Evolution Busted by Definition - Information, Intelligence and Language / Videos and Evidence

Originally posted by mainidh
reply to post by tinfoilman

 

This is my point.

You argue FOR evolution, but with the caveat that there MUST still be the originator.

I disagree. Not when it comes to natural evolution. All it takes is external influence. The human species is abundant with traits that reflect the regions they evolved in.

A friggen banana being grown a certain way over a millennia, defines this.

So, in the crop where you get your banana, where is the original one? Why can't I buy a banana that was like it was 2000 years ago? Why are they all the genetically same crop that was introduced when we first started cultivating them?

There is no banana missing link... It's somewhere else porbably so insignificant due to it's insignificant role in evolution (accompanied with mankind) that it looks like a damn nut!

You're asking where is the evolutionary ancestor to prove the claim of evolution.

Where is this master banana, then?

edit on 23-3-2012 by mainidh because: (no reason given)

Well THE master banana has been dead a long time ago, but I'm not sure what you're getting at. The history of the cultivation of the modern banana is well known and documented lol. That didn't happen millions of years ago. That's a relatively recent thing done my farmers, and so you can just look up how they did that lol.

And you can still get wild bananas. I'm not really sure what you're getting at with that?

Originally posted by boncho
reply to post by tinfoilman

If the creator built one primate and wanted to make another type of primate, would an intelligent creator start completely over, or would he work with what he had already accomplished like programmers do today?

 

This thread, and most creationist theories aren't about a general creator and how it would relate to the scientific discoveries of man. They are all based off of some religious text that supposedly was passed to man from god. (Judging by the psalms in the OP, this one is favorable of the bible) Unfortunately, all the religious texts were written by man and nearly all of them make absolutely no sense, or they directly contradict scientific discovery.

Soooo.....

The only way you can argue creationism is by leaving the bible et al out of the equation.

You cannot make this assertion with credibility apart from demonstration. Provide an example. The Bible cannot be show to be inaccurate with a comparison to modern science. If it could, you would be able to provide examples. Provide away. Nothing you said above is accurate.

Check this out.

Now please take your creationist nonsense elsewhere.

Oh. And please, using the bible as anything but exaggerated tales of long since past events in our history is a sad waste, you can provide no evidence to prove it's validity when compared with our modern understanding of science.

Originally posted by Cyberdaz
Religion has holy texts and faith as evidence. Atheism has scientific knowledge as evidence. If we are totally honest with ourselves, neither has the ability to explain the actual origins of the universe or what, if anything, happens after death. It is that simple. Everybody has the right to hold a belief in their heart, but only once we are dead will we perhaps know the answer. The only common feature in this endless debate is ego. Strip from the debate this ego, and perhaps we can all accept that the universe is a wonderful and mysterious place, and fighting over a truth that cannot be discovered simply keeps great minds from banding together.

Science has observation only. Religion has Science and verification of the science from revelation. The evidence is left for us when we read the Bible by symbol instead of the literal word. If you start from the beginning, you know the end verifies the starting point. We then have a third perspective to verify the claims of the Bible. History demonstrates. We then have a fourth verification in nature. Nature demonstrates God as verified by what he claims. We then have a fifth verification in the revelation of prophecy.

Examples from the Beginning.

I have amply described how the Hebrew language demonstrates a unexplained degree of complexity from the beginning of time. It describes how life was constructed by only defining two words of 'word' and 'world'. LINK

Genesis 3 says we should not reach out for the fruit of knowledge. What is the fruit? Technology of Carbon. How do I know? Revelation and 666. Carbon has 6 protons, 6 electrons and 6 neutrons.

Genesis 1 states that the universe was constructed with the four basics that Einstein noticed in a image. Time, Space, Matter and Energy in an Image.

Genesis 1:1

In the Beginning (Time), God created the heavens (Space) and the earth (Matter). Let there be light (Energy).

Genesis 1:27

1:27 So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.

As we know, energy in time and form for purpose is a metaphor represented in our own mimicked creations of the computer. We have a way to verify it is possible on a larger scale. The illusion of collapsing wave function with light is demonstrated as an illusion of information to perspective. All the ancient sages agree, not just the Bible. Reality is a sort of painted illusion. I could quote page after page from the ancient books. Buddha, Rumi, Lou Tau and the like.

I have only covered a few verses. There are 66 books to go through and no space here to cover so I'll only mention the basics by the story God tells.

The story continues with man ignoring God on the technology issue and we see where it all leads. God promised that if we follow our own laws and the governance by men as kings, we would suffer tyranny at the end, war and the scorching of the earth by greed. He said we would die by the beast of the mark of mankind. 666 is Carbon. Is it coming true? Then God has demonstrated. He goes further with his proof.

777 is nitrogen. 7 protons, 7 electrons and 7 neutrons. Oxygen is 888. Each gas makes up the breath of God we use for words. We overcome the beast of Carbon (666) with these two gasses. Did God mark these elements in his word by number? Yes. In Hebrew Gematria, 777 is YHWH by the numbers. It is also the heptadic structure represented in the ENTIRE Bible. 888 is Jesus in Greek gematria. We rise above the carbon and live by keeping the air pure. Does this ring true with the story of Genesis 3 and science? Does this verify itself by history? Can we locate this information readily in this day and age but not in others? YES

Can science compare to this verification and observation if it ignores God? Not a chance. Religion and Science are female and male in a relationship that must find union to overcome the world around us. Otherwise, we will die as God states. We must be motivated by the leading of the Shepherd or we will destroy ourselves in the process. It's a promise by God. We place our faith in what is unseen from the Quantum Level to the Macro universe. Those who have the faith will have their information (essence to form / Conscious spirit) saved and not deleted.

Hebrews 11

1 Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see. 2 This is what the ancients were commended for.

3 By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God’s command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible.

LOOK and find. The truth is not visible to the eyes. Only to the mind of the one who seeks.

reply to post by mainidh


You also have to understand these are not MY arguments. These are just the unanswered questions of the arguments. I don't know if you watched the video or not, but these are the arguments that the guy in the VIDEO is claiming. Not me.

I don't claim there was a common ancestor with fused DNA. That's what SOME people argue. I was simply pointing out problems with it.

The guy in the video is arguing the more common form of the argument where the fusion didn't take place until AFTER the branch into the human line. I was discussing both arguments.

If you have a problem with a missing "link" or common ancestor thing? Well don't look at me? That's the argument the guy in the video is making.

Also, the whole video argument is kinda off for me anyway, since what it basically amounts to is that we must have evolved from primates because we have the same amount of chromosomes as they do.

Oh, but wait, we don't have the same amount of chromosomes as they do. Must not have evolved from primates? Oh wait, yes we did, our chromosomes fused, we USED to have the same amount of chromosomes as primates did so we MUST have evolved from them right?

But the whole time I know tobacco plants also have 48 chromosomes. Does that mean primates evolved from tobacco plants?

Also, karyotypes in humans and primates are more stable. In other animals like sheep they're not. Their chromosomes are much more varied and messed up. Most have 54 chromosomes, but wild ones have been found with 56, and 58. Three types of sheep.

Is the most logical thing to say then that the ones with 54 chromosomes evolved from one common ancestor while the sheep with 58 chromosomes evolved from an entirely different animal? No that's not logical. As we see, chromosome count has nothing to do with what we evolved from. They're all just sheep that probably evolved from the same pre-sheep animal. Your chromosome count tells you nothing about what you evolved from.

Chromosome fusing can happen quite often, and the authors argument that this is some rare genetic trait that we inherited from a common ancestor millions of years ago kinda goes out the window. The fusing could of happened at anytime just like it happens in sheep all the time, and in no way proves anything about what we evolved from.

reply to post by mainidh


reply to post by tinfoilman


I don't mean to butt in, but both sides are irrelevant when we view this from the correct direction. Evolution is a given, but not a cause. It is a result of design. Once we see this clearly, the details answer themselves. The programming of all life is set to adapt. This is due to the changes in environment and the use of the essence making use of the bio-mechanical technology. Adaptation is necessary for life to flourish in a changing environment. We program redundancy into our own technology for this very reason. We demonstrate the need in our own machines because components often fail. When one circuit fails, there are three more to take it's place. If then statements in logic and programming must be set to adapt to the needs of the machine as well as the needs of the programmer. This is the definition of logic. Again, we have verification from the observation that Design is the obvious part of the thing we observe. Both of your arguments are moot if we know the excluded middle.

Evolution is a result and not a cause. This explains the paradox.

Originally posted by Crutchley29
Check this out.

Now please take your creationist nonsense elsewhere.

Oh. And please, using the bible as anything but exaggerated tales of long since past events in our history is a sad waste, you can provide no evidence to prove it's validity when compared with our modern understanding of science.

edit on 23-3-2012 by Crutchley29 because: (no reason given)

No chance of that. 666 is Carbon. It has 6 protons, 6 electrons and 6 neutrons. See there. Science just verified religion. A man in a cave said it 2000 years ago and then we tagged it in science later when we discovered the nature of creation by the numbers. Give me an explanation for this or you fall on your face with what you said above.

Did God say that the beast and mark of mankind is 666? Did he say that a tyrannical government would require the beast of carbon as payment for purchases (Petrol Dollar)? Did he say that we must overcome our technology or die (Fruit of knowledge in Genesis 3)?

Explanation?

As you get up off your face, please provide a direct answer for the above or you have no ground to stand on with your carbon based body.

After you explain the above, let's make case for the air we breathe. I mentioned above that 777 is nitrogen and 888 is oxygen. YHVH (God) is 777 in the Hebrew numbering system. Jesus is 888 in Greek. The breath of God that gives us life can be choked out by carbon (666) from our technology. We overcome with the Word of God by following the instructions of the program.

Can you explain what I have just verified with science? The guidebook shows us how to use the planet. You say it is mumbo jumbo. Care to follow up with evidence. I have done my part here. Your part is to verify what I say as mumbo jumbo. Bring it.

reply to post by EnochWasRight


Yes I am also aware of the creationist idea of adaptation as well. I'm fine with the idea of both evolution and adaptation, but the point is we still don't know everything and there are still questions to be asked about the whole process regardless of which you believe.

I'm not against evolution, but point out there's still unanswered question and everyone calls you a creationist, which I personally am not a literal creationist lol. But it's strange because we know all the biologists go back to work everyday to answer more questions. So there must still be questions right? They haven't all retired right?

But try asking one on the forums and it's an immediate ad hominem from atheists attacking you for being a creationist lol. Like nope, I'm not. Just talking about the new stuff we're finding out.

reply to post by EnochWasRight


The best you can do is blend the intelligent design idea with evolution in order to claim that a God influenced evolution or perhaps even created the system by which evolution was possible. Evolution is a fact of biology, allele's vary in frequency from generation to generation, each generation is slightly different, and this compounds over millions of years.

Life, at it's base, is just self-replicating molecules, I fail to see why we need aliens, or Gods, or anything of that sort, to spark life on Earth. Consciousness, as near as most scientists can tell, is an emergent property of the brain. When we look at animals closely related to us, such as Chimps, they too seem to have consciousness and are indeed self-aware. There are some mysteries regarding consciousness however this doesn't mean we get to stick any old idea into that gap in our knowledge.

By the way, why are you quoting the Bible? Surely you don't think a God who openly condones slavery and repeatedly commits genocide is the creator of the Universe. If you're gonna believe in a creator at least pick one who isn't incompetent and evil

Originally posted by tinfoilman
reply to post by EnochWasRight

 

Yes I am also aware of the creationist idea of adaptation as well. I'm fine with the idea of both evolution and adaptation, but the point is we still don't know everything and there are still questions to be asked about the whole process regardless of which you believe.

I'm not against evolution, but point out there's still unanswered question and everyone calls you a creationist, which I personally am not a literal creationist lol. But it's strange because we know all the biologists go back to work everyday to answer more questions. So there must still be questions right? They haven't all retired right?

But try asking one on the forums and it's an immediate ad hominem from atheists attacking you for being a creationist lol. Like nope, I'm not. Just talking about the new stuff we're finding out.

edit on 23-3-2012 by tinfoilman because: (no reason given)

We see the results of science going to work each day. The Law of Inverse Squares will always be true. When two opposing realities come closer together, they cancel by the one that is larger in scope. Truth is the evidence for the side that overtakes the other by perspective. We see this happening. The closer we come to verifying the Bible by science, the clearer both come into focus by the simple truth that the light that shines out over the surface of the deep overtakes the darkness.

In physics, an inverse-square law is any physical law stating that a specified physical quantity or strength is inversely proportional to the square of the distance from the source of that physical quantity.

What is the source? The Law of Inverse squares is the process of approaching the source from two sides. Science and religion will bring it closer as we examine the nature of light. God claims to be the source of light, both particle and wave. Science just misses the third aspect of consciousness. Once it admits the excluded middle, the rest comes into focus with the same thing it denies. Consciousness reveals belief in God when we see that it per-exists matter. Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is denying the possibility. Disbelief has just been defined.

Jesus said, "you must be born again." What keeps your information from being saved and transposed to pure consciousness apart from the need for matter? Faith in what is hidden. Why? Because we do not possess love for God and others if we love ourselves first. That's pride and places us as multiplicity instead of unity. Unity and love is what nature demonstrates.

When Jesus looked across the shore at Peter (Church) and said to fish on the other side, they then caught 153 fish. Why 153? This is the Patagonian measure of the fish. It is a ratio of 1:1.415, or the square root of 2. Jesus knew this. The ration of 1:1.415 is the difference between unity and multiplicity. If the church fishes on the wrong side of truth (by man's wisdom), then it misses the chance to unify the world by truth. Jesus said to fish on the side of faith. John 21. This is also covered in the Peter article in the link below (signature).

Does the Bible have the answer if we look? yes. It verifies what we see from our observation in science and then defies our understanding of what we see by what is. God is impenetrable against our false perspective. This is how we learn by the Law of inverse squares to see the truth by perspective and time under a veil of frame of reference. Light illuminates by this process.

reply to post by Titen-Sxull

The best you can do is blend the intelligent design idea with evolution in order to claim that a God influenced evolution or perhaps even created the system by which evolution was possible. Evolution is a fact of biology, allele's vary in frequency from generation to generation, each generation is slightly different, and this compounds over millions of years.

No. It's a theory, not a fact. The way to find a fact is verification from a proof. On the side of creation, the proof has been demonstrated by verification. Read my last few posts and I demonstrate a scratch on the surface of all the proof that the Bible holds. I have only nicked the edge with a glimmer from what we can find if we look. The Bible is one source. There are countless others from antiquity. Have you watched the evidence presented on ATS for the presence of "those who from heaven to earth come?" We have evidence that contact was made at our inception. Have you read Enoch I? More evidence. Have you read the Bible for all it's worth? I have. I present the evidence in my signature link. Check it out before you end your future with ignorance. Don't presume to know creation with 200 years of science when the universe is 15 billion years old. God claims to predate the universe by infinity. The evidence is in his favor by the law of Inverse Squares.

In physics, an inverse-square law is any physical law stating that a specified physical quantity or strength is inversely proportional to the square of the distance from the source of that physical quantity.

The light will overtake the darkness and we can see the source approaching as we speak. If you can't get the picture the light creates from the word of God, you will be lost in the darkness. Illumination of the mind requires you to embrace the light and come out of darkness. God said this from the beginning. Word is conscious information.

John 1

The Word Became Flesh

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.

6 There was a man sent from God whose name was John. 7 He came as a witness to testify concerning that light, so that through him all might believe. 8 He himself was not the light; he came only as a witness to the light.

9 The true light that gives light to everyone was coming into the world. 10 He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him. 11 He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. 12 Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— 13 children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.

14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.

Science lack grace with truth. It needs only to look at consciousness as the third aspect of light. Light is a trinity of particle, wave and consciousness. It's a creative design to a meaningful end. Evolution is a result and not a cause. The cause is the light we use to know why.

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
No chance of that. 666 is Carbon. It has 6 protons, 6 electrons and 6 neutrons. See there. Science just verified religion.

How is the fact that one isotope of carbon has 6 protons, 6 electrons, and 6 neutrons verification of religion? The following makes equally as much sense:

Hydrogen has 1 proton, 1 electron and 0 neutrons. See there. Science just disproved God.

reply to post by EnochWasRight

You cannot make this assertion with credibility apart from demonstration. Provide an example. The Bible cannot be show to be inaccurate with a comparison to modern science.

LOL!

How about all those animals on the Ark. How did Jonah survive 3 days in the belly of a whale? Virgin birth anyone? Resurrection of dead people........I could go on.

reply to post by EnochWasRight

No. It's a theory, not a fact.

Actually it's both. A theory is an umbrella term in science, a theory contains facts. One of the facts that Evolutionary theory contains is the fact that allele frequency varies over time within a population, that is the basic definition of biological evolution.

Read my last few posts and I demonstrate a scratch on the surface of all the proof that the Bible holds.

Enoch, I used to be a Creationist, I was raised in a fundamentalist home and I've read the entire Bible multiple times. The Bible contains no proof of creation, it contains baseless assertions of magical supernatural events without any evidence in support of them.

Have you watched the evidence presented on ATS for the presence of "those who from heaven to earth come?" We have evidence that contact was made at our inception. Have you read Enoch I? More evidence

If you're referring to the Watchers in the Book of Enoch then yes, I've read about them, as well as the Annunaki and Sitchin's supposedly correct interpretation of Babylonian and Sumerian myth. None of these are evidence, they are part of mythology. Mythology is not evidence, unless you want to believe that Odysseus descended into the Underworld, fought an actual cyclops, and that Poseidon the God of the Sea wanted to keep him from getting to Ithaca. If you DON'T want to believe that, then you are cherry-picking stories from mythology that you personally want to accept while rejecting the others.

Have you read the Bible for all it's worth?

Yes, that's a big reason why I stopped believing it.

Check it out before you end your future with ignorance

I've been researching these topics since I was a kid, I was raised to be a creationist and distrust Evolution. However eventually the overwhelming evidence for evolution and against creation shone through.

Science lack grace with truth. It needs only to look at consciousness as the third aspect of light. Light is a trinity of particle, wave and consciousness. It's a creative design to a meaningful end.

This is complete meaningless New Age gobbledygook. Light can be shown to exist, it can be detected, your God on the other hand has never been detected. If you want to call Light your God then you are just re-defining light to create your God, just like folks who say God is the Universe, or God is love.

If you can't get the picture the light creates from the word of God, you will be lost in the darkness.

Light is created from a lot of things, stars for instance. Anything that emits photons creates light. Some supernatural being floating in a timeless void talking does not create light and makes no sense whatsoever.

Do you have an actual argument to make? Have any actual evidence to present? Or are you just going to rely on new age slop that is all empty amphigory?

Just a thought, But if evolution is just a mesurable change for the better over an amount of time.

Then could we not reasonably argue that in many ways God has been the major catalist to the evolution of human society?

Charles Darwin himself is noted for being very impressed with the transformations that he witnessed in the south seas as a result of the people being expossed to christianity for the first time. So much so that he choose to make a sizeable donation to the south seas missonaries to continue there work.

Given the remarkable changes that Mr. Darwin witnessed could we not say that an evolution of south seas society was evident when these people began being exposed to the teachings of god for the first time?

Perhaps the human condition is not all that different. In our evolution it's hard to deny that we as a species are products of our enviroments. However those enviroments have also contained gods teachings.

So to the question of how have we evolved forward to become the most dominant species on the planet. Could it not be argued that the presents of god within our social enviroments have been one of the most profound catalists in our evolution as human beings?

Just a thought, what do you think?

Originally posted by EnochWasRight[/i
LOOK and find. The truth is not visible to the eyes. Only to the mind of the one who seeks.

Yes but you point out the bible constantly, which was written by man.

Seriously, why give a f*** if creationism or evolution is the truth.
What is that going to give us? Nothing at all.

Evolution is a fact of existence, even for creationists and evolution doesn't take God out of the equation.
Why is it so important to know the beginning of infinity when it always has been and always will.

Debating on this or making zillions of years of research will never prove where we come from.