Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: GourmetDan
Paralogs are assumed and 'tracing' their 'common descent' is also assumed.

No, paralogs are deduced from their sequence. And their common descent can be traced by tracing the seqeunce of mutations from species to species, back to where they diverged.

Evolution doesn't predict anything, yet explains everything.

For example, evolution predicts the genetic structure of organisms we haven't even discovered yet.

It is unfalsifiable.

All you need is a rabbit in the Cambrian. Don't mistake 'unfalsifiable' for 'never falsified'. My wedding vows are breakable, but they have never been broken.

874 posted on 07/10/2006 10:22:54 AM PDT by DanDenDar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 856 | View Replies ]


To: DanDenDar

Nope, you are assuming that common descent is true and then 'deduce' this and 'trace' that.

It's all based on the assumption that common descent is true.

Evolution doesn't predict anything. You can't have a rabbit in the Cambrian because the presence of a rabbit means it isn't the Cambrian.

You do realize that fossil reworking most often explains 'older' fossils in 'younger' strata. Now, the only reason that happens is because it is easier to assume that 'older' strata existed first and was then eroded and the fossils became embedded in 'younger' strata than it is to admit that a 'younger' fossil is embedded in 'older' strata.

Or to admit that the strata really mean nothing at all.

Evolution has been falsified many times. It is the 'a priori' commitment to naturalism that keeps it alive.


887 posted on 07/11/2006 7:21:12 AM PDT by GourmetDan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 874 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson