They're creepy and they're spooky

Darwinian mistakes, deceits and out right frauds seem to be endless. What they never show is any viable proof of goo-to-you-evolution

Category:

Education

Tags:

• darwin
• dawkins
• russ miller
• evolution
• creation
• bible
• christianity
• funny
• creation ministries

[TheScienceFoundation]

@CreationMinistries Or a strawman

[TheScienceFoundation]

@JMcH It's the opposite of a just so story, you're projecting the inability of creationism to explain anything at all here in any empirical way. This is in contrast to descent with modification which not only explains the arrangement of chromosome 2 itself, but also its array in relation to other primate lineages.

[JMcH]

@couragepanda - "However, genetic code can be very flexible, and this new orientation survived. "

Attribution: the "just-so" Story of Evolution, page 995, paragraph 3, line 2.

Your only "evidence" for any such thing is the fact that we exist. You assume that "this new orientation survived" only because we are here.

[couragepanda]

@JMcH You have 23 pairs of chromosomes, meaning 46 total chromosomes, in pairs. Whatever ancestor had 48 total, meaning 24 pairs. Mutations happen all the time in individuals, and somehow a mutation that fused two chromosome PAIRS ended up in a viable offspring. So 2 from 24 becoming one from 23 means 4 from 48 became 2 from 46. This actually happens very frequently, but often it is fatal to the cell or organism. However, genetic code can be very flexible, and this new orientation survived. 

[TheScienceFoundation]

@JMcH I'm trying to get to your understanding, but a remedial educating in the difference between a loss and a fusion is warranted at this point. You keep dodging the question and pretending as if I haven't already explained the chromatid fusion event somehow means I haven't in order to distract from the fact that you don't actually want to learn, only continually assert your ignorance as if it's meaningful.

Do you understand yet that a fusion is not a loss?

[JMcH]

@TheScienceFoundation - You have thus far failed to stop lying about my understanding. Two fused chromosomes = 1 chromosome, which must be paired. You have never addressed this issue and you never will because you can't. All you will do is continue to lie about my level of understanding in order to distract from that fact.

[TheScienceFoundation]

@JMcH You have thus far failed to understand that a fusion is not a loss of information. You keep asserting your ignorance regarding 'an unpaired chromosome' when that's exactly the ignorance I'm trying to get to and correct through a basic education of genetics.

[JMcH]

@TheScienceFoundation - "but you're so biased you couldn't even recognize that a fusion of two chromosomes is not a loss of information."

See? I've never said any such thing. You're a flat-out liar.

[TheScienceFoundation]

@JMcH No, I'm the only one with valid points.  I tried to elaborate on the process from the beginning but you're so biased you couldn't even recognize that a fusion of two chromosomes is not a loss of information. It's not an attack, it's an unavoidable observation. 'the fact that you cannot account for the unpaired chromosome.'

I already have, this is an example of the ignorance I've been referring to.

[JMcH]

@TheScienceFoundation - No, see, you're the one with no valid points. Your attempt at a valid point is to falsely portray my position as saying fusion results in the loss of information. You fabricated that straw man from whole cloth. I never said any such thing. Will you admit that? I doubt it. You'll just continue to lay into me with the attack that I don't understand and am willfully ignorant in order to distract from the fact that you cannot account for the unpaired chromosome.