Like how literally every line of evidence converges on the same ~4.5 Billions years for the age of the earth and evolution. Endogenous retroviral insertions alone have no good creationist rebuttal.

ERVs?!?!? 🙄 You are in for some education. If you need more education, ask @SFT_Ministries youtu.be/b4wjQfc2hH8

We have books, videos, debates, presentations and published peer reviewed papers on ERVs from the creationists view. More than enough for a skeptic

Give me the crux of your argument. 1. Are you claiming that sequences of LTR-gag-pol-env-LTR are not retroviral insertions?

In the creation model, many retrovirus-like genomic elements originated as intrinsic, designed components of created organisms, functioning in regulation, development, genomic restructuring, and controlled generation of variation. It’s escape/progressive version of virus origins.

Non-created/acquired ERVs are primarily the unfixed, polymorphic elements that differ among individuals or populations. These are accepted as genuine later retroviral insertions arising from exogenous viral activity after creation.

So then your argument is that endogenous retroviral insertions cannot become fixed in the population. And every sequence that evolutionists point to as ancient ERVs (the majority having no function) are actually design features.

Yes? No? Maybe? We can extend this a bit further then and say that it must be mere coincidence that the map of known shared ERVs in primates aligns almost perfectly with phylogenetic trees based on traits, and the relative dating of the fossil records?

I'm a little disappointed... @ApoloJedi_ had me expecting to get educated. So far all I've seen is denial of evidence and special pleading. I would like to know how you square your assertion that RV insertions *CAN NOT* fix with the fact that the KoVR is currently fixing.

...and KoRV is extremely harmful to koalas. So it's very bad for your position that we are observing it happening in real time. On the other hand, you have ~380 viruses in your body right now. The number of viruses that are actually harmful is statistically zero.

We know empirically that the fixation rate of a neutral allele is 1/2N. So that makes it statistically inevitable that some number of ERVs will fix because the vast majority of RV insertions will not impact reproductive fitness.

A bit ironic, is it not, that the op complained about people running away from debate?

We don’t run from debate we just don’t have them in common sections where no one can see them. You do live debates with us or nothing at all.

🤣 riiiiiight. Homie, when I was in highschool (a Christian school) Answers in Genesis sent an apologist to the school who offered to debate a student live on the chapel stage on evolution. I was elected by the school to participate. I absolutely eviscerated her.

Good you should be brave enough to debate then. We will be waiting. The fact you don’t even know the basics about our position doesn’t instill any confidence at all. But I guess we will see if you are brave enough. Go tell James on MDD and we will add you to the list.

I already refuted the basics of your position. That's why you stopped responding. Your position is dead on arrival. It relies on plainly false assumptions. A decent 10% of your "lecture" was just talking about how much time you have previously spent lecturing.

I already told you we don’t debate in comment sections that’s pathetic. What loser has that amount amount of time anyway anyway? We are professional debate ministry and have been for six years. Step up or run away I don’t care.

If you want to be made to look like a fool, then contact James at modern day debate and set it up. There’s no need to waste time complaining to me. I don’t care. I do this for a living and have a debate coming up soon. You’re low on my radar.

So in other words you don't actually give a damn about truth, you have a grift to maintain. Got it. I am a degreed biologist and a pharmaceutical manufacturing engineer. I make life saving medicine everyday utilizing science built on evolution. Podcasting isn't a real job.

You sound like a genius! Why are you scared to debate @SFT_Ministries ?

These guys always make me laugh lol so brave until it’s time to actually step up and debate. They go running and here he was giving me cricket sounds lol

He's got a degree in biology!!! youtu.be/oFXIALf9zDA

He blocked me and stopped responding to very simple questions, but I'm the scared one. Sometimes I wish there was actually a hell so I could say, "Go to hell."

How tolerant 🙄

Tolerant? No, you don't engage, then backtrack and demand a change of forum and an enormous time investment for any further engagement and then try to reframe me as a coward for taking issue with your manipulation tactics. Y'all modelled your "ministry" after Satan. Irony.

Lies and deceit in the face of good faith truth-seeking dialogue is not of God. It's an Internet-age grift. It's all rhetoric and no substance. You should be ashamed of yourselves.

If evolution were true, how does natural selection preserve the trait of being "ashamed"? Because of course we would assume that being ashamed lowers reproductive fitness, and those with the ability to be ashamed would be culled from the gene pool. Yet, shame persists. How do you explain this contradiction?

Shame is an emotion that serves to socially coordinate behavior. Without shame you cannot organize a society. Individuals with a low capacity for shame thrive in isolation, therefore a variability in that trait is preserved in the population. Good faith answers aren't hard.

To be more statistical.. The reproductive benefit of social coordination outweighs the individual cost of sometimes experiencing negative emotions.

Those answers are stories about how traits might work in the present, but do not explain how natural selection acting on random mutations produced the ability to feel shame in creatures that did not have shame...nor the corresponding trait of reproductive benefit from other representatives of the species to deny fitness to the creature which suddenly appeared to exhibit shame Evolution is all story-telling...all the way down 🐢 🐢 🐢 🐢 🐢 🐢 🐢 🐢 🐢 🐢 🐢 🐢

To be fair, how cognition of symbolic thought evolved will be one of the last things to get fleshed out in evolutionary biology, for the same reason we don't fully understand how LLMs generate their answers. Some systems are not preplanned. But rather constraints on them are.

I'm a process engineer. I design processes. I don't specify every action taken by operators in a process, I specify limits and procedures that guide the outcome within a range. Many biological systems are more like this than a 1:1 blueprint.

Excellent! Then you would understand the frustration you would feel if someone claimed that your job could be done by shaking a Magic 8 Ball that had a million sides on the dice. It's an analogy so I fully understand that it breaks down, but you very likely see the connection. Your procedures/processes are intelligently designed for a purpose to function with your guidance. In the same way, we see incredible purpose, function, innovation, interrelated interdependence in biology...things that randomness cannot do...even with quality control (natural selection) and billions of years It's not a problem of scale. It's a categorical misappropriation of logic. Believing that evolution can produce the blood clotting cascade is like believing in perpetual motion machines. It's alluring but ultimately impossible due to the constraints of the real universe

Self-organization and development becomes possible (no designer necessary) under the following conditions. 1. Self-replication. 2. Random variation. 3. Competition for resources. If you have those things, you have a system that evolves by itself.

We see this happening in populations with a very short generation compared to human life. Eg bacteria. Novel functions arise from random variation (mutation). Calling those functions dormant available variation is like saying that sand is just a dormant CPU.