The Central Flaw of Evolution

Take a look at the fossil record. Find a single fossil that is out of order. Evolution is true because the theory predicted literally billions of independent data points that we have found and are still finding in ever larger numbers, that line up with it perfectly and without exception. The fossil record, and especially DNA analysis of living species, shows that evolution definitely happened, and is still happening.

 

Here's something on peer review.

https://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j22_1/j22_1_44-49.pdf

 

Whenever viruses mutate they always lose information not gain any.

 

has it been peer reviewed?

 

And you know this how?

 

Give an example and I'll show you.

 

Proclamations made by creationists regarding science never fail to amuse me.

 

When a virus mutates to become resistant to antiviral medicine, how is that a loss of information? When the swine flu or avian flu virus mutates so it can infect humans, how is that a loss of information?

 

Peer reviewed articles are not just vetted by scientific peers. They include dozens and sometimes hundreds of citations and research from other peer reviewed work than span decades. Are there some bad apples, sure like in anything. However the scientific community use far more due diligence than probably any other community. Scientists constantly question, constantly build on and constantly learn and innovate. That leaves a lot of room for corrections and refinements. "Peer reviewed" Creationist journals?! You bet I'm going to look at some of those later. Sounds like a bunch of crap to be honest. They rob ably couldn't get into science journals because they incorporate zero science...

 

Proof?

 

They lose the part that antibiotics latch on to. Under normal conditions they are actually inferior to there non mutated counterparts. It'll be like Russia handcuffing POWs dragging them out to kill them, but you don't have any arms, so they can't handcuff you. While its benificial for the moment it's not for the long term.

 

http://www.icr.org/article/evolution-antibiotic-resistance/

 

You are in a Circular web of Apologetics links, Not science.
ICR 'backing' AIG 'backing' Harun Yahya.
Like
Rense.com 'backing' whatreallyhappened 'backing' prisonplanet.

You also are unable to deal with simple points of logic, and just Dump up one of those goofy links when confronted.
+

 

You have that exactly backwards. It's not the virus that looses the ability to latch on, it's the antiviral that has lost this ability. The virus has actually "gained information" about the antiviral that it didn't have before.

You need to work on your metaphors, because this makes absolutely no sense. Unlike your imaginary Russians, the mutated virus still has the ability to kill it's host.

 

Huh?

How about you give the example to illustrate your claim? You got that a bit bass ackwards.

 

Not sure how an article about bacterial resistance has anything to do with viruses losing information when they mutate, though I realize you do not understand what a mutation is or how DNA works.

 

The first site is almost unreadable. Using Newsweek surveys with different criteria as evidence is kind of weak. Another set of crackpots. (that and who uses that kind of web formatting--very unprofessional and hard to read)

The second site has security issues. Just shows that it's a bunch of crackpots.

- - - Updated - - -

Evidence for the above contention?

I'd like to see something in a peer-reviewed professional journal, not your crackpot creationist garbage.

 

Ok, you provide a link showing what happens then.

- - - Updated - - -

I did above.

- - - Updated - - -

Then prove them wrong.

 

I'm a little rusty on viruses but I thought the reason they don't give you anything for a cold (a virus if I'm not mistaken) because antibiotics never worked on them in the first place. Anyway here's an article about viruses.

https://answersingenesis.org/natural-selection/antibiotic-resistance/

 

http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblo...nks-human-ear-to-prehistoric-reptile-jaw.html

http://www.ibtimes.com/scientists-s...first-time-unveiling-evolution-secrets-307672

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v477/n7366/full/nature10390.html

http://www2.hawaii.edu/~pine/book1qts/embryo-compare.html

 

BTW, you'll notice from almost all Creationists that their modus operandi is to try to "poke holes in Evolution"....


not tell you THEIR theory for the development of life on Earth or the Rise of Man.


And everybody knows why.

 

The OP is based upon the old debunked allegation that separate species cannot evolve from existing species even though the common DNA is clear evidence.

Throwbacks, like birds with reptile teeth, are hard evidence that evolution has been proven to the satisfaction of all but those with a vested interest in theism.

Even our own conception from individual cells into what we are today follows the same evolutionary stages during gestation.

 

Hello????!!!!!! You are the one that made the definitive statement as if fact. So can you provide a link to demonstrate that you know what you are talking about?


Perhaps this will inform you a bit more.

http://www.tufts.edu/med/apua/about_issue/about_antibioticres.shtml

 

From your own link it says this:

So we're both right. The main point is either one loses a trait.

 

The first picture has been proven fraud for over a hundred years.