(October 4, 2013 at 9:55 am)SavedByGraceThruFaith Wrote:

(October 4, 2013 at 9:53 am)TheBeardedDude Wrote: That's called geology. We have the rocks and the fossils. We win.

My post already disproved that interpretation of the rocks and fossils.

(October 4, 2013 at 1:11 pm)Tonus Wrote: To be fair, we do have an example of upward evolution:

Quote:That show really was a good metaphor to remind society that compassion was better than greed.

(October 4, 2013 at 12:31 pm)SavedByGraceThruFaith Wrote: But the bacteria are still bacteria. So there is no proof there.

The dogs are still dogs.
Cats are still cats.

Sure, the allele distribution in the population may change due to selective breeding or a change in the environment causing certain alleles to be more advantageous, but that is just already existing alleles. You might even have a new allele from a mutation. But the gene itself already existed.

Give all know evidence of one kind changing into another kind.
Without that you have no evidence.

(October 4, 2013 at 8:30 am)SavedByGraceThruFaith Wrote: Mutations disprove the theory of upward evolution

According to atheistic origin science, all species today have evolved upward through a succession of ancestor species. So all the DNA codes in all species living today are the product of many past generations going back hundreds of millions of years.

Mutations are errors in the DNA code. These mutations will accumulate in the DNA code of each species. There is no original to compare with and correct these errors. Natural selection is no help because all the individual creatures are accumulating mutations.

Now consider mankind. Each person receives at least 30 mutations to their DNA code. That is the mutation rate per generation. Supposedly mankind and all land animals evolved from some creature from the sea that lived about 500 million years ago. Take the average intergeneration time of at most 10 years. That represents 50 million generations. Now multiple the number of generations by the mutation rate per generation. That yields about 1.5 billion mutations. Now some of these will happen at the same code location and some will even be corrected by the double accident. So take 2/3 of that and you get 1 billion errors. But the DNA code for mankind is only about 3 billion base codes in size. So the DNA code of mankind should have been rendered useless. A similar calculation will lead to the conclusion that almost all, if not all, species have useless DNA codes.

Please note that the above calculation only went back 500 million years, but evolutionists claim that life goes back even further than that. So the codes should be even more corrupted than the above calculation shows.

So it is impossible that the species of the earth have originated that long ago. But then the dating of the fossils from 100 million years ago and further back must be incorrect. Also the fossils are not dated directly, but indirectly by the dating of the rock layers. So the dating of the rock layers must be incorrect.

So the entire interpretation of the fossil record has been overthrown. So has the entire interpretation of the rock layers. So there is no way to use the rock layers or the fossil record to establish any descendent relationship among of any species. So there is no theory of evolution that stands.

The house of cards has fallen.

(October 4, 2013 at 2:08 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote:

(October 4, 2013 at 12:31 pm)SavedByGraceThruFaith Wrote: But the bacteria are still bacteria. So there is no proof there.

The dogs are still dogs.
Cats are still cats.

Sure, the allele distribution in the population may change due to selective breeding or a change in the environment causing certain alleles to be more advantageous, but that is just already existing alleles. You might even have a new allele from a mutation. But the gene itself already existed.

Give all know evidence of one kind changing into another kind.
Without that you have no evidence.

Amphibians aren't still fish. Reptiles aren't still amphibians, Mammals aren't still reptiles. Do your own research, we're not your homework monkeys.

In fact, get just a Bachelor's in biology emphasizing evolution from an accredited college. If you're right, you'll have a lot more information when you're done to refute evolution with, and will at least sound like you know what you're talking about. You might even be able to be a contributor to AnswersInGenesis. If you can't afford it, there are many scholarships you can look into. Clearly, the origin and development of life is something you care deeply about, don't deprive yourself by not considering getting seriously educated on the topic.

(October 4, 2013 at 2:23 pm)SavedByGraceThruFaith Wrote: But you have no proof that fish became amphibians or that reptiles became Mammals. That is just you assumption.