Is Darwin's Theory of Evolution True? Part 4.1

  • Thread starter Thread starter Techno2000
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Literally any university would want good quality evidence against evolution.
 
No, scientists do not discard seemingly contradictory evidence; at least the better ones never would. That is the most important kind! Expected results are not nearly as interesting as unexpected results! Provided the unexpected results are cleared of likely sources of error, they are the kind that make careers.

Besides…concealing unwanted results is unethical. Doing that to preserve some pet narrative could totally ruin a career, if it were found out. Once you have a reputation as someone who would bow their reading of the data you turn up, you are toast. No one can trust your work anymore.
 
Last edited:
buffalo said:
There are more than 1. Biologists classify in 3 domains and 6 kingdoms.
Click to expand...
I’m a biologist. I classify living things into domains and kingdoms too. But I think they all descended from one original life form.
This is much closer to Genesis than 5 million species.
Click to expand...
So, let me be quite clear about this, as you seem desperately reluctant to answer my question about millions of years. You think that God only created six ‘kinds’ of living thing - the primordial archaebacteria and eubacteria, protists, plants, animals, and fungi, from which all the other varieties and species have evolved. Is that correct?

This means (and please correct me if I’m wrong) that you believe fish, lizards and elephants are all ‘varieties’ of the primordial animal. I myself feel that there are very few baraminologists who would agree with you.

The fossil record suggests that bacteria are about four billion years old, while eukaryotes are at most three billion years, giving a creation period span of about one billion years. Do you think that’s correct?
 
Last edited:
How much research have you done? Destroying physical archeological findings on purpose? Fabrication? Both are essentially criminal. You would be done.
 
Aloysium said:
I think what has been created is probably what science labels as a genus. From an original form, these go on to diversify into species through the mechanism of descent.
Click to expand...
And why not. Feel free to believe whatever you like. However, although I hesitate to class you with buffalo, do you think elephants, lizard and fish were created more or less simultaneously (within a couple of million years) or hundreds of millions of years apart?
 
Hugh_Farey said:
I’m a biologist. I classify living things into domains and kingdoms too. But I think they all descended from one original life form.

This is much closer to Genesis than 5 million species.

So, let me be quite clear about this, as you seem desperately reluctant to answer my question about millions of years. You think that God only created six ‘kinds’ of living thing - the primordial archaebacteria and eubacteria, protists, plants, animals, and fungi, from which all the other varieties and species have evolved. Is that correct?

This means (and please correct me if I’m wrong) that you believe fish, lizards and elephants are all ‘varieties’ of the primordial animal. I myself feel that there are very few baraminologists who would agree with you.

The fossil record suggests that bacteria are about four billion years old, while eukaryotes are at most three billion years, giving a creation period span of about one billion years. Do you think that’s correct?
Click to expand...
I used kingdoms to illustrate my point which you seem not to have understood. I will defer to baramin researchers to clarify better how many original created kinds there are. As I said, it will be more than 1 and much less than 5 million.

I said no.

No again.

Evolution needs the 4 billion years so of course you won’t believe it is less.
 
buffalo said:
Start with retractionwatch.com Then we can move to peer review.
Click to expand...
What on earth are you on about? Does retractionwatch know more about your beliefs than you do?

Anyway, I’m glad we’ve got rid of the six kingdoms smokescreen, and you’re back to elephants, lizards and fish being separately created. Now can you answer my question about timescales?

If these ‘kinds’ of organisms were created more or less simultaneously, why do we not see all their fossils appear more or less simultaneously?
 
Last edited:
Nope. If a scientist is found to do that, they’re pretty much done.
 
Evolution doesn’t need any particular amount of time. It is a process by gradation. The longer the time you have, the more change you will expect. But every single act of reproduction is evolution in action-- at the moment of conception, there now exists more of the genetic code of both the mother and the father. This is a (very small, mind you) change in the genetic makeup of the species as a whole.
 
Retraction is what happens when someone is discovered to have published something false. This is not a discredit to science, it is a credit to scientists, who work hard to keep each other in line.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top