Evolution is not science

quote:

---

Many atheists question evolution, despite it being taught in American classrooms, despite it being alluded to as fact over and over. If it IS based on scientific evidence, the debate would have ended.

---

That's silly. There are still flat earth believers despite the obvious concluding scientific evidence the Earth is not flat. Just because something is scientific fact does not end the debate. Vaccinations for babies are rejected by some leftists who think that they only pad the bottom lines of drug companies despite being proven to prevent dieases. The science is over on that, the drugs work yet the debate isn't over.

quote:

---

Mutation are copy errors. They cannot produce new traits because the genetic sequence is too complicated.

---

That doesn't follow. In fact if something is very complicated, it would imply it has many different parts. Changing one part would result in a different outcome. How is that not a new trait?

quote:

---

That's simply not true, even atheists question evolution.

---

For very different reasons though. Furthermore, atheists question evolution to understand it. Creationists go in questioning assuming it's all wrong in the first place (hence why at least a few people here are questioning your motives as well as education).

quote:

---

Genetic sequences have to be precise. Each of the three billion "letters" has to be right. You can't take one part of the genetic sequences and put it somewhere else.p

---

And you heard this where? Virtually all of the amino acids can be coded for by 3 to 4 different series of "letters." That kind of proves your sequence claim to be false. Furthermore, meosis results in the mixing up of genetic sequences. And let's remember that viral vectoring has resulted in scientists and highschool students (myself years ago) in producing organisms with traits that normally would not have occured in natural. We took part of a genetic sequence spliced into another and we got glowing bacteria. That would seem to fly in the face of your claim. Your claim would implictly argue that adding genetic sequences to another parts results in a non-viable organism. That simply not true. A example of this would be the research at the genetic labs at the University of Hawaii where researchers removed genes from a octopus and spliced them into mice zygotes. The mice glow under UV light and they were fertile.

quote:

---

I just looked up the figures, and I could store the human genome eight times over on my C drive. And my computer is hardly the world's most sophisticated.

---

You only have a 24 gig harddrive?I can store 190 copies on my combined 3 harddrives.

I thought that the storage of the human genome only took 3 gigs of harddrive space.

Most likely. At 3 gigs, there's not alot of reason for compression no?