menu

Arguing on Craig’s list

Arguing on Craig’s list August 18, 2013
Someone sent me a link to an article on craigslist which I couldn’t help but reply to. Sadly there doesn’t seem to be any discussion forum that I can follow there, so I’ll re-post it here.
This article answers a previous post to this forum, one which included the following comment:

>”Evolution is accepted without question. Many say that the majority of the

>science world accepts it and only a moron would not endorse it. I heard one

>person speak and say that some animal evolved as though it is something

>normal and organic. I wonder why all these claim when not one person has

>seen any evolution take place. How can you so accept such a theory

>without question and yet you have never seen the goods?”

The answer is that we HAVE seen the goods.  Biological evolution is traceable through morphology with derived synapomorphies indicated in taxonomy, developmental biology, and chronologically concordant fossils in the geologic column. The hierarchy is also twin-nested in that it can be confirmed with genetic orthologues, essentially the same as running a simple paternity test.  That’s one of the reasons why evolution is exclusively and unanimously accepted by a global scientific consensus of independent expert specialists in all relevant fields. We know it works, we can show it works, we know how it works, and we can show how it worked in the past. With creationism, all we have are man-made mythologies and contradictory nonsense that never works on any level.

>”The question is when has anyone ever seen Evolution take place? When

>you can answer that question in a visual context then there would be no

>question. We have yet to see anyone one step forth and do so.”

Evolution is also directly observable. It is an inescapable fact of population mechanics long employed and exploited in agriculture -at the ‘micro-evolutionary’ level, (variation within species).  But even mAcroevolution (variation between species/speciation) has been directly observed and documented dozens of times both in the lab and in controlled conditions in the field.  I cite several of these events from peer-reviewed studies in my video on the 11th foundational falsehood of creationism.

Science never accepts anything ‘without question’, but questioning evolution gets answers, and we can easily prove those answers are correct.  The best minds of the modern day have posed testable and potentially falsifiable hypotheses and evolution is always vindicated.  For example, Darwin predicted that if his theory was correct, that there would be many transitions discovered in the fossil record. In my video on the 9th foundational falsehood of creationism, I show more than 300 definite transitions even according to the strictest definition of that word.

The first of Darwin’s predictions was that a bird would be found with unfused wing fingers.  Archaeopteryx was the first of many to be discovered which matched that prediction, and it was discovered while Darwin was still alive.  The predicted link that was still missing in his time was a morphological blend of human and chimpanzee traits. Australopithecus aferensis was the first of dozens of fossil hominines discovered since 1974 which bridge that gap.  Creationists argued that no such transitions would ever be found, and we’ve found all of them, including dinosaurs with ‘half-a-wing’ and turtles on the half shell or with no shell at all.  There are still some lineages that are missing key transitions, but apes to men, dinosaurs to birds, and the land-to-sea adaptations for ichthyosaurs and manatees are essentially complete. The transition to whales is well-understood now and only awaits one or two predicted stages to be confirmed.

>”Viruses that remain a Virus and Bacteria that remains a Bateria is not in

>any way evolution or anything meaningful to the evolution discussion.

>Evolution says one species changes into a whole nother one. Therefore

>this virus and bacteria argument is null and void. Further similar dna does

>not prove evolution you have to show that they changed from one species

>to another which no one has nor can anyone produce. All things continue

>as the Bible says ‘everything according to its kind’.

If you’re going to criticize one of the best-supported theories in all of science, it would be a good idea to know something about it before-hand. So I have included a link to lecture I recently gave at the Houston Museum of Natural Science on the fundamentals of evolution at the 9th grade educational level.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NWdU_MMOo4

There is no such thing as a taxonomic or zoological ‘kind’. The creationist concept of baraminology is wrong, and the proof of that is in my video on the Phylogeny Challenge.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_r0zpk0lPFU

Evolution was never about ‘changes between kinds’; its an explanation of biodiversity from common ancestry.  That means that evolution never suggests -nor permits- that one organism ever gave birth to another fundamentally different one. Everything that ever evolved was just a modified version of whatever its ancestors were.  That is one of the laws of evolution.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wH8LOQAu-5I

Whoever wrote the original article which I now mean to address also accused Darwin of being racist. That poster also implicitly admitted never having read what Darwin actually said.  This is obvious as Darwin was clearly not racist.  He spoke out adamantly against the racism common in his day. He protested eugenics that were already going on in Australia before his time (and for which he was later blamed) and his books were banned and burned by Hitler, who was a creationist himself and rejected Darwinian theory outright.  I explain all this with specific citations in my video playlist on the Erroneous Association of Evolution and Racism:

http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLA11B917D92EC7577

In short, the previous poster has absolutely no idea what he’s talking about, and that’s why he’s dead wrong on every attempted point
.>”All civilizations point not to an evolutionary documentation but to one

>core truth. That Core truth being that there is god. Yes they have many

>stories but all the stories have one common denominator. That common

>denominator is not evolution but only that of god.”

Here I would like to refer to someone else’s videos, Dr. Alice Roberts.  She’s an anthropologist with a brilliant series on tracing human migrations. What her series conclusively proves is that Genesis is wrong about the garden of Eden, the global flood, and the tower of Babel.  None of these actually happened as the Bible describes, and yes this video series does actually prove that with an overlapping alignment of hard uncontested evidence. Enjoy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYe7FJHU2eo&list=PL0307C047FA726FD2

Creationism has been continuously proven to be a vast collection of frauds and lies, not science. I explain that in the 13th foundational falsehood of creationism:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=myfifz3C0mI

>”The closer the world gets to God and his will the less his problems will become.”
Sorry, but that’s not true either; quite the opposite in fact -as I explained in my speech on how ‘Religion Reverses Everything’.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vquOuWx6NlA

Browse Our Archives