Why everything you've been told about evolution is wrong

Discussion in 'Politics' started by jficquette, Mar 27, 2010.

  1. Sort of like the "Global warming / Global climate change" evangelism of recent memory ??
     
    #21     Mar 28, 2010
  2. Wallet

    Wallet

    The problem for Darwinism is irreducible complexity, by Darwin’s own admission; if complex beings can come into being without modification then his theory is wrong. At the time of Darwin’s work, the human genome, cell complexity was not known; he understood cells as building blocks of nature but not how they work or more amazing how they construct themselves. Different parts of the cell building and arranging the protein strings (actually passing of information) as to the exact order and timing for building the essential parts then arranging them for the final cell construction.

    The complexity of cell reproduction has led the field of Biology to concede the “appearance of intelligent design”. But when you start from an atheistic basis the obvious solution to the dilemma is unsolvable. Instead theories are left with unexplainable holes, incomplete conclusions, all the time ignoring the possibility of the simple solution, that life and it’s complex nature was created.

    One thing to ponder - coagulation, the ability of blood to form a clot when you are cut but stay liquid while inside your veins. Study sometime (in detail) exactly how your body does this, when the tissue is injured all the proteins and enzymes sent out that cause other proteins and enzymes in the blood to respond and start the formation of a clot at the injured spot. It’s rather exhaustive to read all the different components and how they interact, and to realize if any one step is altered or missing then we bleed to death as seen in Hemophilia.

    How many thousands, millions of years did it take evolution to form the necessary components of the cell structure to form all the necessary components of this function? And how did life exist and endure without it?
     
    #22     Mar 28, 2010
  3. Well said.

    The "faith" of the macro-evolutionist is exactly as you stated:

    Billions and billions of years.

    Anything that cannot be currently observed or replicated in true scientific examination is defaulted to the "billions of years" article of faith in the Darwinian evolutionary dogmatics.
     
    #23     Mar 28, 2010
  4. #24     Mar 28, 2010
  5. Ricter

    Ricter

    It is not irreducible to the sciences "below" biology, such as biochemistry, molecular biology, and chemistry. That the general public is not mathematically trained enough to be able to follow the chain of cause and effect that connects chemistry (or physics, for that matter) to biology does not mean that the hypotheses and theories of those sciences are wrong, ie. "too complicated", it only means that the general public is "too simple". If I appear to insult, pardon me, I include myself in the general public now, sadly, as I have forgotten the specifics of biochemistry I learned in college, and have retained only the gist.
     
    #25     Mar 28, 2010
  6. IOW: I forgot the details because I never knew them in the first place, now all I have left is the religion they preached.
     
    #26     Mar 28, 2010
  7. All events are stored in DNA. Stories about past lives uncovered by researchers are simply remembering lives of ancestors whose history was stored in their DNA.

    The universe is guided by an intelligence. Humans call that God but that's only because we have no explanation for it.
     
    #27     Mar 28, 2010
  8. Ricter

    Ricter

    The link the OP gave is not about the missing day. It is about a potential modification to our understanding of evolution.

    This is a lesson for today's writers. Be careful what you put in your opening paragraph, the mass of twitter readers may very well get no farther in your piece.
     
    #28     Mar 28, 2010
  9. stu

    stu

    That’s not what I meant it seems you missed the point.


    For some weird reason or other, there are those who want to put God before science. They often try to do so by pretending those scientific theories are merely articles of faith, whilst all the time those theories lead to new facts and endless discovery.

    Without the knowledge in science gained from understanding Darwin and Evolution, there would be no modern day medicine.
    Evolution is a fact . Biological Evolution is a fact.
    All the detailed understanding of Evolutionary mechanisms are not understood.
    Understanding is constantly improved by scientific theories, which can lead to new facts being discovered.Those theories will also include some facts.

    ' Why everything you've been told about evolution is wrong '....... because you can make up some wrong science about how science is wrong. ...Brilliant.
    It sells some books and gets attention in a newspaper column. Mix in some real science and some attention grabbing titles like Darwin's Evolution and act like Darwin is wrong.

    So why on earth would anyone want to do that other than sell books or get recognition or like creationists do, insist that their imaginary friend needs to be pushed in front of science ?

    Those same people push pseudo-science as a means to suggest , or more usually insist , that things like Evolution can't be a fact because... guess what....their pseudo-science says otherwise.


    As you can see in this thread, there are those who want to use any means to remove science from fact to create ignorance, just to say science is wrong and faith is not.
    My question is, why do people want to encourage ignorance?


    ps

    "a potential modification to our understanding of evolution." is not science. It's book selling . The way evolution is understood... is science.
     
    #29     Mar 29, 2010
  10. Thank you stu for clearing that up.
     
    #30     Mar 29, 2010