HOME/ABOUT  Prayer  SCOTUS  ProLife  BangList  Aliens  StatesRights  ConventionOfStates  WOT  HomosexualAgenda  GlobalWarming  Corruption  Taxes  Congress  Fraud  MediaBias  GovtAbuse  Tyranny  Obama  ObamaCare  Elections  Layoffs  NaturalBornCitizen  FastandFurious  OPSEC  Benghazi  Libya  IRS  Scandals  TalkRadio  TeaParty  FreeperBookClub  HTMLSandbox  FReeperEd  FReepathon  CopyrightList  Copyright/DMCA Notice  Donate

Dear FRiends, Your loyal support makes Free Republic possible and your continuing participation makes FR the number one grassroots pro-life conservative forum on the planet! If you have not yet made your donation, please click here and do so now. Thank you very much, Jim Robinson

Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Free Republic 2nd Quarter Fundraising Target: $88,000 Receipts & Pledges to-date: $29,713
33%  
Woo hoo!! And the first 33% is in!! Thank you all very much!!

Posts by Mudtiger

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • No Evolution Is Proof of Evolution?

    04/07/2015 7:31:18 AM PDT · 8 of 27
    Mudtiger to fishtank

    The omni-theory. Can be made to fit any past data or observation. And since it’s future prediction is “change” (or not), it has that covered, too.

  • ObamaCare author: Health law is 'really complicated'

    12/03/2014 7:54:27 AM PST · 33 of 44
    Mudtiger to C19fan

    Shumer - We wasted time working on the wrong thing.
    Harkin - What we worked on, we did it wrong.

    Pretty sums up a democrat congress...

  • Most College Students Don’t Earn a Degree in 4 Years, Study Finds

    12/02/2014 8:05:35 AM PST · 35 of 82
    Mudtiger to central_va

    “Engineering is a 5 year program at the University of Maryland due to General University requirement (GUR’s). The upshot is engineering students need 30 hours of “humanities” to graduate. See, we can’t have inhuman engineers graduating in four years.”

    Agreed. The whole concept of an education needs to be redefined and examined. Do away with the required humanities for the STEM students. It’s just a ruse to ensure students are around longer and pay more to make sure the liberal profs keep their cushy jobs paid by federal loans. About the time my son entered pharmacy school they changed requirements so that you had to have a BS in hand, and the pharmacy program increased from 3 years to 4. Increased his student debt greatly. Stop the insanity!

  • If ID Theorists Are Right, How Should We Study Nature?

    01/23/2014 3:20:29 PM PST · 31 of 417
    Mudtiger to Heartlander

    So what’s this about design? We are just bags of molecules in motion, constrained in our thoughts and actions by the laws of chemistry and physics. Free will is an illusion.

    300 genes in the simplest of lifeforms, all coded to give the correct sequence of amino acids, all remarkably left-handed, to form proteins that fold just the right way, to perform needed functions. Turned on and off at the right moments. Disassembled and ejected when functions are complete.

    Design? This incredible quality of assembled matter that we call life coded itself into existence, randomly generating the needed information. It was inevitable since everything is deterministic from the moment of the big bang. Time - anything can happen given enough time.

    If mathematically impossible in “A” universe, it’s entirely possible, even probable, in infinite universes. We happen to be in the one out of essentially infinity where it all came together.

    It’s all very scientific. Design to explain all of this? Only for the simpletons and the unscientific.

  • A’s for Athletes, but Charges of Fraud at North Carolina

    01/01/2014 7:07:27 AM PST · 21 of 46
    Mudtiger to reaganaut1

    “the African and Afro-American studies department...”

    The real shysters and frauds are the administrators, presidents, etc., who set up such a farce of a department to begin with. They should be prosecuted for stealing money from the public and forced to pay back all students who attended these worthless classes. All colleges need a cleansing from all this PC nonsense.

  • Evolution: a new boost for ‘aquatic ape’ theory

    12/30/2013 7:01:24 AM PST · 26 of 35
    Mudtiger to 2ndDivisionVet

    “The theory was first proposed in 1960 by British biologist Sir Alister Hardy, who believed apes descended from the trees to live not on the savannah as is usually supposed, but in flooded creeks, river banks and sea shores — some of Earth’s richest sources of food. To keep their heads above water, they evolved an upright stance, freeing their hands to make tools to crack open shellfish. Then they lost their body hair and instead developed a thick layer of subcutaneous fat to keep warm in the water.”

    The omni-theory of evolution is so amorphous that one can can dream up any scenario to fit any data, no matter how silly. Exactly what mutations occured to “evolve” the above traits? And why were each of the mutations so advantageous so as to dominate the species and preclude the former traits? A lot of furry creatures live near the water. Perhaps they too are on their way to a furless body. The evolutionists have not a clue - so they speculate and spin yarns.

  • LIVE Thread: Senate cloture vote. Guess the number of RINOs that vote to support "Dingy" Harry

    09/27/2013 8:49:49 AM PDT · 187 of 967
    Mudtiger to Graewoulf

    Happy to report that both AL senators (Shelby and Sessions) plan to vote against cloture.

  • Monogamy May Have Evolved to Prevent Infanticide [or, maybe, GOD instituted it!]

    07/30/2013 7:44:40 AM PDT · 34 of 39
    Mudtiger to SoFloFreeper

    “... A new study comes to a startling conclusion: Among primates, including perhaps humans, monogamy evolved because it protected infants from being killed by rival males.”

    I file this in the same folder where evolution explains my wife’s shopping habits. The omni-theory strikes again. Some of the things that pass as science these days, funded by taxpayer dollars, is astounding.

  • A Book Review and Summary of John C. Sanfor's Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of the Genome

    06/10/2013 10:38:25 AM PDT · 4 of 8
    Mudtiger to kimtom

    “Genetic Entropy” is an excellent book. Should be read by all who have a nagging doubt that mutation and natural selection really has the wherewithal to turn bacteria into Bacteriorologists. The human genome is rusting down, mutation by mutation, like a old car out in the junk yard.

  • Creationism “Creep” in Louisiana

    03/18/2013 12:31:48 PM PDT · 82 of 141
    Mudtiger to Zeneta

    “Has Science ever “observed” evolution?”

    It is my understanding, based on admittedly limited reading, that random mutation and natural selection has been observed to give organisms an advantage for survival in some environments. So in this case, I would say, yes, evolution has been observed.

    However, it is also my understanding that in every case that this has been observed, the mutation has actually damaged an existing gene causing loss of function. Thus evolution of new, more advanced systems, or new genes with new functions, has not been observed.

  • KRUGMAN: This Is The Chart That Debunks What Everyone Says About The National Debt

    11/25/2012 3:07:34 PM PST · 20 of 47
    Mudtiger to blam

    When you find yourself in a hole, the best thing to do is get a bigger shovel...

  • There goes the biofuels $21 billion dollar industry: Reality bites in EU draft

    09/13/2012 9:04:28 AM PDT · 4 of 13
    Mudtiger to Ernest_at_the_Beach

    Here’s an idea: let’s refine and burn the oil, and let’s eat the crops. Thus reducing cost of both. Nah, the greenies know best - what was I thinking.

  • Professor sparks debate after breast-feeding baby in class

    09/13/2012 8:59:23 AM PDT · 5 of 28
    Mudtiger to SoFloFreeper

    The assistant anthropology professor was scheduled to begin her course “Sex, Gender & Culture.”

    I could have guessed. Another worthless class in a worthless curriculum paid for by tax payers. Get a real job.

  • Clinton: Video is 'disgusting and reprehensible'

    09/13/2012 8:37:45 AM PDT · 50 of 80
    Mudtiger to ColdOne

    “America’s commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation,”

    Except now, of course. Now all the religious clingers are just going to have to pony up and pay for abortions even if it violates your religious beliefs!

  • South Korea surrenders to creationist demands

    06/13/2012 8:45:04 PM PDT · 17 of 25
    Mudtiger to SeekAndFind

    “Now Dawkins would say that natural selection is what actually did the “designing,” however Those who oppose Dawkins notes that in all cases where we know the causal origin of ‘high information content, experience has shown that intelligent design played a causal role.”

    Very true. Isn’t it rather strange that while, to date, the only observed explanation for the origin of complex, specific information is the action of intelligence, this explanation is not allowed in the science classroom as an explanation for the origin of complex, specific information in origins and diversity of lifeforms?

  • Darwinism the root of the culture of death: expert

    02/25/2012 10:44:12 AM PST · 348 of 669
    Mudtiger to allmendream

    “People use science to discover things.

    Creationism isn’t useful at all in that regard.”

    I would say that perhaps creationism is irrelevant in most scientific endeavors. But, it certainly doesn’t hinder. One can believe in creationism and make all kinds of discoveries and applications in the biological and medical sciences...and have done so! Whether one believes in evolution or creation matters not at all regarding discovery and application. So in that sense, perhaps they are both irrelevant. The creationist and the evolutionist are both making scientific progress.

  • Darwinism the root of the culture of death: expert

    02/24/2012 5:51:13 PM PST · 298 of 669
    Mudtiger to allmendream

    “The model that it all happened miraculously is absolutely useless in terms of application and further discovery about the natural world.”

    But neither does it hinder application and discovery, apparently. A lot of discoveries about the natural world, and applications from those discoveries, have been made by those who believe God created the world by miraculous means. Believing special, supernatural creation does not preclude discovery about the natural world — been going on for centuries. Perhaps I misunderstood your point.

  • Obama: I'm getting 'better as time goes on'

    02/06/2012 12:30:56 PM PST · 41 of 67
    Mudtiger to ColdOne

    Wow. Four years ago he was able to heal the earth and stop the oceans from rising. Imagine what can he do now./s

  • Tim Tebow keeps smiling

    12/07/2011 9:27:02 AM PST · 22 of 36
    Mudtiger to rhema
    “Critics want him to keep it to himself, a pattern that is increasingly common in American public life.”

    But the homosexual lobby can be in-your-face with their gaudy, immoral parades; the atheists can display billboards ridiculing believers; the Hollywood elites can flaunt their ungodly lifestyles; the ACLU can drag public figures into court for displaying the 10 commandments or uttering a public prayer in a public arena.

    Keep it to himself??? “Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good works and glorify your God which is in heaven.” Keep shining, Tim. I'll keep glorifying God for your faith.

  • U.S. private-sector jobs up 110,000 in October

    11/02/2011 7:49:40 AM PDT · 8 of 10
    Mudtiger to Free Vulcan

    “goods-producing employment fell 4,000”

    This is the key. The only way to increase wealth is to take something of some value (iron ore for example) and turn it into something of greater value (steel for example). Everything else feeds off of this. Service jobs are important but do not increase the pie. We need the mining and manufacturing base to improve, and we should be doing everything we can to see to their success. Instead we throw on more red tape and call them polluters.

  • Sharpton: Republicans Can't 'Use Christianity' Then Vote Against Welfare

    11/01/2011 7:17:02 PM PDT · 26 of 74
    Mudtiger to governsleastgovernsbest

    I just love it when the left wants to “help” me along in my Christian duties by confiscatory tax and redistribution policies. I would gladly give 10% to the poor out of a benevolent heart, but I don’t like Caesar as the middle man — he is inefficient and quite corrupt, and is never satisfied with 10%. Caesar always demands more than the good Lord ever asked.

  • Mercury's Fading Magnetic Field Fits Creation Model

    10/27/2011 9:03:02 PM PDT · 174 of 174
    Mudtiger to The Theophilus
    “When viewing the fact that mutations reduce viability and future genetic variability (ie small dogs lost the ability to procreate larger dogs), time is the enemy of the Evolutionist as compounding mutations leaves the Evolutionist with a genetically bankrupt sickly Poodle.”

    Interesting observation. Dog breeders started with some breed of larger dog and eventually came to the Chihuahua. Could a dog breeder go in reverse?

  • Senator Murray Urges House Subcommittee to Drop Investigation into PPFA, Support Women?s Health

    10/11/2011 1:08:15 PM PDT · 10 of 14
    Mudtiger to mdittmar

    “underscores their support for women’s health and the critical services that PPFA provides to women and families across the country.”

    Well, killing over 1.5 billion females in the womb is hardly support for women’s health.

  • Human Beings Continue to Evolve: Study

    10/06/2011 9:58:32 AM PDT · 105 of 116
    Mudtiger to Tax-chick

    I read where the increase in drownings at the beaches correlates with increased ice cream consumption.

    Therefore, I conclude, we need to ban ice cream sales in the summer months. I mean, people’s lives are at stake here! Where’s my grant to further study this remarkable result, and when will the politicians and public wake up and DO SOMETHING? Think of the children.

  • Human Beings Continue to Evolve: Study

    10/05/2011 6:54:12 AM PDT · 88 of 116
    Mudtiger to 1010RD
    Another example of how the ToE is the omni-theory that explains everything. If the “researchers” had found no change they would have concluded that there were no selective pressures on this little isolated population, hence, no change, just as the ToE would have predicted. So you have a conclusion that supports ToE whatever the outcome and most of the “technical” paper can be prepared before you ever start the study.

    I read once where evolution explains my wife's shopping habits and even the concept of G-d was an evolutionary result to promote survival.

  • The Great Obama Catharsis

    09/20/2011 7:15:43 AM PDT · 10 of 25
    Mudtiger to Rummyfan

    “Fairly or not, “green” conjures up everything from Climategate to Solyndra, and suggests an entire class of elite academics, financiers, and activists who wished to follow the oil companies’ crony-capitalist business plans of the 1940s and 1950s without the basic truth that oil is a logical energy source and so far a windmill isn’t.”

    So very, very true. If going green would save us money and create jobs, then green we would be. But instead it’s a forced agenda putting money in shysters’ pockets.

  • Does questioning evolution make you anti-science?

    09/09/2011 8:45:35 AM PDT · 141 of 157
    Mudtiger to LogicWings

    “Many reasonably intelligent people have considered the theories of evolution and consider them severely lacking, with a LOT of projecting and surmising.”

    “Well - First this is an Assertion Without Proof. Second, Many reasonably intelligent people assumes they are reasonably intelligent which is unproven and just an opinion. Third that they consider them severely lacking, with a LOT of projecting and surmising. says nothing other than that they have opinions. “

    LOL!! You’re right. I have no proof that there are reasonably intelligent people who doubt evolution. Sheesh...

  • Does questioning evolution make you anti-science?

    09/08/2011 1:40:03 PM PDT · 137 of 157
    Mudtiger to LogicWings
    “Just because every last bit of evidence has yet to unearthed doesn't invalidate the proposition.”

    Propositions that whales come from bears, dinosaurs come from birds, or that all living things have a common ancestor are a long, long way from “every bit of evidence”, and while it doesn't invalidate the proposition, one would think that such wild-eyed propositions would not be put on the table as certainties and facts.

    “Don't include me in your You’re asking us to buy into a belief because I'm not asking you to buy into anything.”

    Nothing in my responses are intended to be directed to you personally. Prominant evolutionists are for sure asking us to buy in, even demanding, that government entities and local school systems buy in. Many reasonably intelligent people have considered the theories of evolution and consider them severely lacking, with a LOT of projecting and surmising. Just because they don't know of an alternative naturalistic explanation for the diversity of life doesn't mean they have no standing to question theories that have been proposed.

    “What then, are fossils?”

    Well I am sure that my definition would come up short, but I would say that a fossil is an imprint left in a hard medium such as rock, that gives some information as to the form or function of the creature from which the fossil is formed.

  • Does questioning evolution make you anti-science?

    09/08/2011 9:48:31 AM PDT · 135 of 157
    Mudtiger to LogicWings

    “You can explain nothing but take issue with those who attempt to. It is an intellectually lazy position.”

    It might be intellectually lazy and a bit presumptious to ask us flat-earthers and other ignoramuses to believe that birds descended from dinosaurs by mutation and selection yet not itemize the mutations and showing why each mutation would be naturally selected. You’re asking us to buy into a belief with “evidence not seen.”

    I have no issue with those “attempting to.” I have issue with them claiming things that haven’t yet been proven, and vehemently claiming they have.

  • Does questioning evolution make you anti-science?

    09/08/2011 9:23:27 AM PDT · 133 of 157
    Mudtiger to BroJoeK
    “Descent with modifications and natural selection are confirmed observations = facts.”

    Don't think this is true in the broad sense of changing bears into whales or other fanciful stories. The descendant is always modified to some degree from the parent, but cold-blooded ancestors having progeny that are warm-blooded has not been observed, therefore not fact.

  • Does questioning evolution make you anti-science?

    09/08/2011 9:05:24 AM PDT · 132 of 157
    Mudtiger to LogicWings

    “Since evolution doesn’t assert to do any of the things listed in the coded language the blind to see, the lame to walk, and the deaf to hear then the whole premise is faulty.”

    That is exactly what the evolutionist asks us to believe. Creatures that cannot see, hear, or walk, can eventually have descendents who can. Again, what are the mutations that would turn a sightless creature into a seeing creature?

  • Does questioning evolution make you anti-science?

    09/08/2011 6:18:06 AM PDT · 127 of 157
    Mudtiger to BroJoeK
    “And you propose what, exactly, to replace it?
    Do you imagine some Designer working in His laboratory, every few million years creating new sets of DNA which He somehow injects into old species, causing them to transform and advance towards the varieties we find today?

    And you call that “science”?
    That's not science, it's not even true religion, it's just wild & rambling imagination.”

    I don't propose anything other than random mutation and natural selection to achieve new life forms has not been observed conclusively nor has, even on paper, a truly mechanistic path been proposed for changing a fin into a leg (for example). I realize that intelligent design, creation by a superior intellect, etc. is not “science” as defined. Doesn't belong in the classroom. However, it is fair in the classroom to point out Darwinian evolution to new body plans has not been proved, nor has its mechanism for change to new life forms even been proposed in detail for even one example.

  • Does questioning evolution make you anti-science?

    09/08/2011 6:00:53 AM PDT · 123 of 157
    Mudtiger to LogicWings
    “To which I would rephrase: “”My problem” is that no one has solved the ‘details of the mechanism’ that explains the Resurrection”.”

    You completely misunderstand my point. I do not propose the resurrection as science nor should it be included in the science classroom. Nor should intelligent design. However, just proposing that given enough time the natural selection g-d will allow the blind to see, the lame to walk, and the deaf to hear, without identifying the specific mutations, the intermediates, and explaining how each mutation was critically advantageous to the mutated creature, then there is no real mechanism, and it is projection and surmising. So whether you believe in the g-d of natural selection or a superior intelligence with power to create, either way you accept it by faith.

  • Does questioning evolution make you anti-science?

    09/07/2011 3:40:51 PM PDT · 112 of 157
    Mudtiger to BroJoeK

    “Sounds to me like a “target rich” field for further scientific investigation, for anyone with a good aptitude in science, and a strong disciplined mind.”

    Well, what it has been, and what I think it will continue to be, is just a lot of surmising and presuming. A bacterium can mutate for immunity (but remain a bacterium), a moth can select for a certain color (but remain a moth), therfore a fin can turn into a leg (and completely change body plan), gills can turn into lungs, the blind can see, the deaf can hear, just needs more time. But how, one asks? Well, by mutation and selection of course, nothing else needed for explanation. If you can walk to the mailbox, you can walk to Mars - just takes more time. Doesn’t take much of disciplined mind to practice that art. :)

  • Does questioning evolution make you anti-science?

    09/07/2011 11:32:12 AM PDT · 108 of 157
    Mudtiger to BroJoeK
    “The natural world, including fossil records are chock full of examples of “intermediate steps.”
    These are exactly reflected in DNA analyses of modern species.
    So what, exactly, is your problem?”

    Similarities in DNA can be used to support modular design as much as support common descent. Since many (most?) lifeforms carry out many of the same basic functions on molecular scale, it makes sense that they would have some DNA in common, whether designed or evolved. Intermediate steps may not be intermediates at all but created species that went extinct. The evidence is the same, it's just how does one interpret the evidence.

    "My problem" is that no one has solved the details of the mechanism that explains which mutations occured in changing a fin to a leg (for example) and why each specific mutation imparts greater survivability so as to predominate. Just an assortment of general statements are offered.

  • Does questioning evolution make you anti-science?

    09/07/2011 6:12:27 AM PDT · 105 of 157
    Mudtiger to BroJoeK
    “It is simply not true that there is some difference between “micro-” and “macro-” evolution, beyond the undisputed fact that one takes much longer times than the other.
    But it's the same process, from beginning to end.

    To put it another way, “micro-” and “macro-”, like beauty, are in the eyes of the beholders.”

    Give us the mechanism for explaining the Darwinian evolution of one species to another. Saying Species 1 + Mutations + Changing Environment + Natural Selection + Time = Species 2, is not a mechanism.

    Tell us which mutations occured, and why those particular mutations were of such benefit that each intermediate mutation allows the species to survive and predominate as the original species dies off. Explain the change in the environment that corresponds to the mutated species having an advantage. Starting from species 1, build the new genome mutation-by-mutation that results in the new species.

    Or to make it easier perhaps, start with a fin and describe the mutations that eventually result in a leg and how all intermediate mutations were beneficial on the way from swimming to walking. Then you have a mechanism. Otherwise, it's just an assumption that changes/adaptations within a species can cross the gap to new life forms.

    You don't even have to prove or demonstrate that they happened. Just use mind experiments.

    I don't think evolutionists can describe such a path/mechanism that would be realistic even in their imagination.

  • Does questioning evolution make you anti-science?

    09/06/2011 9:40:29 PM PDT · 95 of 157
    Mudtiger to SoJoCo
    “But dismissing a scientific theory as false based solely on religious theology doesn’t make a lot of sense.”

    Many resonable and intelligent people reject evolution (as in all life descended from a single life form through the mechanism of random mutation and natural selection) for reasons other than religious theology.

  • Anyone watching the Auburn-Utah State game on ESPN2? (vanity)

    09/04/2011 6:31:40 AM PDT · 50 of 50
    Mudtiger to RetiredArmy

    Another opinion, or internet rumor reported as fact...

  • Anyone watching the Auburn-Utah State game on ESPN2? (vanity)

    09/04/2011 6:24:09 AM PDT · 48 of 50
    Mudtiger to RetiredArmy

    You didn’t offer your statements as opinion, you stated them as fact, which is a LIE. The NCAA has determined that Cecil Newton had inappropriate conversations with those connected to MSU. They have repeatedly said, at least to this point, that there is no proof that Cecil or Cam received any money from AU, or even MSU. You see that is something you bammers don’t have that we barners do, that is, the statements of an independent investigative body that has said there is no eveidence that AU has done anything wrong.

  • Anyone watching the Auburn-Utah State game on ESPN2? (vanity)

    09/03/2011 3:42:29 PM PDT · 38 of 50
    Mudtiger to RetiredArmy

    ” Had AU not had the illegal QB last year, they would not have won the NC. Scam Newton’s daddy took illegal money. Yet, the stupid NCAA says that because Scam did not know it (right wanna bet) that daddy took money, he was not illegal. Wrong. His daddy was his agent in this matter. Thus he should have not been able to play. But now daddy has Scam’s NFL money too keep his seven churches up and running.”

    EPIC FAIL! Lot of false witness in there to have a tag claiming Jesus is Lord.

  • Ann Coulter: LIBERALS' VIEW OF DARWIN UNABLE TO EVOLVE ("The dog ate our fossils...")

    09/01/2011 8:11:31 PM PDT · 212 of 242
    Mudtiger to GrandJediMasterYoda
    “Think of it this way: Modern humans are approx. 200k years old which is a blink of an eye, and look how different we look between the races.

    Now imagine billions of years of that. 3.8 billion years I believe. Billions of years which when it comes to life might as well be infinity.”

    I suspect that in billions of years, we would still be humans, with the same number of chromosomes, ability to reproduce only with other humans. We might look different, be taller/shorter, intermingling of races may result in one race. Humans living in different parts of the world for long periods of time will still “adapt”. But the species will still be, at the DNA level, present day humans.

  • Ann Coulter: LIBERALS' VIEW OF DARWIN UNABLE TO EVOLVE ("The dog ate our fossils...")

    09/01/2011 12:15:28 PM PDT · 189 of 242
    Mudtiger to Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus
    “Well, it sort of does actually, under the broader rubric of naturalistic explanations for life and its propagation. If life did not originate naturalistically, then there's much less of a logical reason to assume all of the rest of the naturalistic baggage that comes later.”

    Exactly right. Even the theistic evolutionist must acknowledge that once G-d is put on the table as the one who created the first life from which all others evolve, then he has to see that the same G-d could have created it all. Unless of course they believe that G-d was powerful enough to create the first life but not powerful enough to create all life. They could argue that G-d just chose to create through evolution, and I guess that is one possibility, but certainly another possibility is that G-d created it all. Then the evidence becomes subject to interpretation depending on your view. One man's evidence for common descent is another man's evidence for modular design.

    If you take G-d off the table and say it all must be explained by natural means, then there is no credible explanation for how life originated.

  • Attention Governor Perry: Evolution is a fact (Oh, Really?)

    08/24/2011 9:58:32 AM PDT · 42 of 44
    Mudtiger to OldNavyVet

    “Modern science (DNA) tells us that ... “About a thousand genes are shared by every organism, however simple or complicated.” Ref: Page 284 in “Darwin’s Ghost” by Steve Jones.”

    Excellent modular design!

  • Abortionist admits: babies sometimes born alive and left ‘wiggling around in the toilet’

    07/26/2011 3:59:20 PM PDT · 35 of 117
    Mudtiger to NYer

    “Michele Herzog of Pro-Life Action Ministries, a witness in the courtroom, said that jurors listened as abortionist Randall Whitney, one of Pendergrast’s accomplices, “cavalierly stated that yes, babies are delivered in the toilet all the time and many times are still alive, wiggling around in the toilet.”

    What a gruesome, evil industry. More barbaric than anything from the middle ages. Goes on under our noses all the time, sanctioned by a major political party, dressed up as freedom and choice, pushed as acceptable birth control by the elites! What a black, bleak, dark, ominous cloud this must be bringing to our nation.

  • Exo-evolution: Aliens who hide, survive

    04/15/2011 1:21:08 PM PDT · 24 of 30
    Mudtiger to Ethan Clive Osgoode

    Darwinism — the omnitheory. Even explains my wife’s shopping patterns.

  • Skin color: Handy tool for teaching evolution

    03/08/2011 7:30:04 AM PST · 176 of 183
    Mudtiger to allmendream

    “What survival advantages would result from being multi-cellular? That should be obvious.”

    Well, they are not. A single cell organism that can reproduce asexually and very rapidly has the advantage. If survival was the key, we would all devolve to such organisms.

    “I have been arguing that natural selection of genetic variation is the only scientific explanation for evolving resistance to novel antibiotics, skin color differences, and the INEVITABLE small changes in DNA that will accumulate between separate populations.”

    I have no difficulty with this. Some driven by mutations and some driven by expression of information already present, I suspect. Call it evolution, I don’t care. But the mechanism that gives us bacterial resistance (broken genes), different skin color (expression of existine info perhaps), etc., is insufficient to explain the biological complexity we see.

    The new goal posts, as you say, have to be dealt with because evolutionists claim that we have arrived at these goal posts via mutation/selection/descent. The evolutionist wants us to accept this without any demonstration. I don’t think they can even conduct a mind experiment to come up with the mutations required, in correct sequence, together with the environmental pressures that would result in each mutation predominating. The evolutionist tells us that all life evolved from a simple lifeform. Broken genes and adaptation using exsting info won’t get us there — not in 4billion years squared.

    Over and out. Thanks for the discussion.

  • Skin color: Handy tool for teaching evolution

    03/07/2011 8:06:02 PM PST · 172 of 183
    Mudtiger to allmendream

    “If I take a single bacteria and let it grow, then plate it on ten plates and subject it to ten stresses; I can repeatably get it to “adapt”/”evolve” to be resistant to those ten different stresses through novel variations that are selected for in that environment.”

    Why then, in the big Petri dish that is planet Earth, and in these billions of years, has the single-celled Plasmodium not evolved a resistance to cooler climates? Do you think you could grow Plasmodium under certain environmental stresses and “evolve” a variant of this parasite to be resistant to cooler climates?

    What kind of environmental stress, or sequence of stresses, would result in uni-cellular organisms evolving into multi-cellular organisms. What survival advantage would result? Just what would the mutations conceivably be that would result in multti-cell organisms? Just saying mutations/selection/time doesn’t explain anything about how this would come to be.

  • Skin color: Handy tool for teaching evolution

    03/07/2011 10:57:44 AM PST · 161 of 183
    Mudtiger to allmendream

    “What is going to STOP this “descent with modification” such that over six million years a 2% genetic and 6% genomic DNA difference accumulate in separate populations?”

    Well, it has never been observed. And seems most implausible.

    2% and 6% is an incredibly wide chasm to breech in 6 million years. How many sequential beneficial mutations would that take? And each mutation would have to be so favorable as to be necessary for robustness, or impart some great advantage, in order for that mutation to predominate through the species.

    Mutation/selection/descent has never been observed to any appreciable extent. An evolutionist sees fin, then sees leg, and “assumes” that you can get from one to the other by mutation and selection.

    Can you give one example of a series of 5 sequential mutations, each one imparting an extraordinary robustness that the creature’s siblings and cousins did not experience, that result in survival or some great advantage? What about 4? What about 3? Bacterial resistance, and even metabolizing nylon are really biochemically trivial – a broken gene that just happened to yield resistance. Like the refuse washing down the flooded river might hit a snag in the river, begin to accumulate, and choke off flow downstream, and “build” a dam – but hardly a mechanism to account for an elaborate and exquisite dam with controlled gates and water flow, a secure crossing, generators, etc. And even such a dam does not begin to measure up to the processes and order of a living cell.

    No, mutation and selection is a very poor mechanism for building complex biological systems. So poor as to be quite unbelievable to many who ponder such things.

  • Skin color: Handy tool for teaching evolution

    03/03/2011 6:40:31 PM PST · 146 of 183
    Mudtiger to allmendream

    Has the environment (presence of antibiotics) stressed the bacteria population killing many of them? Yes
    Do bacteria mutate? Yes.
    Do some mutations make bacteria immune to some of these antibiotics? Yes
    Has the genetic code been modified? Yes
    Do other bacteria “descend” from these modified bacteria? Yes
    Do they survive in the same environment? Yes
    Could we say that this is descent with modification? Yes

    Can the mutated gene still carry out its original function? Possibly, but probably (and in most instances) not as well
    Are these mutations on the road to developing new genes for more complex biological functions? No - at least the ones we know about.
    Are these bacteria on the road to ever being anything other than bacteria? No, not that we can tell.
    Do these bacteria, with their mutations, environmental selection, descent with modification, prove that this mechanism can lead to greater biological complexity? No
    Does this prove that uni-cellular organisms can evolve into multi-cellular organisms? No. Is this mechanism proven out to the point that we can say it is the mechanism whereby cold blooded creatures can modify and descend into warm blooded creatures; flightless creatures can modify and descend into winged creatures; creatures with gills can modify and descend into creatures with lungs; sightless creatures can modify and descend into the creatures with sight - complete with the brain functionality to interpret what they “see”; etc, etc. No.

    The chasm is large. Time doesn’t help when there is no mechanism to result in the change needed.
    The mechanism of mutation, selection, descent with modification has been proven for bacteria gaining immunity but has not demonstrated that it can lead to more complex biological functions, it is assumed that this mechanism can cross the chasm but never demonstrated. And to many of us, it seems a very poor, shaky assumption. — and this is the gist of the matter, semantics aside. The only thing we have seen descended from bacteria, fruit flys, and people are more bacteria, fruit flys, and people, whether changed, unchanged, mutated, adapted, “evolved”, etc.

  • Skin color: Handy tool for teaching evolution

    03/01/2011 3:56:56 PM PST · 131 of 183
    Mudtiger to allmendream; SeekAndFind

    “Speciation is not necessary for evolutionary change to take place.”

    I don’t think anyone really has a problem that bacteria might mutate and in so doing achieve a level of resistance. If this is evolution, then we are all evolutionists. You win the semantics battle but do not win many minds over to believe that this mechanism can account for whole new complicated structures and functionalities. I have read somewhere (other than Seek and Find’s posts) that when a bacteria develops resistance through mutation, the gene that mutates really suffers regarding the function it serves to the cell. The bacteria survives but is less robust and contains no new information that puts the bacteria on the road to more complexity. Hence, bacterial mutation to allow survival cannot be used as an example of descent with modification.