Serial hoaxer Charles Dawson faked the Piltdown evidence, he was not a scientist but probably was affiliated with the Church of England. Scientists debunked it, a good example of self-correcting science from before the information age. It was over in 1953, not 2016, more evidence that all your premises are wrong.

I pity you. 🥹 You are overwhelmed by NON EXISITING IMAGINARY evidence for evolution! 😂😂😂 Why didn't you go to school to get your arse whipped? 😂😂😂

@@Dr.Overload994 here is a short list of evidence for evolution, I expect a point-by-point cogent rebuttal:. Some examples: Transitional fossils Archeopteryx, Tiktaalik, Ambulocetus, Australopithicus Afarensis, Homo Erectus, Lokiearcheota, Pikaia, Cloudina, Haikouella, Saccorhytus Coronarius, shared human DNA with bonobos = 98.5%, fusion on human chromosome #2, endogenous retroviral insertion points, vestigial structures, nested hierarchies, atavisms (such as mentioned in this video). Your turn.Try not to make the usual mess of it.

That was a long fart, creatarded incel shill.

“No fossil is buried with its birth certificate,” wrote the renowned science editor Henry Gee in his 2000 treatise, In Search of Deep Time. While true, fossils are buried with plenty of clues that allow us to reconstruct their history. An array of absolute dating techniques has made it possible to establish the timescale of Earth’s history, including the age and origin of life, the timing of mass extinctions and the record of human evolution. (courtesy of the Smithsonian Institute magazine)

@@ergonomover Biased inference and gross extrapolations by 'evolutionists' isn't credible scientific method. Thanks for confirming that you have no regular employment or career by being here all around the clock. No wonder you have to take whatever shill work you can get as being part of rent a mob. When your funding runs out so will you.

@@bigbabatunde1218 Actually, we use 5 different radio-metric dating techniques to measure the age of the Earth, which is supported by the age of distant starlight - Earth's protracted history is measured by dozens of natural clocks. The anti-science bias is all coming from you. Thanks for confirming you have lost every argument and now stoop to personal attacks / innuendo. I've no illusions of changing your mind, but it's a public forum, science is worth defending that much (free of charge, for no tangible reward) for some people.

@@ergonomover Again..... Biased inference and gross extrapolations by 'evolutionists' is not credible scientific method. It's ideological group think. Even George Orwell knew about the fifth column types that populate and run universities back in his day and that continues today. You obviously haven't the faintest knowledge about how cells work to blurt out what you blurt out as you're completely unaware of the genetic impossibility of 'evolution' as taught by 'evolutionists' and your total ignorance and waving away of the origin of life needed for 'evolution' to then allegedly take effect. Your ignorance regarding cellular mechanisms such as those observed in cell division and damage clearance to maintain healthy cells confirms your 'pseudo science', shill for hire approach. You're well trounced. Thanks for confirming that you're an unemployed shill for hire by being here day and night.

And yet there are 37 SPECIES of cats. U think tabby to tiger is just 'variation' U smarmy tw@t.

Other's may 'pity' you if you have never encountered the growing amount of dissenting voices from within the scientific community as to their problematic guess work backfiring on them. Are you aware of anything outside of your troll farm?

@@bigbabatunde1218 Working hard for the creationist shill mill? The Discovery Institute's list of dissenters never grew past 1000 signatures, and the statement they signed only said they are sceptical. Scepticism is part and parcel of the scientific method. 1000 is about 0.03% of scientists, what is growing is acceptance of evolution in the USA, up over 50%, while church attendance has fallen to under 50%, the tide is turning.

@@bigbabatunde1218 Oh yes, we all know all about your list of _"dissenting voices",_ which numbers under one thousand, few of whom were actual biologists, who were asked a misleading question about whether they questioned the Darwinian model of evolution (150 years out of date), NOT if they questioned evolution as such. Many who found out that the list was being used by creationists to misrepresent them, demanded their names be removed, which has never been done. So to get a list of _"dissenting voices"_ it was necessary for creationists to deceive people, then refuse to rectify this when they were found out. If you want to see a troll, look in the mirror.

​@@bigbabatunde1218 How much is the Discovery Institute paying U, incel shill? A cent per rtrd'd comment? I guess that supplements Ur assistant janitor paycheck.

They say we cannot post evidence, and then when we do, they scamper away only to come back with more bare-faced assertions hoping they will stick this time.

​​@@ergonomover Agreed. I think you're right. This is someone we've encountered before. Remember the user 'David'? Same flawed claims and weak arguments. Sam Fey and Bigbabatunde are obviously the same troll.

​@@FlandiddlyandersFRS'evidence' that you cannot post for some reason. Why do you think that is? Saying it a million times over doesn't help you and neither does your reality denying double down.

​@@robertmcmillan3638 Your embarrassing inability to comprehend the evidence is your problem, not mine.

@@FlandiddlyandersFRS Your embarrassing inability to post any evidence makes you no good to man or beast. Your problem not mine.

Intelligent Design was debunked 20 years ago. Do try and keep up, child.

And yet I gave you evidence that all living things on earth ARE related, which you were unable to explain.

1. Intelligent Design is nothing more than creation science with a cheap lab coat. The exact same definition is used for both. 2. While ID proponents claim it is scientific and NOT religious in nature, internal documents at the Discovery Institute clearly identify the "designer" as the god of the Christian bible. 3. In the Dover Trial "Dr" Micheal Behe admitted that if the definition of science were changed enough for ID to meet that definition, astrology would also meet that definition. 4. ID fails the first test of science by invoking a causal agent for which there is absolutely no testable evidence, namely the "Intelligent Designer" or god. 5. ID is an assertion for which there is NO supporting evidence and NO scientific merit.

​@@FlandiddlyandersFRS'Debunked' by who? You? 😂🤣🤣🤣😆🍿🙂🍿

​@@TheHairyHeathenYou keep saying that you have posted evidence. But we only have your word for it as there's no evidence filled posts here from you.

All around you.

I posted evidence which you were unable to refute. BTW, you claiming _"Nuh ah"_ is not a refutation.

Neither of you two have posted anything but shit here. Address what was posted. Other people can see this you know. If you're still doing this tomorrow (Monday) then you're beyond being a sad attention seeker.

1. ERV markers are non coding sequences of DNA inserted into the genome of host organisms by viruses. These markers are inserted at random and are used by the virus to take over the cell and produce more viruses. Humans and chimps share over 200 ERV markes that are in the same locations in both genomes and have the same content. The ONLY feasible way for this to happen is for our species to have a common ancestor that also had these 200+ ERV markers. 2. Almost all mammals produce the Vitamin C they require. Humans have the gene to produce Vitamin C but there is a single bit error in the gene that renders it useless. The only other mammals that have this error are the members of the primate sub-order Haplorhini; Tarsiers, New World Monkeys (Platyrrhini) and Old World Monkeys (Catarrhini) including the family Hominidae (humans and other apes). 3. Most mammals do not see in 3 colors. The gene that allows humans to see yellows, blues and reds is only found in one group of animals, primates of which we are a member species. Some 40 million years ago a gene duplication mutation occurred doubling the OPN1MW gene sensitive to the yellow/green section of the light spectrum and a later mutation of this resulted in the OPN1LW gene that enables primates having this to see the color red. This mutation is unique to primates and as a primate, we too have this form of color vision. 4. Valid Scientific Theories can be used to make predictions. Darwin noted that the bones in the wings of birds resembled the fused finger bones of other animals so he predicted that fossil bird would be found with unfused finger bones. Less than 5 years later, archaeopteryx was found with feathers, a long bony tail like a dinosaur, teeth and unfused finger bones in the wing. 5. Dr Neil Shubin wanted to find an early fish that could crawl up onto land. Eusthenopteron of 385 million years ago was similar to the later Acanthostega of 365 million years ago but there was too much difference for there not to be an intermediate species so he looked for exposed sedimentary rock of the right type and age and found this in the Canadian Arctic on Ellesmere Island and found the intermediate species that was then named Tiktaalik. 6. The human and chimp genomes have been compared and the two are over 98% the same. More over, where there are differences the are those genes that enable brain development, different hair growth, language development. 7. The fact that new medicines have been tested on animals for side effects and efficacy shows that the underlying biological systems are biologically similar and therefore related however distantly. 8. Embryology hints at the Evolutionary history of species with snakes developing limb buds in the early stages of development that then get reabsorbed. We have the fossils of primitive snake that have vestigial legs that extend beyond the body of the snake and it is a regular "birth defect" in snakes to have non functioning legs. 9 Whales evolved over the past 55 million years from land animals. This is shown through the fossil record that start with Pakicetus that was identified as the precursor to the whale lineage by the presence of an S shaped bone in the skull of Pakicetus that is unique to whales as well as an unusual double tendon arrangement on the limbs of Pakicetus and is still found in the flippers of modern whales. Neither of these features are found in any other animals. It is also noted that by comparing the genomes of many species, the closest living relative of whales is the hippo, another aquatic mammal. 10.Genomes contain non functioning genes called pseudogenes. Mammals, including humans have the gene to produce egg yolk due to the fact that we evolved from egg laying ancestors some 100 million years ago. 11. Birds are descended from and are a living branch of dinosaurs. We have found many dinosaur fossils with the imprints of feathers preserved, even dinos that were too heavy to ever fly. Even the velociraptor of "Jurassic Park" fame has been shown to have the anchor points on the bone of its fore limbs of feathers indistinguishable from the same bumps found in eagles or geese. This case is further reinforced by the fact that chickens still have the DNA for a long bony tail like a dinosaur. 12. Characteristics of animals and plants are strictly divided by phylogeny. Only birds have gullets, feathers and beaks, features that have all been identified in dinosaurs. Only mammals have lactation glands and hair. Only reptiles and snakes of land animals are cold blooded. 13. The creationist's cry that there are no transitional species found is an outright lie. 14. "The story is this. At some time after the separation of the human and chimpanzee lineages, two ancestral chromosomes, #12 and #13 in the chimpanzee, fused end-to-end to form a single chromosome, #2, in humans. Chimpanzee chromosome 13 forms the short arm (2p) and part of the long arm (2q) of human chromosome 2, while chimpanzee chromosome 12 forms most of the long arm (2q) of chromosome 2. The primary evidence for this fusion is the comparative genetic content of these chromosomes. That is, most of the genes in chimpanzee chromosome 13 are found in human 2p, and most of the genes in chimpanzee chromosome 12 are in human 2q. The chromatin binding patterns line up, the sequence analysis confirms, and there have been some lovely FISH studies that show the correspondence. What has since been done is that a prediction was made that there ought to be fragments of telomeres (the end caps of chromosomes) in the middle of chromosome 2, at the fusion site. Which has been examined. And the prediction has been confirmed.

​@@walkergaryaEndogenous retroviruses found in various species are bits of dna found inside an organism’s genome that looks like a retrovirus. 'Evolutionists' claim that these are 'junk' sequences that came from past viral dna despite the lack of supporting evidence for this then the likelihood that alleged ancient 'ape like ancestors' passed this on to their 'evolutionary' offspring is not probable or high when a shared common environment between many co existing species in the past is a more reasonable conclusion to come to. Shared similarities doesn't equate to shared common ancestry. Those sequences aren't even 'junk’ or viruses. Endogenous retroviruses could be evidence of common design as well as shared environment but are certainly not evidence for common descent. They should certainly no longer be touted as the ‘smoking gun’ that proves ape to human evolution. Up to 80% of human endogenous retroviruses are transcribed non randomly, therefore strongly suggesting a functional role. Thousands of endogenous retrovirus derived sequences are associated with cell type specific expression of neighbouring genes allegedly. More and more examples of viral sequences that have some kind of function in human cells. For example, many endogenous retrovirus sequences play a role in human gene regulation so are functional. They are there for a reason, and so are highly unlikely to have come from retroviruses, unless you want to reclassify what you think a virus is and what it's for? Which if true makes 'evolutionists' entire endogenous retroviruses argument null and void. And if thousands of endogenous retroviruses really were inserted by retroviruses, the body’s own apoptosis defense mechanisms should have dealt with most of them long ago. Why we allegedly still have so many endogenous retroviruses (allegedly) suggests they were not caused by past viruses and aren't an 'evolutionary' leftover. * *"Every palaeontologist knows that most species don’t change. That’s bothersome....brings terrible distress.... They may get a little bigger or bumpier but they remain the same species and that’s not due to imperfection and gaps, but stasis. And yet this remarkable stasis has generally been ignored as no data. If they don’t change, its not evolution, so you don’t talk about it.”* And *"The absence of fossil evidence for intermediary stages between major transitions in organic design, indeed our inability, even in our imagination, to construct functional intermediates in many cases, has been a persistent and nagging problem for gradualist accounts of evolution.".* Stephen J Gould. Pick the bones out of that 🤡🍿🙂🍿

Here's one from Patterson's textbook "Evolution" "evolution is about what Darwin called 'descent with modification'--it concerns the idea of common or shared ancestry and the belief that all species are related by descent. I think that belief is now confirmed as completely as anything can be in the historical sciences." Perhaps not the ancestor of all birds, but Archeopteryx has transitional features that are hard to deny. A long bony tail, teeth, 3-digit hands, no modern bird has any of those (maybe one species with fingers). It had feathered arms for powered flight, totally uncommon in land lizards. Your quote is from a pirated recording of a closed conference of systemics experts? Do you even care that it is taken out of context?

Archaeopteryx shows a blend of theropod dinosaur and avian traits. Long bony tail, no breast bone keel, unfused finger bones in the wing and fully formed feathers. This very much what we would expect a species to look like in the transition from small theropod dinosaurs and avian dinosaurs. This is not a "made up story" like those found in the bible, this is based on evidence.

​@@walkergaryaDon't tell me what Dr Colin Patterson said, *"Is Archaeopteryx the ancestor of all birds? Perhaps yes, perhaps no. There is no way of answering the question. It is easy enough to make up stories of how one form gave rise to another and to find reasons why the stages should be favoured by natural selection. But such stories are not part of science for there is no way to put them to the test."* Dr Colin Patterson a former Senior Paleontologist at the Museum of Natural History. DID YOU GET THAT? So WHY do the "evolution" obsessed scientific community STILL teach that Archaeopteryx is the ancestor of birds? Also, Dr Patterson on record as saying..... *"Fossils may tell us many things but one thing that they can never disclose is wether they are ancestors of anything else."* Dr Colin Patterson. During a public lecture Dr Patterson dropped a bombshell among his peers who in turn became very angry and emotional as a result. Here are some extracts from what he said: *"....I’m speaking on two subjects, evolutionism and creationism, and I believe it’s true to say that I know nothing whatever about either.... One of the reasons I started taking this anti evolutionary view, well, let’s call it non evolutionary, was last year I had a sudden realisation. One morning I woke up.... and it struck me that I had been working on this stuff (evolution) for twenty years and there was not one thing I knew about it."* (as in known facts). *"That was quite a shock that one could be misled for so long.....I’ve tried putting a simple question to various people and groups of people, “Can you tell me anything you know about evolution, any one thing that you think is true?” I tried that question on the geology staff in the Field Museum of Natural History, and the only answer I got was silence. I tried it on the members of the Evolutionary Morphology Seminar in the University of Chicago.... and all I got there was silence for a long time, and then eventually one person said: “Yes, I do know one thing. It ought not to be taught in high school.”.* Although these are only excerpts from Patterson’s very frank and startling lecture (the full text is even more revealing), it is plain to see the doubts he was having. It also shows that creationist usage of such quotes by Dr Patterson does not amount to 'out of context' or 'quote mining' but very real public record comments that have never been disputed, refuted or retracted by Dr Colin Patterson. Dr Patterson’s penchant for openness did not do him any favours with the pro evolutionary peers in the scientific establishment. They often expressed anger and dismay at his comments when they could not make excuses for them. His experience and expertise as holder of one of the most prestigious scientific posts in the world did not grant him immunity from pressure and attacks for having dared to express reasonable doubts about the "evolutionary" worldview as taught.* *It is a sad reminder that nodding and making all the correct noises to toe the proverbial party line is more important than any so called objective facts or indeed truth when it comes to determining scientific acceptance of a theory.* This might come as a shock to you but there are over one thousand PhD experts that have risked their careers and reputations by signing their names to the scientific community's dissent from Darwinism statement over the years also. It's only when one looks into this and applies common sense as well as considering some of the public record comments from other proponents of evolution (that are real eye openers). What story is 'made up' in the Bible according to you? Is this you trying to deflect away from pseudo science 'evolution'?

@@bigbabatunde1218 Attacking hapless Patterson won't make the bible any more believable. Here are a couple of quotes that undermine your mined quotes: "In several animal and plant groups, enough fossils are known to bridge the wide gaps between existing types. In mammals, for example, the gap between horses, asses and zebras (genus Equus) and their closest living relatives, the rhinoceroses and tapirs, is filled by an extensive series of fossils extending back sixty-million years to a small animal, Hyracotherium, which can only be distinguished from the rhinoceros-tapir group by one or two horse-like details of the skull. There are many other examples of fossil 'missing links', such as Archaeopteryx, the Jurassic bird which links birds with dinosaurs (Fig. 45), and Ichthyostega, the late Devonian amphibian which links land vertebrates and the extinct choanate (having internal nostrils) fishes. . ." --Collin Patterson, from his textbook "Evolution" Reacting to creationists misquoting him after pirating a recording of his speech to systemics experts: *I seem fated continually to make a fool of myself with creationists.* The specific quote you mention, from a letter to Sunderland dated 10th April 1979, is accurate as far as it goes. The passage quoted continues "... a watertight argument. The reason is that statements about ancestry and descent are not applicable in the fossil record. Is Archaeopteryx the ancestor of all birds? Perhaps yes, perhaps no: there is no way of answering the question. It is easy enough to make up stories of how one form gave rise to another, and to find reasons why the stages should be favoured by natural selection. But such stories are not part of science, for there is no way to put them to the test." I think the continuation of the passage shows clearly that your interpretation (at the end of your letter) is correct, and *the creationists' is false.* All this happened 40 years ago, nothing a little more recent? Things change. More and more scientists are on to your obfuscation.

She's gone now, too bad her theory of symbiogenesis was rejected for lack of evidence. She also said: "All scientists agree that evolution has occurred - that all life comes from a common ancestry, that there has been extinction, and that new taxa, new biological groups, have arisen." Glad to know you stand by what she said. Nothing but failed quotes out of context and/or from long dead-scientists decades ago?

​@@ergonomoverMargulis stumped Richard Lewontin and Richard Dawkins with her work. Mind you, wouldn't be hard now would it. What's your PhD in?

​@@bigbabatunde1218 Lying DI shill. "All scientists agree that evolution has occurred - that all life comes from a common ancestry, that there has been extinction, and that new taxa, new biological groups, have arisen." Lynn Margulis. (Tip of the hat to Mr Ergonomover for this)

@@bigbabatunde1218 How did she stump Dawkins? It shouldn't be too hard to show me. "The fact that *all* the organisms that are born or hatched or budded off do not and cannot possibly survive is natural selection. *Observable inherited variation* appears in all organisms that are hatched, born, budded off, or produced by division, and some variants do outgrow and outreproduce others. These are the tenets of Darwinian evolution and natural selection. *All thinking scientists are in complete agreement with these basic ideas, since they're supported by vast amounts of evidence."* --Lynn Margulis I don't have a PhD and don't think I need one to rebut pseudoscience. I did take biology classes in a university.

I did what you don't dare to do, I looked it up: Whippomorpha is a suborder located within the Order Artiodactyla, and the clade Cetancodontamorpha. It contains the clades Hippopotamoidea (ancestors of hippopotamuses) and Cetaceamorpha (ancestors of whales and dolphins). The only one trying to make stuff up must be you.

"What common ancestor between whales and hippos? " Never heard of sirenians?? For example, dugongs and manatees. Tw@t.