Quote Originally Posted by Guisslapp View Post
Not remotely the same. The amount of evidence for evolution makes it certain. Did you watch the vid that was linked earlier?
Of course I watched it. And others too. Other pro-evolution videos. Just more of the same. Loosely connected pieces of evidence. I think I posted this comment before. But, will again. Evolution depends on one accepting as fact some contention. As in:

A=B, B=C, and therefore A=C.

Evolutionists always point at that A = C part and say, see! given the rest of it you have to agree it is true. Yeah, if indeed the first two parts are true. But, how do you know A = B? Where did that come from? Show me your evidence that PROVES A = B. And then you get, at best, some VERY loose small tidbits of evidence, with ENORMOUS assumptions to string it all together.

While I am certainly no geneticist, I did take a couple of classes in genetics, and did a research paper on the Punnett Square. As I have posted before, I can see the concept of Natural Selection altering, or more accurately, focusing the gene pool for a species. But most of the "inferior" traits do not go away, just that they appear less often in the phenotype, especially if that trait happens to be a recessive gene. Even if you accept the concept of Natural Selection on steroids, it still does NOT create a new species.

And science itself is constantly correcting itself. Recently new research changed "the fact" we share 99% of our DNA with chimps to 92%. You may say, well see, science is doing what it's supposed to do as new data is discovered. Granted. But then how can anyone state something is factual when the previous "facts" proved erroneous? One can't.

So, if you want to tell me, evolution is a work in progress, that we really don't KNOW if it's true, but it remains the most likely explanation for many of the changes noted over time. I am willing to meet you halfway and agree....well, maybe science is on to something. But do not tell me it's certain.