You simply don't get it. In order for one species to mutate into another species, there must be an evolutionary process during the life of the creature. Selective mating and environmental adaptation does not explain the leap from one species to another.
Here is your hard science:
many of those snapshots appear to fall along a continuum of change from one species to another.
Genetic similarites across different forms of life is explained most simply by common ancestry
None of your rhetoric actually explains the leap from one species to the next. It is purely observation of similarities and speculation about origins. The "evidence" that you are citing is nothing more an attempt to support a conclusion that evolution explains our existance.. This conclusion is not based on anything except similarities and observations.
Please to explain how an explosion resulted in this:
Cells are the fundamental working units of every living system. All the instructions needed to direct their activities are contained within the chemical DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid).
DNA from all organisms is made up of the same chemical and physical components. The DNA sequence is the particular side-by-side arrangement of bases along the DNA strand (e.g., ATTCCGGA). This order spells out the exact instructions required to create a particular organism with its own unique traits.
The genome is an organism’s complete set of DNA. Genomes vary widely in size: the smallest known genome for a free-living organism (a bacterium) contains about 600,000 DNA base pairs, while human and mouse genomes have some 3 billion. Except for mature red blood cells, all human cells contain a complete genome.
DNA in the human genome is arranged into 24 distinct chromosomes--physically separate molecules that range in length from about 50 million to 250 million base pairs. A few types of major chromosomal abnormalities, including missing or extra copies or gross breaks and rejoinings (translocations), can be detected by microscopic examination. Most changes in DNA, however, are more subtle and require a closer analysis of the DNA molecule to find perhaps single-base differences.
Each chromosome contains many genes, the basic physical and functional units of heredity. Genes are specific sequences of bases that encode instructions on how to make proteins. Genes comprise only about 2% of the human genome; the remainder consists of noncoding regions, whose functions may include providing chromosomal structural integrity and regulating where, when, and in what quantity proteins are made. The human genome is estimated to contain 20,000-25,000 genes.
In your world, all of this had to happen by chance in order for the first living cell to replicate itself. The leap from that one cell to our existance is unfathomable.
Take a good hard look at the world we live in: the environment that fosters us; the abundant variety of food; human emotions such as love and hate; intelligence and reason; good and evil; pets to comfort us and horses to ride; game to hunt and oceans to fish in; mountains to climb; trees that provide oxygen to breathe and wood to make paper and build shelter for people and livestock; the sun to warm us and provide UV light for plants that grow fibers that we use to create fabric to wear; minerals and fossil fuels that allow us to build cars to drive; electricity to power our homes; fire to warm us on a cold night; freon to cool us on a hot day. The pieces of this puzzle are endless, and they cannot be explained by random chance and selective mating habits beginning with a single-celled organism in a pool of prehistoric muck.
If you believe this is all an accident, and not of intelligent design, then there's nothing anybody can do to help you. Maybe someday, when you are faced with your own mortality, you will see the error of your twisted scientific logic. Maybe someday God will find you just as He found me. And give this some thought: the consequence of you being wrong is infinitely greater than the consequence of me being wrong. Exactly how confident are you in your scientific theories?
You are utterly wrong about this, both logically, and factually with regard to evolutionary theory. The only two required evolutionary processes during the life of an individual creature are (1) during gametogenesis, which has NO impact on the expressed traits of the individual organism; and (2) reproduction, which is affected by existing traits, but also does not affect the expressed traits of the individual.
Selective mating and environmental adaptation does not explain the leap from one species to another.
You again reveal your ignorance of evolutionary concepts by your use of the word "leap". You don't realize it yet, but with every post you reveal that you do not understand evolutionary concepts.
None of your rhetoric actually explains the leap from one species to the next. It is purely observation of similarities and speculation about origins.
First, those observations of genetic similarities are striking and persuasive. Second, that is not the only evidence, as I put in my previous posts, but you left out of your response. There is the observed fact of space-time continuity. There is the observed fact of offspring being different than parents. There is the observed fact of genetic changes from generation to generation. There is the observed fact of environmental influence upon genetic expression in populations. One merely adds to this the snapshots available in the fossil record showing temporal changes in organisms over vast periods of time.
I don't understand why I went to the trouble of denumerating so many facts, and you then ignored most of them. It is as though you are avoiding something--like you've been struck with intellectual blinders.
The "evidence" that you are citing is nothing more an attempt to support a conclusion that evolution explains our existance.. This conclusion is not based on anything except similarities and observations.
Of course not. The evidence exists. Genetics, experimental evolution, biology, physics, chemistry, geology, the fossil record, all present the evidence I described to you and much more. How is all of the available evidence best explained? Together it is all just screaming "natural selection!"
I *again* ask you, how would you best explain all of these observations?
Please to explain how an explosion resulted in this:
First, what "explosion" are you talking about? I thought we were discussing evolution. Second, you needn't cut & paste such long passages. My education includes general biology, genetics, cellular biology, molecular biology, biochemistry, animal & human biology and physiology. This is not to say I'm an authority, but so often I wind up arguing with people who paste long passages of other people's words. Feel free to use key words and shortcuts. And please, show your own understanding by using your own words.
In your world, all of this had to happen by chance in order for the first living cell to replicate itself.
You clearly don't know "my world". I conceive of no probability model to describe how the first living cell replicated itself.
The leap from that one cell to our existance is unfathomable.
I can tell it hasn't been fathomed by you. Nature is not constrained by your own particular intellectual limitations.
The pieces of this puzzle are endless, and they cannot be explained by random chance and selective mating habits beginning with a single-celled organism in a pool of prehistoric muck.
Again, it is you, not me, suggesting some sort of probability model for all of those things. But at any rate, you say they cannot be explained such. How do you know? Are you suggesting that you have a better explanation? What is it?
If you believe this is all an accident, and not of intelligent design, then there's nothing anybody can do to help you.
Oh, I see. You hold a false dichotomy that existence is either "random" or by intelligent design. You should know that deterministic theories about various things, without appeal to intelligent design, are quite common.
Maybe someday, when you are faced with your own mortality, you will see the error of your twisted scientific logic.
What does that have to do with truth? Are you saying that people think clearer when faced with death? Do you have evidence for that claim?
Maybe someday God will find you just as He found me.
My friend, I can say one thing--you are wrong about much of what you have posted to me on this thread. If there are acorporal voices telling you these false things, I promise you, it is not from a friendly entity.
And give this some thought: the consequence of you being wrong is infinitely greater than the consequence of me being wrong.
Do you base all of your knowledge upon an appeal to consequences? And you accuse me of "twisted...logic"?
Exactly how confident are you in your scientific theories?
I can only say that evolutionary science today does provide the most rational explanation of all currently available evidence. It does, in fact, put itself at the mercy of evidence, and so as we observe more, evolutionary science will change as necessary to incorporate it.
Finally, I am of course not unfamiliar with your beliefs. You won't like what follows. You have been taken in by a group that tells you that unless you believe their particular modern twist on Christianity, you are a bad person and will likely be cast into some torment when you die. They have captured your mind with fear, peer pressure, and an overwhelming supply of factually incorrect rhetoric and literature. Neither Christianity nor your everlasting soul are dependent upon their false proclaimations. I hope you can free your mind from their clutches, since they stifle in you useful ways of understanding the world which can contribute to a very stimulating intellectual life.