kent hovind now promoting evolution as fact???? - Page 1

yes that is correct, see for yourself;

[sigh]  So?? You take a university education in the life sciences anywhere else but the Bible Belt in the States, and that's what you will be taught. Personally, I believe something (someone) guided evolution, but I do not for one minute question that evolution DID take place, and is STILL taking place, as animals adapt to changing conditions. We'd be dead, too, without that ability to adapt to our environment.

Maybe his prison term is doing him good, as he is finally getting the time to study from reliable resources, instead of the crap put out by the diploma-mill fundamentalist 'colleges' he attended!

SS you are free to believe what you want, when it comes to manipulating the public to gain money from them and power over them including children i think we should as a default position stick with what we can prove by experiment and verified by anyone who chooses to do so, call me difficult and strike me purple.

Sunsilver wrote: "I believe something (someone) guided evolution" "as animals adapt to changing conditions"


I would have to disagree in regards someone guided evolution, or reality by mechanisim of evolution called "natural selection" in which it has no evolutionary power except ONLY in people's imagantions; no one has ever produced a species by the mechanisms of natural selection. No one has ever got near it, and most of the current argument in neo-Darwinism is about this question. When it was clear mechanism of natural selection propose by Darwin had no evolutionary power. Evolutionist had to make fundamental change in the theory; in edition to the concept of natural selection they added second mechanism called mutation. Mutations are alterations or distortions that take place in the DNA of living beings, mostly as the result of the external effects such as radiations or chemical action. The theory of evolution now holds that living things are differentiated from one another and develop of the result of the mutations. This cannot be true, for mutations only damage the information in the DNA and give only harm to living being; no beneficial mutation has yet been observed either in nature or in laboratories, since mutations do not add new genetic information, it is impossible for living beings to acquire new organs through mutations.
 

clever bit of photoshopping there, Red Sable.

Shtal, stop shoveling the crap. You obviously have NO idea what you're talking about!

I studied science in university for four years. Even back in those days, they were able to replicate how certain species formed. For example, the plant we know as wheat (the sort we get our bread from) came from the crossing of 3 different species of grass. The genomes are still there in the plant, and have been compared to the original species. Scientists then took the original species and managed to duplicate the speciation, creating a plant that looked like primitive bread wheat.

If I were still teaching biology, no doubt I'd be able to give lots of other examples of newer discoveries that have been made since I graduated in the late 1970's.

I'm going easy on you, and am only pointing out the most serious error in you post above. There are lots more. For instance, mutations occur nearly every time a cell divides. Bits of DNA, especially those at the end of the chromosomes, get swapped around. It has NOTHING to do with radiation or chemicals in the environment, though those, too, can cause mutations.

You need to read some real books on science, instead of listening to the drivel being spouted by the Creationist lobby. Some of it will blow your mind!

New studies in genetics, and the ability to map entire genomes has me fascinated. I wish I could go back and take my degree all over again! 

Photoshopping where?  Seriously, there is much proof out there.  I just picked two videos of many.  Look it up. :)

Actually RS, you should look it up, they're hoaxes.

Sunsilver, it seems to me this subject is a bit touchy to you, but I think you are confused and need to go back and study. No one has ever observed macro evolution, period. Evolutionist always look at variations within the kind or other definition micro evolution, sure I agree micro evolution happens but it has limits and it doesn't go any further except only in people's imaginations.

When I was a little kid, I could see the profound correlation between evolution and embryonic development ( from the single cell through the stages of developing embryo/ evolution). Also, the universe seems to be duplicated in micro in a cell and all the way down to the atom.