tHE lIST OF eVIDENCES aGAINST eVOLUTION cONTINUED

i FORGOT TO INCLUDE ON THAT LIST THE RATE OF EROTSION OF ROCKS SUCH AS THE BUTTES OF THE mONUMENT vALLEY ND THE WALLS OF THE gRAND cANYON AND OTHER INTERESTING FORMATIONS OF THE sOUTHWEST.  iF THEY ARE DATESD TO TENDS OF THOUSANDS OF YEARS OR A MILLION OR MORE THAE AMOUNT OF EROSION SEEN COLLECTED AT THE BOTTOM OF ANY OF THESE FORMATIONS IS WAY TOO LITTLE.  tHIS IS JUST A GUESS AND IT SENEED S TO BE TESTED.  iT PROBABLY HAS BEEN BUT i DON'T KNOW HOW TO FIND THE INTERMTIATION.  THAT IS, THE RATE OF EROSION IS PROBABLY KNOWN FOR SOME OF THEM AND THEY'VE BEEN ASSIGNED A STARTING DATE S WELL.  

tHE ARGUMENT THAT WHAT WE SEE ARE SPECIFIC kINDS AS hAM PRESENTS THEM, i THINK NEEDS TO BE PRESENTED AS A PROBLEM OF HOW VARIATION OR EVOLUTION COULD OCCUR OUTSIDE THE GENOME OF A GIVEN kIND OR sPECIES.  aLL THE VARIATION WE SEE, THAT EVOLUTION HAS COOPTED QUITE RONGLY, OCCURS ACCORDING TO THE DESIGN OF THE GENOME, EACH GENE BEING REPRESENTED BY TWO DIFFERENT ALLELES WHICH PRODUCE DIFFERENT RESULTS IN THE CREATURE.  THIS IS BSICALLY THE GENETIC BASIS FOR mENDELIAN VARIATION, ONE ALLELE PRODUCING ONE COLOR OF FLOWER AND THE OTHER A DIFFERENT COLOR FOR INSTANCE.  yOU CAN HAVE HOMOZYGOUS RECESSIVE OR HOMOSZYGOUS DOMINANT OR HETEROZYGOUS VERSIONS OF ANY GIVEN GENE AND IN COMBINATION WITH ALL THE OTHER GENETIC VARIATIONS A GREAT DEAL OF VARIETY IS PRODUCED JUST WITHIN A GIVEN sPECIES OR kIND.  

THIS IS NOT EVOLUTION.  aND WHAT THE EVOLUTIONISTS NEED TO BE CHALLENEGED TO DO IS TO PROVE THAT THEY CAN SHOW HOW ANY KIND OF VARIATION CAN OCCUR WITHOUT BEING LIMITED BY THE DESIGN OF THE GENOME, OR HOW THE GENOME ITSELF CAN BE CHANGED.  THIS THEY'VE NEVER DONE AND i DON'T THINK IT CAN BE DONE.  i THINK ALL VARIATION IS DTERMIEND BYT HE DEISGN OF THE GENOME.

EYOND THAT i'VE ARGUED THAT THE PROCESSES OF EVOLUTION OR VARIATION INVOLVE THE REDUCTION OF GENETIC DIVERSITY WHICH WORKS AGAINST THE WHOLE IDDEA OF EVOLUTION FROM SPECIES TO SPECIES.  aS YOU GET A MORE AND MORE REFINED BREED OF DOG OR ANY OTHER ANIMAL YOU ARE LOSING THE ALLALES FOR TRAITS THAT DON'T BELONG TO THIS BREED AND THAT IS THE ONLY DIFRECTION POSSIBLY AS NEW PHENOTYPES ARE DEVELOPED.  tHIS IS A FORMULA THAT WORKS AGAINST EVOLUTION.

AI'4 H44N FOMINY 6O 6HINK 6HW6 HORY PLWN IE W HIY TWF6O5 IN IR4N6ITYINY H4 AEP4FI4E O5 AKINR 6O EHO3 6HW6 I6 54MWINE 6HW6 AKINR WNR RO4EN'6 GW5Y.  AI6 MWY GW5Y ELIYH6LY HU6 TO5 6H4 MOE6 PW56 NO, W FHIHUWHUW IE H4 EWM4 WE W AY54W6 ARWN4 O5 W 3OLT 3H4N YOU FOMPW54 6H4I5 HORY PLWN4E.  AWNR 6H4I5 H4HWGIOTE TO5 6HW6 MW6645.  AEWM4 3I6H FW6E WLL OT 6H4M EHW5INY W HORY PLWN 6HW6 IE 54FOYNISWHL4 IN 6H4 EK4L4F6ON OT 4G45Y KINR OT FW6.  AAAAAAAA  AWNR HIRE.  AWNR 

2h3When you compare the body plan or skelecton of an ape with a human being you have to see that the claimed similarity is really not there.  The proportions are completelyh different.

Apparently the great variation that occurs within a given genome does not occur in the part that determines the body plan.   

There's more to say about all that but I have to mention that I'm still sort of shocked and amused by Bil l Nye's giving me an argument against evolution when he so emphaticlaly said that you absoluteoyly camnot find a fossil from a lower layer showing up in higher layers and that's supposed to be an argument aginst the Flood.  I'd been trying to get a sense for some time of how many of the fossils get carried over into later time periods, and it was a big surprise for him to say absolutely none.  He says it twice too, in his opening statmeent and again in his half hour talk.  this is deadly for evolution since it completley falsifies the fossil record.  If those were really time periods then they should show an accumulation of living things from earlier times as well as the new evolvedld creatures, but apaprently that is not the case.  A According to bill Nye.