Where is the scientific evidence for "nature pre-programmed" for "variation within the kind".
Please feel free to create your own thread for this question, the topic of THIS thread is for Hewy to give examples of the "empirical evidence" he claimed exists...
In otherwords I want him to "put his money where his mouth is", yet it seems (as always) evolutionists do not even want to support their own claims...
Gilbo, There's "Mountains of Evidence" <---------That's the evidence
Lol, that is what we keep getting told
Another example that comes to mind is the discovery of Tiktaalik by Neil Shuman et al. They predicted that they would find a transitional species in Devonian rock because of the time frames involved and everything else that they assume about geologic history. They found some Devonian rock in Northern Canada, searched around for 5 yrs and voila! They found a transitional species buried in the rock.
This is a prime example of a theory succesfully making a prediction and making a succesful prediction is how we know that a theory may be correct. After you accumulate millions of bits of corroborating evidence you can be fairly confident that you are on the right track.
As has been said before, Tiktaalik has already been debunked. The footprints in Poland which were dated OLDER than the oldest Tiktaalik fossils implies that tetrapods (the think Tiktaalik is claimed to be an ancestor for), were walking around before Tiktaalik... Do you see the problem?
How can you have something as an ancestor when it comes after the thing it is an ancestor for? Its like saying my great great grandfather will be born in 20 years...
If you can't see the problem here then I think EQuestions is right.
From an article about Richard Lenski's work with E. Coli found here,
"A major evolutionary innovation has unfurled right in front of researchers' eyes. It's the first time evolution has been caught in the act of making such a rare and complex new trait.
And because the species in question is a bacterium, scientists have been able to replay history to show how this evolutionary novelty grew from the accumulation of unpredictable, chance events."
I'll suggest reading Lifepysop's post here.
You might want to examine what that E.Coli change actually was instead of going off buzzwords. The "complex new trait" or "novelty" is based entirely on preexisting genetic information that simply became expressed at different times.
No novel information was generated.. Ecoli are able to digest citrate (as per the citric acid cycle), the only thing that changed was mutations resulted in a loss of regulation, a loss of information, which allowed the digestion of citrate outside it's normal use.
Therefore the experiment has actually demonstrated the reverse of what evolutionists propose. A loss of regulation is not a new function.