When people question whether evolution happens, they are questioning whether variation and selection account for the diversity of life on Earth. For the purposes of that discussion, it doesn't matter if Darwin in his personal life kidnapped, killed, and ate babies. Ad hominem is a fallacy of irrelevancy. Your posts are ad hominem and irrelevant. That you like to scream about ad hominem if I characterize Lubenow as a Young Earth Idiot--how you missed that in his writing I can't imagine--just adds irony.
Darwin nailed it on the Origin of Species. For the purposes of kicking and screaming, you pretend to misunderstand how science is argued or even what is being taught in science class. More Creation Science lessons.
Common descent via variation and natural selection. There's a lot of evidence for it.
VadeRetro: "The history of life on Earth and the mechanisms of biology do not depend upon whether somebody's writings can be subjected to Twist and Shout Quote ScienceTM."
Asolutely, which is why I previously posted the items below.
Can you explain why dysfunctional change, the DNA code barrier, and natural selection - (which removes DNA information but does not add new information), wouldn't be critical flaws in the theory of macroevolution (Darwinianism) through gradual change, or do you believe they are?
The theory of biological evolution maintains that living things (plants, animals, humans, etc.) have descended with modifiction from shared common ancestors.
[1.] Macroevolution (Darwinianism) refers to large-scale changes - where one species transforms into another completely different species.
For example, birds are said to have evolved from dinosaurs.
This process would require the addition of new information to the genetic code. [DNA]
[NOTE: It is IMPOSSIBLE for "new information" to be naturally added to DNA, so that should end it right there for rational people who don't have an agenda.]
[1.-a] Gradualism refers to the theory that macroevolution proceeds through the slow and basically constant accumulation of many small changes in order to effect large changes. This theory predicts that the fossil record would provide abundant evidence of intermediary life forms as one species is progressively transformed into another.]
[2.] Microevolution refers to changes in the gene expressions of a given type of organism but does not produce a completely different species. This is perfectly normal and natural and is indeed what occurs.
For example, through selective breeding, dogs ranging from Great Danes to Chihuahuas have been produced from wolves. That process doesn't require new information because the changes are a function of the genetic makeup [DNA] already present in the gene pool of the species. [Note: No "new information" in the DNA is needed].
The general public seems blithely unaware that no transitions from one species to another [known as macroevolution / Darwinianism) exist, even though it is common knowledge among paleontologists. That's why novel theories ---[ involving Archaeopteryx (false links between reptiles and birds), pro-avises (pure figment of someone's imagination;science fiction), and punctuated equilibrium (a new species appears all at once fully formed aka the theory of the "hopeful monster") ]--- are constantly "evolving".