|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: front loading: did evos get it backwards | |||||||||||||||||||||||
randman  Suspended Member (Idle past 4926 days) Posts: 6367 Joined: |
Is it your understanding that "molecular studies" refers to the fossil record?
hmmm...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Force Inactive Member |
randman,
randman writes: Evos consider molecular studies on current animals as evidence for preexisting and extinct animals that are there theoritical common ancestors. So for evos, they consider it "falsifiable." were you claiming that evolutionists find studies on living animals as evidence to support descent from a common ancestor? Edited by Force, : edit Edited by Force, : edit Edited by Force, : edit Edited by Force, : add quote other edits were grammar Thanks
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
randman  Suspended Member (Idle past 4926 days) Posts: 6367 Joined: |
were you claiming that evolutionists find studies on living animals as evidence to support descent from a common ancestor? 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. But as far as this thread, I am not sure how you could misread my discussion of molecular studies from an evo assumption perspective, meaning assuming common descent, as studies on the fossil record. Perhaps you should reread my comments and this thread....or perhaps you think you are on a different thread....it happens. Evos do consider current molecular studies in light of various assumptions to have specific indications of the genome of the last common ancestor of all plants and animals. If you want to argue it's bogus and unfalsfiable science, be my guest. You may well be right. But that's not the point of this thread. What I am talking about is viewing the evidence from these studies, assuming for sake of argument for a minute they were accurate (big assumption since they are based on common descent), and what their conclusions suggest since they were predicted by front loaders and contradict the expectations of evos.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Force Inactive Member |
randman,
no wonder you have trouble believing in the theory of evolution.
randman writes: 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. prove it. Edited by Force, : edit Edited by Force, : edit... quote error-fixed Thanks
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ramoss Member (Idle past 639 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
quote: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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 312 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
The point is what NeoDarwinism predicts and what it predicts is a rough parellel with morphology and the genome due to random mutations being adapted to a wider population group via natural selection ... Keep trying. One day, just by chance alone, you may manage to use all the right words in the right order. Unless you always screw it up by design.
We have very simple organisms with massive genomes ... Do any of them have intact genes with potential biological function lying in unused storage for future use, as in front-loaded evolution? Would you care to give us an example of one of these organisms, so's we can see what it's doing with its genes?
... and evolution from the LCA via loss of genes. The article you cited does not in fact say that. Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 312 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
Randman said: Or is it your contention that no matter what the results are, NeoDarwinism predicts it (as far as this issue)? http://www.physorg.com/news127055240.html "This finding challenges the traditional view of the base of the tree of life, which honored the lowly sponge as the earliest diverging animal. "This was a complete shocker," says Dunn. "So shocking that we initially thought something had gone very wrong." "But even after Dunn's team checked and rechecked their results and added more data to their study, their results still suggested that the comb jelly, which has tissues and a nervous system, split off from other animals before the tissue-less, nerve-less sponge. The presence of the relatively complex comb jelly at the base of the tree of life suggests that the first animal was probably more complex than previously believed, says Dunn." I think the NeoDarwinists specialise in the game called Heads I win, Tails you lose. Huh? Scientist Makes New Observation, Revises Old Opinion Shock! This ... is ... how ... it's ... meant ... to ... work.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
randman  Suspended Member (Idle past 4926 days) Posts: 6367 Joined: |
Pretty simple question....what does NeoDarwinism predict? So far, no evo dares answer.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
randman  Suspended Member (Idle past 4926 days) Posts: 6367 Joined: |
Would you care to give us an example of one of these organisms, so's we can see what it's doing with its genes?
Interesting that you cannot produce the common ancestor for nearly anything of substance, and yet you make this statement. Is it fair to say evos are deluded then because they have no common ancestor alive for all animals, plants, or heck, any common ancestor living for any grouping of animals above the species level?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
randman  Suspended Member (Idle past 4926 days) Posts: 6367 Joined: |
Why don't you check into some of the fossil threads. You might be surprised what you find and what your fellow evos claim.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
randman  Suspended Member (Idle past 4926 days) Posts: 6367 Joined: |
Here is your proof from the OP and evidence you should probably just read this thread and learn something rather than try to engage in debate. You apparently have no clue as to how evos do indeed do molecular studies on current species to infer conclusions on the theoritical last common ancestor. Sad you are participating without bothering to read the OP.
Page Not Found | University of California
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Wounded King Member Posts: 4149 From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA Joined: |
That isn't so much simple as vague. Could you maybe narrow it down a bit? Do you mean 'What does NeoDarwinism predict the latest common ancestor of the metazoa should be like genetically?'?
TTFN, WK
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
mark24 Member (Idle past 5223 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: |
randman,
You claimed the fossil record contradicts the ToE. Ramoss asked you to support that claim. Please do so. Failure puts you in contravention of Forum Guideline #4. What is it this time, permanent suspension? Mark There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ramoss Member (Idle past 639 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
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?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13038 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 2.1 |
Two things:
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024