Seeing that evotards are so dishonest and obtuse they keep perroting the same ole refuted nonsense it is time to revisit this post:
Main Entry: equiv·o·cate Evolution
Function: intransitive verb
Inflected Form(s): -cat·ed; -cat·ing
1 : to use equivocal language especially with intent to deceive
2 : to avoid committing oneself in what one says
has several meanings*:
1. Change over time; history of nature; any sequence of events in nature
2. Changes in the frequencies of alleles in the gene pool of a population
3. Limited common descent: the idea that particular groups of organisms have descended from a common ancestor.
4. The mechanisms responsible for the change required to produce limited descent with modification, chiefly natural selection acting on random variations or mutations.
5. Universal common descent: the idea that all organisms have descended from a single common ancestor.
6. “Blind watchmaker” thesis: the idea that all organisms have descended from common ancestors solely through an unguided, unintelligent, purposeless, material processes such as natural selection acting on random variations or mutations; that the mechanisms of natural selection, random variation and mutation, and perhaps other similarly naturalistic mechanisms, are completely sufficient to account for the appearance of design in living organisms.
With the above in mind it is easy to see that the theory of evolution is really a theory of equivocation
. That is any and all evidences for evolution 1-5 are always used as evidence for evolution #6.
For example- the varying beak of the finch, anti-biotic resistance in bacteria, and genetic similarities (including alleged shared mistakes but regardless of the physiological & anatomical differences), are all used as evidence for evolution #6.
It should also be noted that evolution #6, ie culled genetic accidents, does not produce any predictions beyond perhaps change and/ or stasis, nor is it objectively testable.
* page 136-37 of Darwinism, Design and Public Education
In October 2007 I posted a piece I called Equivocation and Evolution
, to highlight the blatant misrepresentation that evolutionists use in order to deceive anyone reading their comments.
This equivocation has now filtered into mechanisms- so called evolutionary mechanisms
1. As I have pointed out many times, evolution
is not being debated.
2. Evolutionary mechanisms
could very well be telic- ie designed, as in designed to evolve
, with genetic accidents being a small part of the scenario. See Dr Spetner's Not By Chance
And finally, as has been pointed out at least several thousand times, not one of the evolutionary mechanisms, nor any combination, has been demonstrated to do anything except provide slight, oscillating variations in an existing population.
Note: Page 67 of “The Edge of Evolution” Dr Behe has Table 4.1- Varieties of DNA Mutations
- substitution, deletion, insertion, inversion, gene duplication, genome duplication. IOW those evolutionary mechanisms are not ignored.
Let the evotard flailing begin...