Ahh… Memories.

I’m such a nerd.

If gene mutation can cause a “micro” change why can’t a long series of change cause a “macro” change.

Additionally, what would you consider a good transitional species? The fossil record is, understandably, lacking but it does have transitions for many species.

Furthermore, how would you argue for the evidence of common ancestor? There are many gene mutations that are only shared between the great apes and humans. For example, the gene that synthesizes vitamin C has been naturally knocked off by a series of bad mutations. The gene has no current argument for functional use. more information

Another broader case for shared ancestry is endogenous retroviruses. I’m not sure that I can efficiently explain what they are so I’ll point you toward a wiki link: more information

There is not a single strand of ‘reason’ that will interfere with one’s personal religious beliefs if the reason for… reason… happens to be for anything other than inquiry into religious truth.

Voltaire was right – it is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere. But I remain cautiously optimistic that it is still possible.

This might make me a fool in your eyes, but I just can’t let myself be that cynical about believers. They have ten fingers and toes, and brains not dissimilar to mine. Just because I don’t know of a way to do it yet doesn’t mean it can’t be done, and I am looking.

My question to Justin is just my latest little experiment. I’m looking forward to his response… I want to see if he’ll dodge the question, claim that he would be convinced by something that evolution doesn’t actually predict, claim that he would be convinced by something that is impossible to achieve, or if he’ll accept that he might be a bit more closed-minded than he would like to admit.

If it’s something outside of those four outcomes, I’ll be very surprized indeed.

No one raised creationist in any form will ever question their religion based on any evidence and often ignore the evidence. At least, unless they’re seeking truth. If they’re seeking truth, they can accept the evidence as-is and let it be as a part of their religious view of life without distorting it to those views, or they can reject their religious view in favor of evidence, as I did.

Evidence that leaves me to conclude without a reasonable doubt.

Obviously.

But so far, all you’ve said is that you’re capable of changing your mind if and only if something comes along that is capable of changing your mind.

But if nothing is capable of changing your mind, then you’re still as closed minded as someone who says that they’re not capable of changing their mind.

So what I want to know is – what would something that is capable of changing your mind even look like. Be specific.