Evolution destroyed in 10 minutes

[Loki]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKvEXGYIysg

[Peterski]

But this forum has evolved and you have evolved from an atheist to a Christian...

[Profileid]

how does modern medicine even work then

[Loki]

But this forum has evolved and you have evolved from an atheist to a Christian...

That's not evolution. Evolution is a gradual process, but this happened suddenly without warning or expectation.

[Peterski]

That's not evolution. Evolution is a gradual process, but this happened suddenly without warning or expectation.

Not true. Ever heard about evolutionary leaps (or evolutionary jumps)?

Evolution can happen very rapidly, even overnight. For example imagine there is a colony of ants, of which 50% have a mutation that gives them genetic adaptation to cold temperatures and 50% don't. One very cold night, 50% of the colony die because they were not adapted to survive such cold. This is an example of evolution too. On the other hand, there are also species that practically do not change over milllions of years - so called living fossils.

[Dick]

Not true. Ever heard about evolutionary leaps (or evolutionary jumps)?

Evolution can happen very rapidly, even overnight. For example imagine there is a colony of ants, of which 50% have a mutation that gives them genetic adaptation to cold temperatures and 50% don't. One very cold night, 50% of the colony die because they were not adapted to survive such cold. This is an example of evolution too. On the other hand, there are also species that practically do not change over milllions of years - so called living fossils.

Nonsense. Dna is pseudo-science and single nucleotide polymorphisms don't exist even though they represent a difference in a single Dna building block called a nucleotide, but hey Dna is pseudo-science.

[GreentheViper]

Wow, very cool!

[The Lawspeaker]

I will watch the debate later but my main issue with the standard scientific explanation has always been the "why". It's good they understand the mechanism but they don't seem to want to look into what or who set off the whole thing to begin with. It's like looking at a watch and explaining the mechanism in detail and then complaining that we don't know who made and claiming that "it must all have been made on its own without a designer, while when the brand name on the watch's back clearly shows "Cartier" and "Made in Switzerland".

That's no science as there is no inquisitive spirit behind it all. That's autism. That's an example of tunnel vision.

[Dna8]

I will watch the debate later but my main issue with the standard scientific explanation has always been the "why". It's good they understand the mechanism but they don't seem to want to look into what or who set off the whole thing to begin with. It's like looking at a watch and explanation the mechanism in detail and then complaining that we don't know who made it and then claiming that "it must all have been made on its own without a designer, even when the brand name on the outside clearly states that it was made in Switzerland by Cartier.

I think that whatever precipitated existence need not have been a personification or entity of some sort, for it to be considered awe inspiring.

[Dna8]

And design need not originate from a designer.

[The Lawspeaker]

I think that whatever precipitated existence need not have been a personification or entity of some sort, for it to be considered awe inspiring.

Perhaps. But the design is just too perfect for it not to have a designer.

[Dna8]

Perhaps. But the design is just too perfect for it not to have a designer.

Our speculations are hampered because, as humans, we associate design with designer, with the same intensity as we associate oxygen with breathing..

Perhaps, outside the context of our planet (and all the cognition held therein), design and designer aren't necessarily a strict binary.

[The Lawspeaker]

Our speculations are hampered because, as humans, we associate design with designer, with the same intensity as we associate oxygen with breathing..

Perhaps, outside the context of our planet (and all the cognition held therein), design and designer aren't necessarily a strict binary.

Maybe. But I have very strong reservations regarding this. I think that, in regards to atheism, we should look at their fruits and in regards to Christianity we should do the same.

[Dna8]

Maybe. But I have very strong reservations regarding this. I think that, in regards to atheism, we should look at their fruits and in regards to Christianity we should do the same.

Agreed. IMO, God need not exist for religion to have its benefits/uses.

[The Lawspeaker]

Agreed. IMO, God need not exist for religion to have its benefits/uses.

Society would better off "wrong" in believing (and living in accordance to the rules of the Christian faith) then it would be "right" in disbelieving. Nihilism destroys societies as it leaves it without any purpose other than immediate self-gratification (in the full absence of even the most basic morality).

[Dna8]

Society would better off "wrong" in believing (and living in accordance to the rules of the Christian faith) then it would be "right" in disbelieving. Nihilism destroys societies as it leaves it without any purpose other than immediate self-gratification (in the full absence of even the most basic morality).

Belief in the positive if not strictly existent is worthwhile, I agree.

Privileging the Christian template for positivity over other such templates, as a matter of course, I disagree with.

[The Lawspeaker]

Belief in the positive if not strictly existent is worthwhile, I agree.

Privileging the Christian template for positivity over other such templates, as a matter of course, I disagree with.

Even if I wouldn't have my own background, I would still privilege them for a simple reason: We are a Christian country and Europe, for the most part, is a Christian continent. I would refuse to privilege others at the same level because it would have similar societal repercussions. Better have one story and series of independent churches to tell the story in their own way for people to choose from independently.

[Dna8]

Even if I wouldn't have my own background, I would still privilege them for a simple reason: We are a Christian country and Europe, for the most part, is a Christian continent. I would refuse to privilege others at the same level because it would have similar societal repercussions. Better have one story and series of independent churches to tell the story in their own way for people to choose from independently.

Fair enough

[Loki]

And design need not originate from a designer.

Actually, it does. Unless you're talking about some random mass of rubbish. But living organisms are no random occurrences. For sure there is a creator, anyone who is brutally honest with himself, and applies solid logic, would have to admit that. We all know this instinctively, also. God has created us with an appreciation for his creation, and to see his hand in it. It is because we rebel against God and against our own conscience that we begin to question God.

[Dna8]

Actually, it does. Unless you're talking about some random mass of rubbish. But living organisms are no random occurrences. For sure there is a creator, anyone who is brutally honest with himself, and applies solid logic, would have to admit that. We all know this instinctively, also. God has created us with an appreciation for his creation, and to see his hand in it. It is because we rebel against God and against our own conscience that we begin to question God.

I respectfully disagree.

[Loki]

Privileging the Christian template for positivity over other such templates, as a matter of course, I disagree with.

Why? This is a rebellious attitude that has no foundation in sincerity. The "Christian template" is superior over all other on earth, because it is God's way. And therefore it is no wonder that Christianity is the world's primary religion, even in this information age. In fact it is still growing by the day into traditionally non-Christian areas of the globe. This should tell you something.

[Loki]

I respectfully disagree.

Well, that is your choice. God is not going to force anyone to spend eternity in heaven with him. And I'm thankful for that. We don't want those around who do not love God.

[Dna8]

Fair enough.

[renaissance12]

Great video

[Lemgrant]

Evolution of antibiotic resistance in real time in a 2'x4' petri dish

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHI45garS3g

Kishony Lab, Harvard Medical School / Technion -- Israel Institute of Technology

Bacteria (white) grow up to the boundary where they can no longer survive. Mutants, capable of surviving the higher concentration of antibiotic appear and invade the new band. Subsequent steps require further mutations. After about 11 days, resistance to over 1000 times as much antibiotic as was originally toxic evolves.


This appears as movie S1 from: http://science.sciencemag.org/content/353/6304/1147
by Michael Baym, Tami D. Lieberman, Eric D. Kelsic, Remy Chait, Rotem Gross, Idan Yelin, and Roy Kishony.

The MEGA-plate with an exponential trimethoprim gradient (0-3-30-300-3000-300-30-3-0 MIC).

This movie was compiled from time-lapse imagery every 10 minutes for 11.7 days, and played at 30fps (18000X speed). Each second of video is approximately five hours of real time.

Condensation on the lid is visible in the first several frames, and a single contaminating colony appears on the plate.

[renaissance12]

No, Despite Often-Heard Claims, Antibiotic Resistance in Bacteria Is Not Evolution.
Bacterial resistance to antibiotics has nothing to do with evolution. Evolution, in the Darwinian sense of undirected (unintelligent) process of random heritable variation and natural selection, is the process by which populations of living things change over time without intelligent agency causing or guiding the process. When the process of change in populations is guided by intelligence, it is called artificial selection — breeding.

[Thracian]

No, it didn't.

[Catarinense1998]

How many books about evolution did you read? It is so easy to take these theories as fact and true without study other views. I'm not telling to you embrace the evolutionary view, but you should read more about this topic to make these conclusions. Anyway, everybody must be free to trust any theory.

Whale's evolution:

http://www.dolphin-way.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Cetacean-Evolution.jpg

Bird's evolution:

https://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/images/evograms/bird_evo.jpg

[renaissance12]

How many books about evolution did you read? It is so easy to take these theories as fact and true without study other views. I'm not telling to you embrace the evolutionary view, but you should read more about this topic to make these conclusions. Anyway, everybody must be free to trust any theory.

Whale's evolution:

http://www.dolphin-way.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Cetacean-Evolution.jpg

Bird's evolution:

https://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/images/evograms/bird_evo.jpg


What is that ? Cartoon pictures ? If "scientific facts don't work.... let's try with cartoon..

[Catarinense1998]

What is that ? Cartoon pictures ?

No.

[Thorns]

How many books about evolution did you read? It is so easy to take these theories as fact and true without study other views. I'm not telling to you embrace the evolutionary view, but you should read more about this topic to make these conclusions. Anyway, everybody must be free to trust any theory.

Whale's evolution:

http://www.dolphin-way.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Cetacean-Evolution.jpg

Bird's evolution:

https://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/images/evograms/bird_evo.jpg

It's in a book, it must be true. We can see in those wonderful illustrations how a whale turns into a dolphin, or how a land mammal becomes a an aquatic mammal but do they show us the development (via random mutations and natural selection) of sex, eye-hand coordination, balance, navigation systems, tongues, blood, antennae, waste removal systems, swallowing, joints, lubrication, pumps, valves, autofocus, image stabilization, sensors, camouflage, traps, ceramic teeth, light (bioluminescence), ears, tears, eyes, hands, fingernails, cartilage, bones, spinal columns, spinal cords, muscles, ligaments, tendons, livers, kidneys, thyroid glands, lungs, stomachs, vocal cords, saliva, skin, fat, lymph, body plans, growth from egg to adult, nurturing babies, aging, breathing, heartbeat, hair, hibernation, bee dancing, insect queens, spiderwebs, feathers, seashells, scales, fins, tails, legs, feet, claws, wings, beaver dams, termite mounds, bird nests, coloration, markings, decision making, speech center of the brain, visual center of the brain, hearing center of the brain, language comprehension center of the brain, sensory center of the brain, memory, creative center of the brain, object-naming center of the brain, emotional center of the brain, movement centers of the brain, center of the brain for smelling, immune systems, circulatory systems, digestive systems, endocrine systems, regulatory systems, genes, gene regulatory networks, proteins, ribosomes that assemble proteins, receptors for proteins on cells, apoptosis, hormones, neurotransmitters, circadian clocks, jet propulsion, etc. ?

Much of evolutionary theory cannot be tested.

[renaissance12]

It's in a book, it must be true. We can see how a whale turns into a dolphin, or how a land mammal becomes a an aquatic mammal but do they show us the development (via random mutations and natural selection) of sex, eye-hand coordination, balance, navigation systems, tongues, blood, antennae, waste removal systems, swallowing, joints, lubrication, pumps, valves, autofocus, image stabilization, sensors, camouflage, traps, ceramic teeth, light (bioluminescence), ears, tears, eyes, hands, fingernails, cartilage, bones, spinal columns, spinal cords, muscles, ligaments, tendons, livers, kidneys, thyroid glands, lungs, stomachs, vocal cords, saliva, skin, fat, lymph, body plans, growth from egg to adult, nurturing babies, aging, breathing, heartbeat, hair, hibernation, bee dancing, insect queens, spiderwebs, feathers, seashells, scales, fins, tails, legs, feet, claws, wings, beaver dams, termite mounds, bird nests, coloration, markings, decision making, speech center of the brain, visual center of the brain, hearing center of the brain, language comprehension center of the brain, sensory center of the brain, memory, creative center of the brain, object-naming center of the brain, emotional center of the brain, movement centers of the brain, center of the brain for smelling, immune systems, circulatory systems, digestive systems, endocrine systems, regulatory systems, genes, gene regulatory networks, proteins, ribosomes that assemble proteins, receptors for proteins on cells, apoptosis, hormones, neurotransmitters, circadian clocks, jet propulsion, etc. ?


:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

[Lemgrant]

https://i.imgur.com/OlPZQol.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/wReMrLV.jpg

[Thorns]

Just to be clear, my position in Evolution is mostly neutral, despite the fact that much of what people claim about it cannot and will not ever be tested. If it becomes a question of logic or mathematics, that position would change.

[Loki]

Evolution of antibiotic resistance in real time in a 2'x4' petri dish

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHI45garS3g

Kishony Lab, Harvard Medical School / Technion -- Israel Institute of Technology

Bacteria (white) grow up to the boundary where they can no longer survive. Mutants, capable of surviving the higher concentration of antibiotic appear and invade the new band. Subsequent steps require further mutations. After about 11 days, resistance to over 1000 times as much antibiotic as was originally toxic evolves.


This appears as movie S1 from: http://science.sciencemag.org/content/353/6304/1147
by Michael Baym, Tami D. Lieberman, Eric D. Kelsic, Remy Chait, Rotem Gross, Idan Yelin, and Roy Kishony.

The MEGA-plate with an exponential trimethoprim gradient (0-3-30-300-3000-300-30-3-0 MIC).

This movie was compiled from time-lapse imagery every 10 minutes for 11.7 days, and played at 30fps (18000X speed). Each second of video is approximately five hours of real time.

Condensation on the lid is visible in the first several frames, and a single contaminating colony appears on the plate.

It starts off as a bacteria, and it becomes... a bacteria. Still a bacteria...

[Loki]

How many books about evolution did you read? It is so easy to take these theories as fact and true without study other views. I'm not telling to you embrace the evolutionary view, but you should read more about this topic to make these conclusions. Anyway, everybody must be free to trust any theory.

Whale's evolution:

http://www.dolphin-way.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Cetacean-Evolution.jpg

Bird's evolution:

https://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/images/evograms/bird_evo.jpg

I've read all this stuff, and I still see no evidence that one type of animal evolved into another type of animal. It's all wishful thinking, there's no concrete evidence like genuine transitional fossils, between these animals. If such evolution was true, there should have been millions of transitional, intermediate types in the fossil record. But there is none...

[Antimatter]

I believe you can reconcile evolution and religion together. Theistic evolution is quite interesting and close. As for evolution I see that we do not have enough fossils to suggest this, as many fossils that I have seen (e.g: Fossils of Fish and Shrimp from Lebanon, dated to be 20 million years old) they are still somewhat unchanged. But if you think about it, it makes perfect sense. Shrimps used to have legs and now if you can remove the shell, close to the tail you can see tiny leg-like prominence that can be explained as above. Obviously this is not proof, but only further fossils and excavations will show us whatever is true. The best position now is to be neutral, because we can neither assert evolution as proved, nor can we say it's all useless talk.

[Sacrificed Ram]

It starts off as a bacteria, and it becomes... a bacteria. Still a bacteria...

In USA:

Frog
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Fernanda_Schmidt_Silveira/publication/319017138/figure/fig10/AS:631676212367383@1527614753836/Figura-1-Sapo-cururu-Rhinella-icterica-Os-anfibios-possuem-glandulas-de-muco-e-veneno.png

Frog
https://cptstatic.s3.amazonaws.com/imagens/enviadas/materias/materia10795/central-criacao-ras-cursos-cpt.jpg

Frog
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c9/Perereca_de_banheiro_-_Scinax_fuscovarius.jpg/800px-Perereca_de_banheiro_-_Scinax_fuscovarius.jpg

In Brazil:

Sapo
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Fernanda_Schmidt_Silveira/publication/319017138/figure/fig10/AS:631676212367383@1527614753836/Figura-1-Sapo-cururu-Rhinella-icterica-Os-anfibios-possuem-glandulas-de-muco-e-veneno.png

Rã
https://cptstatic.s3.amazonaws.com/imagens/enviadas/materias/materia10795/central-criacao-ras-cursos-cpt.jpg

Perereca
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c9/Perereca_de_banheiro_-_Scinax_fuscovarius.jpg/800px-Perereca_de_banheiro_-_Scinax_fuscovarius.jpg

[Lemgrant]

These cats share like 95% of the same DNA. No one disputes the fact that these animals are related.
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/93/7e/85/937e85cab9f901a2de68c1af53d07a7d.jpg
Humans and Chimps share about 98% of the same DNA.

If tiger is just another cat, then human is just another chimpanzee, just a little bit more advanced.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sLYorVnA44U

[Marmara]

I've read all this stuff, and I still see no evidence that one type of animal evolved into another type of animal. It's all wishful thinking, there's no concrete evidence like genuine transitional fossils, between these animals. If such evolution was true, there should have been millions of transitional, intermediate types in the fossil record. But there is none...

When you were Atheist, did you search evolution?

[Dna8]

One might also think of dogs.. look at the variety of phenotype in the domestic dog.. and said variety is purely on account of selective breeding (and the vast majority of breeds were developed within the last 200 years..)

If man can manipulate one species to such an extent.. who is to disbelieve what nature is capable of over millions of years..?

[renaissance12]

Just to be clear, my position in Evolution is mostly neutral, despite the fact that much of what people claim about it cannot and will not ever be tested. If it becomes a question of logic or mathematics, that position would change.

If You Trust In Math And Logic You Can't Believe In Darwin Evolution

[Pandur]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCqHoHo5E7I

[Thorns]

If You Trust In Math And Logic You Can't Believe In Darwin Evolution

I agree, that's why I don't believe in Darwinian evolution as a sufficient universal explanation. I think some it's basic concepts can be applied at some level, but with extreme limitations.

[Thorns]

These cats share like 95% of the same DNA. No one disputes the fact that these animals are related.
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/93/7e/85/937e85cab9f901a2de68c1af53d07a7d.jpg
Humans and Chimps share about 98% of the same DNA.

If tiger is just another cat, then human is just another chimpanzee, just a little bit more advanced.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sLYorVnA44U

I'm really not sure why that "98% identical" mythical figure still persists.

[Loki]

One might also think of dogs.. look at the variety of phenotype in the domestic dog.. and said variety is purely on account of selective breeding (and the vast majority of breeds were developed within the last 200 years..)

If man can manipulate one species to such an extent.. who is to disbelieve what nature is capable of over millions of years..?

They are still dogs, though... and at no point will they become anything other than dogs. The reason we find vastly different-looking dog breeds, is because of inbreeding of certain traits. But it means the original dogs had all of those characteristics in their genes already -- a high genetic diversity. And that's the thing, God created the original animals with a range of genetic diversity, which could then be isolated in certain groups by breeding, selecting certain traits for certain conditions as preferable. But the original dogs already had those genetic potential. None of the dog genes have changed. No matter how hard you try, dogs will never be able to become cats or any other species. They will remain dogs, with a range of possible phenotypes based on their genetic potential.

[Dna8]

They are still dogs, though... and at no point will they become anything other than dogs. The reason we find vastly different-looking dog breeds, is because of inbreeding of certain traits. But it means the original dogs had all of those characteristics in their genes already -- a high genetic diversity. And that's the thing, God created the original animals with a range of genetic diversity, which could then be isolated in certain groups by breeding, selecting certain traits for certain conditions as preferable. But the original dogs already had those genetic potential. None of the dog genes have changed. No matter how hard you try, dogs will never be able to become cats or any other species. They will remain dogs, with a range of possible phenotypes based on their genetic potential.

But consider the changes effected within a tiny period of time by tiny (in the greater scheme) humans..

Now consider what nature, with the great force at her disposal, might be capable of over millions of years..

[Borealis]

My IQ dropped after watching this.

[Loki]

But consider the changes effected within a tiny period of time by tiny (in the greater scheme) humans..

Now consider what nature, with the great force at her disposal, might be capable of over millions of years..

No, those are not the type of "changes" that turns animals into other genera. It just isn't, and it's never been proven. It's pure speculation.

[Loki]

My IQ dropped after watching this.

That's not possible.

[Borealis]

That's not possible.

I know...Im kidding and implying the video is highly ignorant.

[Thorns]

But consider the changes effected within a tiny period of time by tiny (in the greater scheme) humans..

Now consider what nature, with the great force at her disposal, might be capable of over millions of years..

Awesome. Now we are talking about my imagination, a more interesting subject.

[Loki]

I know...Im kidding and implying the video is highly ignorant.

It isn't, you are highly ignorant for thinking that.

[Lemgrant]

I'm really not sure why that "98% identical" mythical figure still persists.

Chimps, Humans 96 Percent the Same, Gene Study Finds
https://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/08/chimps-humans-96-percent-the-same-gene-study-finds/

Bonobos Join Chimps as Closest Human Relatives
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2012/06/bonobos-join-chimps-closest-human-relatives

Eight Striking Similarities between Humans and Chimpanzees
https://www.bbvaopenmind.com/en/eight-striking-similarities-between-humans-and-chimpanzees/


The latest findings on how chimpanzees behave and think have -once again- shown that these primates could well be called the “cousins” of human beings. They not only laugh like us, but also smile in silence; they are gourmands, they play, they are aware of the fact that they think and can distinguish between fair and unfair, as well as cultivating friendship.

THEY PLAY
Children are not the only ones who spend hours playing and having fun. Chimpanzees spend many hours playing —which ethologists, the behavioral scientists, have defined as any activity that produces no clear or immediate benefits—, both during their childhood and their “youth”. Scientists at the University of Pisa (Italy) have demonstrated that social games, that is, those which are not played alone but with other chimpanzees, help them build strong social relationships and develop cooperative attitudes. And as in humans, game modes and playmates change as primates grow up. Among other things, games are more cooperative in early childhood, becoming more competitive as young primates grow older.

THEY KNOW HOW TO SMILE
These primates can smile in silence, laugh out loud or burst out laughing, a range and flexibility in communicating positive emotions that until now was thought to be a unique human feature. Everything suggests that facial expressions linked to laughter were already present in our primate ancestors, appearing long before humans evolved.

The only smile that for now seems unique to humans is the so-called Duchenne smile, a spontaneous expression that is recognizable by the involuntary contraction of the orbicularis oculi muscle —which surrounds the eyes—, whose contraction raises the cheeks and forms wrinkles or “crow’s feet “around the eyes. This is the true and genuine smile and is linked to the activation of the brain’s limbic system -where emotions are generated-, as demonstrated years ago by French neurologist Guillaume Duchenne.

THEY ARE GOURMANDS
As they have no access to supermarkets or restaurants, chimpanzees are willing to travel any distance to find their favorite ingredients in order to prepare a succulent feast. This was the conclusion reached recently by scientists from Harvard University (USA), also demonstrating that chimpanzees share with humans a preference for cooked rather than raw food, as well as the ability to understand the transformation processes that occur when cooking food. Between the taste of a cooked potato and that of a raw one, primates opt without hesitation for the former. The only thing lacking for them to be considered chefs, researchers say, is controlling fire. Yet if they are given a heated pot or pan, experiments show that they learn immediately how to put it into use.

THEY ARE AWARE OF THE FACT THAT THEY THINK
Chimpanzees have meta-cognition, that is, they are able to reflect on their own thoughts and mental processes, as demonstrated recently by researchers from several US universities in Cognition, the science journal. According to the authors, these primates are aware of what they do and do not know, and based on that they are able to display more or less confidence in their responses and behave accordingly, thus enabling them to make intelligent decisions.

THEY ARE FAIR AND MORAL
The sense of right and wrong is not unique to humans. Chimpanzees also discriminate in terms of deciding what behavior is inappropriate, especially when it affects young and baby chimpanzees. In a study carried out at the University of Zurich and which was published in the journal Human Nature, it became evident that if a chimp sees scenes of a baby being harmed or killed by another member of its own species, it reacts with indignation and anger, something which does not happen in cases of violence among adult monkeys. The study indicates that these primates have a sense of morality that is similar to that of humans.

In addition, having played Ultimatum with chimpanzees –this is an experimental economics game that aims to show that choices regarding fairness and equality criteria take precedence over the benefits-, US biologists have demonstrated that these primates share our aversion to injustice. Specifically, chimpanzees tend to make fair and egalitarian offers, and only accept these kinds of offers from their peers. “For chimpanzees -who are very cooperative in the wild-, being sensitive to the equal distribution of rewards represents an evolutionary advantage because cooperation benefits them“, say the authors of the research.

THEY HAVE A NUMERICAL MEMORY SPAN
If you think that humans outperform chimpanzees in all cognitive functions, you are wrong. As it happens, the ability of a young (5 year-old) chimpanzee to remember the numbers displayed on a screen is considerably higher than that of an adult human, according to an experiment conducted at the University of Kyoto (Japan). Scientists attribute this to an equivalent of eidetic or photographic memory, that is, the ability to recall in detail what is seen or heard, which is present in human children and which declines with age.

THEY WAGE WAR
Of all the world’s species, humans and chimpanzees are among the only ones who participate in coordinated attacks on other members of their own species. In other words, both species are able to deliberately provoke a war. And in the case of primates, attacks are not caused by interference with humans, which was for some time wrongly thought to be the cause of the signs of aggressiveness displayed by these animals. What moves them to commit violent acts is in fact an adaptive strategy, as was recently concluded by thirty primatologists, based on the analysis of data gathered during five decades of research on conflicts involving chimpanzees. Attacks increase in denser populations and in those in which there is a greater number of males. And the victims are usually members of rival communities.

THEY CULTIVATE FRIENDSHIP
The maxim that states “whoever finds a friend finds a treasure” also applies among chimpanzees. In case of any doubt, just ask Filippo Aureli, who —after a thorough study of the behavior of these primates— concluded that they live surrounded by good friends, that is, “not only unrelated individuals who spend time with them, but who also help them in cases of confrontation, sharing food and collaborating”. They even comfort one another and relieve other group members’ stress, as Aureli and colleagues demonstrated in a study published in PNAS.

When choosing a friend, primates are selective. According to a study conducted by the University of Vienna, friendly relations are established between chimpanzees who share certain personality traits. Specifically, the most sociable individuals get along with each other, while other shy chimpanzees seek other equally timid individuals in order to socialize. This resembles the “similarity effect” in humans, which is simply the tendency to have as friends those subjects who resemble ourselves.

Bonobo Love | Wild Wives of Africa
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82GUjPConiE

Most Brutal Chimpanzee Society Ever Discovered
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQn1-mLkIHw

Chimpanzee smoking and acting like a gangster
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DVR27dKuQY

[Thorns]

Chimps, Humans 96 Percent the Same, Gene Study Finds
https://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/08/chimps-humans-96-percent-the-same-gene-study-finds/

Bonobos Join Chimps as Closest Human Relatives
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2012/06/bonobos-join-chimps-closest-human-relatives

Eight Striking Similarities between Humans and Chimpanzees
https://www.bbvaopenmind.com/en/eight-striking-similarities-between-humans-and-chimpanzees/


The latest findings on how chimpanzees behave and think have -once again- shown that these primates could well be called the “cousins” of human beings. They not only laugh like us, but also smile in silence; they are gourmands, they play, they are aware of the fact that they think and can distinguish between fair and unfair, as well as cultivating friendship.

THEY PLAY
Children are not the only ones who spend hours playing and having fun. Chimpanzees spend many hours playing —which ethologists, the behavioral scientists, have defined as any activity that produces no clear or immediate benefits—, both during their childhood and their “youth”. Scientists at the University of Pisa (Italy) have demonstrated that social games, that is, those which are not played alone but with other chimpanzees, help them build strong social relationships and develop cooperative attitudes. And as in humans, game modes and playmates change as primates grow up. Among other things, games are more cooperative in early childhood, becoming more competitive as young primates grow older.

THEY KNOW HOW TO SMILE
These primates can smile in silence, laugh out loud or burst out laughing, a range and flexibility in communicating positive emotions that until now was thought to be a unique human feature. Everything suggests that facial expressions linked to laughter were already present in our primate ancestors, appearing long before humans evolved.

The only smile that for now seems unique to humans is the so-called Duchenne smile, a spontaneous expression that is recognizable by the involuntary contraction of the orbicularis oculi muscle —which surrounds the eyes—, whose contraction raises the cheeks and forms wrinkles or “crow’s feet “around the eyes. This is the true and genuine smile and is linked to the activation of the brain’s limbic system -where emotions are generated-, as demonstrated years ago by French neurologist Guillaume Duchenne.

THEY ARE GOURMANDS
As they have no access to supermarkets or restaurants, chimpanzees are willing to travel any distance to find their favorite ingredients in order to prepare a succulent feast. This was the conclusion reached recently by scientists from Harvard University (USA), also demonstrating that chimpanzees share with humans a preference for cooked rather than raw food, as well as the ability to understand the transformation processes that occur when cooking food. Between the taste of a cooked potato and that of a raw one, primates opt without hesitation for the former. The only thing lacking for them to be considered chefs, researchers say, is controlling fire. Yet if they are given a heated pot or pan, experiments show that they learn immediately how to put it into use.

THEY ARE AWARE OF THE FACT THAT THEY THINK
Chimpanzees have meta-cognition, that is, they are able to reflect on their own thoughts and mental processes, as demonstrated recently by researchers from several US universities in Cognition, the science journal. According to the authors, these primates are aware of what they do and do not know, and based on that they are able to display more or less confidence in their responses and behave accordingly, thus enabling them to make intelligent decisions.

THEY ARE FAIR AND MORAL
The sense of right and wrong is not unique to humans. Chimpanzees also discriminate in terms of deciding what behavior is inappropriate, especially when it affects young and baby chimpanzees. In a study carried out at the University of Zurich and which was published in the journal Human Nature, it became evident that if a chimp sees scenes of a baby being harmed or killed by another member of its own species, it reacts with indignation and anger, something which does not happen in cases of violence among adult monkeys. The study indicates that these primates have a sense of morality that is similar to that of humans.

In addition, having played Ultimatum with chimpanzees –this is an experimental economics game that aims to show that choices regarding fairness and equality criteria take precedence over the benefits-, US biologists have demonstrated that these primates share our aversion to injustice. Specifically, chimpanzees tend to make fair and egalitarian offers, and only accept these kinds of offers from their peers. “For chimpanzees -who are very cooperative in the wild-, being sensitive to the equal distribution of rewards represents an evolutionary advantage because cooperation benefits them“, say the authors of the research.

THEY HAVE A NUMERICAL MEMORY SPAN
If you think that humans outperform chimpanzees in all cognitive functions, you are wrong. As it happens, the ability of a young (5 year-old) chimpanzee to remember the numbers displayed on a screen is considerably higher than that of an adult human, according to an experiment conducted at the University of Kyoto (Japan). Scientists attribute this to an equivalent of eidetic or photographic memory, that is, the ability to recall in detail what is seen or heard, which is present in human children and which declines with age.

THEY WAGE WAR
Of all the world’s species, humans and chimpanzees are among the only ones who participate in coordinated attacks on other members of their own species. In other words, both species are able to deliberately provoke a war. And in the case of primates, attacks are not caused by interference with humans, which was for some time wrongly thought to be the cause of the signs of aggressiveness displayed by these animals. What moves them to commit violent acts is in fact an adaptive strategy, as was recently concluded by thirty primatologists, based on the analysis of data gathered during five decades of research on conflicts involving chimpanzees. Attacks increase in denser populations and in those in which there is a greater number of males. And the victims are usually members of rival communities.

THEY CULTIVATE FRIENDSHIP
The maxim that states “whoever finds a friend finds a treasure” also applies among chimpanzees. In case of any doubt, just ask Filippo Aureli, who —after a thorough study of the behavior of these primates— concluded that they live surrounded by good friends, that is, “not only unrelated individuals who spend time with them, but who also help them in cases of confrontation, sharing food and collaborating”. They even comfort one another and relieve other group members’ stress, as Aureli and colleagues demonstrated in a study published in PNAS.

When choosing a friend, primates are selective. According to a study conducted by the University of Vienna, friendly relations are established between chimpanzees who share certain personality traits. Specifically, the most sociable individuals get along with each other, while other shy chimpanzees seek other equally timid individuals in order to socialize. This resembles the “similarity effect” in humans, which is simply the tendency to have as friends those subjects who resemble ourselves.

Bonobo Love | Wild Wives of Africa
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82GUjPConiE

Most Brutal Chimpanzee Society Ever Discovered
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQn1-mLkIHw

Chimpanzee smoking and acting like a gangster
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DVR27dKuQY

I rest my case, various claims give various numbers. All of them are problematic (be it omitted sequences, filtering and using only coding DNA, removing indels, etc), once you go deeper into the details of the studies. Despite these problems, these claims still persist, and people take them as gospel - for reasons I don't understand. Most people are apparently not equipped with bullshit detectors, or they have them in the off position.

The point is that in more than a few areas, many in the scientific community are pushing an agenda, directing a narrative and in many cases they are playing with/editing/manipulating the data. In so doing, they are actually doing a disservice to science. The same stuff happens with "climate science". It happens all the time, bunk studies get peddled to the masses all the time. It is a crisis.

For me it's not about whether or not we have a common ancestor, it's just a matter of making disingenuous claims. As a seeker of the truth this kind of behavior bothers me, and it should bother everybody else too.

[Dna8]

I rest my case, various claims give various numbers. All of them are problematic (be it omitted sequences, filtering and using only coding DNA, removing indels, etc), once you go deeper into the details of the studies. Despite these problems, these claims still persist, and people take them as gospel - for reasons I don't understand.

The point is that in more than a few areas, many in the scientific community are pushing an agenda, directing a narrative and in many cases they are playing with/editing/manipulating the data. In so doing, they are actually doing a disservice to science. The same stuff happens with "climate science". It happens all the time, bunk studies get peddled to the masses all the time. It is a crisis.

For me it's not about whether or not we have a common ancestor, it's just a matter of making disingenuous claims. As a seeker of the truth this kind of behavior bothers me, and it should bother everybody else too.

The data and scientific reasoning in the post you quoted is "problematic", but the pseudoscience informing taxonomical/racial discussions in TA is reasonable?

[Loki]

The data and scientific reasoning in the post you quoted is "problematic", but the pseudoscience informing taxonomical/racial discussions in TA is reasonable?

This discussion has nothing to do with the taxonomy discussed elsewhere on this forum. It's an entirely different subject altogether. Not all members of this forum engage in taxonomic discussions. I personally don't anymore since long ago.

As for this "98% similarity" nonsense... it has been shown that it's just meaningless talk.. that all genetic material has some similarity... for example you'd have a "large percentage" of genetic similarity with a mushroom or a blade of grass. All it means is that they are all biological material that has some common characteristics. We have all been created by God, who used the same DNA code that he has developed for his earthly biological lifeforms. DNA is a highly advanced and sophisticated code, actually... almost like a computer language, only far more advanced, sophisticated and complex. And God created all this. He wrote the code that exists in our DNA and also in animal and plant species. Because it's the same God who created us all. Why would he not use the same fantastic code he wrote? Why would he write a different code altogether for every different lifeform? It wouldn't make sense. He could use the same DNA code for all his projects, and he did -- with minor variations that resulted in the diversity of life as we know it. Creation is wonderful! (and it was even better before the fall of Adam... and will be restored in the future again)

[Thorns]

The data and scientific reasoning in the post you quoted is "problematic", but the pseudoscience informing taxonomical/racial discussions in TA is reasonable?

Well no, data collected by physical anthropologists is helpful but my views are the same on that issue. The issue remains bad studies and bad agendas, which also applies to areas other than just the topic of evolution. I think I mentioned that previously.

[Insuperable]

Chimps, Humans 96 Percent the Same, Gene Study Finds
https://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/08/chimps-humans-96-percent-the-same-gene-study-finds/

Bonobos Join Chimps as Closest Human Relatives
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2012/06/bonobos-join-chimps-closest-human-relatives

Eight Striking Similarities between Humans and Chimpanzees
https://www.bbvaopenmind.com/en/eight-striking-similarities-between-humans-and-chimpanzees/


The latest findings on how chimpanzees behave and think have -once again- shown that these primates could well be called the “cousins” of human beings. They not only laugh like us, but also smile in silence; they are gourmands, they play, they are aware of the fact that they think and can distinguish between fair and unfair, as well as cultivating friendship.

THEY PLAY
Children are not the only ones who spend hours playing and having fun. Chimpanzees spend many hours playing —which ethologists, the behavioral scientists, have defined as any activity that produces no clear or immediate benefits—, both during their childhood and their “youth”. Scientists at the University of Pisa (Italy) have demonstrated that social games, that is, those which are not played alone but with other chimpanzees, help them build strong social relationships and develop cooperative attitudes. And as in humans, game modes and playmates change as primates grow up. Among other things, games are more cooperative in early childhood, becoming more competitive as young primates grow older.

THEY KNOW HOW TO SMILE
These primates can smile in silence, laugh out loud or burst out laughing, a range and flexibility in communicating positive emotions that until now was thought to be a unique human feature. Everything suggests that facial expressions linked to laughter were already present in our primate ancestors, appearing long before humans evolved.

The only smile that for now seems unique to humans is the so-called Duchenne smile, a spontaneous expression that is recognizable by the involuntary contraction of the orbicularis oculi muscle —which surrounds the eyes—, whose contraction raises the cheeks and forms wrinkles or “crow’s feet “around the eyes. This is the true and genuine smile and is linked to the activation of the brain’s limbic system -where emotions are generated-, as demonstrated years ago by French neurologist Guillaume Duchenne.

THEY ARE GOURMANDS
As they have no access to supermarkets or restaurants, chimpanzees are willing to travel any distance to find their favorite ingredients in order to prepare a succulent feast. This was the conclusion reached recently by scientists from Harvard University (USA), also demonstrating that chimpanzees share with humans a preference for cooked rather than raw food, as well as the ability to understand the transformation processes that occur when cooking food. Between the taste of a cooked potato and that of a raw one, primates opt without hesitation for the former. The only thing lacking for them to be considered chefs, researchers say, is controlling fire. Yet if they are given a heated pot or pan, experiments show that they learn immediately how to put it into use.

THEY ARE AWARE OF THE FACT THAT THEY THINK
Chimpanzees have meta-cognition, that is, they are able to reflect on their own thoughts and mental processes, as demonstrated recently by researchers from several US universities in Cognition, the science journal. According to the authors, these primates are aware of what they do and do not know, and based on that they are able to display more or less confidence in their responses and behave accordingly, thus enabling them to make intelligent decisions.

THEY ARE FAIR AND MORAL
The sense of right and wrong is not unique to humans. Chimpanzees also discriminate in terms of deciding what behavior is inappropriate, especially when it affects young and baby chimpanzees. In a study carried out at the University of Zurich and which was published in the journal Human Nature, it became evident that if a chimp sees scenes of a baby being harmed or killed by another member of its own species, it reacts with indignation and anger, something which does not happen in cases of violence among adult monkeys. The study indicates that these primates have a sense of morality that is similar to that of humans.

In addition, having played Ultimatum with chimpanzees –this is an experimental economics game that aims to show that choices regarding fairness and equality criteria take precedence over the benefits-, US biologists have demonstrated that these primates share our aversion to injustice. Specifically, chimpanzees tend to make fair and egalitarian offers, and only accept these kinds of offers from their peers. “For chimpanzees -who are very cooperative in the wild-, being sensitive to the equal distribution of rewards represents an evolutionary advantage because cooperation benefits them“, say the authors of the research.

THEY HAVE A NUMERICAL MEMORY SPAN
If you think that humans outperform chimpanzees in all cognitive functions, you are wrong. As it happens, the ability of a young (5 year-old) chimpanzee to remember the numbers displayed on a screen is considerably higher than that of an adult human, according to an experiment conducted at the University of Kyoto (Japan). Scientists attribute this to an equivalent of eidetic or photographic memory, that is, the ability to recall in detail what is seen or heard, which is present in human children and which declines with age.

THEY WAGE WAR
Of all the world’s species, humans and chimpanzees are among the only ones who participate in coordinated attacks on other members of their own species. In other words, both species are able to deliberately provoke a war. And in the case of primates, attacks are not caused by interference with humans, which was for some time wrongly thought to be the cause of the signs of aggressiveness displayed by these animals. What moves them to commit violent acts is in fact an adaptive strategy, as was recently concluded by thirty primatologists, based on the analysis of data gathered during five decades of research on conflicts involving chimpanzees. Attacks increase in denser populations and in those in which there is a greater number of males. And the victims are usually members of rival communities.

THEY CULTIVATE FRIENDSHIP
The maxim that states “whoever finds a friend finds a treasure” also applies among chimpanzees. In case of any doubt, just ask Filippo Aureli, who —after a thorough study of the behavior of these primates— concluded that they live surrounded by good friends, that is, “not only unrelated individuals who spend time with them, but who also help them in cases of confrontation, sharing food and collaborating”. They even comfort one another and relieve other group members’ stress, as Aureli and colleagues demonstrated in a study published in PNAS.

When choosing a friend, primates are selective. According to a study conducted by the University of Vienna, friendly relations are established between chimpanzees who share certain personality traits. Specifically, the most sociable individuals get along with each other, while other shy chimpanzees seek other equally timid individuals in order to socialize. This resembles the “similarity effect” in humans, which is simply the tendency to have as friends those subjects who resemble ourselves.

Bonobo Love | Wild Wives of Africa
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82GUjPConiE

Most Brutal Chimpanzee Society Ever Discovered
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQn1-mLkIHw

Chimpanzee smoking and acting like a gangster
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DVR27dKuQY

No, they don't share that much of DNA. For a reason given in the video down we are mostly talking about the middle part which chimps and humans share and not about parts left out. In essence they share 81% of genome.
https://i.postimg.cc/cLXBWbBk/aaaa.png

This video sums it up really nice. It also gives an example of big differences in genome due to many mutations yet the outcome is almost identical result (two types of rats).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IbY122CSC5w

[Dna8]

This discussion has nothing to do with the taxonomy discussed elsewhere on this forum. It's an entirely different subject altogether. Not all members of this forum engage in taxonomic discussions. I personally don't anymore since long ago.

As for this "98% similarity" nonsense... it has been shown that it's just meaningless talk.. that all genetic material has some similarity... for example you'd have a "large percentage" of genetic similarity with a mushroom or a blade of grass. All it means is that they are all biological material that has some common characteristics. We have all been created by God, who used the same DNA code that he has developed for his earthly biological lifeforms. DNA is a highly advanced and sophisticated code, actually... almost like a computer language, only far more advanced, sophisticated and complex. And God created all this. He wrote the code that exists in our DNA and also in animal and plant species. Because it's the same God who created us all. Why would he not use the same fantastic code he wrote? Why would he write a different code altogether for every different lifeform? It wouldn't make sense. He could use the same DNA code for all his projects, and he did -- with minor variations that resulted in the diversity of life as we know it. Creation is wonderful! (and it was even better before the fall of Adam... and will be restored in the future again)

Just saying, we are a part of the animal kingdom.. granted, we have fostered anitibiotics and conceived of the internet.. but that just means that we are Apes who can heal themselves and who can go online..

Kings we may be in our animal kingdom.. but animals nonetheless.. Nature is sufficient enough an explanation for our being the way we are..

[Dna8]

Well no, data collected by physical anthropologists is helpful but my views are the same on that issue. The issue remains bad studies and bad agendas, which also applies to areas other than just the topic of evolution. I think I mentioned that previously.

Fair enough

[Loki]

Just saying, we are a part of the animal kingdom.. granted, we have fostered anitibiotics and conceived of the internet.. but that just means that we are Apes who can heal themselves and who can go online..

Kings we may be in our animal kingdom.. but animals nonetheless.. Nature is sufficient enough an explanation for our being the way we are..

We are not animals, because we have been made in the image of God, and God has set us up as rulers over his earthly creation. It's a pity we're doing such a bad job of it, though.

We humans don't only have a body and mind, but we have a spirit too. And our spirit is actually the real us. That means, you would be able to see, hear and utilize your other senses -- even more acutely -- after your body has died. And you will be aware. Countless people who have had near death experiences have testified to this happening... some people who have left their bodies for example during an operation during which they briefly died, have seen things happening in adjacent rooms and elsewhere, and later could tell people about it. If their spirit didn't leave their bodies and seen these things, it would have been impossible for them to know that. This has happened many times, you can find such testimonies on YouTube quite readily.

[Dna8]

We are not animals, because we have been made in the image of God, and God has set us up as rulers over his earthly creation. It's a pity we're doing such a bad job of it, though.

We humans don't only have a body and mind, but we have a spirit too. And our spirit is actually the real us. That means, you would be able to see, hear and utilize your other senses -- even more acutely -- after your body has died. And you will be aware. Countless people who have had near death experiences have testified to this happening... some people who have left their bodies for example during an operation during which they briefly died, have seen things happening in adjacent rooms and elsewhere, and later could tell people about it. If their spirit didn't leave their bodies and seen these things, it would have been impossible for them to know that. This has happened many times, you can find such testimonies on YouTube quite readily.

I can believe in spirit and in out of the body experiences without necessarily having to believe in a Christian spirit and a Christian mode of out of body experience?

[Loki]

I can believe in spirit and in out of the body experiences without necessarily having to believe in a Christian spirit and a Christian mode of out of body experience?

Hmm, unfortunately not. I can tell you that most people I have heard about who have been dead for long enough, had an NDE experience for long enough, have seen Jesus. Or been taken to hell, which compares to what Christians say about hell. Even non-Christians have experienced this. For example, I've heard of a Buddhist monk who saw Jesus, and hell (and saw Buddha in hell), and became a Christian afterwards.

Of course one can't go on these experiences alone, but they are significant. But even if it wasn't for them, I would still have believed in the Christian way. Because it's the truth, there are many pointers to that. If the Bible is true, and Jesus is true, then the stuff about the afterlife would be true as well.

Unfortunately there is no "neutral" way. One cannot be neutral in this... either follow the truth of Jesus, or follow some New Age lies or other lies.

[Peterski]

You were a fanatical Atheist, and now you are a fanatical Christian, you know no moderation and no limits in your views.

BTW, evolution does not disprove the existence of God, it does not even disprove that he intervenes in the course of events.

Evolution might be just a "software" or tool that is being used to produce certain outcomes in the grand scheme of design.

[Loki]

You were a fanatical Atheist, and now you are a fanatical Christian, you know no moderation and no limits in your views.


Correct... I've always had a tendency towards fundamentalism. It's who I am.



BTW, evolution does not disprove the existence of God, it does not even disprove that he intervenes in the course of events.

Evolution might be just a "software" or tool that is being used to produce certain outcomes in the grand scheme of design.

I know, but I still don't believe in Darwinian evolution. I don't see evidence for it.

[Dna8]

I find Desert Monasticism very interesting/appealing.

[Catarinense1998]

I'm not a biologist, then I'm not able to argue with you because I do not have a big knowledge about evolution. However, even not being an expert about this, I've sure that evolution theory is better than the intelligent design one.

"Scientists are highly critical of the specific scientific arguments of the ID movement, as well as its overall claim that intelligent design is a scientific theory developed through scientific methods.

Regarding ID’s specific claims, scientists object that the concept of "irreducible complexity" relies upon a mischaracterization of biological mutation as a relatively linear process involving only the addition of more and more "parts," rather than a dynamic process that can also reshape, rearrange, or fundamentally alter existing elements and features. Systems that must be fully formed to serve their current function could have developed from earlier forms that served a different function, or could be significantly reorganized versions of an earlier form that served the same function.

Mathematicians are similarly critical of ID’s mathematical arguments against evolution, which rely on an excess of subjective calculations, manipulation of numbers, and misrepresentations of evolutionary models.

Moreover, scientists point out that while ID breaks some new ground, it far too often falls back on long-debunked arguments plucked straight from "creation science," such as the claim that evolution can only happen within species, or an exaggerated emphasis on (shrinking-but-still-present) gaps in the fossil record."

Source: https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/religion/news/2006/04/10/1934/the-flaws-in-intelligent-design/

[Loki]

I'm not a biologist, then I'm not able to argue with you because I do not have a big knowledge about evolution. However, even not being an expert about this, I've sure that evolution theory is better than the intelligent design one.

"Scientists are highly critical of the specific scientific arguments of the ID movement, as well as its overall claim that intelligent design is a scientific theory developed through scientific methods.

Regarding ID’s specific claims, scientists object that the concept of "irreducible complexity" relies upon a mischaracterization of biological mutation as a relatively linear process involving only the addition of more and more "parts," rather than a dynamic process that can also reshape, rearrange, or fundamentally alter existing elements and features. Systems that must be fully formed to serve their current function could have developed from earlier forms that served a different function, or could be significantly reorganized versions of an earlier form that served the same function.

Mathematicians are similarly critical of ID’s mathematical arguments against evolution, which rely on an excess of subjective calculations, manipulation of numbers, and misrepresentations of evolutionary models.

Moreover, scientists point out that while ID breaks some new ground, it far too often falls back on long-debunked arguments plucked straight from "creation science," such as the claim that evolution can only happen within species, or an exaggerated emphasis on (shrinking-but-still-present) gaps in the fossil record."

Source: https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/religion/news/2006/04/10/1934/the-flaws-in-intelligent-design/

I disagree, intelligent design is an excellent theory. That article is very biased and obviously anti-ID.