The Lie of Evolution from a Credible Scientist

page: 5
26
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 09:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by OldCurmudgeon
Not arguementively, but I've seen tangible evidence of evolution in many plants and animals...

I've never seen tangible evidence of creation, just belief in individuals.



What evidence is that again? Give some examples.




posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 09:50 PM
link   
reply to post by EnochWasRight
 


Not a problem EWR, I'll post this and then find more information with links for you tomorrow... but in the meantime:

Biology: en.wikipedia.org...
Biology is a natural science concerned with the study of life and living organisms, including their structure, function, growth, origin, EVOLUTION, distribution, and taxonomy.[1] Biology is a vast subject containing many subdivisions, topics, and disciplines. Among the most important topics are five unifying principles that can be said to be the fundamental axioms of modern biology:[2]

1.Cells are the basic unit of life
2. New species and inherited traits are the PRODUCT OF EVOLUTION
3.Genes are the basic unit of HEREDITY
4.An organism regulates its internal environment to maintain a stable and constant condition
5.Living organisms consume and transform energy.

Respectfully, I am not a debunker but Creationism EWR is to date unproven, so "Can't prove it, can't disprove it."



posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 10:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by EnochWasRight

Is it even possible to deny a Creator based on our current understanding of information entropy, collapsing wave function and genetics? Obviously, consciousness is at the heart of all we know. Consciousness preexists matter in a form to purpose. The acorn is the enfolded oak tree of information to form. This is engineering and design. When you realize this, see your own information as either saved or lost by the blueprint we are given as a gift. The information to translate your essence beyond the material is available.

I Believe that there is a Creator, but what do you mean with your last sentence? Jesus' followers are going to be given new bodies.



posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 10:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by rhinoceros
reply to post by ArrowsNV
 

You forgot the other quote from the same page


But with regard to the material world, we can at least go so far as this - we can perceive that events are brought about not by insulated interpositions of Divine power, exerted in each particular case, but by the establishment of general laws.

W. Whewell

I don't personally see the need for a divine power behind the curtains (IMO it makes the model ever so more complex), but if that's where your God is, I'm totally fine with it. It's not that irrational stance. Irrationality is, when creationists and ID/Ancien Alien advocates refuse to accept reality, which is, that life on this planet evolved more-or-less as modern synthesis puts it. To argue otherwise sans new ground breaking evidence is but a display of ignorance (and often symptom of years of brainwashing).
edit on 20-3-2012 by rhinoceros because: (no reason given)
I left the quote from Newton out because that one has a lot left to interpretation (mostly semantics though), and I had a feeling people in this thread would try to skew it one way or the other, but thank you at least for being civil in your response.

But someone had to 'write' or define those laws (imo) just as we humans write our laws, no?

A lot of people don't see the need for a higher power, and I will not say that it has to be, nor am I trying to convince you otherwise, I'm simply trying to convince the hardline religious people that science & religion can peacefully coexist. As well as the hardline atheists, not trying to convert them, that's a personal decision that can only be made by one person; yourself.

I guess it really boils down to believing whether or not we (the universe) just popped into existence with the big bang, or if some driving force was behind the bang.

All I'm really trying to say is bible or not, science and religion are both right in their own respects.

Like I said in my earlier post; Religion is speculation on life & how to be a 'good person', why we're here, and what happens when we die. Science is the study, and by proxy, the admiration of life and it's many wonders and how they came to be.

I just think that people should take a step back and realize that fighting over such trivial crap like this does nothing but make you look stupid in the end and hurts the human species as a whole. But I'm preaching to the choir, am I not?

I'm done. So say what you want, I just wish we could all just put our differences aside, like 'grownups' should be able to do, and work together for a change. We have bigger fish to fry than to bicker over our various personal beliefs which won't be changed by some person posting on a internet forum from thousands of miles away...


I guess if we were to simplify this whole thread it would boil down to the eternal question:
What came first? The chicken or the egg?

The answer to which we will never know, so stop bickering about it.
edit on 3/20/2012 by ArrowsNV because: added a bit



posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 11:22 PM
link   



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 01:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by EnochWasRight

Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
reply to post by EnochWasRight
 


I have to agree with other posters here... all he's doing is saying "wow look how complex these biological systems are, they must have been designed consciously". It's the same argument the Mormons try to give me when ever they visit. Clearly he lacks a true understanding of how evolution works, and why the solutions designed by evolution are so far beyond our comprehension. Anyone who thinks these things can't be a result of evolution doesn't understand evolution at all.
edit on 20-3-2012 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)


Do explain how evolution works. Give me some science behind the theory.

Take a look at the link in my signature labelled "evolution". It will take you to one of my threads which is related to the topic of evolution. Watch the video I present in that thread. Take a look at how "evolutionary algorithms" can create code which is beyond our comprehension. These trial and error systems can develop techniques of solving problems which are far beyond our comprehension. Some of the code produced can't be figured out or reverse engineered without years of research and analysis, just like some of the systems in real life. Mother nature has a way of solving problems in a way that we can't even begin to understand because they are so far out of the box. It's a mindless system that relies on trial and error.

This is where people get confused. They just can't understand how a mindless process can result in such intricate and complicated things, because usually the world doesn't work like that. Usually the watch maker creates the watch. Usually the potter creates the pot. The creator is always more complex than the creations. It's a top down paradigm of creation, something complex can only arise from something more complex. It's perfectly rational reasoning on the surface, it seems absurd to say that the process might also work the other way around, where something as simple as repetitive trial and error can result in things so complicated, it seems beyond reasoning.... but it isn't, because that's exactly what happens when you let that process run for long enough.

Computers allow us to speed up that process and watch it happen in real time, it shows us that some simple rules can produce things which are enormously complex. Complexity arises out of simplicity. Everything complicated in this world is actually founded on a base of extremely simple rules, executed in such a way that results in a very complex systems. When you understand the underlying rule sets you can extrapolate from there and understand the entire nature of the complex systems that result from those simple rules. For example, the English language is based on a very simple set of letters, but when they are used together in certain ways they can create vastly complex and meaningful pieces of writing.

Most things work on that same principle. They look complicated on the surface but in actuality they are founded on very simple rules, used in clever ways to produce very complex systems. Evolution works in that way too. It isn't a very complicated process at all, the rules are actually quite simple and easy to understand if you try to. But from these simple rules result vastly complex creatures and mind-boggling systems of life. This mindless process results in things that we can hardly comprehend. This is exactly how it should and does work, it's exactly what one would expect when they understand the theory, and it's provable via computer simulations, using a repetitive mindless system built on simple rules very complicated things can be produced.
edit on 21-3-2012 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 01:20 AM
link   
reply to post by ArrowsNV
 



I guess if we were to simplify this whole thread it would boil down to the eternal question:
What came first? The chicken or the egg?

The answer to which we will never know, so stop bickering about it.
Actually we can know, and the answer is extremely obvious when you think about it.

The chicken is the result of billions of years of evolution. It didn't suddenly pop out of thin air. So lets refine this argument to it's most basic components, that is to say, we need to ask this question not for a chicken, but for the very first type of life on Earth.

The very first type of life is the common ancestor for all life on Earth, it was most likely formed via some extremely unlikely luck of the draw process where the right molecules were placed together to form this thing we might label a form of "life".

Of course if this "thing" didn't have the ability to replicate it's self, once it was dead it wouldn't exist anymore. Therefore we can assume that this thing had some sort of built in ability to replicate its self through some sort of basic division process.

As this process of division continued, mutations would have entered into the population, and from there the rest is history. So obviously, metaphorically speaking, the chicken did come first. Of course that is the correct answer, because it's absurd to say the egg came first, logically speaking.

edit: and even if life was placed in Earth by an alien species, this is how the first type of life in the Universe would have arose.
edit on 21-3-2012 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 02:12 AM
link   
reply to post by EnochWasRight
 


one thing I have to say about this whole "Evolution Vs Creationism" BS is this..

NONE OF YOU SETTLE FOR SHADES OF GREY!!

it's either.. "Evolution is CANNON!!!" or "Creationism is CANNON!!!"

both sides.. UNFLINCHING!

RIDICULOUS.. BARBARIC and UNREASONABLE!!!


What I put forth is a concept of "DYNAMIC ADAPTATION".

If ever there is an intelligent force in the universe.. and say for good measure that that intelligent force is just US.. just us humans.. here.. on Earth..

and WE .. through consistent collaboration.. and scientific perseverance.. arrive at a point where we can use computers to print DNA into whatever pattern we choose..

Then we inevitably will be faced with the challenge of placing our genetic creations in a laboratory ecosystem for them to interact with to mimic what we see in nature... in order to have proof of concept...

and say perchance.. there are "teams" of lab workers.. "developers" you might call them.. that compete with one another on this front.. for the sake of a challenge to accelerate productivity in the field...

and they must enter their genetic 'invention' into a standardized ecosystem simulating that of natural magnitude... ie: seashores .. rainforests.. deserts.. tundras.. etc... ALL with changing weather patterns and geological changes...

WHICH organisms would succeed in the plight of survival???
The ones that are static in their reproduction... ie: Parthenogenesis and make no apparent chance for adjustment to the environment??

or ones with an embedded "DYNAMIC ADAPTATION" whereas what "LOOKS" like .. Darwinian evolution is actually a specific encoded RE-ROUTING of genetic code that is SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED to recombine as many times as possible so that the ALREADY existing CODE that would RESPOND CONFIDENTLY and CONQUER specific current environmental challenges.. would RISE in the species .. FORMING said species into one that would have the capabilities to adjust and make due.. towards the situation at hand...


I say if there is an intelligent hand in play.... in designing organisms.. (ourselves included)..
then the "team" of "designers"... who included "DYNAMIC ADAPTATION" into their coding ... would be the winners..

and this "DYNAMIC ADAPTATION" coding would look very similar to what Darwin, in his well thought out yet "naive to all that is"... put as "evolution"....

I hold that there exists the very real possibility that ANY type of organism here on Earth, could very well have been genetically engineered by races not of our knowing.. and what looks like "evolution" is merely a specific stategic genetic coding ensuring survival of that genetic project.

If I was a genetic engineer competing with another genetic engineer... I would place this type of coding in the organism to ensure my success over theirs.

edit on 3/21/2012 by prevenge because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 02:23 AM
link   
Why must creationism cancel out evolution and why must evolution cancel out creationism?

You see, the creator could have just given matter the chance to evolve and transmute and/or the evolution theory can't explain the reason of life itself, it doesn't explain what is the source only the path.

How can you find a source to infinity, now that is beyond reason.
Evolution is a fact of existence that affects even creationists and evolutionists will never find the source of existence.

Creationists should stop fighting the theory of evolution since it doesn't exclude the idea of creation and evolutionist should stop fighting for something impossible to prove.



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 02:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by prevenge
I say if there is an intelligent hand in play.... in designing organisms.. (ourselves included)..
then the "team" of "designers"... who included "DYNAMIC ADAPTATION" into their coding ... would be the winners..


Heh, I always knew reptilians weren't superior to mammals!

I say this because I heard that reptilian DNA doesn't evolve thus, they feel like they are better because they are already perfect to survive without the need to evolve. Of course, that implies that reptilians exist.



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 02:43 AM
link   
reply to post by EnochWasRight
 


You have a very poor understanding of Entropy and the Law of Thermodynamics . This is one of the easiest creationist arguments to debunk. In fact it's number one on this list.
www.weirdcrap.com...



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 03:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by EnochWasRight

Originally posted by Auricom
I didn't watch the video, but it's hard for *ME* to say that evolution or creationism is false. *I* don't know. I'm an open kind of guy, and I find it completely idiotic to mock one or another. It goes against everything I believe in. Like keeping an open mind. How much do we really know? We don't even know what's in our oceans... So what does that really say about us?

We're "stupid" in the grand scheme of things. To deny there is a god is as stupid as claiming there was never such a thing as dinosaurs.

I don't really know where I'm going with this post, but in order for us to mature as a people, we need to realize there will ALWAYS be things beyond our current understanding and instead of denying that fact, embrace it one way or another.

Hope I made some sense.


The wonderful thing about our day and age is this: We have the tools to know, yet we lack the ability to overcome bias. I agree with you on the point. The part I disagree with is that we cannot know. We can know if we are open to the possibility that a very old book tells us the truth. See my previous post above.



That statement was pretty biased



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 04:08 AM
link   
That scientist is about as credible as a Snake Oil Salesman. The Topic statement being that some guy who says he's a scientist sy's EVOLUTION IS A LIE....is pathetic. We use and see EVOLUTION on a daily basis world wide.

You can VISUALLY SEE EVOLUTION taking place in a matter of minutes as Bacteria are put under a Microscope and a toxin is introduced....those that survive the toxin and are placed in another slide and fed as they multiply or reproduce by MITOSIS....the new Bacteria are less effected by the introduction to the toxin and by the third slide and reproduction and all this happens in a period of 30 minutes or so....by the third Generation...the toxin has almost ZERO EFFECT on the Bacteria.

This is a form of EVOLUTION....Survival of the Fittest or Mutation or Forced natural selection of what animals are left that survive their enviroment and reproduce carring on the traits in their GENOME...DNA and RNA which allow them to survive. This anyone can see under a Microscope in 30 minutes or so and it proves EVOLUTION is a REALITY.

In Multi-cellular Animals...and we Humans ARE ANIMALS....the same thing occurs only we can't reproduce that quickly so it takes more time as the Humans left living are alive because their Systems of their bodies which are created by the Blueprints of our GENOME.....under either the same conditions or various others over Millions of years....have the STRONG and SURVIVING breeding to create Children with similar traits.

The Human Body does this to protect the continuation of the species....but after the entire Mapping of the HUMAN GENOME as well as mapping of hundreds of other animals especialy primates which Human Beings are of that Clasification...PRIMATES....we were able to trace a current Homosapien Genome all the way back to the original Single Celled Animal All Life Evolved from on PLANET EARTH!

EVOLUTION is no longer a theory it is a Fact. We use it to create Insect and Blight resistant crops....we use it to create GENE THEROPY to cure certain types of CANCERS and other diceases. The cure to M.S. as well as AIDS and just about any other scurge of the Human Condition is only hope is through Genetic Alteration of Cells delivered into our system with a Retrovirus and as the Retrovirus penetrates say all the Cancer cells in a deadly tumor...they change the DNA of each cell and carry new instructions to the tumor cells that when they reproduce...do not do so in an abnormal way because that is all Cancer is Normal cells reproducing improperly...the tumor cells then having new reproductive growth instructions reproduce normally and the tumor disapears and all that is left are healthy cells....we have done this...but more research is needed. So when someone says EVOLUTION is a LIE...he better hope he never gets Cancer and needs GENE CELL TREATMENT
Split Infinity



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 06:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
EVOLUTION is no longer a theory it is a Fact.

Fact and theory. The theory of evolution explains the natural force of evolution. If we didn't know how it worked, it would be called the law of evolution instead of the theory of evolution (compare to e.g. Newton's law of gravity).
edit on 21-3-2012 by rhinoceros because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 07:14 AM
link   

Is it even possible to deny a Creator based on our current understanding of information entropy


I would ask the same : Is it even possible to deny the ENTIRE fossil record , the entire field of geology, paelentology and biology just so your deluded religious views can make sense?
You use the word "LIE" in your thread title, i have yet to see ONE lie out of the theory of evolution.

I liken the debate to a jigsaw puzzle that does not have its picture on the box.
Science is trying to put it together, while religious dogma is looking over his shoulder.
Dogma feels strongly that the resulting picture will be a unicorn, while Science has speculated a hypothesis based on viewing the individual pieces that the picture is of a bear.
The more Science puts it together, the more the puzzle begins to look like a bear.
Dogma begins to get more and more upset. "I don't know why you're bothering, it's obviously a unicorn!" he chortles.
Science shrugs, and continues assembling the pieces. The picture begins to look even more like a bear, until it's almost unmistakable.
Every once in a while, Science will have to correct an error and move a piece. Religion shrieks with glee at this. "See?! You put that piece in the wrong place! Your wishful thinking that it's a bear made you make a mistake! Since you're wrong, I am therefore right, and the picture is of a unicorn!"

"But what about all the other pieces I did get right? Can't you see by the rest of them it's obviously a bear?" replies Science.
"You just don't want to admit it's a unicorn! Your arrogance is getting in the way!" screams Dogma lividly.
Science just shrugs, and continues with the puzzle...

I suggest all religious nutcases suspend their belief in the "theory" of gravity, and all float up to "heaven", since gravity is just a theory...



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 07:23 AM
link   
Hahaha, it always cracks me up when i see a scientific explanation(by someone who doesn't believe in science) then followed by a holy book quote....

It just makes them look so less intelligent.

edit on 3/21/2012 by luciddream because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 07:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by ArrowsNV
But someone had to 'write' or define those laws (imo) just as we humans write our laws, no?

The higher level laws of nature such as evolution are merely the consequence of more fundamental laws such as laws of chemistry and quantum mechanics. I don't really see why the most fundamental laws (of which we now perhaps know some) had to be defined by a creator entity.



I guess it really boils down to believing whether or not we (the universe) just popped into existence with the big bang, or if some driving force was behind the bang.

The biggest problem with the creator entity stance is, that it adds a level of complexity to the beginning of the Universe. If the Universe has a designer, then it's quite obvious that the designer itself is even more complex than the Universe. How are we going to explain where it came from? If on the other hand we assume that it just always existed, then we might just as well assume that the potential for the Big Bang always existed.

Anyway, your post was nicely written and I respect your stance. Everything goes by me as long as we don't refute reality
edit on 21-3-2012 by rhinoceros because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 07:48 AM
link   
Not sure if anyone has pointed this out yet but in complete contradiction to the OP Title:

1. In no place in the video does the "Credible Scientist" state that Evolution is a Lie

and

2. The "Credible Scientist" is in fact not a scientist at all, he is a medical visualisation artist, He uses data gathered from medical imaging technology to visualise the human anatomy and produce breathtaking animations nothing more.....



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 08:31 AM
link   
reply to post by ChaoticOrder
 



Take a look at how "evolutionary algorithms" can create code which is beyond our comprehension.


That's programming and programming comes from code that is written, not accidentally put together randomly. Choice must be involved. Algorithms do not create.



These trial and error systems can develop techniques of solving problems


Evolution cannot judge a quality apart from consciousness, no more than a single cell can make a value judgment on becoming a more complex system. As we are speaking of a single cell, we might as well speak of Chemiosmosis. Chemiosmosis shatters the theory that we emerged from a primordial goo. This method of deriving energy from ATP is the movement of ions across a selectively permeable membrane to create energy from ATP. It is the most efficient fuel cell know to exist. It just so happens that this mechanical process of the cell pump produces energy as a mechanism. Try as you might to explain this technique to derive energy at the most basic level of the single cell, no amount of accidental early biology can produce a mechanism that is capable of this level of sophistication. There is no explanation for this in biology.



Mother nature has a way of solving problems...


No. Consciousness can solve problems by collapsing the indeterminate wave of probability and to make it determined. No other process can do this. Evolution is a result, not a cause. That's worth repeating. EVOLUTION is a RESULT, not a CAUSE.



we can't even begin to understand because they are so far out of the box. It's a mindless system that relies on trial and error.


Not mindless. Mindful. There is consciousness at the heart of what is observed. The only thing out of the box of understanding is the evolutionist who denies the evidence on every level of understanding. Forget that it points to a divine Godlike understanding. See it from the theory. To change the states of matter, a choice must be made. Only consciousness can choose by collapsing the wave of collapsing wave function theory. This is what is ACTUALLY observed. Matter and consciousness are part of the same thing.



This is where people get confused. They just can't understand how a mindless process can result in such intricate and complicated things, because usually the world doesn't work like that. Usually the watch maker creates the watch. Usually the potter creates the pot. The creator is always more complex than the creations. It's a top down paradigm of creation, something complex can only arise from something more complex. It's perfectly rational reasoning on the surface, it seems absurd to say that the process might also work the other way around, where something as simple as repetitive trial and error can result in things so complicated, it seems beyond reasoning.... but it isn't, because that's exactly what happens when you let that process run for long enough.


As I said before, not one shred of evidence has ever been produced by an evolutionary scientist for this reasoning. They simply say, we DON"T know.



There are no examples. He is stumped because there is no obvious answer that has ever been observed other than the theory that it must happen. This is the hardest answer to give when the simplest answer is already available. We are programmed. It's all conjecture from the evolutionist. With an answer like a creator, we are on the right trail for the proper basis for what the data actually suggests. Evolution is DEAD as a theory.



Computers allow us to speed up that process and watch it happen in real time, it shows us that some simple rules can produce things which are enormously complex. Complexity arises out of simplicity. Everything complicated in this world is actually founded on a base of extremely simple rules, executed in such a way that results in a very complex systems. When you understand the underlying rule sets you can extrapolate from there and understand the entire nature of the complex systems that result from those simple rules. For example, the English language is based on a very simple set of letters, but when they are used together in certain ways they can create vastly complex and meaningful pieces of writing.


Based on rules that are already governed in the universe. We have the answer to this from the Bible already. Where di the governor come from? What produced the energy and the perfection in law that is necessary to have life? Why these laws and no others? We already know the answer: Because no other laws will produce life. Too many happy accidents to say accident. Purpose is OBVIOUS!

edit on 21-3-2012 by EnochWasRight because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2012 @ 08:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Truth_Hz
Not sure if anyone has pointed this out yet but in complete contradiction to the OP Title:

1. In no place in the video does the "Credible Scientist" state that Evolution is a Lie

and

2. The "Credible Scientist" is in fact not a scientist at all, he is a medical visualisation artist, He uses data gathered from medical imaging technology to visualise the human anatomy and produce breathtaking animations nothing more.....



I provide a video from Leonard Susskind as well in this thread. I dare you to question him on the subject of Entropy in information theory. Energy has entropy because it is information. Where do we see information in the universe? EVERYWHERE. Consciousness is what energy is and matter is a form of energy from information. See the video and discuss. No one has denied this yet. Do you deny it? This one video below shatters any hope of denying consciousness at the heart of our universe.

Evolution is not a cause, it is a result. Please refute this last statement. Can you deny it based on the video below? If you cannot, then evolution rests on a lie.






new topics
top topics
 
26
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join