> In article <8def273e-f745-4143-9f96-5f956888a...@r37g2000prm.googlegroups.com> SkyEyes cox.net> writes:
>
>
>
>
>

>> On Jun 26, 2:19=A0pm, lsend...@hotmail.com wrote:

>>> On Jun 25, 5:37=A0pm, Immortalist yahoo.com> wrote:

>

>>>> If the theory of evolution is based upon some observables like,
>>>> mutation,

>

>>> ALL, as in ALL, mutations are loss of genetic info and almost always
>>> leads to a lower life.

>

>> Cite, please?  I do not believe this is accurate.  Please provide
>> scientific references.

>

>>

>

>>> the Gene gnome project

>

>> The "Gene gnome project"???

>

>>  Spell much?  How do you expect us to take anything
>> you say seriously if you don't even look up how the project is
>> spelled?

>
> But you know?...it's kind of catchy, if you pronounce
> the second `g'.  Try it.

>>> has found a bottleneck in the gene
>>> pool that dates back to roughly 6,000 yrs ago. =A0Just about the
>>> time of Noah's universal flood.

>

>> That's flat *wrong*.  The bottleneck was ~70,000 years ago, not
>> 6,000.  Stop parroting the [wrong] information your fundy handlers
>> spoonfeed you and fucking LOOK THINGS UP.

>

>>

>

>>> cough! =A0Theory. =A0That is why, despite huge fundings and
>>> experiments in high energy physics, we've only managed
>>> to evolve from steady state, to big bang and now possibly
>>> moving onto some sort of string theory. =A0Models and
>>> perhaps theories but nothing beyond that.

>

>> In science - nay, in *all* of academia, the word "theory" does NOT
>> mean "wild-ass guess scribbled on the back of a cocktail napkin after
>> three beers."  It means "a comprehensive explanation for a phenomenon
>> that takes into account *all* the data currently known."

>

>> *Theories* explain *phenomena*.  Something can be a fact and a theory
>> simultaneously.  Ever hear of "music *theory*?"  It's the explanation
>> of how the *fact* of music works.  Ever hear of "germ *theory* of
>> disease"?  It's the explanation of how germs, which are real, factual
>> things, cause diseases.  Gravity is another thing that is both a fact
>> and a theory, as is electricity.

>

>> The theory of evolution explains the observed *fact* that life forms
>> evolve.  Suck it up and deal.

>

>>>> he convicts
>>>> himself out of the gate. He must show that mutations and the strong
>>>> evidence for mutation rates is not possible or highly unlikely,

>

>>> What like the black and white moth fiasco which is still be taught as
>>> proof of beneficial genetic mutation =A0when it was all a hoax (lie). =A0=

>> I

>>> suppose you're going to bring up whale feet next.

>

>> Actually, the peppered moth example was *not* a lie, nor is the fact
>> that whales have hip bones.

>
> Ah, but he said it first, and sneered.  Thus it is invalidated.

>> Nor is the fact that both humans and chimps have traces of an a
>> retrovirus that affects only apes in our DNA.  The traces occur at the
>> same point in both sequences, and is a BIG FUCKING CLUE that humans
>> and chimps split off from a common ancestor.  That's called *data*,
>> godboy.

>

>>>> and I
>>>> would welcome that challenge. As for Newton

>

>>> a born again Christian who believed in a literal interpretation
>>> of the Genesis record.

>

>> Oh, you fatuous idiot, you.  Newton was a type of
>> believer, but he wasn't any sort of christian that you would
>> recognize.  Go actually *read* Newton's stuff, and then read the books
>> that he owned.  He was a quirky kind of deist at best.  The last thing
>> he was is a "born again christian."

>
> Can `lsenders' say "Socinian"?...