will return and reconstitute the grande to its original form. by the finite angle of the shrapnels trajectory.

Except we already know that is not the case. It is KNOWN.

Our horizon is speeding away at the speed of light - the shrapnel will NEVER reach it. The atoms in the shrapnel will decay (if neutrons decay as this is strongly suspected but not evident yet) before it reaches the horizon and the radiation from that decay will still fail to reach it.

So the observations to disprove that conjecture have already been made.

 

[FA_Q2]

You do not understand the article I posted.

I understand it perfectly.

It is rather clear you do not as you cant even comment on it. What a surprise?

 

[BreezeWood]

Except we already know that is not the case. It is KNOWN.

Our horizon is speeding away at the speed of light - the shrapnel will NEVER reach it. The atoms in the shrapnel will decay (if neutrons decay as this is strongly suspected but not evident yet) before it reaches the horizon and the radiation from that decay will still fail to reach it.

So the observations to disprove that conjecture have already been made.

not sure what you are saying; our horizon - the shrapnel will never reach it ... they are unrelated.

the shrapnel's path is only related to the finite angle of its trajectory - that is circuitous and will return the shrapnel to its origin, eventually - under ideal conditions and from a static location. but may be inside out upon completion so may not refit like a puzzle.