Science Disproves Evolution

[bluewater2]

"Shall I in turn ask of you or Dodge for such an apology in jumping on me for believing in God, or am I to assume your far to above one such as me for any such thing?"

Please direct me for where I have "jumped on you" for believing in god. If I have done that as you have stated, I would absolutely appologize.

If you feel that questioning your beliefs is the same as jumping on your beliefs, please let me know if that is the case and I will cease to do so.

So far, it seems, honest questioning has done nothing more than expose your faulty assumptions, which I think is what questioning is about.

Again, if you can show me where I "jumped on your belief in god", I will gladly appologize.

[dobman53]

I'll take your comments as a no!

As for any of my posts their intensions were not to promote myself as you seem to think, if such were my actual cause don't you think I might actually use spell check or spend hours in wording such posts to then have it appear as I'm the real cats meow!!!

So as you contribe as Dodge does in thinking such things as being so asured, such is not the case. Any such Einstien talk was only to say even ones whom we all look upon as greats had faults as well, nothing at all with me associating myself with him. But I can understand such things coming to the fore-front with ones personal thoughts. When all posts seem to be the launching pads of attack we all asume a defensive posture.

I guess thats just the way it goes sometimes, as I seem to do it as well. In that aspect are any of us really all that innocent, perhaps not!!!

DOB!

[bluewater2]

"As for any of my posts their intensions were not to promote myself as you seem to think."

I would not take any of the posts by you as being promotional. Quite the contrary.

"I'll take your comments as a no!" No to what? Are you able to direct me to where I have jumped on your beliefs in god?

"When all posts seem to be the launching pads of attack we all asume a defensive posture." I'm sorry if you feel the need to be defensive when your erronious facts are displayed.

My greater concern is your lack of contrition.

"So as you contribe as Dodge does in thinking such things as being so asured, such is not the case." Huh? Why don't you stop pretending that you are in some Shakespearean play and speak normal English. It would help someone like me with my obviously limited intelligence to understand the points you are trying to make.

[dobman53]

First according to Dodge I'm a hillbilly hack now I'm supposed to be Shakespear, well thats another fine mess I've gotten myself into?? Maybe I should take up pig-latin next? I guess from now on with my obvious limited intelligence, I can no longer pretend to be mighty mouse either, and here I was hoping to save the day!!! Dog gone it any how!!!

I had my heart on being somebody, and to think it's not going to be. I can't take it as this is just to much to take in one day. Please say it isn't so please!!!!

I gotta hand it to ya bluewater, I haven't had such a good laugh in I don't know how long. Your the greatest, and I do mean it.

DOB!

[jargon631]

dob...we arent talking about a computer...we are talking about God...you know, omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent...what about the adaptation of species to environment...it has happened countless times in the animal kingdom...

frederick denison

[jargon631]

and continues to happen...(sorry, i should proofread better)

[dobman53]

jargon631: If your talking about the diversification in species fine, but I'll asume your talking along lines of altogether completely new species arriving from no new imformation such as that is completely false. DNA cannot develope new information anymore so than my old commadore 64 can. Technically biologically how ever you want to put it it's scientifically impossible.

First you must remember the entire story. By that I'm meaning first you have heat, light, and rocks. I have in the past represented this by joking in saying the rubbing of two stones did come life??? Then as to say add in a bunch of exploding valcano's smashing meteorites, not forgetting numerous lightning bolt strikes and toss in couple of comets to boot then walla!! Life??? Some don't think thats very funny, but I do.

Now sure enough many believe such fairy tales, but lets not forget their trying to come up with some sort of something to explain life without there being any logic involved.

Some might then ask OK smarty pants how did it happen? I scratch my head look them straight in the eye, and say isn't it obvious?? But in their discust of any such thing they raise their eye brows and say you gotta be kidding!!!

I'll then say oh it's true just as it's true no lightning bolt struck an abicuss and out popped a commadore 64. Seriously It's just not going to happen, and I don't care if that abicuss were struck for a billion years either!!! Time creates nothing, but only decay.

Thermo-dynamics are proven fundamentalls of scientific observations. Higher chemical combinations decay in time, no new elements ever come from decay. You can set an object in motion though it will never asume more energy. As with all things it will eventually decay once abstructed.

In one gallon of gasoline there is an exact amount of energy, you'll never get 110% return no matter what. No new energy no new higher forms, these are the fundamentals of thermo-dynamics which are scientificaly proven observations.

All these theories are nothing more than the unproven thoughts of men. Some still insist upon their thoughts of billions of years as being the creator of all things. Time it's self has no mental powers of creation. No new ideas are held within time, as time in it's fundamental state is only a perceptions held within the minds of men. Nothing more nothing less thats all it shall ever be is just simply time.

DOB!

[bluewater2]

"All these theories are nothing more than the unproven thoughts of men."

So is the theory that a god did it.

[dobman53]

Isn't it obvious. And to that I say no I'm not kidding either!

Oh now I'm all aware about the supposed pecking order of Darwin beaks. Not forgetting the lizards crawling out of the waters. Toss in a billion years and you then have me!! Sorry I can't swallow it, it just won't go down!! My commador 64 says no compute!!

DOB!

[bluewater2]

Isn't what obvious?

[dobman53]

Bluewater: GOD!! All the wonders in the heavens, and here on earth.

All the supposed stages of evolution are still right here. All the varities still have the keys from the past, and the future as well. Any and all imformation still locked within all DNA. There's nothing new under the sun.

DOB!

[jargon631]

dob..actually i was talking about both diversification between species and adaptation and change within species...

[dobman53]

Lets take Darwins beaks. Yes through time a longer beek could dominate a selected group in a species. Though those birds could breed for 100 billion trillion years and at the end of time birds would still have nothing but birds for their efforts.

It just so happens I breed fancy pigeons. I breed for rare colors, and structure in formation to futher inhance the breed. I could breed pigeons till forever and never shall a monkey climb from my cage. I challenge any to do so, as it's just not going to happen. I don't care if you breed pigeons for a billion years no monkey shall ever climb from a pigeon cage. Nor any lizard rat cat or dog either.

Some get so caried away when they begin to learn a thing or two, they instantly train their thoughts on there being no God. Them thinking I am now wise. Just look upon me they say, see how much I know. Never argue with me!! as I am the most wise!!!

Sorry Dob doesn't dance on command to any tune. Least of all thoughs whom insist their wise whilst whistling their tunes.

DOB!

DOB!

[jargon631]

dob...why would you assume that i was talking about a new species...adaptation to environment is a survival skill...there is a reason that darwin chose the galapagos islands...the flora and fauna on each island , while coming from common ancestors, had adapted to their own specific island environment...also, the following words are spelled in the following way...

valcano...wrong volcano...right
discust...wrong disgust...right
dialation..wrong dilation...right
abicus....wrong abacus...right
inhance..wrong enhance..right
geno...makes pizza rolls genome...part of us all
ranker...british military personel below an officers rank
rancor...bad feelings towards another

[dobman53]

My spelling is beyond bad. My sentance structure stinks!! Should these be the root to your misunderstandings I'll except that. But I don't think so!!!! I don't think they really are anything more than what you choose to make them.

Are such things as these now your only defence, to promote Darwins stories as being such noble in facts.

Without question there is deversification within all spiecies. Though may I remind you such thinking as explained by Darwin was not in it's self anything new. As all that was actually proved was of things that had already been previously said.

Darwin was from a successful family. In growing up Darwin had difficulties with the strict Christian traditions, Once married he told to his wife of his true feelings, she warned him early on that such talk could destroy his exceptance. He well knew that he could be declared a heritic!

During those early times Darwin did keep certain things to himself. Though in short order many discoveries were being made that didn't fit with the then Christian traditions. Right here I feel the need to interject that back then as even today these traditions that are held are not from the Bible they are the traditions of the held beliefs of men. Supposed Christian men say this, or say that!! not the Bible. I challenge you to show me one verse in the Bible that backs up so many of these supposed christian mens thoughts!! Would you believe me when I tell you there not there???

So as with Darwin in those days men did start to question these traditions, and not surprising they found them wanting. Before long it became most apparent that to be concidered as wise one must first divorce themselves from the bonds of Christianity. For me to be honest I can't hold this against them, as such is the case today as it was in the past all these supposed Christian traditions do hinder many things. Though here again I must remind you these traditions are not of the actual Bible.

It then came to be a situation that did worsen, a full out head on assault to wipe God from the minds of all men. Today all new scientific discoveries must first pass the no God test. It's gotten so bad these days that many new discoveries are at first with held untill they can be best explained to fit within Darwinian thoughts. The reason being should a scientist be thought of as a heritict of scientific men, fingers are quickly pointed at such scientist's as being unscientific not worth of the time of day.

Many times in the cases I'm talking of it's found certain forms of life pop up in rock strata's that don't follow the time line structures of previous convictions. Many times such discoveries are quickly hid, if for no other reason than to dodge pointing fingers. Then later if there not found to fit within expected perameters, there quickly explained away as inferior fact recoveries.

Now we have made great strides in our knowledge concerning many things, but here again we have to admit when we approuch information with preconcieved ideas often as not we find ourselves commiting these before hand traditions of men once again. We have critisized in the past false traditions of men. One thing seems most certain, and if you think it over it's true. Were probably just as commited today to once again repeat these false traditions of men as we have done from the past. Though now these supposed traditions are of scientific ways, but in that it makes no difference as all are just traditions of men.

DOB!

[Pahu]

Pahu: Seems that all what appears is not allways so. Many get all sorts of conclusions drawn when condemplating unknowns. We all may be guilty of such on accassion though on that note while I to find fault with Evolution I see it's errors from a far different view.

Mine simply is concluded from the errors that I see in the drawing of such conclusions. While I base my thoughts from different realms than thoughs who hold upon being a young earth bases. It does point out that many are far from one another in drawing our own seperate conclusions.

Pahu I myself find from within the Bible that the universe, earth included is beyond our minds to comprehind such an age. Far far more than any 6-10,000 years. Those sort of numbers are mention from the Bible to be a mere pittance in days. Virtually no time at all.

The time for light to travel from one end of the milky way to the other is 100,000 years.
If we were but 10,000 years in exsistance when we look out through our telescopes we would see very little. Many of the targets I know by heart are beyond 10,000 light years distance. These are actually small distances in the realm of things these smaller distances were proven long ago by triangulations. These billion years distances are the products of red shifts, and cified stars (poor spelling) This type of star is a constant brightness where with the degrees of brightness can be calculated to distance. Huble used such stars when discovering the Andromeda Galaxy. Through spectural anallises he detected these cified stars at distances that rocked the then know facts of there being another galaxy other than our own.

DOB!

DOB!

You bring up a very strong reason to believe the universe is indeed billions of years old, but there are reasons to believe the speed of light has not always traveled at its present speed, but was going far faster in the past. If that is true, the distances from earth to the galaxies would be far closer. That is the purely physical explanation.

In the Bible, God reveals He stretched out the heavens. That stretching would also include light, which would result in the appearance of great distances and time.

Another question that comes to my mind is that if it is true light left a star billions of years ago, then what we are seeing is not that star at all, but the way it was billions of years ago. For all we know, that star doesn't even exist now. That holds true for all of the galaxies we see.

Another question I have is how do we know how far away those stars are in the first place. Triangulation may be the answer, but I wonder.

[Pahu]

Dodge: Pahu, your quote from Edward O. Wilson is out of context, where you make it seem as if he has “recognized the failings” of evolution.

Pahu: That implication is in your mind, not the post.

Dodge: Wilson is a Harvard University entomologist, and he has spent most of his life studying ants. His comments about altruism has to do with insects, not humans.

Pahu: True, but isn’t it true for all life forms that in the framework of evolution, none of them give any thought to the destiny of their genes or the welfare of their fellow critters? I think that is what he was suggesting.

Dodge: If you actually read that interview instead of clipping pieces of it from your favorite creationist website, you would have seen that Edward O. Wilson is a secular humanist who teaches that belief in God is a product of evolution. His explanations of morality are based on evolutionary theory.

Pahu: I have no reason to believe otherwise, but those are just his opinions, aren’t they?

Dodge: Wilson said, “Believe what you will, but the science of evolution is as clear and firm as any science on earth. It’s just taking a lot of humans a long time to catch up.”

Pahu: Ditto above. What he says and what he can back up with evidence are two different things.

Dodge: More quotes from Wilson:

“I think evolution came up with a fairly big animal, primates, with a fairly big brain, and then this animal somehow got on its hind legs. And once it was erect, it had the freedom of hands. It could carry things. It could try out tools. This was the takeoff point. Nothing like that had ever happened before.”

Pahu: Notice this paragraph is filled with nothing but speculation, not facts.

Dodge: “One of the difficult truths of evolutionary biology is that we live in a world where the brain gives rise to the mind and when we die physically, we’re dead forever.”

Pahu: He calls that a truth. Where is the evidence?

Dodge: I can see why some have called you a “copy/paste quote mine propagandist.” What you do is dishonest.

Pahu: Do you know the difference between a lie and a false statement?

[Pahu]

Extraterrestrial Life?

No verified form of life which originated outside of earth has ever been observed. If life evolved on earth, one would expect that the elaborate experiments sent to the Moon and Mars might have detected at least simple forms of life (such as microbes) that differ in some respects from life on earth (a).

Many people, including Carl Sagan, predicted the Viking landers would find life on Mars. They reasoned that because life evolved on Earth, some form of life must have evolved on Mars. That prediction proved to be false. The arms of the Viking 1 Lander sampled Martian soil. Sophisticated tests on those samples did not find even a trace of life.

a. The widely publicized claims, made by NASA in 1996, to have found fossilized life in a meteorite from Mars are now largely dismissed. [See Richard A. Kerr, “Requiem for Life on Mars? Support for Microbes Fades,” Science, Vol. 282, 20 November 1998, pp. 1398–1400.]

http://www.creationscience.com/onlin...html#wp1279359

[jargon631]

dob...im confused...what does any of what u just ranted have to do with species adaptability...stick to the point...answer the question...what fingers are pointed...what discoveries are hidden...my mother taught biology and chemistry for years at a christian boarding school...i grew up in a christian home surrounded by the sciences and at no time was there any cognitive dissonance regarding the two...(christianity/science) in fact, if u consider God to be the creator,wouldnt he also be at least partly responsible for the knowledge that the earth gives us...

frederick denison

[dobman53]

jargon631: First off I have no problems with species adaptabilities. As I above wrote (Without question there is devesification within all species)

Sometimes there are those who have from before hand made up thier minds about another. Do you blindly read thinking it not neccessary, as already having made up your mind??

I touched on some things apparently that are forien to your thinkings. Have you never heard of where scientific discoveries were hid in the past, and such things are still going on to this day.

Reread my post if you find something that concerns you then simply spell it out. I'll return a post in kind.

DOB!