|
REPORT ABUSIVE REPLY
|
|
Message Subject
|
Scientists Baffled-New Discoveries-Darwinian Evolution Crumbling-Scientists Abandon Theory
|
|
Poster Handle
|
musashi777 |
|
Post Content
|
...
1: Retroviruses insert their genes into a random location within the genome. Which means that the odds of two individuals having a single ERV at the same location (when not inherited from a common ancestor) are billions to one. Yet there are hundreds of thousands of these ERVs in identical locations.
2: It would require that the genetic tailor created every taxon by modifying the DNA of a preexisting taxon, in exactly the same order that evolution theory predicts. ie; the tailor took a fish, modified its DNA and made amphibians. Then took an amphibian and modified its DNA to produce reptiles. Took a reptile and made synapsids. Then mammals. Then primates. Then apes. Then humans. With millions of little steps inbetween.
The burden of proof is not on me to disprove a tailor, it is on you to prove a tailor. Since we have never observed this tailor, yet we do constantly observe animals diverging into different lineages, then the common ancestry model is most supported by the data.
Quoting: Spur-Man Fascinating, I will require time to ponder your response. I feel that I am too inebriated to propose a valid counter argument. I will check in tomorrow. That being said, couldn't a genetic tailor have a plethora of animal species, with humans at the apex, to demonstrate the potential of all our animalistic instinct's, thereby isolating the ones with the most noble virtues?!?!?  Again, the burden of proof is on the positive claim. The tailor model is not correct by default until we disprove it. You have to actually provide evidence for this tailor. I can't disprove that a genie used time travel to go back and magically generate organisms with ERV's in order to play a joke on scientists. That doesn't mean there's any reason to think it's true. Have you considered that this 'tailor' might use natural phenomena (like evolution) to create life?And here we go again. Occam's razor completely ignored. Postulating a theory of death and destruction as an explanation for all novelty by a 'tailor' is just fucking retarded bro. Thats like making 50 bikes and then destroying them and make one motorbike. Completely, fucking, retarded. Not to mention you need at least one mind to make one bike and one mind to make one motorbike. You'll also need a livable universe for this creative organism creating bikes and motorbikes and some major laws to hold the grand masterpiece together. But I am convinced you have all of this figured out. For science Yeah. Making 50 bikes is exactly like creating the heavens and the earth! good point.
|
|
|
Please verify you're human:
|
|
|
Reason for reporting:
|
