Jon I appreciate your gracious candor and lavish approbation. I will try to be so kind.
I am glad you have been able to answer and respond to my observations here, as I have watched, spent time, and made notes on all your videos, I can't wait to share my observations with you also. But first, true, it is tiring to watch you and other Evolutionists spiral down the same hole you all are digging, I would like to save you all from a lot of wasted energy.
The theory of Evolution itself is a broken record, for one it is all based on the same reasoning ‘
that if things look similar - they must have Evolved from one another’. This is repeated in every single thing Evolutionists put forth as evidence. It is repeated all through your animated videos, and it is the reasoning behind all your conclusions. The same groove on the same record, over and over, and you claim that evolution is progressive, all the while
Gods designs are stolen, repackaged, and sold as Evolution.
Unless you can prove that there is
a mechanism that can design complexity, you have nothing.
Evolutionists have supposed there is a proof (mutation and or unnecessary genes) and mechanism (natural selection) for unintelligent design in gene formation,
however this theory does not eliminate nor provide a better explanation than: By Design.
Simply stated: a simple observation doesn’t explain every other observation.
A. Having one simple sentence in a code (such as DNA) ‘appear’ to reorganize and leave a few unnecessary structures of code still in place, does not explain the fact that creation consists of
zillions of fantastic complex, ingenious and organized structures that depend on this extremely complex code.
B. Natural selection does not answer ‘why’ a life force would even ‘want’ to continue to exist.
C. Natural selection does not explain how the choices being selected from, got on the shelf in the first place.
D. Again, since all
your proofs and explanations are also consistent within the realm of Design and Creation, they don’t prove Evolution.
You are ignoring the point that everything you have presented in your videos and
your statements here repeat the same idea: your proof is that -
because things look alike - they evolved from each other. Everything Evolutionists have presented is the same argument, and I have given you dozens of different arguments explaining why
this one observation is the same argument Evolutionists use over and over.
I have seen schoolbooks used in public classrooms dating back 50 years (and to Darwin) that use
this same argument over and over, all building on this
one singular premise.
“I have carefully explained, in this very thread, why evolution is a scientific theory and not a religion” (Jon)
Why evolution is a religion, and whether evolution is useful for studying biology, are different topics.
Although you made ‘your’ statement that Evolution is not a religion in ‘this’ thread (just above), and that you now assume that you have been making a case for this all along, is quite a leap of reason to suppose we have even discussed this statement, or reached a conclusion. But I will address the religion point in another thread.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Evolutionist theory is akin to theft and plagiarism.
Evolutionist theory copies someone elses idea and packages it as their own.
Who invented Legos? Lego? No, they copied an existing building block, and put their name on it.
Who invented Oreos? Oreo? No, Hydrox invented this, and Oreo put their name on them.
Who invented the Internet, Al Gore? Four years ago Barack Obama said Ford, uh uh, invented the Automobile, now he has toned it down to, uh uh, America invented the car. It is an ‘automobile’ Barack, and as an auto buff, the idea was driven way before Benz even built his automobile (And a German inventor Andreas Flocken, built the worlds first electric car in 1888! Barack).
Should I mention the idea for the book of Mormon (Ethan Smith etc.) and the plagiarism of the Bible?
(And you are making videos (or ads) to sell this stuff. It is interesting that you use animation. The Mormon church has produced hundreds of drawings and animations of Nephi, and the other book of Mormon stories, that make it
seem as if this all really happened, NOT)
The Creation was here all along. A designer can and does, make things that look very similar in design. For every logical purpose known to man: 'an observation of design, means there is a designer' (of course 'except' for the Theory of Evolution). Professional designers often design numerous things that aren’t even related, and other times they design things that have very similar design.
Evolutionists have taken this observation and sold it as Evolution. A design can have adaptability and adjustment built into it. Good designs can have many similar functions and uses, uses in multiple products, built for different purpose and environments, and yet keep their basic design, and more often than not, they do.
The only credible advancement made in Evolutionist theory (other than things look alike): is identifying genes that develop new code,
which is the only place evidence can come from actually. But, unnecessary code, or mutant improvements in the code are not enough to explain everything else, and they themselves are suspect, because a creator could anticipate fluctuations, allow them for a purpose, utilize a code shift for a purpose, and or, even design the ability for minor change to occur, within limits. It is obvious there is more in the DNA code than we understand as yet, or presume to know, especially since they interact with so many other processes in biology that are still mysterious.
I know that you are also saying that it (Evolutionist theory) causes one to go ‘look’ for similar structures in design, and that this helps biological research.
I do not see the logic in thinking that similar design in biological structures would be any different than similar structure in mechanical structures (So I don’t know how you could argue that this is a logical argument).
In design, the quickest way to design something is to familiarize yourself with other similar designs (just don’t get caught infringing a copyright. And I have a serious disregard for a lot of modern designers who neglect to look back at the history of similar design, bad automobile designs being a prime example). A good designer looks to other industries and products for inspiration. Much the same way a cook looks for recipe ideas.
This idea is not the property of Evolutionists (similar structures that have multiple uses), in fact evolutionists are guilty of taking this idea and making it their own, it is in a sense stealing an idea. Evolutionists are just repackaging things we’ve known all along: That a builder, artist, or writer, will produce things and structures for a variety of products that are similar, is not news to a designer. Also, good designers design things to last (Survival of the fittest). A good design should have the ability to adapt to surroundings (adaptation). And now we make machines that can adapt in numerous ways, good and bad, as in viruses and virus software.
I took your thinking and went and looked for
similar structures in similar structures that serve different purposes (something designers have done since the idea of the bow and the arrow). Well amazing just as you predicted: things that are designed have
similar structures that are used in other useful structures, and quite often for different purposes.
There are trucks with ladders that telescope, cement pumpers that telescope, water trucks that telescope. Fire trucks, boom trucks, and dump trucks: that lift people, lift machinery, dirt, rocks, babies, etc. Trucks that carry cattle and some that carry other trucks. Logging trucks that evolved to launch missiles. Airplanes with cargo doors that can drop both bombs, food and people, sometimes in the same place! Airplanes that spray water, bullets, fertilizer and poison, sometimes from the same kinds of pumps! This evolutionary idea will soon catch on among designers when they realize pumps and motors can be similar and yet be used for different purposes and functions! Think of the possibility’s: water pumps, oil pumps, air pumps, pumps for blood, pumps for industry and health care and transportation, all because now we realize you can use a similar design for multiple purposes! This was so obvious and we never saw it, tools can combine ideas, hammers that have claws attached…