None of what I wrote is copy and paste. - Vidqun
That's not entirely true is it? Compare your last but one post with the text of this Wiki article...
This is the third or fourth time you have pasted text without any attribution and once again you have tried to totally misrepresent the content.
The Wiki article reveals a few flaws with the theory symbiogenesis:
This is so egregious as to qualify as a deliberate lie. The Wiki article is specifically about the evidence for endosymbiosis. Nowhere in the article does it describe any alleged "flaws" in the theory. None of the three points you raise are in any way presented as problems for the theory but as part of the narrative of explaining gene transfer.
The article even concludes with 13 bullet points of evidence for its veracity.
Let's review - You began your contribution to this thread by objecting that complex eukaryotic cells are evidence against evolution.
It was explained to you that complex cells originated as simpler prokaryotic cells that had formed an endosymbiotic relationship.
Next you objected that this was not real science since it had never been observed in the lab
I told you that it had been observed in the lab by your fellow microbiologist Kwang Jeon in 1966.
You neglected to read the original article I posted for you - see here - and raised a new objection about the mechanism of gene transfer.
If you had read the article you would have discovered that selective gene transfer was also observed by Jeon.
1 - Genome size - Why is this an objection? Even the Wiki article explains it nicely.
2 - Loss of genetic autonomy - Again why is this an objection? The reason some genes get transferred to the host cell's nucleus is part of the fascinating story of cellular respiration. As a microbiologist should you not know that already? I will describe the details in a future thread.
3 - Examples used - I have no idea what your point is?
Now that all of your objections to the evolution of prokaryotic cells via endosymbiosis have been answered you fell back on the last resort of creationists - insults and personal attacks.
To you it's either your beloved evolution or bust!
If i wasn't prepared to entertain challenges to evolution why did I start a thread offering anybody the opportunity to do exactly that?
You want to make up rules as you go along
No I laid out two or three very simple rules about how we could hold an honest conversation. The problem for you was simple. It required you to commit to responding to a challenge of my choice in support of evolution. Something you knew you could not do.
and are not really interested in anybody else's opinion,
That's correct. At last something we agree on. Since this is a conversation about facts I have no interest in anybody's opinion and nobody should have any interest in mine. Only evidence matters...
especially concerning ID, because it clashes with your personal agenda
ID conflicts with all the evidence.
The challenge remains on the table.