If all I get for evidence to refute my expose is ad hominem attacks from a peanut gallery evolutionist, then I feel I have done a pretty good job of putting a torpedo below the waterline of the evolutionists ship. Not like it didn't leak profusely all along. But the explosion is fun to watch.
There is no amount of evidence that would please a creationist. You give them exactly what they ask for, but they show know curiosity and no ability to understand. Don't you know that the same DNA that we use to determine paternity and forensic testing to show how closely people are related...is the same DNA that shows how closely animals are related? Darwin has been vindicated in spades (he never saw a chromosome, you know)...and the knowledge is accumulating exponentially, but you are too stupid to comprehend it because you believe that you have an intelligent designer that wants you to believe a silly story and that he'll make sure you live happily ever after for doing so. Evolution will be "overturned" on the same day they declare the earth is flat afterall... and the center of the universe.
Moreover, as Wings said...no creationist ever offers any evidence for whatever creation story they are proffering...just books which they say speak the truth...and there's lots of such stories...no one agrees...and the people in the stories sure weren't writing this stuff down, so it's all hearsay...and there is no evidence that snakes talked and that people poofed into existence as fully formed adults suddenly speaking some language. In fact, language has to be learned in childhood as do many things in order build an adult brain. If god whipped up a brain from scratch and knew everything in advance then he was utterly cruel to be indistinguishable from a schizophrenic delusion while tempting his beloved creations with a test that he'd have known they'd fail so he could kill his kid (who was him) to atone for it later (as if that made sense!). Christian creation stories and interpretations are as useless and unsupported as Moonie and Scientology and Mormon and Muslim and Greek Mythology creation stories. Where did these magical events occur? What did the people look like? Did Eves sons mate with her to spawn the rest of humanity? Why do we share so much DNA with primates including fossil DNA-stuff that doesn't work? How do you explain virgin births. Is there any evidence for any creation myth other than the fact that creationists can't possibly fathom how this can come about "randomly"?? Any measurable, replicable evidence...the kinds science has amassed in every field.
In any case, thanks for being a brilliant illustration as to why all credible scientists go out of their way to distinguish natural selection and how it brings order from the the relative randomness of mutation. Evolution is really easy to understand so long as you don't assume that "scientists think this all happened randomly". You have to know a little science to understand...and you can't be afraid that you will be punished forever for understanding--but the explanation for the seeming design we see is very easy to explain. But first you have to understand natural selection and why it is the opposite of random--the filter through which the random passes with the winner spawning more success in incremental fashion:
Or is MSNBC part of the conspiracy, rttjc?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19733274
Do you have any evidence for your creation hypothesis yet?
And, if you randomites can not yet understand why you are using language poorly if you want to clarify an understanding of evolution, then rttjc is the best evidence I can imagine. To a creationist, saying "this order came about randomly" is like saying "scientists want us to think this just happened by chance". Given this interpretation, a designer seems plausible...even necessary. But once you understand natural selection...and how it is non-random--how it brings order to the randomness...once you understand the answer to the OP--then evolution is obvious and an intelligent designer is not only unnecessary, but unlikely and lame and wasteful and apparently not omniscient. He could have at least mentioned germs and saved some suffering. Or let people know that men determine the sex of a child so that so many women weren't killed and abandoned for not producing sons.
Rttjc is what the intelligent design movement makes. And it is impenetrable. If you don't want a world filled with such ignorance and their spawn, I suggest you make sure the people you love understand exactly how natural selection is not random lest this be the pathetic result. I'm telling you--this is unfixable. I have never known a male creationist over 40 change his mind or even get a clue. They sound bizarre and tangential like Behe and purposely obfuscate the understanding of natural selection for themselves and every one they come in contact with. The stupid meme has good replicating power...it promises eternal glory for believing without question and getting others to believe--and it also says non believers will suffer forever. There's nothing in science that can top that. Moreover, religion tells you it's arrogant to ask for evidence...and they never proffer any in return.
If you (any randomites) are not a creationist...I hope you at least understand why Dawkins et. al. say natural selection is not random. Saying it is, just encourages rttjc ignorance/arrogance. Don't let your ego get in the way of seeing this. What more evidence do you need that this is a disastrous way of explaining evolution? The stuff you want to call random in the environment is just part of the filter. There are causes...reasons for every thing in the environment. There is no "reason" a mutation happens. There IS a reason that some mutations make some organisms more successful in whatever environment they find themselves in. However you explain things, don't leave that part out. Don't mistake the filter for the randomness.
