Evolution is a Bad Idea (Page 3)
Geoff: Yeah, lori - you keep posting that.
Werner Von Braun was a committed Nazi who started the space race.
Scientists are human. Science is about "What can be proved, not what is a good idea or a bad idea, but what is supported by the evidence"
And the evidence shows you and blackshoes are a pair of fruitcakes.
Geoff: This is the science forum, so "theory" has a special meaning here.
Unlike "hypothesis" which is equivalent to "deity".
Of all the gods that graced this earth, yours is only special because a Roman emperor was feeling at a loose end before a battle, and Mithras was more popular with people who didn't have as much money.
Evolution being a bad idea or not, it all depends where the objective evidence points..
lori100: noun, plural hypotheses
[hahy-poth-uh-seez, hi-] (Show IPA)
a proposition, or set of propositions, set forth as an explanation for the occurrence of some specified group of phenomena, either asserted merely as a provisional conjecture to guide investigation (working hypothesis) or accepted as highly probable in the light of established facts.
a proposition assumed as a premise in an argument-------------no mention of deity..-------.I'm not that interested in gods, more interested in God....and I can believe God created the universe and also set life on an evolutionary path to automatically adapt to changes ......very possible...God is within everything...
(Edited by lori100)
Blackshoes: Geoff that's your opinion of me', thinking yourself more versed' in a false, and unscientific theory '.You cannot prove Evolution nor can you show any real science behind it !Therefore you must typically criticize , and insult them that know better !
You hold to adaptation as evolution so as to confuse and deceive the unknowledgeable
As you have been deceived !
By the way the Catholic Church will also accept the Antichrist rule In the lasts Days !
Blackshoes: "Scientific Fact No. 2 - Species Without a Link Prove Evolution Theory is Wrong
The evolutionist will claim that the presence of many individual species proves evolution. This shallow statement is devoid of reason, logic, and scientific proof.
Evolutionists line up pictures of similar-looking species and claim they evolved one from another. The human "family tree" is an example of this flawed theory. Petrified skulls and bones exist from hundreds of species of extinct monkeys and apes.
Evolutionists line up the most promising choices to present a gradual progression from monkey to modern man. They simply fill in the big gaps with make-believe creatures to fit the picture.
This procedure can be done with humans only because there are many extinct monkey and ape species. They never do this with giraffes, elephants or the Platypus. (...)
The pictures are simply a grouping of individual species that does not prove evolution.
Close to the Missing Link -- Oldest Human Ancestor Discovered
Why do they claim the above discovery is "close to the missing link"? The answer is simple. Look at the picture: It is a monkey.
A monkey species that has become extinct. Lots of species have become extinct. Millions of species have become extinct.
It is obviously not similar to a human. Look at the feet with the big toe spread away from the smaller toes exactly like a modern chimpanzee, not like people.
A newly discovered extinct species does not prove a "missing link" has been found.
Charles Darwin admitted that fossils of the transitional links between species would have to be found in order to prove his "Theory of Evolution." Well, these transitional links have never been found. We only find individual species.
Evolutionists try to form these individual species into a link according to similar major features such as wings or four legs, but this simply proves the Theory of Evolution to be a fraud. Darwin was hopeful that future fossils would prove his theory correct, but instead, the lack of transitional links has proven his theory to be wrong.
The presence of individual species actually proves they were not developed by an evolutionary process. If evolution were true, all plants, animals, and insects would be in a continual state of change. No two creatures would be identical, because they would not be separate species.
All life forms would be a continual blend of characteristics without a clear definition among the species. Everything would be changing, and every animal, insect, and plant would be different.
The cheetah above proves evolution does not exist. All species are locked solidly within their DNA code."
Blackshoes: The Problem of Molecular Biology
At the 1997 keynote lecture of Darwin Day at the University of Tennessee, Douglas Futuyma stated that ". . . the molecular revolution in biology has furnished us with mountains of information that not only attests to the history of evolution, but also sheds even more light on evolutionary processes." A far different evaluation was given the same year by three evolutionary biologists who stated: ". . . even with the appropriate genes, the molecular tree of life is difficult to interpret."12 Few systematists (biologists who study taxonomy and are involved in reconstructing phylogenetic, or evolutionary, history) would say that morphological patterns of form line up with the molecular evidence.
Regarding the supposed relationship between terrestrial and aquatic mammals, one publication reported: "These results reveal a large discordance between morphological and molecular measures of similarity. Rats and mice are classified in the same family, while cows and whales are classified in different orders. Perhaps molecular sequences are not necessarily giving us an accurate picture of ancestry."13
Zoologist John Gatesy reports competing interpretations of whale origins using phylogenetic analyses of a blood-clotting protein gene from cetaceans, artiodactyls (pigs, hippopotamuses, ruminants, and camels), perissodactyls (rhinos and horses), and carnivores. He says that in combination with published DNA sequences, the data of this clotting protein " . . . unambiguously support a hippo/whale clade and are inconsistent with the paleontological perspective."14
Ever since Darwin we have seen that neither natural selection nor random mutations could possibly serve as remotely sufficient mechanisms of change that would turn terrestrial tetrapods into whales. Molecular biology, physiology, and morphology present impenetrable roadblocks for tracing a common ancestry from tetrapods to archaeocetes to modern whales.
lori100: ...-----Intelligent Design
www.intelligentdesign.org/whatisid.php ----------Not by chance: From bacterial propulsion systems to human DNA, evidence of intelligent design is everywhere
Stephen C. Meyer
National Post of Canada
December 10, 2005 -------------In December 2004 New Mexico Public Television scheduled, advertised and then, under pressure, canceled a documentary explaining the scientific case for a theory of biological origins known as intelligent design.
In the same month, a renowned British philosopher, Antony Flew, made worldwide news when he repudiated a lifelong commitment to atheism, citing among other factors, evidence of intelligent design in the DNA molecule.
Also in December, the ACLU filed suit to prevent a Dover, Penn. school district from informing its students about the theory of intelligent design.
In February, The Wall Street Journal reported that an evolutionary biologist with two doctorates had been punished for publishing a peer-reviewed scientific article making a case for this same theory------------------------DNA functions like a software program. We know from experience that software comes from programmers. We know generally that information-whether inscribed in hieroglyphics, written in a book or encoded in a radio signal-always arises from an intelligent source. So the discovery of information in the DNA molecule, provides strong grounds for inferring that intelligence played a role in the origin of DNA, even if we weren't there to observe the system coming into existence.--------------------trying to keep increasing evidence of a Designer from being published and taught....
(Edited by lori100)
Geoff: Well, scientists can believe what they want. But as scientists they have to respect evidence.
And the evidence shows that design is an awful lot like time plus adaptation.
lori100: Why would DNA adapt to such precise encoded messaging? For what purpose?....I could believe God encoded species to adapt automatically to extreme changes in the environment...and why are half of humans born male and half female ?...It seems more than an 'accident'...the system seems balanced on purpose...
lori100: this one,? The anthropic principle states that coincidences are part of the universe's very structure.--------------- never heard of it...-----but I don't think half being born male and half female is a coincidence...or the way DNA works, or the Fibonacci sequence...or other evidence of a design.......why does DNA need to survive? why should it exist at all?
generation_X: Humans are curious people, we have technology that can measuring ages of rock, fossils, and solid surfaces called radiometric dating. This measurement device involves an understanding of physics and chemistry, it belongs to geochemists who can measure particularly solids with great accuracy. they measured the solar system to be 4.5 billion years using radiometric dating. Only people who deny evolution have a belief system deeply rooted in religion. That is okay, but "the bible is an ever-receding pocket of scientific ignorance that is getting smaller". (N.Tyson.) If we never questioned anything, we would believe that there are still witches, homosexuality is a choice, the Earth is the center of the universe, etc. Humans question and when they do, they usually get the right answer.
Blackshoes: The above insults and assumptions of everything and everyone that disagrees with evolution .Only shows the ignorance of those that think themselves wise !
Information about any subject is the key to understanding the subject .
Insulting those that give information ?Doesn't lend to a good nor informative discussion !
generation_X: There is no reconciliation between evolution and creationism. They shouldn't even be allowed.
Blackshoes: So You say ! If you understood how unscientific Evolution really is .You be preaching the Gospel of Creation ! Rather than the unlikely hood of Trans species development .Evolution assumes;' because Adaptational change happens . They conclude that Evolution is a fact , without any other evidence !
generation_X: Well, I agree with Neil DeGrasse Tyson on this subject. They are irreconcilable. If you attempt to get your science from the bible, you will get it all wrong. We know enough now to say that isn't honest. Two examples, during the revelation when all the lights in the sky come to Earth during the second coming, and Earth is the center of the universe. This tells people who want the truth, that the bible doesn't know what the hell those lights are, and that we are not the center of universe, we are in the cosmic boondocks. But, I have nothing against religion when it is used say in the instance of a Peruvian peasant, who teaches a bible study class on Tuesday nights. She does not need a lesson in epistemology. Oh and by the way, it is with human evolution we lack the most evidence of any facet within the theory of evolution. It does have evidence that we came from a small ape-like perhaps hominid species in east Africa, 50,000 years ago. Hey that is older then 6,000 years.
Blackshoes: I don't care if you're a Atheist ,Creationist ,Believer or Accept Intelligent Design ,or Evolution !
Just show me something factual about the THEORY of Evolution', other than Adaptational change ? Before you claim it's a fact ?
A number of Bias assumptionist', believe that the reason I reject Evolution is due to my Faith in God ?
" The only reason " I reject Evolution is that it's unscientific !
The first ten minutes explains many of the same reasons why I reject the religious theory of Evolution !