Because all humans are made in the image of God…

Jarod a genome as complex as the human genome is statistically HIGHLY improbable to the point of impossible.

No, it is not. In fact, it is almost a certainty.
There is simply not enough time for Man to evolve into the complex genome we are.

Do you understand the concepts "infinite" and "eternal?"
(Obviously you do not.) Unless you are able to prove that existence is NOT infinite and eternal...you are all wet.
 
so you don't believe in the evolution of DNA.

that's being a creationist fool.
Just parading around hollering the word 'evolution' isn't an explanation of anything.

Evolution is a buzzword that just means change through time.

It doesn't explain the process for how that change actually happens.

Natural selection, genetic drift, and genetic mutation are the processes that explain descent with modification.

As theories of science, natural selection and genetic mutation do nothing to explain the process by which complex information-bearing molecules were assembled.

At this point, there are no accepted scientific theories for how atoms assembled into ultra complex self-replicating information management and storage systems.
.
 
Last edited:
NO IT DOES NOT.

I do like the way you proclaim your ignorance, though.
How does evolution work without one family of animals changing into another family of animals, all knowing one.:laugh: If we all evolved from a single cell animal miraculously developed from a lightning sticking a puddle of amino acids or some other nonsense.
 
How does evolution work without one family of animals changing into another family of animals, all knowing one.:laugh: If we all evolved from a single cell animal miraculously developed from a lightning sticking a puddle of amino acids or some other nonsense.
I'm doubting our fake doktor graduated HS.
 
@FastLane, @T. A. Gardner and to a lesser extent @Damocles all really struggle to understand science and what "scientific theory' is.

At no point, NONE, is the science on a theory closed to new evidence, especially as technology and man's comprehension of ever more science advances.

That our knowledge grows as newer and better telescopes travel deeper into space and our prior theories may be updated or invalidated does not mean that we mock the scientists as wrong and say they should not be trusted.

This is one of the biggest issues with this Trump age of the poorly educated, ala Marjorie Greene types, who will never defer to any expert because they read stuff on the internet.
 
Just parading around hollering the word 'evolution' isn't an explanation of anything.

Evolution is a buzzword that just means change through time.

It doesn't explain the process for how that change actually happens.

Natural selection, genetic drift, and genetic mutation are the processes that explain descent with modification.

As theories of science, natural selection and genetic mutation do nothing to explain the process by which complex information-bearing molecules were assembled.

At this point, there are no accepted scientific theories for how atoms assembled into ultra complex self-replicating information management and storage systems.
.
so you're a creationist.
 
For @FastLane and the other science illiterates here.

‐----


Evolution is the process of descent with modification, where populations of living things change over many generations.

It operates through a few simple, repeating steps:
  • Inheritance: These traits are heritable, meaning they are passed from parents to offspring through genes.
  • Selection: Not all individuals survive to reproduce. Those with traits best suited to their environment are more likely to survive, find food, and avoid predators.
  • Time: Because the "fittest" individuals have more offspring, advantageous traits become more common in the next generation.
Over millions of years, these small changes accumulate, leading to the adaptation of species to their habitats and the eventual formation of new species.
 
So where are the missing links?
You're talking points are from 1925.

In the intervening century, numerous transitional fossils showing intermediate transitional forms between two different species have been documented. Tiktalik is a transitional fossil animal showing both fish and tetrapod morphological features. Australopithicus is transitional species between our genus Homo and primitive apes.
 
You're talking points are from 1925.

In the intervening century, numerous transitional fossils showing intermediate transitional forms between two different species have been documented. Tiktalik is a transitional fossil animal showing both fish and tetrapod morphological features. Australopithicus is transitional species between our genus Homo and primitive apes.
The meth has fried her brain.
 
You're talking points are from 1925.

In the intervening century, numerous transitional fossils showing intermediate transitional forms between two different species have been documented. Tiktalik is a transitional fossil animal showing both fish and tetrapod morphological features. Australopithicus is transitional species between our genus Homo and primitive apes.
but you don't believe in DNA.

so......

:tardthoughts:
 
Back
Top