Summations Only

Talk Origins describes Universal Common Descent as a "hypothesis". So I was wrong to call it a "theory" - way too generous.

Dredge writes: Acceptance of ToE is directly proportional to the incidence of atheism. Having rejected Creation, atheists have no chose but to accept some theory of evolution as a means of explaining the reality of life (as there are no other alternatives). This position requires no evidence at all - except the existence of life. Darwinism is an attempt to provide a scientific explanation for how this this evolution works.
The fact that any theory of evolution is utterley useless in any applied scientific sense is irrelevant to it's acceptance - because it's raison d'etre isn't scientific, but philosophical. For this reason, Darwinism can rightly be described as "atheist theology".

Science is overrated and subject to delusion.

SIFTER = Statistical Inference of Function Through Evolutionary Relationships. Nice try, but no cigar ... I will bet my bottom dollar that "Evolutionary" refers to principles of microevolution (that all creationists accept) and is not in any way dependent on the theory that all life on earth shares a common ancestor.

That's true. Lasers were initially useless. But Darwinism has been useless for more than 150 years. In another 150 years it will still be useless. (Note: The hallmark of a false theory is uselessness.) Actually, within 150 years, the science of genetics will prove that evolution is impossible ... and useless.Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

"Universal common descent is the hypothesis that all known living terrestrial, organisms are genealogically related." - Talk Origins. (emphasis mine).Anyhow, all these evolution words games is like debating the colour of the Tooth Fairy's hair. Thank you for your concern, but the team of psychiatrists who look after me assure me that I'm no madder than I was at my last check-up. How did you know my OIR (Official Insanity Rating) is RF (Real Fruitcake)?Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

In the wild, 99.9999% of budgerigars are coloured green and yellow. But breeders have produced budgies in many different colours, including white, blue, green, yellow, grey, violet and Pied. The potential for these "new" colours always existed. I suspect that the same potential for different coloured Pepperd Moths always existed. And Chicko agrees with me.

... otherwise known as natural selection.

Dredge writes:
What you consider to be a scientific conclusion is actually an absurd extrapolation - observed small changes mean big changes are possible. After weighing up the evidence you have come to the conclusion that universal common descent is a fact. But I disagree - it's not a fact, but an absurd extrapolation. I think my hypotheis is worth serious consideration: "This extrapolation was inspired by an hallucination induced by an overdose of peyote that Charles Darwin experienced while in South America. He then used the hallucination as the basis for his first science-fiction novel." It explains everything.Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

Thank you for providing this example of you arriving at what you think is a scientific conclusion, but is in fact an absurd extrapolation.

Dredge writes:
Talk Origins describes Universal Common Descent as a "hypothesis". So I was wrong to call it a "theory" - way too generous. Not scientific ... rather, atheistic.

Dredge writes:
Of course not. An explanation can be true yet useless to applied science. What I'm going on about about is, scientific explanations can be wrong. I like science that produces a practical use, because then you know that the principles involved are more or less correct.

Except when science is abused as a front for atheistic philosophy, which is what ToE does.

Well, ToE is actually an invention of Satan; but it is transmitted to the world at large by atheists. Out of the Enlightenment came a tsunami of atheism. It's was only a matter of time before a pseudo-scientific creation story came along to make all these atheists feel "intellectually fulfilled". It's so obvious. Why can't you see it?Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

That's not a very nice thing to say. The cult you have willingly joined doesn't like dissenters who shine lights in their dark dungeons. You are childishly deluded if you think the purpose of ToE is to advance science.