What is the Evidence of Mutations and New Information

[Guest shiloh357]

6 hours ago, one.opinion said:

Scientists do not see a distinction in process between micro-evolution and macro-evolution, only in time scale.

But that distinction  exists.   There is a difference between changes and adaptations to external conditions within a given species and  the outright evolution of an organism into a completely different organism.

Quote

You keep asking and I keep giving you the same answer - it is completely unrealistic to expect to see a gradual process that takes millions of years to occur in 150. This is a completely immaculate depiction of what evolution is predicted, expected, and hypothesized to do. You want new phyla to appear before your eyes because of a misconception of the science.

Yes it is unrealistic, which is why I never said that.   I am saying that over the last 150 years, NO evidence of billions of years of evolution has been produced or observed in the fossil record.  What we have for the last 150 years is an assumption that evolution is true and fossil evidence is interpreted to fit that assumption.  

If evolution were true, you would be able to produce millions of fossils at every strata, showing an unbroken line of transition, from the past to today.  Science cannot produce that.   But, that is what we would expect to see if the fossil record actually supported evolution.  

 

Quote

 

. Let’s actually take a different angle and let me ask you a question.

What scientific evidence is there to support some type of physical barrier between micro and macro varieties of evolution?

 

Adapting to external changes doesn't produce new organisms, never has. The mutations needed for macro-evolution simply don't exist and cannot be supported by the fossil record.  

[one.opinion]

3 hours ago, shiloh357 said:

If evolution were true, you would be able to produce millions of fossils at every strata, showing an unbroken line of transition, from the past to today.

Perhaps this would be the case if everything died became a fossil. We know that unique circumstances must take place for fossilization to occur.

3 hours ago, shiloh357 said:

Adapting to external changes doesn't produce new organisms, never has.

Adapting to environmental changes can lead to new species. That would be the beginning stages that would lead to very different organisms. A changing environment will not make a fish directly become a giraffe. You want to see a change to a completely different organism, which would be something at the phylum or class level. You discard evilution because you cannot see these changes taking place even though that is not how the theory works.

Let me try again - what scientific evidence (i.e. data) do you have that there is a functional barrier between micro and macro evolution?

[Guest shiloh357]

41 minutes ago, one.opinion said:

Perhaps this would be the case if everything died became a fossil. We know that unique circumstances must take place for fossilization to occur.

Yes, but since we are talking about millions upon millions of years and millions of different animals evolving over those years , we should still get sufficient unbroken lines of transition.

Quote

Adapting to environmental changes can lead to new species.

Yes, but that is not the same as dinosaurs turning into birds.    And there is no evidence that humans evolved from some other non-human animal.



Quote

That would be the beginning stages that would lead to very different organisms.

That is not observed in the fossil record, though.   Stating what you believe can true simply doesn't cut it.

Quote

You want to see a change to a completely different organism, which would be something at the phylum or class level.

Which should be evident in the fossil record. 

Quote

You discard evilution because you cannot see these changes taking place even though that is not how the theory works.

The theory has gone under changes because we are not seeing what we expected to see.   That's why we now have Punctuated Equilibrium as an alternative explanation as to why what is supposed to be in the fossil record can't be found.

Quote

Let me try again - what scientific evidence (i.e. data) do you have that there is a functional barrier between micro and macro evolution?

In micro-evolution, you are talking about changes to existing genetic information, which causes variations, that is not the same thing as introducing brand new, never before existing mutations into genes of animals.  

To say that micro-changes lead to macro changes is really nothing more than leap of  wishful thinking.  Insects that develop resistance to insecticides and bacterial strains that develop resistance to anti-bacterial chemicals and medicines simply do not provide the kind of information that would lead to any kind of major evolutionary changes.  

Since you admit that it has not been observed and would be observable in the last 150 years, you are really not operating in science, but in the realm of wishful thinking, or a philosophical leap into the dark. 

[enoob57]

Evolution is a joke... and at the death the joke will be on them...
The evidence of fact makes an evolutionist foolish yet they are so proud that they are evolutionist.
Species Without a Link Proves Evolution is Wrong
Single Cell Complexity Proves Evolution is Wrong
Human Egg and Sperm Proves Evolution is Wrong
DNA Error Checking Proves Evolution is Wrong
Chaos From Organization Proves Evolution is Wrong
Chromosome Count Proves Evolution is Wrong
Origin of Matter and Stars Proves Evolution is Wrong
Radio Silence from Space Proves Evolution is Wrong
Not one shred of evidence scientifically exist so evolution is a faith based idea without one fact in it's court...
In fact the idea without evidence must be evaluated by mathematical probability. This computation, because of complexity in the single cell, is so large in numerical size that no one in their right mind would accept this! It is a underlying spirit of force that deceives the mind causing lie to be truth! If someone believes in evolution they are already aware of this information and they are willful fools... You can pray for them in love but they will remain as a fool as long as the lie is truth to them... 

Edited August 24, 2018 by enoob57

[one.opinion]

21 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

Yes, but that is not the same as dinosaurs turning into birds.

The archaeopteryx fossils are a good indication that this indeed happened.

22 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

The theory has gone under changes because we are not seeing what we expected to see.   That's why we now have Punctuated Equilibrium as an alternative explanation as to why what is supposed to be in the fossil record can't be found.

As I mentioned earlier, science is self-correcting. As new discoveries are made, scientists have to re-write what is known. Evolutionary thinking has changed a lot since Darwin. Genetic thinking has changed a lot since Mendel. It is part of science.

26 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

Since you admit that it has not been observed and would be observable in the last 150 years, you are really not operating in science, but in the realm of wishful thinking, or a philosophical leap into the dark.

What I am admitting is that indirect observation like the fossil record and biogeography need to be used to build the bigger picture. And there is no evidence to suggest that micro and macro evolution are anything other than different points on the same trend line.

29 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

there is no evidence that humans evolved from some other non-human animal.

I showed you evidence yesterday that you did not accept. The evidence remains, whether or not you believe it.

[enoob57]

2 minutes ago, one.opinion said:

I showed you evidence yesterday that you did not accept. The evidence remains, whether or not you believe it.

It is the kings clothes scenario … we all can see it is nothing~ it is you that cannot see because willfully you will not see!

[one.opinion]

11 minutes ago, enoob57 said:

Species Without a Link Proves Evolution is Wrong
Single Cell Complexity Proves Evolution is Wrong
Human Egg and Sperm Proves Evolution is Wrong
DNA Error Checking Proves Evolution is Wrong
Chaos From Organization Proves Evolution is Wrong
Chromosome Count Proves Evolution is Wrong
Origin of Matter and Stars Proves Evolution is Wrong
Radio Silence from Space Proves Evolution is Wrong

Please start a thread with everything you know on any one of these topics. Let's discuss one individually instead of elephant hurling.

[one.opinion]

Just now, enoob57 said:

It is the kings clothes scenario … we all can see it is nothing~ it is you that cannot see because willfully you will not see!

I will happily discuss all of your scientific objections to the evidence. Would you like to give that a shot?

[enoob57]

Just now, one.opinion said:

Please start a thread with everything you know on any one of these topics. Let's discuss one individually instead of elephant hurling.

There is no need I will not debate with foolishness... I will simply rest on fact and await upon the time when foolishness cannot continue  

[enoob57]

1 minute ago, one.opinion said:

I will happily discuss all of your scientific objections to the evidence. Would you like to give that a shot?

We have already and you ignore and restate your faith in evolution... God says it is not possible this should be enough!