Evolution, religion, and ignorance.

[LastPoet]

Evolution as a scientific theory is always under scrutiny, even by those that understand it. Why can't the religionists do the same for their dogmas?

It's a rethorical question.

[Tonus]

Has someone implied that a vestigial appendage is some sort of evidence of upward evolution?

Hopefully not, since "upward evolution" is one of those terms that a creationist is likely to use, thus making his ignorance of evolution clearer. Natural selection may make it seem as if evolution moves in an "upward" direction, but this is not the case.

You should be able to pick out hundreds of these changes as there are multitudes of subsystems that are being altered. Where are of these mistakes?

Those "mistakes" are probably more notable in the millions of species that no longer exist because they did not evolve the necessary mechanisms to survive ongoing changes in their environment or in competing organisms.

Evolution only seems to move "upward" because those species that don't evolve in a sufficiently beneficial direction die out and disappear. The creatures that populate the world today are the result of a sifting out of a heck of a lot of failures, many of which we find in the fossil record and many which we will probably never find out about. How does that point to an intelligent designer providing complete forms or evolutionary guidance?

[Rampant.A.I.]

I wonder if RDK has ever taken a math class. He'd probably spend most of the class arguing that Algebra was "too hard" and therefore "couldn't possibly be true"

[Chas]

Likewise I have brought a multitude of points to you which you refuse to answer. Is there some agreeable common ground?

Your questions are largely nonsense. You have no knowledge of biology, and what you think you know is utterly wrong.

You really, really need to read a book or two by an evolutionary biologist before there can be any meaningful conversation.

Alternatively, you could actually try to understand what people here have written, but you have shown no willingness to do so.

[NoE]

I'm trying to make this as simple as I can.

You've succeeded. What you've been saying if very simple.

[dafydd]

If odds are so much against accidental creation, there must be a rational one somewhere out there.

Believing that a god did it by waving a magic wand is rational?

[Bad Wolf]

Don't be ridiculous, god doesn't need a wand!

[Holden Caulfield]

Evolution as a scientific theory is always under scrutiny, even by those that understand it. Why can't the religionists do the same for their dogmas?

It's a rethorical question.

Evolution is a "theory" as much as gravity is a "theory". Yes in technical scientific terms they are "theories" but that's only attacked by people who have no understanding of what the scientific meaning of theory is.

And yeah never ask religious people to back up there arguments if you respect those people you'll only embarrass and piss them off since they have no arguments and get upset when you point that out.

[Rampant.A.I.]

[downbeatplumb]

Sorry about the quote edit screw-up. Genetic info is infinite, but only planned application of that info will lead to any usable change.

No because evolutionary pressures will come into play.
These pressures are whatever will help the creature out breed or out live any competitors.
That is all, its very simple and elegant and supported by the evidence.