Question Evolution!

I notice that this question sort of answers itself; How did life with specifications for hundreds of proteins originate?Just by chemistry, without intelligent design.This answers questions 2, 3, 5, 7, 8 and 11 as well.Mutate and Survive

Hi Chuck, Well, yeah. They are the correct answers.I know that, to you, they appear trite and dismissive. That is a fair comment. But the thing is that to those who have an understanding of the Theory of Evolution and the evidence for that theory, CMI's questions look trite. They are also quite clearly based on falsehoods and misunderstandings.Take one example; Panda's answer; "They don't."Well, that is the truth. The idea that "living fossils" remain completely unchanged is simply not true. The coelocanths of the Devonian are not the same species as today's coelocanths. They have changed; not much compared to some other groups of fish, but they have certainly not remained "unchanged", as CMI's ludicrous questions would have it. The same can be said of all the living fossil species; they have only changed a little, but they have changed. The question is founded on a falsehood.To get some perspective on this, imagine if you, as a Christian, were asked the following; "According to the Bible, Jesus could raise the dead as zombies. If that's true, why wasn't the world over-run by a zombie apocalypse? Do Christians have any evidence that zombies exist?"Now if someone asked you such a damn fool question, I can only imagine that you would give them short shrift. You would be justified in doing so. A question that does not address the real content of the Bible is not a valid criticism of the Bible, right? Well in the same way, a criticism of evolution that is based on a falsehood is not to be taken seriously.These CMI questions are trite, vague and overly general. About half of them are simply based on nonsense. They are getting dismissed out of hand because that's all that such rubbish deserves.Mutate and Survive

Chuck, I gave you a respectful answer to question 10 in Message 48 and you have ignored it.Please do not complain about a lack of answers when you have ignored those answers that you have received.Mutate and Survive

Hi Chuck, Fortunately, there exists a solution to that problem; So now you know.Or, alternatively, we will all know that you were too lazy to click on a few hyperlinks and find out.Your choice.Mutate and Survive

Hi Chuck, Yes and they told BT that they couldn't possibly get involved. This turns out to be a lie. Odd that their lying doesn't bother you at all. I guess you must be okay with dishonesty. In other words "An evolution said a bad thing! Evolution must be false!". Pathetic.Meanwhile you continue to reply only in trite soundbites. You refuse to engage with the topic. You reply almost exclusively to those who are being rude to you whilst ignoring anyone who tries to respectfully make a point.I mean, when do I get the promised response to Message 48? You have found the time to address various people who were being dicks to you. When do you address my message, that even you have acknowledged was respectful and on topic? When Chuck? Or are you not actually interested in real debate? Do you not think you can handle it? I have to say, I don't think you are up to it. I think that's why you won't engage; you know you'll be out of your depth, so you ignore serious responses in favour of soundbites and slanging matches.Your behaviour on this thread has been that of a child, the only difference being that when I was an eight-year-old child, I knew more about biology than you do as an adult. Here is a case in point; Here's an instance Chuck; It was in English. You just haven't learned enough to understand it, even though it represents the most basic level of understanding in biology. When I say that I knew this as an eight-year-old, it's not rhetoric. Please try to bring your level of understanding up to the level of a schoolboy. If you won't, then I guess you will have proved Percy right; you'll refuse to learn anything that might challenge your beliefs. There appears to be a hell of a lot more that you don't know and some of that includes the most elementary facts of biology. Really? Oh, so not the same evidence, since there exist a great many transitional fossils. We have evidence, you have to resort to untruths and pretend that that evidence doesn't exist. Sad.Mutate and Survive

Then don't sink to their level Chuck. Rise above it.I gave you a respectful answer and you ignored it in favour of mudslinging. That strips you of any right to complain about the mud.If you want us all to throw shit at each other, carry on as you are doing, ignoring serious posts and addressing abusive posts.If you at all serious about defending the creationists position, pick a respectful post - there are quite a few - and address it respectfully.Show the mudslingers that you can do better. Or show us all that you can't. Your choice. Do you have any point that is relevant to the discussion? Or just more shit to throw at everyone?

---

Added by EditPlease try to keep it to one reply per message. Multiple replies clutter up the thread unnecessarily. Use edit if you need to. Or just take a moment to think before posting. You have misunderstood.What I was referring to was the system of Biological Classification that you seemed to be having such trouble with in dwise1's message. That is truly one of the most basic concepts in biology. I understood it as a child because I was a keen bird watcher.The questions asked by CMI go way beyond that, encompassing a bewilderingly huge range of information. That you don't even understand taxonomy only goes to show how out of your depth you and exactly how minuscule your chances are of understanding the answers to CMI's ludicrous questions. Baby steps first Chuck. Then, when you've understood the real basics, you can move on to more complex material. Unless you refuse to learn at all, in which case you will remain woefully ignorant of the theory you arrogantly claim to disbelieve.In order to refute something, you first have to understand it. That will require that you learn something. Sorry. I know that creationists don't like learning, but sometimes, there's just no other way.Mutate and SurviveEdited by Granny Magda, : No reason given.

Portillo hasn't posted to this thread , whilst on the Australia thread, I have asked him again and again to tell me what his problem is with the evolutionist position. He refuses to do so. Nonetheless, I seem to recall that Portillo has "cheered" at least one of my messages on that thread, so he's clearly a bit thicker skinned than you.Stop trying to move the attention away from yourself. Argue the points made by those who are being respectful or quit complaining about mudslinging of which you are one of the prime participants.Mutate and Survive

Hi Percy,Personally, I'd be interested to see how Chuck answers the following question;Does the Periodic Table of the Elements exist?The Geologic Column exists in the same way that the Periodic Table does; as an abstraction used to make sense of certain facts. The fact that there exist several places where near complete matches for the column can be found in the actual rocks only serves to confirm the column's usefulness as a model.Mutate and Survive