[central_va]

Feel free to enlighten me by providing links to the original research reports, and post the statistical analyses which demonstrate that the observations and analyses in the reports are mistaken.

I will explain this like you were a 3 year old. Turn off all the bullcrap you learned in university for one minute. And listen to me. You are not the only person who has studied math and science around here. You are not special. The fact that the evolutionists identify specific species both extinct and living disproves the theory of evolution. THe theory is self destroying. What I am saying is that evolution thru natural selection should be a smooth linear process and identifying specific species through genetics should be theoretically impossible. The genetic code for a species should be unidentifiable say to the family level as all species are in continual evolution, right? And no I don't think the earth is 5,000 years old so don't go their. Your mind has been closed by your "education".

[exDemMom]

I will explain this like you were a 3 year old. Turn off all the bullcrap you learned in university for one minute. And listen to me. You are not the only person who has studied math and science around here. You are not special. The fact that the evolutionists identify specific species both extinct and living disproves the theory of evolution. THe theory is self destroying. What I am saying is that evolution thru natural selection should be a smooth linear process and identifying specific species through genetics should be theoretically impossible. The genetic code for a species should be unidentifiable say to the family level as all species are in continual evolution, right? And no I don't think the earth is 5,000 years old so don't go their. Your mind has been closed by your "education".

Sorry, but majoring in math or statistics does not qualify anyone as an expert in any life science. Therefore, claiming that such a background makes one as qualified to speak about such a topic as someone who studied life sciences exclusively for several years is unjustified.

Do you have any idea of the natural spontaneous mutation rate of DNA? Any idea of how often the repair enzymes fail to correctly repair those spontaneous mutations? How does the incorrect repair rate compare between humans, bacteria, yeast, viruses, etc.? Are those topics even mentioned in statistics courses? How many times have you downloaded the DNA sequence for a specific protein and compared it across dozens of species to generate a phylogenetic tree that tells you about the evolutionary relationships between the different species? Is that a function of the SPSS software used by many statisticians? You don't specify exactly how the fact that evidence of both extinct and living species negates the theory of evolution, nor explained how the theory is "self-destroying". Nor did you specify why I shouldn't expect to be able to identify a species through genetic sequences. If you're going to make such assertions, you need to back them up with some sort of logical/factual explanations.