Why Evolutiontheory is just a theory and not an Evidence

[Afghanistan2010]

Feel free to correct lapses in my education. You are welcome to try again. All that has happened in the past is I have educated you and shown you how you misunderstood something. I don't claim to be perfect, but I am doing a much better job of defending evolution than anyone here is doing disproving it.



I don't understand what you mean, or why you brought a christian into the discussion. What does Adolf have to do with anything here? We are rejecting proof from authority, proof from holy books, and instead require proof from evidence. We are rejecting the very fallacy you are suggesting we use -- and so far, we have done a good job, not many have tried to claim that the koran constitutes scientific proof, and when they try, we correct that and move on.

All claims require evidence.

You do not believe in our Books so its senseless to present sources from the Quran and saying of the Prophet (pbuh).

evidence from whom ? those who support our views are not allowed to say their opinion or fear the consequences resulting from it.
Are there any critics of Evolution ? few (this does not make it a true tale), so this is just obvious that you will find more pro's than con's and he presented reliable sources even when all is against our views.

so it is the same parable to if Adolf hitler asks you : my son proof me wrong that nationalism is wrong and he gives you alot of nazi-books.
iits just ridicules

[ozymandias]

False! The timeline is irrelevant since the original assumption was that anti biotic resistance developed as a "response" to recent advances in medicine.

Please stop making stuff up. That was *not* the original assumption, nor is the validity of the timeline important to evolution in this case.

False! You have not shown that such resistance is as a result of evolution.

You are the one claiming to have proof evolution is false -- and that this is that proof. It is up to you to prove the validity of your claims and evidence.

No, you clearly have misunderstood what I am saying since the evidence in question is in regards to the adaptability of bacteria to certain strainers that have always existed. It is not contrary to evidence of that bacteria has always had resistance.


I understand that you don't understand what I am saying because you don't have a biology background and hence cannot use biology vocabulary.

There you go again, making unfounded claims. If you understand the vocabulary better than I do, how come I consistently prove your use of the language flawed, and consistently correct your misunderstandings of basic modern biology?

Not true since none of those species have been observed to evolve from what to what. It was only a list of species existing.

You keep repeating that, as if you repeating it made it true. Too bad that's not the case.

That is not true. You only assume that to be true because the author of Talkorigin.com said so but he does not go into details to specify what the species evolved from and what proof there was of that happening.

Actually, it did. I simply copied the scientific names in order to save space and time in this thread. I could have also followed the citations, or used any number of other sites. That just happened to be the first article that included citations.

It should be obvious to you that since I don't believe in narrative of evolution - time scales of 1 billion, 4 billion or 600 million are all equally meaningless to me since they are not proven beyound the shadow of doubt.

Your belief is not evidence. It is not proof. If you are going to use your belief that E.Coli has not changed it's DNA in over 1 billion years as evidence to disprove evolution, you need to make sure that is a fact, not your opinion. Science does not care what your opinion is.

Such "evolutionary clocks" are based on assumptions and the models that produce the numbers are "worked" and cropped to give the assumed estimate.
My point being that some bacteria have been the same species bacteria for over 3 billion years, according to evolutionist.

Prove it. Prove the DNA has not changed in 3 billion years.

And since there isn't any evidence to suggest that one species changed into another,

Sadly for you, this is not true. I have repeatedly pointed out that this is false. Please provide some evidence and citations next time you make this claim.

I don't assume that E.coli "evolved" later than say, cyanobacteria or Thermotoga maritima orAquifex Aoelicus or methanococcus jannaschii or pyrobaculum aerophilium or methanopyrus kandleri - all of which have remained to be the same over 2 billion years according to "Evolutionists".

Let's see the DNA evidence.

It is only assumed that e.coli has "descended" from something that was common to it and something else ... but if you know your stuff, then you would know that such phylogentic trees that subdivide clones of E.coli are baseless...for example Shigella spp. Salmonella has over a thousand gene couterparts in E.coli, and E.coli has 800 genes that are absent in Salmonella...however two thirds of the the gene products involved in small molecule metabolism in e.coli are the same found in yeast...but they are not even in the same genra, but of totally different kingdoms...meaning to say that because horizontal gene transfer is now accepted, the phylogenetic tree now looks more like a web, and that too is still debatable.

As for the mule, it is a hybrid, and no matter how much you wish for it to be a "Species" of it is own, that won't happen. That is your own delusion.

It's not my wish -- it is your claim that mules, donkeys, and horses are all the same species -- unless you wish to correct your definition of a species.

You wish to prove evolution by showing cases of artificial selection where hybrids are made with deleterious traits...compare a chihuahua or a ****zu to a wolf in the wild.

I am doing no such thing. Please do not make up straw men about my position. That is a logical fallacy.

[ozymandias]

I am getting tired of arguing with nincumpoops who, when given a rebuttal simply play blind to it, deny it like children, and then develop amnesia of ever having read it. Worse is Ozy, who when given a quote from a scientist, goes to say that the scientist is wrong...because by his definition horses and donkeys are the same species...when the scientist goes on a lengthy explanation of why they are NOT the same species... what jackassary!

I'm sorry, but it has been my stance all along that donkeys and horses are not the same species. I have been using the fact that these two types of animals are different species to illuminate the flaw in *your* definition of a species. According to *your* definition, which I have been pointing out is flawed, they are the same species.

Please stop making up false claims about what I believe or what I have stated. I have made myself very clear on this matter, and have left no room for confusion -- but you still manage to pretend to be confused.

[ozymandias]

You do not believe in our Books so its senseless to present sources from the Quran and saying of the Prophet (pbuh).

This is part of it -- but regardless of faith in a holy book, there is no holy book on earth that constitutes valid scientific evidence in and of itself. You need something outside the holy book to validate it's claims, or it is no better than any other book ever written. A book cannot be held as true simply because the book claims to be true, you need something additional to make that claim.

This is not meant to be offensive, or digress into the validity of the Koran, it is just to show that the book, alone, is not enough in a scientific discussion.

evidence from whom ? those who support our views are not allowed to say their opinion or fear the consequences resulting from it.

This is not true. Science is open to opposing viewpoints, as long as they fit the evidence.

Are there any critics of Evolution ? few (this does not make it a true tale),

I agree popularity does not make something true. Please keep this in mind when people bring up the popularity of Islam as evidence it is correct -- that is a very common argument.

so this is just obvious that you will find more pro's than con's and he presented reliable sources even when all is against our views.

I am not sure what you mean.

so it is the same parable to if Adolf hitler asks you : my son proof me wrong that nationalism is wrong and he gives you alot of nazi-books.

Which is why you need outside sources to validate claims. The books are not enough.

iits just ridicules

Indeed.

[ScimitarXEdge]

Alchemist is a write-off. He's just a fool. He won't even tell us what his own academic credentials are.

Mustafa aka Alchemist, is a liar when it comes to academic credibility, I've known him for about 2 years, he originally claimed to have a Bachelors in Psychology, this was over at another forum. If you want to check his background, Look up the screen name RawanShenas on the *****************, they should still have his posts still there.

He's using every intellectually dishonest tactic that he can, from emotional appeals, histrionics, appeals to false authority, false causation/association.

I originally duped into believing he was a young professional, in reality he ran a Subway Sandwich shop, which openly sold pork products like Ham, which as you know would be a criminal act according to the Islamic Shari'ah, he claims he represents.

[Alchemist]

Please stop making stuff up. That was *not* the original assumption, nor is the validity of the timeline important to evolution in this case.

Yes it is. Buy a biology book and read it.
The discovery that anti biotic resistance is ancient is a recent one. But books written from even the 50s have been promoting that assumption.

Once again you show ignorance.

You are the one claiming to have proof evolution is false -- and that this is that proof. It is up to you to prove the validity of your claims and evidence.

Already have son.

There you go again, making unfounded claims. If you understand the vocabulary better than I do, how come I consistently prove your use of the language flawed, and consistently correct your misunderstandings of basic modern biology?

You never have. You just assume that you have and then keep saying that you have...hoping it will come true. Show that you have?

You keep repeating that, as if you repeating it made it true. Too bad that's not the case.

No. That is what you do, sir.

Actually, it did. I simply copied the scientific names in order to save space and time in this thread. I could have also followed the citations, or used any number of other sites. That just happened to be the first article that included citations.

Space and time? You can't follow citation because you don't know how to read a biology paper published in a scientific journal.

Thanks for admitting that you are intellectually lazy.

Your belief is not evidence. It is not proof. If you are going to use your belief that E.Coli has not changed it's DNA in over 1 billion years as evidence to disprove evolution, you need to make sure that is a fact, not your opinion. Science does not care what your opinion is.

The belief that it is 60 or 120 millions years old is based on conjectures as well not science. If you know the details of such studies you wouldn't be so confident.


P

rove it. Prove the DNA has not changed in 3 billion years.

Another asinine statement. Every biologist and every evolutionist out there knows that Thermotoga maritima, Aquifex Aoelicus, methanococcus jannaschii or pyrobaculum aerophilium or methanopyrus kandleri have been the same for over 3 billion years. I don't believe it. But you should because this is

A genomic timescale of prokaryote evolution: insights into the origin of methanogenesis, phototrophy, and the colonization of land

Scroll to figure 3.

I just proved it. But I am sure your too stupid to know that I did. Do you feel like a moron now?

Sadly for you, this is not true. I have repeatedly pointed out that this is false. Please provide some evidence and citations next time you make this claim.

Sadly for you, speciation CANNOT be observed. It is only based on conjectures. You showed what you thought was evidence but I made it clear to you it wasn't. Beyound that you are simply deluding yourself into thinking that there is evidence. I am much more familiar with the 'evidence' than you are. They are all cases for micro evolution, it is only assumed that in the long term it might diverge into another species, but that is conjectural, not evidential.

Let's see the DNA evidence.

LOL.

Pulling a ****mitar?

Figure 3 above. What do you mean "DNA evidence" anyway? You are showing how ignorant you are to ask that. Seems like your understanding of what DNA is comes from your weekly indulgence of television crime shows like CSI: miami.

"DNA evidence" LOL

if you reject the DNA evidence, then you are pretty much rejecting palentology as a whole. And if you believe that timeline has nothing to do with evolution then once again you are taking away a pillar of the theory of evolution. To ask for proof of DNA is to question the theory of evolution. LOL

In half of your post, this time, you have argued against evolution but you are too ignorant to even realize it since you don't even know what evolution is. Blind faith.




I

t's not my wish -- it is your claim that mules, donkeys, and horses are all the same species -- unless you wish to correct your definition of a species.

Read this carefully: Mule = Hybrid. Donkey & Horse = species.

Get it?

I am doing no such thing. Please do not make up straw men about my position. That is a logical fallacy.

Your face is a logical fallacy. LOL


Actually it is exactly what you are doing and it is no strawman. You just don't realize it. It's not just you even Darwin tried to do the same in his thesis and so does Jay Gould. I tired explaining it to you earlier ...but now I realize that you are not that educated on the subject for me to take the discussion to that level. Have you even read Darwin's original book?

Please go educate your self first then come debate with me. You are simply making a fool out of your self. Get my english dude?

[Alchemist]

Mustafa aka Alchemist, is a liar when it comes to academic credibility, I've known him for about 2 years, he originally claimed to have a Bachelors in Psychology, this was over at another forum. If you want to check his background, Look up the screen name RawanShenas on the *****************, they should still have his posts still there.

He's using every intellectually dishonest tactic that he can, from emotional appeals, histrionics, appeals to false authority, false causation/association.

I originally duped into believing he was a young professional, in reality he ran a Subway Sandwich shop, which openly sold pork products like Ham, which as you know would be a criminal act according to the Islamic Shari'ah, he claims he represents.

You are a clown buddy... that's all you can do here. Clown around like a monkey because you are too stupid to actually delve into the science.

Last time I got you eating your own hat and you had to admit that you are too ignorant of biology to debate with me so you had to go look for a friend to convince to come here or on youtube. LOL

I am the liar? You were the one boasting of having studied evolution and biology...but you don't even know the basics! You were so full of your self you even wanted to write a biology test for me ... how you gonna grade me if you don't even know what the subject is?

LOL

[Alchemist]

السلام علیکم


I have a question for those here that do not believe in evolution.

Do you believe in the existence of dinosaurs?
What does the Qur'an say about them?
The creation of "large creatures" is mentioned, but is not very detailed.
Can someone please shed some light on this?

Thank you.

Do you believe in 1 meter long dragonflies?

[ScimitarXEdge]

Ok

here are several of the articles I posted regarding the specification of Bacteria

http://www.pnas.org/content/96/13/7348.full.pdf

In conclusion, these data support all of our predictions
concerning the effects of MMR on recombination rate, with
the minor exception that MMR slightly impedes recombination even among self-crosses; this last effect has been observed
previously in yeast (15). These findings thus support three key
components of a recent model (16, 28) that postulates an
important role for MMR in speciation: (i) populations that
evolve defects in MMR undergo rapid genetic divergence from
other populations because of their mutator phenotypes; (ii)
this accelerated sequence divergence does not impede recombination as long as the MMR system remains defective; but (iii)
on reacquisition of a functional MMR system, the accumulated
sequence divergence presents a genetic barrier to further
recombination. Of course, the magnitude of the barrier to
recombination in our experiments is much smaller than the
barrier between such clearly distinct species as E. coli and
Salmonella enterica (13, 14, 16), which have diverged from a
common ancestor for '130 million years (29). Nonetheless,
our findings indicate that an incipient barrier can evolve
rapidly, during only 20,000 generations (less than 10 year)

Antibiotic-resistant bacteria in Indian public water supply

Samples were taken in New Delhi from public water taps and from waste seepage, such as water pools in the street. Resistant bacteria were found in 4 per cent of the water supplies and 30 per cent of the seepage sites. The researchers identified 11 new species of bacteria carrying the NDM-1 gene, including strains which cause cholera and dysentry. Antibiotics are used to reduce excretion of bacteria in cholera patients, and to reduce the duration and severity of dysentery. Worryingly, the identified Shigella isolate, which can carry dysentery, is resistant to all appropriate antibiotics.

Please indicate which part of these articles I have misunderstood their references to speciation of bacteria?

[ScimitarXEdge]

Y
Last time I got you eating your own hat and you had to admit that you are too ignorant of biology to debate with me so you had to go look for a friend to convince to come here or on youtube. LOL

Actually you did to me exactly what you're doing to Ozymandias, make straw man arguments, haughty impulsive reactions, obstinately rejection of evidence and scapegoating.

even in this thread you called research a "fabrication".

Hiding behind stupid internet memes won't redeem you.

The reason for the youtube challenge, was so you can't hide behind the psychological comfort of being insulated by this forum and that you'll have your arguments publicly scrutinized by people who are experts in the field, so you won't be able to use scapegoats

But I would naturally expect you and the voices in your head to manufacture your own narrative of the situation, I mean it's what's most comforting when you're rocking in the corner frothing at the mouth right?

[Alchemist]

Actually you did to me exactly what you're doing to Ozymandias, make straw man arguments, haughty impulsive reactions, obstinately rejection of evidence and scapegoating.

even in this thread you called research a "fabrication".

Hiding behind stupid internet memes won't redeem you.

The reason for the youtube challenge, was so you can't hide behind the psychological comfort of being insulated by this forum and that you'll have your arguments publicly scrutinized by people who are experts in the field, so you won't be able to use scapegoats

But I would naturally expect you and the voices in your head to manufacture your own narrative of the situation, I mean it's what's most comforting when you're rocking in the corner frothing at the mouth right?

Let it be noted on record that ****ymardulledge is once again slandering.

The research was not a fabrication, your interpretation of it was.

And let it also be noted on record that ****ymardulledge is not an expert.

[Alchemist]

I have never seen any, but it might be possible for them to exist.

google it...its pretty cool.


Let me answer your question like this: Cockroaches have been around since the time of Dinosaures, if evolution happens, then why are wasps, bats, sharks, crocodiles, turtles still the same even after 100+ million years? Why would you believe that humans evolve from apes in lesser time?

And since we are in the religious section, you should know that Allah does not make "mistakes". To believe in the theory of evolution is believe that Allah is not a creator but just "lucky". Because the key word in evolution is "Random". So people who are heretics like Scimitar believe that Allah couldn't create Adam from mud, (because it was too complex and it would have defied universal laws) so He, auzubillah, had to create through 1 billion years of work, a phospholipid bilayer membrane, then through another billion years of random trial and error, Allah had to figure out how to make these cells stick together, then through another billion years of thinking and working, He had to figure out how to make plants, insects and reptiles. Then after millions of years of trial and error, Allah finally figured out how to make monkeys...so when He came close to making monkeys that live on trees walk on earth, He decided to call the Angels, metaphorically, because according to ScimitarXedge, Angels and devils are just archetypal, they only exist in Allah's imagination, and not in reality, and tell the Angels that now he has decided to make monkey into man. But in the process, Allah had to create some prototype adams and then destroy them because they were not right...they weren't able to speak...so finally after another millions of years of trial and error ...Allah finally made Eve...and then some 50,000 years or so Ago..some adams were starting to take shape here and there across the continents...and then finally Prophet Scimitar was born and started his new religion of Evolutionary Islam. So according to him, Adam was not created from mud. Heaven and Hell are just metaphors. They don't exist. Adam wasn't sent down from Heaven to live on Earth for an appointed Time. Heaven just means the Universe and the Galaxies in it. And Allah is just some medium etheral force that is bound by the limits of physical and quantum laws.


Do you believe that? Because that is what ****mitar believes - verbatim.

[Alchemist]

Ok

here are several of the articles I posted regarding the specification of Bacteria

http://www.pnas.org/content/96/13/7348.full.pdf

conjectural...



It may evolve in another 20,000 years ...or it may not. Who is going to stick around for another 20,000 years to find out if evolution is true or not?

That is the beauty of this theory - you can't test it.

Antibiotic-resistant bacteria in Indian public water supply


Please indicate which part of these articles I have misunderstood their references to speciation of bacteria?

not "speciation"...

You can't really be this stupid?

I have to explain to you what the difference is between new gene, and new species?

[badmash_khel]

Seems like ScimitarXEdge, is limiting Allah's capabilities according to human faculties such as logic and limiting him to what is possible according to the laws of nature. It is Allah (SWT), who has created laws of nature and he is not bound by them. seems like he doesn't believe in miracles as well. If miracles could be explained by humans then they no longer are miracles as miracles are something which defy logic and scientific laws. Too much philosophy and relying on science and logic to come up with answers has messed up his mind.

[Soldat_Amir]

Seems like ScimitarXEdge, is limiting Allah's capabilities according to human faculties such as logic and limiting him to what is possible according to the laws of nature. It is Allah (SWT), who has created laws of nature and he is not bound by them. seems like he doesn't believe in miracles as well. If miracles could be explained by humans then they no longer are miracles as miracles are something which defy logic and scientific laws. Too much philosophy and relying on science and logic to come up with answers has messed up his mind.

Nobody knew of a Allah or a god, Jesus nor a Abraham before Judaism, most of the world was Pagan. Its taken mankind to discover the laws of nature through science and research, I didnt see any assistance from an external body(God) assisting in the research.

The Laws of nature have been made by nature herself. Thats just my view.