Who Owns the Standard Definition of Evolution

Maybe we could just stick to the facts?--Percy

Sorry to be a downer, but... have you seriously considered the possibility that you really don't know what you're talking about? Because I don't want to insult or demean you, but you do come across as not understanding some pretty basic concepts in evolutionary biology. This is not intended to belittle or ridicule you. I'm not framing this as some sort of personal failing on your part. It's just that biology is a huge field. The basics of evolutionary theory are simple enough, but scratch the surface and it gets complicated very fast. Not everyone is going to be well informed in a field like that, especially if they haven't received any formal education in the subject. Have you ever taken any kind of biology course? If not, how could you possibly be expected to know the subject?Take me for example; I know bugger all about physics. It's not a subject I understand well enough to hold forth on. That's why I rarely take part in online discussions about physics. I simply don't know enough about the subject to have an opinion or even ask sensible questions really. There's no shame in that. It's just not something I've learned much about. I think it would be somewhat shameful though if I, from my position of relative ignorance, went around making sweeping accusations about the validity of physics or the professionalism of physicists. That would be poor form.Not that I'm any kind of expert on the subject of biology. I have no formal education there either. But at least I know a little bit, enough to not embarrass myself too frequently. And... I just don't think you do. You just don't seem to understand the subject of evolution, even the basics. Sorry, I know that's not flattering, but personally, I value candour above false flattery.I recently saw an internet atheist lecturing in the comments of a Youtube video about how the canon of the New Testament was set at the Council of Nicaea, an utterly false talking point literally taken from The Da Vinci Code. It's hard to take someone seriously when they make errors like that. It's like if I were to attack the Bible by complaining that I don't believe the bit where Jesus rides to Mecca on a flying horse. This is what you're doing. You're complaining about strawmen. It's probably not your fault. You've probably been exposed to some pretty shoddy depictions of the ToE. It is a problem though if you're going to continue asking questions that betray your lack of understanding of the subject, especially if you are going to refuse to even contemplate the possibility that your knowledge of evolution is in any way faulty.Mutate and Survive

Hi Granny,Long time no see. Science? can't find the beginning to exist of one lifeform, and you are wanting to suggest a second lifeform beginning to exist?God Bless,

Hi ICANT,That was a hypothetical, not a suggestion about actual reality. It was only meant to illustrate a point, that whilst evolution is critical to common ancestry, universal common ancestry is not essential to the ToE.Mutate and Survive

Tanypterix:

---

Reality overwhelms religious mythology with real data, that's why we call it reality.

---

Your made up reality is not real though. You don't have a single fact to prove your theory.

It's actually built on a set of observations. Observations are facts. That is not a problem for evolutionary biologists because the origin of life is not part of the theory of evolution. Weird huh? Evolution is happening in every species alive on earth today. It's just not what you think evolution is. That's because you haven't the first clue what evolution is. What you imagine it is, is not what science says it is. And luckily for the world, how science defines science is not affected by what you think it is.
​

He doesn't even know what a scientific theory is. Expecting him to understand biology is beyond the pale.

Twisty, twisty in the mind. Not overwhelming for me but for you.The reality of evolution, the evidence in favor, overwhelms your religious fantasies against. Your views on this subject, along with many others, are demonstrably wrong. Yet, you insist your fantasy is right. You live in your own delusional world. Religious = delusional.Your talking snake doesn't. Delusion (religion) always fails in the face of universal reality.

Wishful thinking on your part. Tons of evidence that you refuse to see. As usual, your religious fantasy cannot stand before the reality.

AZPaul3:

---

Wishful thinking on your part. Tons of evidence that you refuse to see. As usual, your religious fantasy cannot stand before the reality.

---

You already lose credibility the moment you bring up religion on a scientific topic. And you do it repeatedly. Not surprised here, because you don't have facts to argue with.

Tangle:

---

Evolution is happening in every species alive on earth today. It's just not what you think evolution is. That's because you haven't the first clue what evolution is. What you imagine it is, is not what science says it is. And luckily for the world, how science defines science is not affected by what you think it is.

---

Weak response to his concrete example. You are deflecting here. And also reverting to cheap tactics, claiming that those who do not agree with you, don't have any understanding on the matter, which is simply not true. Luckily, I see through your lies, easily.

Gosh, don't you think it's silly to keep pushing this lie?You must have been shown evidence supporting the Theory of Evolution a hundred times since you've been here.

quote:

---

You must have been shown evidence supporting the Theory of Evolution a hundred times since you've been here.

---

Then you should be able to easily find one example where your evidence proves common ancestry of all animals (not even asking for proof of common universal common ancestry of animals, plants, fungi, etc, which is the most common theory of origin of species).
Show me one example, or I will take it as you admitting that you are the one that is lying here.

Why not, if it happened once? Your Bible posits thousands were magicked into existence.In near-infinite space over near-infinite time (or fully, both) the universe has produced stars and planetary systems through the same processes everywhere we look. The universe is managing everything else perfectly well on its pwn without a god, so why not life? Why not many times?My personal, wholly intuitive hunch, is that the universe tends to produce life as surely as it formed the galaxies. Further, I think life tends to evolve toward sentience and intelligence as naturally as apples fall to earth.Now, that's my deep flash of intuition about things, fueled years ago by star-gazing and wine. It's a pretty thought, and perhaps a profound one.But unlike you and your myth, I don't believe it.

You are a religious nutjob trying to dabble in a science thread. Religion is your motivation for being here. As Granny Magda noted in Message 115 your projection problem is showing again.