Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 33
  1. #1

    SCIENTIFIC PROBLEMS WITH MACROEVOLUTION: Gatorboymike, this one's for you.

    Yes, this is from a Christian website, but quotes famous and renowned Scientists, Genetiscits, heck I dunno, you probably know these last names more than I do. This is just a quickie, I really don't have time to compile research, data, etc. for a proper thread of refutations to evolution alone. Not to mention, big bang and others.

    Since you like to slander me and say I'm an ignorant redneck who quotes, as you call them, quack scientists or whatever, and I say a quick mantra to an aparition made up by goat herding nincompoops. Well, here's some quotes from your heroes......



    http://75.125.60.6/~creatio1/index.p...ask=view&id=40


    (Karl Popper's definition of the scientific method )

    1. OBSERVATION -steps of evolution have never been observed (Stebbins )

    In the fossil record we view our data as so bad that we never see the very process we profess to study.(Gould )

    2. EXPERIMENTATION -The processes would exceed the lifetime of any human experimenter (Dobzhansky )

    3. REPRODUCTION - impossible to reproduce in the laboratory. (Dobshansky )

    4. FALSIFICATION -cannot be refuted thus outside empirical science. (Ehrlich )



    RESEARCH PROBLEMS WITH MACROEVOLUTION:

    1. ORIGINS -the chance of life originating from inorganic chemical elements by natural means is beyond the realm of possibility (Hoyle )

    2. DEVELOPMENT -to produce a new organism from an existing life-form requires alterations in the genetic material which are lethal to the organism (Maddox )

    3. STASIS -enzymes in the cell nucleus repair errors in the DNA (Barton )

    4. GEOLOGIC COLUMN -out-of-place artifacts have been found in earth's sedimentary layers which disrupt the supposed evolutionary order (Corliss )

    5. DESIGN -irreducible complexity within the structure of the cell requires design (Denton, Behe ).



    (DNA REPAIR: The genome is reproduced very faithfully and there are enzymes which repair the DNA, where errors have been made or when the DNA is damaged. - D.H.R. Barton, Professor of Chemistry, Texas A&M University, Nobel Prize for Chemistry )



    (CHANGE WITHIN GENETIC BOUNDARIES: Microevolution does not lead beyond the confines of the species, and the typical products of microevolution, the geographic races, are not incipient species. There is no such category as incipient species. Richard B. Goldschmidt )



    (MUTATION ACCUMULATIONS RELENTLESSLY FATAL: Any random change
    in a complex, specific, functioning system wrecks that system. And living things are the most complex functioning systems in the universe.Science has now
    quantitated that a genetic mutation of as little as 1 billionth (0.0000001%) of an animal's genome is relentlessly fatal.The genetic difference between human an
    his nearest relative, the chimpanzee, is at least 1.6% Calculated out that is a
    gap of at least 48 million nucleotide differences that must be bridged by random changes. And a random change of only 3 nucleotides is fatal to an animal.
    Geneticist Barney Maddox, 1992 )







    Variant Protein Expression in Living Systems
    Dependent upon Information Already
    Present in Genome





    Original research carried out at the Creation Evidence Museum in Glen Rose, Texas in the mid-1990’s utilized the physical atmospheric parameters of the hyperbaric biosphere on premise. Alteration of atmospheric parameters included increase of atmospheric pressure, oxygen and carbon dioxide ratios, and electromagnetic moment. Under these alterations physical structure and protein expression of snake venom were significantly changed. Comparison was made between ambient control conditions and hyperbaric biospheric conditions.

    In the independent analysis and correspondence related in the following pages some protein expressions were enhanced, some were diminished, some were eliminated, and some expressions not seen under ambient conditions were seen under hyperbaric conditions.



    Page 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | Page 4 | Page 5 | Page 6 | Page 7 | Page 8
    Page 9 | Page 10 | Page 11 | Page 12 | Page 13 | Page 14 | Page 15



    A Moment in History...

    That a maker is required for anything that is made is a lesson Sir Isaac Newton was able to teach forcefully to an atheist-scientist friend of his. Sir Isaac had an accomplished artisan fashion for him a small scale model of our solar system which was to be put in a room in Newton’s home when completed. The assignment was finished and installed on a large table. The workman had done a very commendable job, simulating not only the various sizes of the planets and their relative proximities, but also so constructing the model that everything rotated and orbited when a crank was turned. It was an interesting, even fascinating work, as you can image, particularly to anyone schooled in the sciences.

    Newton’s atheist-scientist friend came by for a visit. Seeing the model, he was naturally intrigued, and proceeded to examine it with undisguised admiration for the high quality of the workmanship. ‘My! What an exquisite thing this is!’ he exclaimed. ‘Who made it?’ Paying little attention to him, Sir Isaac answered, ‘Nobody.’

    Stopping his inspection, the visitor turned and said: ‘Evidently you did not understand my question. I asked who made this. Newton, enjoying himself immensely no doubt, replied in a still more serious tone. ‘Nobody. What you see just happened to assume the form it now has.’ ‘You must think I am a fool!’ the visitor retorted heatedly, ‘Of course somebody made it, and he is a genius, and I would like to know who he is.’

    Newton then spoke to his friend in a polite yet firm way: ‘This thing is but a puny imitation of a much grander system whose laws you know, and I am not able to convince you that this mere toy is without a designer and maker; yet you profess to believe that the great original from which the design is taken has come into being without either designer or maker! Now tell me by what sort of reasoning do you reach such an incongruous conclusion?’

    Sir Isaac Newton Solar System Story (from the book: ‘The Truth: God or evolution?’ by Marshall and Sandra Hall, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, MI)

  2. #2
    I've never understood why people can't work that faith of their's to believe that evolution is a scientific process set into motion by God.

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by daniel3417 View Post
    I've never understood why people can't work that faith of their's to believe that evolution is a scientific process set into motion by God.
    I'll tell you this, saying we came from animals is a ploy of the great liar. This ploy gets us to believe we are the same as animals, thereby exusing certain ways of life as, "well, we're just animals".

    When actually the Bible says this,
    See, I give you every seed-bearing plant all over the earth and every tree that has seed-bearing fruit on it to be your food; and to all the animals of the land, all the birds of the air, and all the living creatures that crawl on the ground, I give all the green plants for food." And so it happened. God looked at everything he had made, and he found it very good.... Such is the story of the heavens and the earth at their creation. (Genesis 1:27-31; 2:4)
    "Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground." So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them." (Gen.1:26-27)

    How can we possible rule over them if we came from them? If we came from animals, they would have equal rule as we do.

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by jessejordan419 View Post
    How can we possible rule over them if we came from them? If we came from animals, they would have equal rule as we do.
    So you don't believe in evolution. Fine, you aren't alone. It's a theory, perfectly logical backed by tons of evidence, but a theory nonetheless. But your logic above is ludicrous.

    Animals all have equal rule? Does a lion have as equal of a rule as a ladybug? Please say no. Save yourself the ridicule. Just wanted to debunk that idea.

    And if humans aren't animals, what are we? Humans, homo sapiens, are the most complex and intelligent animal on earth. Do you refute this??

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by daniel3417 View Post
    So you don't believe in evolution. Fine, you aren't alone. It's a theory, perfectly logical backed by tons of evidence, but a theory nonetheless. But your logic above is ludicrous.

    Animals all have equal rule? Does a lion have as equal of a rule as a ladybug? Please say no. Save yourself the ridicule. Just wanted to debunk that idea.

    And if humans aren't animals, what are we? Humans, homo sapiens, are the most complex and intelligent animal on earth. Do you refute this??
    The Bible refutes this, indicated in the passages above. So you're saying God is an animal?? If you say man is an animal, well, God created man in His image, so therefore you're saying God is an animal.

  6. #6
    Jesse.... I get what you are trying to say but honestly... Evolution is pretty much proven to be in action today. Its not on a grand scale and they arent completely evolving like monkeys into humans but survival of the fittest is natures way of evolution. Small traits die out and are replaced all the time. There are many scientific documentations that pretty much prove this. Again, I do not believe we all evolved from a small atom into what we are today but i also believe there is a little bit of evolution going on all the time.
    Magglio Ordonez 665/4851 13.7%
    AJ Guyton 75/87 85% plus 5 1/1's
    Hidden Content

  7. #7
    For me the theory that we evolved from animals is way more believable than a man being created and then a woman being created from that man and then all other humans were created by that couple.

    The similarities between us and "animals" are way too vast in my opinion. I'm not sure of other people's motives but I don't use my belief that we evolved to excuse certain ways of human life.

    Also, I don't an issue with classifying god as an animal.

  8. #8
    I am sorry. The fact that you use the term macro-evolution exposes the fact that you have no idea about the theory. Evolution is evolution, small and big. No one who truly understands the theory would use a ridiculous term, macro-evolution. If I can not trust you to understand this simple fact, I can not trust you to explain any other infromation.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by jessejordan419 View Post
    The Bible refutes this, indicated in the passages above. So you're saying God is an animal?? If you say man is an animal, well, God created man in His image, so therefore you're saying God is an animal.
    Well are you saying then that we are all gods then?

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by tutall View Post
    Jesse.... I get what you are trying to say but honestly... Evolution is pretty much proven to be in action today. Its not on a grand scale and they arent completely evolving like monkeys into humans but survival of the fittest is natures way of evolution. Small traits die out and are replaced all the time. There are many scientific documentations that pretty much prove this. Again, I do not believe we all evolved from a small atom into what we are today but i also believe there is a little bit of evolution going on all the time.
    And that is the difference between microevolution and macroevolution. You are referring to the former, and I am referring to the latter.

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •