Who Is Your Creator message forum

 

Who Is Your Creator message forum
This Forum is Locked
Author
Comment
View Entire Thread
Is there something new?

Which topic is new and one that we haven't covered before?

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Replying to:

You ignored the transitional nature of Ambulocetus in my last post. It has been pretty typical of your responses. As though a couple of out-of-context quotes could counter the scientific data supporting the whale transitional sequence.

One example from today

Multiple SINE transposons that support the common ancestry of whales with hippos and ruminants. And like all the other evidence for the whale series, you couldn't present a creationist explanation for this occurance. With three shared and the other multiple lines of evidence common descent of these creatures becomes much stronger.

Did you forget I did respond twice, and you responded only 45 minutes before your tirade?

This is my response from a earlier posting on this very thread.

From: http://pub17.bravenet.com/forum/1424646898/fetch/727123/1
In regard to your comment:

"More specifically, three different specific SINE transpositions have been found in the same chromosomal locations of cetaceans (whales), hippos, and ruminants, all of which are closely related according to the standard phylogenetic tree. However, all other mammals, including camels and pigs, lack these three specific transpositions (Shimamura 1997)."
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section4.html

Please refer to contradictory scientific evidence:

"These results have major repercussions for phylogenetic analyses based on SINE insertions, indicating the need for caution when one concludes that the existence of a SINE at a specific locus in multiple individuals is indicative of common ancestry. Although independent insertions at the same locus may be rare, SINE insertions are not homoplasy-free phylogenetic markers."

From 'Genetics' June 2001 158(2) 769-777 published by Genetics Society of America:
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pmcentrez&artid=1461688&rendertype=abstract

Would you like to contact talkorigins to have them update their 'scientific' website?

Re: Did you forget I did respond twice, and you responded only 45 minutes before your tirade?

We weren't talking about analysis based on SINE insertions. We were talking about endogenous retrovirii being found in the same location among multiple species. SINE insertions are a different class of retrotransposons. One considerably less complex than ERVs. You might count this article as a response, but it really doesn't address the issue at hand.

You could try something new?

Actually engaging in debate about the specific evidence of the whale sequence instead of trying to avoid a debate. I can understand why you don't. The case for the whale sequence has multiple fossils that show a graduated change in characteristics over time. These characteristics show increasing adaptation to life in the oceans from the earliest terrestrial whales to the obligate marine creature we see today.

Postings like these will be deleted from now on

You must have forgotten about this.

From: http://pub17.bravenet.com/forum/1424646898/fetch/726906/1

"This forum is for creationists to present a critical analysis of the theory of evolution and for evolutionists to defend it.

Because evolution is claimed to be a scientific fact, the burden of proof is on evolutionists. Since you have NOT made your case yet, offering EVIDENCE instead of your insensate whinning is the only thing that will save your theory.

If you wish to start a thread with some evidence to prove your theory, go ahead. Otherwise, I will delete any postings without specific points.

If you don't like it, go play somewhere else."

Re: Postings like these will be deleted from now on

WiYC said:
"You must have forgotten about this.

From: http://pub17.bravenet.com/forum/1424646898/fetch/726906/1

"This forum is for creationists to present a critical analysis of the theory of evolution and for evolutionists to defend it."

Like so much of this forum, you have deleted that post. Interesting. I have shown you how your critical analysis just doesn't hold up. You don't want to talk about the actual evidence.

"Because evolution is claimed to be a scientific fact, the burden of proof is on evolutionists. Since you have NOT made your case yet, offering EVIDENCE instead of your insensate whinning is the only thing that will save your theory."

I have given you evidence and corrected your misconceptions about whale evolution. I am not the one deleting posts. You are the one that seems to whine about when you can't refute the truth of evolution. I have posted things more than once because you never responded to them the first time around. Not whining, just stating the facts. Of course when it is pointed out that you can't hold your own, you start deleting posts.