Top Ten Scientific Facts : Evolution is False and Impossible.

page: 58
91
<< 55  56  57    59 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 12:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by Since1981
 



The Weasel applet starts with maximum diversity in the group, for each iteration it converges to the minimum amount of diversity. How do you explain this? Should not evolution theory produce diversity?

The applet does not reflect reality. It is an example of a method called a genetic algorithm.

en.wikipedia.org...
www.obitko.com...
lancet.mit.edu...

Have at it and learn something.


A genetic algorithm is a selection process, which always apply to entities that multiply imperfectly in a limited system.

It is definitively applicable on earth, because the prerequisites are fullfilled without a single doubt. Now you are arguing that this demonstration of a principle, the most fundamental corner stone of evolution theory, does not reflect in reality.

That is a little bit too much for me. There is just silly inaccurate slander from your side and a complete void of logic as you just have demonstrated. Have it your way, I will not mind about you any more.




posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 12:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by Since1981
 



The Weasel applet starts with maximum diversity in the group, for each iteration it converges to the minimum amount of diversity. How do you explain this? Should not evolution theory produce diversity?

The applet does not reflect reality. It is an example of a method called a genetic algorithm.

en.wikipedia.org...
www.obitko.com...
lancet.mit.edu...

Have at it and learn something.


A genetic algorithm is a selection process, which always apply to entities that multiply imperfectly in a limited system.

It is definitively applicable on earth, because the prerequisites are fullfilled without a single doubt. Now you are arguing that this demonstration of a principle, the most fundamental corner stone of evolution theory, does not reflect in reality.

That is a little bit too much for me. There is just silly inaccurate slander from your side and a complete void of logic as you just have demonstrated. Have it your way, I will not mind about you any more.



posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 01:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Since1981
 



It is definitively applicable on earth, because the prerequisites are fullfilled without a single doubt. Now you are arguing that this demonstration of a principle, the most fundamental corner stone of evolution theory, does not reflect in reality.

You are completely confused about simple issues such as the meaning of fact and theory and how they are related. Now you continue this confusion.

Despite your appeal to ignorance science works and so does evolution. Evolution is a fact. The fossil record makes it abundantly clear that life on Earth appeared at staggered times and changed into the forms we see today. The archaeological record is also clear that the stories in the bible are not true.

I recommend that you take the time to learn the basics. Begin with learning what a fact and theory are and then go from there.



posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 02:15 PM
link   
This thread is a perfect demonstration as to why homeschooling is generally a bad thing, especially in religious households. First, the parents are not nearly qualified enough to educate their children about anything that matters. 2nd, kids are intentionally mislead by their parents about important subjects like science and math, because they won't teach anything that contradicts their fundamentalist belief in a compilation of stories from thousands of years ago. This is despite the fact that their understanding of science and reality is extremely poor. Thus they pass their ignorance on to the next generation. This is why many people are still living in the dark ages. I feel bad for the many children this happens to, but the only advice I can offer them is break the cycle. Go out there and actively seek knowledge, so you can understand these concepts for yourself. Don't rely on others to tell you things. Use google, and if you are interested enough, you can become a scientist and research these things for yourself. The knowledge is out there but so many people flat out refuse to even attempt to learn. Your parents are not all knowing and neither are you. Stop being a drone and a follower. Start acting like an individual and learn things for yourself.
edit on 18-4-2012 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 25 2012 @ 10:49 PM
link   
It's clearly obvious that natural selection is an observable phenomenon. Whatever value the bible may have to you it doesn't change the fact that there are major flaws in it's presumptions. Scientifically speaking, how accurate do you believe the bible could be seeing how it was written (old testament especially) thousands of years ago. I mean it doesn't take a genius or someone reading through all 58 pages of this thread to understand that the bible is clearly wrong about the origins of life. May this be because it was written by humans? (known to be imperfect to a high degree) Brainwashed bible thumpers take the bible so literally as to ignore common sense and logic. One of the only hiccups in the theory of evolution via natural selection is the development of certain complex parts like an eye or your liver. There is a scientific explanation as with anything we can grasp it just needs to be discovered. In this day an age you can hope to witness that happen so be patient. People need to grow up and take things for what they are and not what they wish they were. Thats exactly whats wrong with this world and im fully against those who take religion and use it to control the lives of others. Example, moral conservatives against birth control. We have enough dumb people on this planet WHY overpopulate this # hole any faster with more pieces of #. Just sayin. I'm 21 and want to have an enjoyable retirement. Thank you



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 12:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by NoJoker13
reply to post by edsinger
 


Well there are a number of your facts that are "false". In recent weeks we've figured out that NASA scientists missed data from mars from the 70's, in that data the scientist said that Mars showed it had life. He speculated that in the next couple years we will know for certainty, he said in his mind it was a %100 chance of life. I could go into the other ones but I'll leave it at that, also you should really lookup what an ostrich is since you're clearly dillusional about the pros of small wings.


They didn't miss it--they just ignored it because they couldn't arrive at a consensus. Levin has been shouting at the top of his lungs for 36 years that it tested positive. NASA dropped the ball--it discounted the results from his experiment and at the same time upheld the results from its own GCMS, which didn't even function properly in Antarctica during testing. There was NO indication from Viking that the GCMS, on which NASA based its results, ever received samples into its chamber. Either there was a flaw in the delivery mechanism, or the GCMS didn't get a big enough sample to register. (Which doesn't say a lot about the sensitivity of the GCMS.)



posted on Apr, 26 2012 @ 12:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Since1981

Originally posted by stereologist
reply to post by Since1981
 



The Weasel applet starts with maximum diversity in the group, for each iteration it converges to the minimum amount of diversity. How do you explain this? Should not evolution theory produce diversity?

The applet does not reflect reality. It is an example of a method called a genetic algorithm.

en.wikipedia.org...
www.obitko.com...
lancet.mit.edu...

Have at it and learn something.


A genetic algorithm is a selection process, which always apply to entities that multiply imperfectly in a limited system.


Genetic algorithms apply in artificial intelligence, and EA's are extremely limited in their application and modeling of biological evolution. One of their biggest drawbacks is the lack of a clear genotype-phenotype distinction.

Although you should know, since you brought it up, that Amoeba (an offshoot of Tierra) evolved self-replication from a randomly seeded initial condition.



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 02:04 AM
link   
reply to post by edsinger
 


Scientific Fact No. 8 - Origin of Matter and Stars Proves Evolution is Wrong

Evolutionists just throw up their hands at the question of the origin of matter because they know something cannot evolve from nothing. They stick their heads in the sand and ignore the problem. The fact that matter exists in outrageously large quantities simply proves evolution is wrong. The "Big Bang" theory doesn't solve the problem either. Matter and energy have to come from somewhere.

Stephen Hawking postulates the universe simply "popped into existence". This idea is based on the fact that at the quantum level small sub-atomic particles are known to pop into and out of existence at random. Knowing that the universe began as a very small and dense sphere of energy he proposes that the Universe may have simply appeared from no where for no apparent reason. So Matter and energy don't have to come from somewhere, this happens in the quantum world constantly, since particles appear then disappear to appear somewhere else.

The energy required for the big bang did indeed spontaneously appear. But that energy couldn't have appeared as a single super dense sphere of energy or else it would be a black hole. So lets say that the state of nothing is a neutral state we can give that the value 0 and the state of 'something' would be the positive integer 1. But if you think about this mathematically a neutral state(nothing) cant give rise to a positive state(something) unless something changes. You cant get something from nothing. You need something to balance it out from a logical mathematical perspective, so -1 plus 1 gives you 0, we also have something called negative energy.

-1 + 1 = 0

Positive Things + Negative Things = Nothing

Sum total of all things = Nothing

Thus the average state of reality is actually neutral/nothing. There is no logical contradiction, as this theory shows things can come from nothing, assuming that negative-things also exist to provide a total sum of nothing.



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 07:05 AM
link   
reply to post by SoSolid
 


"Evolutionists" throwing their hands up at "the origins of matter"? Thanks for demonstrating that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Yet another creationist who is utterly ignorant of the science they attack.



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 07:18 AM
link   
reply to post by SoSolid
 


At least source your posts correctly! In this case, Google shows you copied it from Yahoo Answers


Anyway, cosmology has nothing to do with evolution and you are applying the old God of the gaps again. We don't know how the universe started, so you can't claim "nothing can come from nothing" (except for God, right?) without actually knowing.

Objective evidence matters!

Also, we know evolution is correct because we actively apply it in modern medicine!
edit on 10-7-2012 by MrXYZ because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 07:27 AM
link   
Simple question. If evolution is wrong, why do human beings have the remnants of a tail?

Thank you, good night.



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 08:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by DerekJR321
Simple question. If evolution is wrong, why do human beings have the remnants of a tail?

Thank you, good night.



Because God has humor...but at the same time he's a bit of a dick because he/she/it gave us wisdom teeth.




posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 08:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by DerekJR321
Simple question. If evolution is wrong, why do human beings have the remnants of a tail?

Thank you, good night.



I saw that X Files episode...



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by SoSolid
Scientific Fact No. 8 - Origin of Matter and Stars Proves Evolution is Wrong


You do realize that scientific facts have to be proven right? Origin of matter and stars has nothing to do with biological evolution. It's funny how desperate you guys are to continue the uncalled for assault on science and knowledge. If you hate science so much, please do the world a favor and throw away all of your technology and medicine. Basically, get rid of anything that science has done to make YOUR life better. Attacking a field of science while you reap the benefits from it is hypocritical. There's no way around that.



posted on Jul, 11 2012 @ 10:17 AM
link   
Threads like this are great, the OP thinks he's/she's stumbled upon some information that nobody else has considered, information that will enlighten everyone while totally unaware that the information is so hilariously and demonstrably wrong that only the most dishonest, ignorant or naive people will take it as truth.



And yes, this above pic is meant to be ironic!




posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 04:42 AM
link   
Evolutionists have been brainwashed! They cant reject evolution because they have allready decided to reject God! People have tried to prove the bible wrong for thousands of years but CANT! Yet the evolution theory has allready been proven wrong on so many levels by SCIENCE & LOGIC! Heres just one of my favorite links out of many debunking evolution. Wake Up people! God Bless in Jesus name...

www.inplainsite.org...
edit on 5-12-2012 by HooFHearteD77 because: wrong link



posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 07:33 AM
link   
reply to post by HooFHearteD77
 



Evolutionists have been brainwashed! They cant reject evolution because they have allready decided to reject God! People have tried to prove the bible wrong for thousands of years but CANT! Yet the evolution theory has allready been proven wrong on so many levels by SCIENCE & LOGIC! Heres just one of my favorite links out of many debunking evolution. Wake Up people!

It's obvious who has been brainwashed.

1. Most evolutionists believe in god. Thus you are wrong.
2. The bible has been proved wrong for centuries. That's okay. It still has important lessons to teach even if it is mostly a fabrication.
3. Evolution has been tested extensively and has been modified as required. That is why evolutionary theory today is not the same as what Darwin stated. That is what science does. It adjusts to mistakes.

Yes you have been brainwashed. That site begins with a lie. Creationism is not science. Creationism attempts to mangle facts to fit the bible. Creationism is unwilling to reject any biblical claims such as the obviously nonexistence of the flood. Creationism is unwilling to address the issue that order of creation in genesis is not the same as the order observed in the historical record.

Here is a whopper of a lie in that first paragraph.

Both systems agree on the basic facts. The dispute lies in the interpretation of those facts.

I already gave you an example. The order of creation in genesis is nonsense. Yet, bible thumping liars Ihave heard speak at creationism lectures defend that order. They are unwilling to do science, which requires them to adjust their theory when shown to be wrong.

Long ago people realized that the archaeological evidence does not support the bible. A good example is exodus. There is zero archaeological evidence to support that fairy tale.



posted on Dec, 5 2012 @ 02:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan

Science merely tries to explain the universe in such a way as to not have to reference a supernatural being, since things about a supernatural being can only be understood thru faith, not material evidence.

So when science looks at the development of a human in the womb, its not saying that there is not any soul that enters the body, just as much as its not going to be able to say that there is. Science is mute on religious aspects. Life could be a miracle by god, Science will not be able to refute or affirm that.


So much said in so few words.

Science creates theories that attempt to explain the universe with God left out of the equation (evolution, abiogenesis, multiverse), because God is spirit and not physical/observable. The problem is God created and sustains all things in the universe, to attempt to explain/understand His creation without Him is to leave out the one thing missing in observable science.

This is understandable to those without faith, for only faith can bring understanding of the Creator. And only God can give His servants faith.

Hebrews 11:1&3
"Faith is... the evidence of things not seen. By faith we understand that the worlds were framed (created) by the mind (design) of God, so that the things which are seen (physical universe) were not made of things which are visible (physical materials)."


It does not say, "by physical proof, we understand the worlds were created by God" it is only by faith.

Now this is not an attack, faith is something only God can give in His timing, and not by force or evidence (physical proof) presented by men of faith towards men of the world. When it is God's time, all will have faith because God will proove who He is to all mankind as part of his overall plan. Once again God will proove Himself to unbelieving mankind, it is not the individual that is burdened with this proof.

But this is not that time yet, not in this age, where mankind and scientists are allowed to freely choose what they want to believe is true, it will actually bring greater glory to God and deeper repentance of self-righteousness afterwards because God is allowing this free thinking to exist and be pursued by the "intellectual" people of Earth.

"Life could be a miracle of God, science will not be able to refute or affirm that."

Life is a miracle of God, and science refutes this daily. But you have been rather cordial in your responses and I appreciate that.

I believe true science is the observation of the natural processes God created to sustain the physical universe.

To the OP,

Nice work, it is clear you have spent some time here and found some great evidence for the debunking of many areas of the Evolutionary Theory. Keep up the effort, in time the truth of your findings will be known to all mankind.

Great thread.

God Bless,



posted on Dec, 7 2012 @ 07:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by ElohimJD

I believe true science is the observation of the natural processes God created to sustain the physical universe.



Ok....but you then say.....





To the OP,
Nice work, it is clear you have spent some time here and found some great evidence for the debunking of many areas of the Evolutionary Theory. Keep up the effort, in time the truth of your findings will be known to all mankind.



Eh?

So is it any scientific theory...............except the theory of evolution?

You know, the scientific theory that was put together using 'the observation of the natural processes'....

Is the theory of evolution just a bit too close to the bone for you to accept?

Is this the only scientific theory you guys have a problem with?

edit on 7-12-2012 by Prezbo369 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 12:38 PM
link   
Certainly, this is one of the debates that has moved Christians the most over the years. The reason this is so, I believe, is that evolution is presented as a fact by the media and taught as such in schools and universities. Whether or not I believe in evolution is really neither here nor there. However, it has been placed on me, i believe by God, to argue that it is not a fact. A fact is something that has been proven, observed and recreated beyond all reasonable doubt. None of these is the case with the theory of evolution. That is not to say, therefore, that it is wrong but that it is no more a fact than the Creation story we have been given in Genesis. I would go so far as to say that I know the Creation story as it is written in the Bible to be true but this does not make it a fact and no Christian should ever presume to argue that it is such in those terms.

However, as a disciple of Christ for the last 11 years and a student of horticultural biology, I feel it necessary to point out some additional flaws in the theory of evolution that I have come to see and others that I have been informed of. I will not post anything i am unable to understand because it is not in my mandate to do so but not all of what i will post will be directly related to horticulture as i have had an interest in the subject of how the World came about for a number of years and, by the direction of the Holy spirit, the love of Christ and the grace of God, have been lead to this conclusion and subsequently saved. I do not profess to be an authority on the subject but I have long had a fascination with animals and, combined with just enough God-given intellect so that all the glory goes to him, have been able to quantify the following arguments.

1. It is impossible for D. N. A. to gain information from an outside source. As a horticultural biologist, one of the initial things you learn is that, no matter how much we want to, we are unable to make something out of what is not there. A horticulturalist very close to where I live has recently been able to grow the only blue Streptocarpus in the World. This would suggest that tote-potency (the ability for all living organisms to produce the same information - a fact necessary for the theory of evolution to exist) is, indeed, a reality. The reality is that, on closer inspection, the flowers are not really blue at all. They are a mix of many of the colours that are in the Streptocarpus genealogy combined to make a colour that appears to the human eye to be blue. The insects that pollinate the plant are blind to the colour blue. Fortunatelly for them, it does not look blue at all. For evolution to be true, all the necessary requirements for all fauna on the planet to portray the traits that they do would have had to have been in every organism's D. N. A from the moment they came into being. Apart from the fact that we know this is not the case, it is also impossible because, as vast a vessel D. N. A. is, it will not hold that much information.

2. The fossil record. There has already been many things said about the fossil record on this thread but i believe there are one or two points that are yet to be touched on. For a start, if the Earth were as old as evolution would need it to be, most of the species scientists have been able to observe would not be around as fossils today. The metamorphosis of stone happens roughly once every million or so years (Please, correct me if I am incorrect. This is not my area of expertise). This would mean that, according to most evolutionary scientists, most of the dinosaurs would have descended deep into the Earth's mantle and we would not know anything about them. Does it not make more sense that they died far more recently, a few thousand years ago, around the time the Bible claims the great flood took place?

3. A brain, be it the brain of a person or the brain of a nematode, is hugely complex. Every connection in the brain is linked to a nerve-ending specifically designed to power one microscopic part of a body. For even a slight change to take place, massive cerebral metamorphosis would be required to take place. This, if gotten even slightly wrong, would render an organism completely incapacitated.





new topics
top topics
 
91
<< 55  56  57    59 >>

log in

join