Endosymbiont theory wrong?

quote:

---

Originally posted by peter borger:

And you say:
"..it says that these parasites did't diverge from other eukaryotes before the gain of mitochondria. In fact it makes sense that a parasite that gets all of its energy from its host would have smaller or vestigial mitochondria."

​

I say:
It makes sense indeed, but it cannot be used to support evolution. If it demonstrates anything it is de-evolution.

---

... and your use of a term such as 'de-evolution' shows that
you have a complete lack of understanding wrt evolution in the
first place.

quote:

---

Originally posted by peter borger:
Dear Peter,

​

How can somebody understand something that isn't?

​

Best wishes.
Peter

---

Perhaps I should have said the Theory of Evolution ... but your
response avoids answering the criticism levelled.

quote:

---

Originally posted by peter borger:
Dear Peter,

​

Nobody understands the ToE at the molecular level, or any level. Why? Because evolution doesn't exist.

---

Not understanding how activity at the molecular level could
cause the effects seen at the species level does not mean
(necessarily) that evolution does not exist. It means that
there is a gap in understanding ... which considering the
relative youth of molecular biology I would expect.

quote:

---

Originally posted by peter borger:

Better name for the wat the ToE stands for would be Theory of Variation-induction (or something like that). Scientists are discovering that evolution as it was set up by the NDT-ers cannot work.

---

Is that in the same way that a bumble bee cannot fly?

quote:

---

Originally posted by peter borger:

​

In addition, why do you think that websites like these are around? If evolution was a fact --as claimed so often by proponents-- these sites wouldn't exist. Ever encountered a site for "flat-versus-round" earth-discussions? Of course not. There is scientific consensus about the earth. Not about evolution, since compelling evidence is lacking.

---

Someone else pointed out that there are those who suggest that
the world is flat.

quote:

---

Originally posted by peter borger:

I will always object to the nihilism underlying NDT. It's my main goal in life.

---

Please elaborate why NDT is nihilistic.A general comment would be that you have still avoided my original
question.If you know what NDT is described to be how can you use a
term like 'de-evolution'?If that concept even exists within your consciousness in connection
with ToE, then you do not understand the proposal ... I have
asked nothing about your understanding of the facts, only of
the theory as currently presented.