front loading: did evos get it backwards

Let me get it this way.We observe phenomena, and gather data, then come up with a model to explain the data and phenomena we observe, and you object to that?Do you know what evidence that caused scientists to conclude common decent? Do you understand that evidence?Could you please show that you know what that evidence is, then , show how that evidence is 'circular reasoning'? I get the distinct impression you do not know what that evidence is.

Well, individual people might make overstatements. However, considering you are not looking at this thing called 'context' , I find your statement to be highly disingenuous. You make a lot of accusations, but when you read the 'evidence' for your accusation in context, the 'evidence' evaporates.

What a species is often is blurred. Tigers and lions are considered seperate species, but they have been known to interbreed. The males are sterile, but the females are most often fertile.About 35000 years ago, there appeared a variation of a gene introduced into the homo sapian population of Europe that appears to be an introgression into the gene pool.

quote:

---

Evos do indeed find studies on living animals as evidence for common ancestry. The fossil record contradicts evo models in reality which is one reason they have started harping on the claim the fossil record isn't the primary evidence for evo theory, though they would claim it isn't that the fossil record contradicts evo theory (though it does) but that it is too incomplete or some fossil rarity claim.

---

Please show how the fossil record contradicts the TOE. Please show where
the biologists say it isn't the 'primary' evidence. (I am objecting to the word primary). It might not be the sole evidence of evolution, and it is not evidence for the degree of common decent among ALL living creatures (although it is among vertebrates at least). I would like for you to provide evidence for your assertion. It looks totally unsupported to me, and contradictory to what I know about the claims of evolution.

That seems to be an avoidance of the issue. I asked you to provide evidence of your claim. Show me the evidence for the claim , not a random 'Oh, see what someone else says' (pretty vague if you ask me).Can you point to evidence? Or, perhaps, it is just misinterpretation on your part?Can you show evidence, or will you continue to make unsupported claims, and then say 'Look it up yourself' when asked to provide evidence for those claims?