Quote from: BADecker on August 15, 2018, 03:08:55 PM

Quote from: Astargath on August 15, 2018, 03:00:50 PM

Quote from: BADecker on August 15, 2018, 02:57:04 PM

Quote from: Astargath on August 15, 2018, 02:47:09 PM

''One of the important things that will need to be found to prove evolution is, two living creatures that are almost exactly the same, one of which has a mutation within it, to make it slightly better than the other one''
Here we go then, I just proved evolution to badecker:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/07/140731201531.htm

or
''Researchers at the U.S. Department of Energy's Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory have discovered the mechanism by which an extremely rare protein mutation shields people from cardiovascular disease''
There you go, tow living creatures that are almost the same (humans) one of which has a rare protein mutation that shields him from cardiovascular disease, we won boys, pack it up!

You forget that simply showing that these things exist isn't proving that they are evolution, especially evolution theory evolution. We haven't gotten deeply enough into the "programming" of the various forms of cause and effect using the various forms of physics that exist. The whole thing is very complex, and we simply don't know if we have discovered it all, so that we can make a correct judgement.

Why do I say this? Because everything in your link can fit a complex form of adaptation rather than evolution. And it can fit adaptation much easier and better. On top of that, C&E shows that it is programming rather than random anything, like random selection.

Evolution might be a fun story, but nobody has shown that it really exists. When you keep on saying that evolution is a reality after you have been clearly shown that you don't know, you are attempting to promote and further a hoax.

Evolution is a hoax.

Cool

''One of the important things that will need to be found to prove evolution is, two living creatures that are almost exactly the same, one of which has a mutation within it, to make it slightly better than the other one''

You clearly said it would, though. I provided the examples you asked for, now you are saying it doesn't prove evolution but you just said it would.

What? You are so silly. Now you want to base evolution on things that are said in this forum. How in the world more unreal can you get?

Where did you lose it? Was it in school? Were you so limited in your ability to think that the teacher made you wear a dunce cap in the corner, and now you don't care, because if you blab it, you totally think that it is correct?

You seem to be two-faced all in the same short post. You accept that I am saying a complete talk about evolution theory, you ignore parts of my post you don't like, you forget other parts of your own posts you have posted previously, etc. Isn't it kinda time you sat in your rocking chair out on the porch with granny?

How in the world much are they paying you to spout all your self-contradictory nonsense with nothing to back it? The way you do it doesn't even make you a reasonable troll.

Cool

So what does this mean ''One of the important things that will need to be found to prove evolution is, two living creatures that are almost exactly the same, one of which has a mutation within it, to make it slightly better than the other one'' ?