1) Speciation occurs within limits. Usually at the genus level, probably may happen at the family level given hybridisation but never past that.

2) Living fossils are fossils of species still alive today that have remained unchanged over supposed vast time periods.

3) Lifeforms are dependent on interdependent organ-systems. Therefore a change in one tissue or organ requires changes in other organs. For instance, a change in the respiratory system would require a change in the nervous system which signals it. This precludes gradual change of a species over time.

4) Random mutations are rare and beneficial mutations even rarer, also their frequency varies in some parts of the genome which would mean they are rarer there. This stands against the idea of random mutations being a viable mechanism for evolution.

5) Not all parts of the genome are tolerant to random mutations. While there is some tolerance given redundancy in the genetic code and DNA repair mutating some parts of the genome involved in crucial functions can lead to the death of the organism. This also stands against the mechanism of random mutation.

6) The assumption that similarities across different species is proof of their shared ancestry is unjustified. Even within a species, such as humans or dogs, you can have similarity with different ancestry.

7) Virtually all lifeforms are based on a genetic code in their DNA. Codes require foresight to build since they involve symbolic representation and imposing arbitrary rules for communication. This could not possibly evolve via random mutations. In fact, scenarios for the evolution of the genetic code typically assume its arrival through a putative mechanism.

Fossils cannot be used as evidence of evolution since one cannot determine ancestry by examining them. Even in humans one can't determine trace geneologies by examining bones or human traces, how much more so for other species.

9) Vestigial organs don't prove evolution they assume it. Even if an organ truly has no function, that doesn't mean it must be a vestige of an ancestral species. We can only infer this if one has actually observed an organ going vestigial in species. Furthermore, most if not all, cases of functionless vestigial organs have been rebutted by research which revealed such organs had function.

10) Evolution ultimately rests on the notion that natural processes can generate complexity unaided. But observations show that Nature is highly limited in the type of complexity it can generate, usually self-repeating patterns like clouds, sand dunes or crystals. Nothing that begins to approach the complexity seen in life.

Here we go again...

donnffd:
Here we go again...

Respond to the points please. Otherwise I can assume you can't refute it.

[/color]the more you know [color=#006600]the more you know the more you know

hmmm.. It depends on how you want to define creation The biblical style?

UyiIredia:


Respond to the points please. Otherwise I can assume you can't refute it.

I have better things to do than to spend my time doing back and forth with you...but i would ask this question, kudos, you have destroyed Evolution with your ten points, now whats your alternative?

science without religion is lame., religion without science is blind.. A Lincoln

Rucheen:
science without religion is lame., religion without science is blind..
A Lincoln

Nonsensical quote. Science has never needed religion

I'm wondering why atheists and other evolutionists aren't responding to my post. Perhaps they can't rebut it.

JackBizzle:


Nonsensical quote. Science has never needed religion

The ones proposing a theory for eternal universe stole the idea from religion/theism

Where are these people : seun , taurus25 , cloudgoddess , plaetton , coolusername , valentinemary

Oya food don come oo

KingEbukasBlog:


The ones proposing a theory for eternal universe stole the idea from religion/theism

Which religion would that be?

UyiIredia:
I'm wondering why atheists and other evolutionists aren't responding to my post. Perhaps they can't rebut it.

Rebut it how?


Who has time to unpack the nonsense you have written?

Your first point makes no sense. What are you even arguing? You are contradicting yourself if you say speciation occurs and then say that you dont believe in evolution.

Speciation is what separated us from apes/monkeys from our common ancestor.

JackBizzle:



Rebut it how?


Who has time to unpack the nonsense you have written?

Your first point makes no sense. What are you even arguing? You are contradicting yourself if you say speciation occurs and then say that you dont believe in evolution.

Speciation is what separated us from apes/monkeys from our common ancestor.

It's like you have comprehension problems. If my post is nonsense then show it, and create time to do so.

UyiIredia:


It's like you have comprehension problems. If my post is nonsense then show it, and create time to do so.

Why do i even bother?

Guy, evolution is basic biology. The theory evolution has enough proof supporting it. I can't waste my time arguing on a matter that has been concluded.

If you feel that you with all your intelligence can disprove evolution, write a scientific paper documenting your research. You will surely be given award as the first man to disprove evolution.

JackBizzle:




Why do i even bother?

Guy, evolution is basic biology. The theory evolution has enough proof supporting it. I can't waste my time arguing on a matter that has been concluded.

If you feel that you with all your intelligence can disprove evolution, write a scientific paper documenting your research. You will surely be given award as the first man to disprove evolution.

You are talking crap. Don't bother.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!! Jackbizzle!!! You be confirmed prophet!!! You took the words right out of my mouth!!!

Ignorant talker:.........................."Speciation occurs, but I do not believe in Evolution!!!"

The OP(as usual),asked us to debunk his "doctrine of delusions and dung", and before we can even get a chance to do it, he does all the hard work for us by debunking it himself by admitting****, that Speciation occurs?!!!

****

Rucheen:
science without religion is lame., religion without science is blind..
A Lincoln

Lincoln was wrong on this one. Science has since gone beyond moon, without religion.

donnffd:
Here we go again...

You are lost of argument against it, right? Do yourself a favour accept the creationist account even you know without investigation that whatever is left to itself without care will decay

akintom:


Lincoln was wrong on this one. Science has since gone beyond moon, without religion.

Lincoln might be however, this is not a good way to respond to the post refute or accept it. Don't try to derail the thread

Niflheim:
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!! Jackbizzle!!! You be confirmed prophet!!! You took the words right out of my mouth!!!

Ignorant talker:.........................."Speciation occurs, but I do not believe in Evolution!!!"

The OP(as usual),asked us to debunk his "doctrine of delusions and dung", and before we can even get a chance to do it, he does all the hard work for us by debunking it himself by admitting(rather foolishly), that Speciation occurs?!!!

My goodness!!! This is surely the tragedy of "self imposed digital buffoonery"!!! He
feels like a star and yet he is as knowledgeless as a green stain on a 4 year old's handkerchief!!!

Kakakakakokokokokikikikikukukukukeke Marwa Stupidity!!!

Very typical of atheists; attack the person and use it as a decoy to avoid issues raised.

Let's assume the first point admitted to speciation....please, move on and debunk the rest, don't use speciation as an excuse to avoid others!

Niflheim:
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!! Jackbizzle!!! You be confirmed prophet!!! You took the words right out of my mouth!!!

Ignorant talker:.........................."Speciation occurs, but I do not believe in Evolution!!!"

The OP(as usual),asked us to debunk his "doctrine of delusions and dung", and before we can even get a chance to do it, he does all the hard work for us by debunking it himself by admitting(rather foolishly), that Speciation occurs?!!!

My goodness!!! This is surely the tragedy of "self imposed digital buffoonery"!!! He
feels like a star and yet he is as knowledgeless as a green stain on a 4 year old's handkerchief!!!

Kakakakakokokokokikikikikukukukukeke Marwa Stupidity!!!

Is that the atheist way of responding to a post of this nature?

UyiIredia:
I'm wondering why atheists and other evolutionists aren't responding to my post. Perhaps they can't rebut it.

Your first observation on your OP is a result of observations right? Personal observations or systematic observations carried out by professionals?

UyiIredia:
I'm wondering why atheists and other evolutionists aren't responding to my post. Perhaps they can't rebut it.

You're not satisfied with the overwhelming evidence for evolution, yet you expect us to take your claims seriously without any evidence at all?

1. Funny, I remember a time when the argument was that speciation is impossible. Now the goal posts have shifted (fallacy alert!). Anyway, there's no reason to believe in such a frivolous claim because speciation is not known to have any limit given enough time in reproductive isolation.

2. Living fossils remain unchanged have remained due to lack of environmental pressure, this is a known phenomenon known as evolutionary stasis. The coelacanth is a good example of a living fossil, studies show that its deep-sea habitat had remained unchanged, coupled with lack of predation, there simply hasn't been much natural selection taking place.

3. Evolution doesn't work on a singular organ and leave others high and dry, it is a very gradual process that affects the entire organism (to an extent). Of course, we do have cases of animals that were driven to extinction by exaggerated body parts. One example is the Irish Elk which was driven to extinction by it's ridiculously sized antlers.

4. Evolution is based on a non-random process known as natural selection. With natural selection, traits that are beneficial to an organism in a given location within a given generation are likely to be passed on to the next. This is why sudden changes to the environment can lead to mass extinctions. I repeat, evolution is non-random.

5. See no. 4. I'll add that most deleterious mutations would be gone after several generations of selection.

6. Humans are 98% similar to chimps in terms of DNA and about 70% similar to slugs. Lions, tigers and cats all display 95% of similarity with one another. DNA is used in paternity tests to show familial relations. As a general rule, DNA similarity shows closeness in familial relationships. Fossil evidence proves that not species have existed from the beginning of time, it also shows that many species that have gone extinct. Perfectly fitting into the evolutionary theory for some reason.

7. Redundant. See no. 4.

8. Fossil evidence proves that not species have existed from the beginning of time, it also shows that many species that have gone extinct. Perfectly fitting into the evolutionary theory for some reason.

9. Vestigial organs are proof against Intelligent Design. For example the human ear contains muscles that are generally too weak to move it (although there are some exceptions). In other mammalian species that morphologically resemble the common ancestor, these muscles are used to move the ears toward sound.
Furthermore, vestigiality only denotes loss of some or all function and not necessarily all. The human appendix for example, still retains some function as a store house for beneficial gut flora but was once a caecum for breaking down vegetables, this correlates with the nutritional information that can be gleamed from the dental information of a skeleton which showed that we once ate a lot of plant material.

10. Similarly, every incredibly complex structure evolved from simple parts, organisms are a bunch of anatomical systems working in tandem, anatomical systems are a bunch of organs working together, organs are related tissue structures working in tandem, tissue is made up of cells working in tandem, a cell is genetic material co-ordinating chemical reactions, genetic material is nucleic acid with a certain configuration. Nucleic acids are formed from complex organic compounds. Organic compounds are formed from Carbon, Hydrogen along with other inorganic elements. Elements come from a certain number of electrons orbiting a neutron and a proton. These structures are condensed energy. What then is so complex about concerned energy particles orbiting and colliding in a given manner?

Screw, it! I'm not editing this.

UyiIredia:
1) Speciation occurs within limits. Usually at the genus level, probably may happen at the family level given hybridisation but never past that.

2) Living fossils are fossils of species still alive today that have remained unchanged over supposed vast time periods.

3) Lifeforms are dependent on interdependent organ-systems. Therefore a change in one tissue or organ requires changes in other organs. For instance, a change in the respiratory system would require a change in the nervous system which signals it. This precludes gradual change of a species over time.

4) Random mutations are rare and beneficial mutations even rarer, also their frequency varies in some parts of the genome which would mean they are rarer there. This stands against the idea of random mutations being a viable mechanism for evolution.

5) Not all parts of the genome are tolerant to random mutations. While there is some tolerance given redundancy in the genetic code and DNA repair mutating some parts of the genome involved in crucial functions can lead to the death of the organism. This also stands against the mechanism of random mutation.

6) The assumption that similarities across different species is proof of their shared ancestry is unjustified. Even within a species, such as humans or dogs, you can have similarity with different ancestry.

7) Virtually all lifeforms are based on a genetic code in their DNA. Codes require foresight to build since they involve symbolic representation and imposing arbitrary rules for communication. This could not possibly evolve via random mutations. In fact, scenarios for the evolution of the genetic code typically assume its arrival through a putative mechanism.

Fossils cannot be used as evidence of evolution since one cannot determine ancestry by examining them. Even in humans one can't determine trace geneologies by examining bones or human traces, how much more so for other species.

9) Vestigial organs don't prove evolution they assume it. Even if an organ truly has no function, that doesn't mean it must be a vestige of an ancestral species. We can only infer this if one has actually observed an organ going vestigial in species. Furthermore, most if not all, cases of functionless vestigial organs have been rebutted by research which revealed such organs had function.

10) Evolution ultimately rests on the notion that natural processes can generate complexity unaided. But observations show that Nature is highly limited in the type of complexity it can generate, usually self-repeating patterns like clouds, sand dunes or crystals. Nothing that begins to approach the complexity seen in life.

Blood of god .


O my gosh


What poo


I stopped reading at no 1 when i saw speciation