The Tuatha'an said:
[quote="Darck Marck":c6c4b]
Right, nice way to avoid saying what hasn't been observed. Half of your post is a product of you superiority complex as I see it.
Marck, lay off the personal attacks.
Let me simplify: Small changes do not prove that over millions of years these have let us say "accumulated" and produced a new creature.
So then tell us, Marck...what exactly do small changes over millions of years prove?
Especially if the original form of the life is uncomplex(kind of an oxymoron, but you know what I mean.).
Well, tell me what you mean by complex.
And then tell me what explains the order of fossils found in the geological column.
It is a guess, not one beyond a shadow of a dought a that. So, the guesses are still guesses, the evidence is still able to interpreted, the evolution claimed to have happened millions of years in process has still not been observed, and the evidence for important evolutionary ideas is still circumstancial. Well, you really didn't have to make my point for me, but thanks anyway.
Marck, asking a biologist to prove that over millions of years, small changes result in larger changes, is like asking a geologist to prove how mountains form over millions of years.
It's not a guess, it's a theory based on the evidence collected. So far, Marck, you haven't done a very good job of offering a counter explanation as to the evidence that hasn't been falsified.[/quote:c6c4b]
I wasn't attacking Syntax, just expressing an indirect observation. Besides, Syntax is more of a personal attacker, and he also doesn't like opinions that disagree with his own, although it seems the people is who he doesn't like. See? You'd most like likely say this was an attack, but I am just making, and expressing an observation. Now on to business....
Small changes over millions of years doesn't prove anything really. First, I see no evidence of microevolution having occurred for that long, and second, it may just indicate that small changes happen over millions of years.....perhaps. Although.....the possibility that microevolution over millions of years equals macroevolution is well, a possiblity, but then you have the multiple evidence problems.
As for life's complexity, I could just give a definition or more right now, but I don't think it needs to be defined....I see it as pointless for you, and possibly an arguement starter, and.....I've no care to start arguing over definitions, always useless in the face of opinions, and well, then no dought we'll start calling definitions into question regarding their validity. So....I'm not going to do it.
One more thing, and nice dodge with that 'asking to have small changes over millions of years proven is like asking a geologist to prove how mountains form over millions of years.' Not my problem. You can make predictions, guesses, educated guesses, interpret the evidence, what have you, but it isn't good enough for me, it gives me nothing. Except guesses. And I don't care for that. Show me abiogenesis, the full process of common descent, macroevolution, and that is it, you win. If you can't do it, well, not my problem.
I also, do not neccisarily dought that the TOE is a theory based on collected evidence, but I do dought whether the evidence is interpreted correctly, whether the study is unbiased, if some of the evidence is real, if the predictions/guesses are correct, and if definitions are accurate, appropriate, and correct.
