The Theory of Evolution is False

Rebuttal to Species Without A Link-I seldom see the logic that missing links proves evolution completely false for scientists do not "line up imaginary creatures that best fit the picture" as my opponent said.Although I will provide methods scientists use to keep track of common descent- Anatomical homologies - Throughout the domains of life, organisms show a distinct pattern of constraints based on homology in development and construction of the body. For example, tetrapods have five digits because the ancestor of tetrapods had five digits. When a tetrapod does not seem to have five obvious digits, a review of their development shows that they start development with five and that they fuse together later to form fewer numbers. DNA and RNA code - Almost all organisms use the same three-letter code for translating RNA into proteins. There are variations, such as the code used by mitochondria and some bacteria and fungi, but the differences are only minor. Regardless of the slight differences, all organisms use the same coding mechanism for translating the code into amino acid sequences. Endogenous retroviral insertions - Ancient retroviruses inserted inactivated viral genes into genomes. For a retrovirus to be inherited in all members of a species, a series of highly improbable events must occur. The virus must insert into a gamete cell and it must mutate so it is inactive. That gamete cell must be used to make an embryo that lives to reproduce and whose genome fixates into the population at random location in the genome. This rare event is usually species specific. Pseudogenes - Shared errors are a powerful argument for a common source. If two books describe the same concept in similar language, it's possible they just both converged on the same wording. However, if they both share the same grammar or spelling errors it becomes improbable to assume that they did not derive from a common source. There are genes that no longer code for a protein due to a mutation or error. Species often share the same pseudogene with the same inactivating mutation. A famous example of this is the L-gulonolactone oxidase that synthesizes vitamin C. All simians including humans share one pseudogene of inactivated L-gulonolactone oxidase, but the guinea pig has a different pseudogene indicating a different mutation. Embryology - The pharyngula stage of embryonic development appears to be highly conserved. At this stage, it is difficult to tell the difference between various vertebrate species. This conserved state screams common ancestry, and the field of evolutionary development has expanded our knowledge of developmental genes and their consequent embryo ontogeny to amazing levels of detail, all thanks to acknowledging common descent. Chromosome fusion - Gene fusion or chromosome fusion is when two chromosomes are spliced together. As an example, chimpanzees have one more chromosome than humans do. If the two species share a common ancestor, scientists should be able to figure out what happened to that chromosome. Researchers have found that chromosome 2 in humans is actually the fusion of two separate chimpanzee chromosomes. At the end of each chromosome is a marker called a telomere, which usually appears only on the ends. In human chromosome 2 it also appears in the center, marking where the two ends fused. Convergence - The phylogenetic trees constructed using anatomical homology, DNA homology, pseudogenes, endogenous retroviral insertions, and many other methods all converge on a similar looking tree. There are slight differences but the general relationships of the trees are intact. If any of these methods were flawed, they would not converge on the same tree. http://rationalwiki.org... As you can see the process for this is very genuine and isn't just a guess.Rebuttal To My Opponent R4 Response-And of course my opponent isn't sticking to his resolution, I will have to explain: As you can see my claim for microevolution is relevant to species change and macroevolution because one is responsible for another.Pro writes.......... "My opponent also claims that evolution in humans is still taking place"........ No explanation, only an assertion, no evidence has been provided.Pro writes.......... "Humans are not evolving anymore".............. You may want to reference back to my R2 explanation of this because you are obviously ignoring it.Rebuttal to: Point 1) Already refutedPoint 2) Already refutedPoint 3) You have given no evidence to support this claim.Point 4) My opponent obviously does not get the concept of evolution species do not rearrange themselves, they form into higher forms of life through speciation and natural selection.Point 5) Evolution is completely unrelated to the beginning of the universe, already addressed.Resolution Negated.I'd like to thank m opponent for an evolutionary spectacle! Happy Voting!