(March 25, 2014 at 6:04 pm)tor Wrote: Thunder do you believe black holes exist?

yes. At least holes that would appear black to the eye

---

When scientists give an estimate that it takes this many million years for a lizard to mutate into a horse, where do they get that number? Someone's head.

TC that Lenski experiment is exactly what you are talking about. 50,000 generations of bacteria observed. There is no reason to suggest that it would be any different for mammals, fish, trees, invertebrates.

Also, you know what the word theory means, right? It's not the colloquial term you seem to be using it as. A scientific theory is the highest form a scientific concept can take. A Scientific Theory is supported by the preponderance of evidence, explains observed phenomena, can be used to predict future phenomena, and is falsifiable. Evolution meets these criteria.

(March 25, 2014 at 6:19 pm)Thunder Cunt Wrote: When scientists give an estimate that it takes this many million years for a lizard to mutate into a horse, where do they get that number? Someone's head.

Scientists can predict how long ago two species diverged, therefore predicting how long ago the LCA (Last Common Ancestor) lived based on the differences between their genetic code. However, it usually gives a longer ago prediction than the fossil record does. The LCA between humans and chimps differs by around 2 million years depending on whether you use hominid fossils or genetic studies.

Both are backed up by solid science but the methods are still being refined. The predictions will only get better as we learn more.

(March 25, 2014 at 1:06 pm)popeyespappy Wrote: For example if you stood back to back with the chimpanzee at your local zoo. Beside each of you we lined up your mothers, their mothers, their mothers mothers and so on until each line reached all the way back to your last common ancestor. Then if a stranger looked at each individual in both lines starting at you and working their way back to the common ancestor then started back up the other line until they reached the living chimp the chances are they would not be able to identify the point in either line where homo stopped or pan started.

Do you think the gaps in the fossil record pose any problems for gradualism? Now, I know there are hundreds or thousands of these transitional fossils, but that seems kind of scarce if there are actually five billion+ fossils (I think that's the figure) that we have discovered. Are like 4.5 billion of these fossils simple microbes or fish or modern animals?

TC, you are full of surprises.
I am also surprised I went thru all these pages, got quite a few chuckles too.

At work, when a test sometimes doesn't pan out perfectly, a "performance fairy", gets to analyze the data and "Presto" all is well....... what I think we have here is the effect of a "Time fairy" weaving her magic dust into the data.

(March 25, 2014 at 8:22 pm)professor Wrote: TC, you are full of surprises.
I am also surprised I went thru all these pages, got quite a few chuckles too.

At work, when a test sometimes doesn't pan out perfectly, a "performance fairy", gets to analyze the data and "Presto" all is well....... what I think we have here is the effect of a "Time fairy" weaving her magic dust into the data.

You, too, need to read some science books.

Why don't the two of start a book group? We can give you a comprehensive reading list.

Feel free to peruse Lenski's raw data. Numbers don't lie, you disingenuous douche.

(March 25, 2014 at 12:05 am)Thunder Cunt Wrote: I know that evolution is indeed a fact but the belief that different types of animals evolved into other species is not fact or we would see them "evolving" into other types or at least need to see this to say it is fact.

Where is the evidence of cats, dogs and horses gradually turning into something else? We do see changes within species. We also see no evidence of gradual change in the fossil record either.

Isn't Evolution still called a theory, a possible explanation or assumption, because it is not testable according to the scientific method?

Organisms never evolve into "something else". Human beings are still apes, horses are still equines, dogs are still canines, and there is A TON of gradual change that we see in the fossil record. The theory of evolution has never once been proven false during these past 160 years. In the scientific field, a theory is the graduation point of an idea. It is not a theory until it's passed a series of confirmation tests.

How do you think medicines are developed? Here's a hint: God doesn't swoop down from the sky, wave his magic wand and the medicines magically appear. Researchers develop medicines by the model of Differential Reproduction. Look it up in a science dictionary.

You confirm the hypothesis that theism is the pocket of scientific ignorance.

(March 25, 2014 at 8:22 pm)professor Wrote: TC, you are full of surprises.
I am also surprised I went thru all these pages, got quite a few chuckles too.

At work, when a test sometimes doesn't pan out perfectly, a "performance fairy", gets to analyze the data and "Presto" all is well....... what I think we have here is the effect of a "Time fairy" weaving her magic dust into the data.

Isn't it interesting, TC, that those who accept evolution can give you reams of data and experimental evidence, and the evolution deniers only supply glib non-answers and mockery?

It's almost as if they think they can disprove a hundred and fifty years of scientific confirmation merely by laughing at it, and displaying how little they understand it in the process!

I don't think evolution is hiding at all, just look around and see the similarities of many animals, and even humans, some do look like monkeys, and some even look like cows lol.