On 27/08/2014 9:09 AM, Jojo Iznart wrote:
In my previous existence here, Nigel and I engaged is quite a long discussion about evolution. We did it offline. At that time, I asked Nigel to provide evidence of what he considers to be "clear" proof of evolution. I don't believe he has satisfied that criteria.
Nothing would satisfy that criteria for people like Jojo.
A termite colony takes up residence in a 1000 year old dead tree trunk. A biologist walks by and catches a few termites for analysis. A scientific paper is published with the interest grabbing title "living termites carbon dated as 1000 years old!" Because of a few interesting examples like this Jojo writes off the entire discipline of radionuclide dating with all of its endless self-consistent and cross-discipline consistent results.
If you can't date at what time in the past various life forms lived and thus say which ones came before others, then what is left to say!? You may as well save your typing!
So, now, I would like to ask Nigel to provide the group with his best proof (genetic or otherwise) of evolution happenning. Not speculation of "maybe this", "maybe that", "this should happen", "that should happen" ...etc. Just clear simple proof of evolution that is observable. You see, sometimes many highly qualified people would infer from the data their interpretation of what the data means. This is what Nigel is doing. He is inferring that the genetic data "appears" to match Darwinian Evolution Theory. But Folks, we need to be circumspect enough to separate the fact from its interpretation. The fact is the fact, but interpretation of what that fact infers is just an opinion.
