Make these ads go away.
+ Reply to Thread
Page 380 of 381 FirstFirst ... 280 330 370 378 379 380 381 LastLast
Results 3,791 to 3,800 of 3802

Thread: Science Disproves Evolution

  1. #3791
    Ted
    Currently Offline
    Senior Member
    This user has no status.
     
    I am:
    ----
     

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Gabriola Island BC
    Posts
    5,298
    Local Date
    12-12-2017
    Local Time
    05:39 PM
    Points
    5,780

    Re: Science Disproves Evolution

    The whole creationist theology is simply an ignorance of man by scientific wannabees. To say there is no evidence of evolution is to walk blindly and not use one's brain. Denying the obvious.

  2. #3792
    Senior Member
    This user has no status.
     
    I am:
    ----
     
    Pahu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,657
    Local Date
    12-12-2017
    Local Time
    08:39 PM
    Points
    6,232

    Re: Science Disproves Evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Ted View Post
    The whole creationist theology is simply an ignorance of man by scientific wannabees. To say there is no evidence of evolution is to walk blindly and not use one's brain. Denying the obvious.
    Where is evidence that evolution is obvious?
    Truth Frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.

  3. #3793
    Ted
    Currently Offline
    Senior Member
    This user has no status.
     
    I am:
    ----
     

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Gabriola Island BC
    Posts
    5,298
    Local Date
    12-12-2017
    Local Time
    05:39 PM
    Points
    5,780

    Re: Science Disproves Evolution

    Pahu I'm not going to do your research for you. If you really want to know start looking. But hey, I don't want to confuse you with the facts.

  4. #3794
    Senior Member
    This user has no status.
     
    I am:
    ----
     
    Pahu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,657
    Local Date
    12-12-2017
    Local Time
    08:39 PM
    Points
    6,232

    Re: Science Disproves Evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Ted View Post
    Pahu I'm not going to do your research for you. If you really want to know start looking. But hey, I don't want to confuse you with the facts.
    Evolution: Real Science or Nonsense?


    "Remember now thy Creator in the days of thy youth, while the evil days come not, nor the years draw nigh, when thou shalt say, I have no pleasure in them" (Ecclesiasties 12:1).

    Humans don't seem very satisfied. There is always something else they feel they need. Where are they trying to get to? On the other hand, most apes are quite content. If I were to apply some home-spun logic to the theory of evolution, then I would logically have to believe that apes evolved from man.

    If evolution means that a species changes to improve itself, it seems more logical that humans would grow hair to keep warm, reduce their diet to the most nutritious foods, eliminate high mortgages by adapting to the outdoors, and do away with money, complex governments, saying what you don't mean, war, stress, traffic congestion, and genocide (which occurs when you let other members of your species needlessly starve). Apes have accomplished all this.

    Apes, by evolving from man, have "created" a more workable and more sane life-style. If the ultimate aim in a more advanced society is for peace and equity, then those who evolved into the ape species have certainly surpassed their forbears of the human species.

    Pass me a banana. I want to be an ape.

    Real Science Is Not Arbitrary

    Life—according to evolutionists—began when different chemicals, under the right circumstances, came together and formed a more complex unit which eventually developed into an organism.

    It took millions of years for life to begin because the right kinds of chemicals, initially, didn't know they were right for each other until, under some arbitrary, chance circumstances, they finally met and made a match. Then, it required millions of more years for organisms to co-mingle and become transformed into complex creatures.

    The key factor in the theory of evolution is that the right elements came together under arbitrary circumstances. It would have to be that way, because if the elements were to be put together in a planned, or predestined, or systematic way, there would need to be a force directing them. The life forms that resulted would, then, have been "created."

    Charles Darwin advanced the theory of evolution by natural selection in 1859. As it was gaining wide acceptance in the scientific community in the 1920s, noted scientist Sir William Cecil Dampier wrote:

    The fundamental concepts of physical science, it is now understood, are abstractions, framed by our mind, so as to bring order to an apparent chaos of phenomena.

    [continue]
    Truth Frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.

  5. #3795
    Senior Member
    This user has no status.
     
    I am:
    ----
     
    Pahu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,657
    Local Date
    12-12-2017
    Local Time
    08:39 PM
    Points
    6,232

    Re: Science Disproves Evolution

    Evolution: Real Science or Nonsense?


    [continued]

    In other words, some scientists believed it was valid to use an abstract as theory to provide a simple answer to something that they could not otherwise observe and called it "evolution science." Yet, what is true science? Is it merely theory, or is it demonstrated fact? Is it arbitrary and unpredictable, or specific and systematic? In true science, a theory may be the basis for inquiry and study; but until it is "proven up," it is only speculation. It is not scientific to guess at conclusions.

    In addition, whatever has been determined to be scientific fact always turns out to be part of an elaborate pattern. When you take a closer look at fact-based science, it is very systematic.

    Science looks at the way something is. Research may have to discover how it is. But once a discovery is made—for instance, the speed of light—it becomes a scientific fact because it repeats itself in exactly the same way. Scientific facts are consistent and predictable—from the simplest to the most complex.

    [continue]
    Truth Frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.

  6. #3796
    Senior Member
    This user has no status.
     
    I am:
    ----
     
    Pahu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,657
    Local Date
    12-12-2017
    Local Time
    08:39 PM
    Points
    6,232

    Re: Science Disproves Evolution

    Evolution: Real Science or Nonsense?


    [continued]

    Two plus two is four; and two times two is four. It is absolute, conclusive, and unalterable. The way you do a certain calculation, whether basic math or complex algebra, is the way it will always be done, and it will always produce the same result. Physics. Chemistry. Electricity. Radio waves. Plant life. Animal life. The physical and life sciences are all very precise and systematic sciences. Each follows a specific pattern. There are basic forms of each, as well as scientific combinations. For example, you can "mate" an orange and a tangerine because they are from the same family. But you cannot mix apples and oranges, even though they are both fruits. Nor is there any logic or proof that an apple evolved from an orange, or an orange from an apple. Likewise, monkeys and humans may have many similar physical features and social behaviors, but that seems to be a rather thin link to conclude that humans are the offspring of monkeys.

    Furthermore, for anything to be considered scientifically true, it has to be something that can be duplicated. If evolution were true, wouldn't scientists be able to recreate the sequence of change that transformed monkeys into humans?

    [continue]
    Truth Frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.

  7. #3797
    Senior Member
    This user has no status.
     
    I am:
    ----
     
    Pahu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,657
    Local Date
    12-12-2017
    Local Time
    08:39 PM
    Points
    6,232

    Re: Science Disproves Evolution

    Evolution: Real Science or Nonsense?


    [continued]

    Instead, scientists in the 1950s discovered that each organic species—both plant and animal—has a specific, complex code for its species. It is called DNA which are complex segments of information in a cell that determine what kind of a plant or animal something is. The DNA signature is unique for every species, plus every creature has a DNA pattern which is unique for it. In other words, "Joe" has a DNA code for the human species, as well as a DNA pattern unique to him.

    More importantly, that DNA pattern has to be in a specific sequence for each species. In humans, there are three billion bits (called nucleotides) of information which fall into a very precise DNA sequence.

    And this DNA sequence cannot, and does not, rearrange itself to create something new. DNA does not have the independent capacity to add nucleotides at will. Once a given program is established, it remains fixed in its basic sequence.

    So in terms of pure science, "evolution science" appears to be a contradiction—an oxymoron. Evolution is unpredictable and arbitrary, while science is systematic—based on a preexisting system. And in a broader sense, it does not seem the universe could have created itself arbitrarily and still be completely, totally, and in every regard, systematic.

    More Questions Than Answers

    Evolution faces additional problems besides not fitting into the standard definition of science. Despite the extensive research in this field, it has to be acknowledged that some 130 years after the theory was proposed, there are still more questions than answers.

    The Darwin concept of evolution was chiefly based on a cause-and-effect scenario: creatures changed and developed because of the necessity to adapt to new surroundings.

    In this century, various paleontologists have discovered bone fragments of skeletons which they claim are extinct creatures that are the "missing links" between apes and man, thus supposedly proving evolution, and proving that today's humans are better adapted than these other creatures of a bygone era.

    But what supporting evidence do we really have? Why are we so quick to believe that a one-of-a-kind, hunch-backed skeleton 400,000 years old is suddenly the "missing link"? A few years after this discovery, some different fossils—supposedly one million years old—were found in another part of the world and were called the "missing link." Is there a link between these two links? And where are all of the other missing links? Where is the chain of evidence that shows how the unique parts of creatures evolved? How did the eye develop? How did we get a heart, stomach, other organs, teeth, hearing, smell, nerves, muscles, bones, and skin all in one nice, neat package?

    And a sperm meets an egg, we get another creature, almost as easily as using the Xerox. For that matter, how did the distinction of male and female genders occur?

    How does evolution explain an unattractive, slithering caterpillar going into a chrysalis and emerging as one of nature's most delicately beautiful creatures—a butterfly?

    But the most basic and difficult question of all is: How did inorganic material make the transition to organic, living cells? In fact, this was one of the first questions raised about evolution theory. But the proponents of evolution past and present avoid it. I. L. Cohen points out in his book, Darwin Was Wrong—A Study in Probabilities: "The idea that life sprang spontaneously from dead inorganic matter was quietly set aside, under-emphasized, and virtually forgotten."

    With so many pertinent questions, and such weak science in the limited answers offered, at best, evolution seems to end up being a jigsaw puzzle with a significant number of pieces missing. Looking closely at the issues surrounding evolution, it seems perplexing that so many scientists still cling to and advocate it, even to the point of endorsing it as factual truth in science textbooks.

    The conclusion of I. L. Cohen is that "the constant repetition of a speculation did, unfortunately, extend it an aura of unwarranted credibility, which, in turn, embedded itself into our collective minds as established fact."

    Conclusion

    Are evolutionists disingenuous? In the beginning, the proponents of evolution theory asked that society become broad-minded to allow the free expression of their minority point-of-view. But now that Darwinists represent the majority viewpoint, they have become narrow-minded, forcing the exclusion in the free marketplace of ideas of differing opinions.

    In the most democratic of places—public schools—evolution has been elevated to a scientific gospel, and other concepts are no longer presented because they are heretical. But other ideas need to be given a forum. Indoctrination in only one viewpoint demeans true science. Let's be more fairminded.

    Evolution: Real Science or Nonsense? | The Institute for Creation Research
    Truth Frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.

  8. #3798
    Proudly humble
    is Lost in the Ozone, again.
     
    I am:
    Cool
     
    LarsMac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    usually on the road to somewhere.
    Posts
    9,592
    Local Date
    12-12-2017
    Local Time
    08:39 PM
    Points
    36,699
    Gifts Beer Balloons Gift Car Beer

    Re: Science Disproves Evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Ted View Post
    Pahu I'm not going to do your research for you. If you really want to know start looking. But hey, I don't want to confuse you with the facts.
    That fact that he is talking about a completely different "Evolution" than what most scientists define makes the discussion with him a waste of time and effort.

    But still he never has actually offered any science to even disprove his own brand of Evolution.
    "The trouble with people isn't that they don't know, but that they know so much that ain't so."
    - Anonymous

  9. #3799
    Senior Member
    This user has no status.
     
    I am:
    ----
     
    Pahu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,657
    Local Date
    12-12-2017
    Local Time
    08:39 PM
    Points
    6,232

    Re: Science Disproves Evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by LarsMac View Post
    That fact that he is talking about a completely different "Evolution" than what most scientists define makes the discussion with him a waste of time and effort.

    But still he never has actually offered any science to even disprove his own brand of Evolution.
    Sure I have but you choose to ignore it to preserve your erroneous preconceptions. The disciplines of science prove creation and disprove evolution. For example:

    Sea Worm Is 'Man's Ancestor'?


    On July 7, BBC News reported the rare discovery of a fossilized sea worm, classified as a hemichordate, a sophisticated invertebrate. Evolutionists are excited because this find supposedly provides insight into early evolution. And some evolutionists even see this worm—called Oesia—as a half-billion-year-old ancestor of man.1

    Hemichordates—the acorn worms inhabiting ocean sediments today—are anything but simple. They are designed with a net-like nerve plexus containing giant nerve cells, pharyngeal gill slits, glomerulus, longitudinal and circular muscle, and unique embryonic development.

    But what do scientists know for sure regarding this new supposedly ancient fossil? Clearly, like its modern version, it's quite a complex creature. The article states Oesia "had U-shaped gills running down most of the length of its body, to enable filter feeding." The fossil showed the sea worm lived inside a sophisticated tube-like structure that served as a protective house. But to say this worm is our ancestor is a wholly unwarranted extrapolation.

    Contrary to what the BBC article states, this half-billion-year-old fossil does not give scientists any "new insights into how early creatures evolved." It's merely a sea-worm fossil much like sea worms alive today. Indeed, in 2013 three evolutionists said, "Hemichordate [evolution] has long remained problematic."2 British paleontologist Michael Benton stated, "The [evolutionary history] of hemichordates is actively debated."3 and six evolutionists said, "Hemichordate [evolutionary history] has long been puzzling."4

    The amount of extrapolation needed to jump from sea worm to human is absolutely incredible. Evolutionists are simply speculating from something known to something unknown using conjecture and lots of imagination, rather than relying on an empirical process.

    The fact that no undisputed transitional fossils exist doesn't seem to thwart evolutionary extrapolation nor wild claims, like we see in this story, of an ancestral connection between sea worms and humans. There must be a better scientific explanation.

    Creation scientists view this Oesia fossil as an ocean bottom-dwelling sea worm buried suddenly during the first stage of the Genesis Flood.

    Sea Worm Is 'Man's Ancestor' | The Institute for Creation Research
    Truth Frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.

  10. #3800
    Proudly humble
    is Lost in the Ozone, again.
     
    I am:
    Cool
     
    LarsMac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    usually on the road to somewhere.
    Posts
    9,592
    Local Date
    12-12-2017
    Local Time
    08:39 PM
    Points
    36,699
    Gifts Beer Balloons Gift Car Beer

    Re: Science Disproves Evolution

    Register to remove this ad.
    Quote Originally Posted by Pahu View Post
    Sure I have but you choose to ignore it to preserve your erroneous preconceptions.
    After all this time, you have no idea what sort of preconceptions, ereoneous, or otherwise that I may have.
    I am simply waiting for you to produce some science.


    Quote Originally Posted by Pahu View Post
    Creation scientists...
    Oxymoron
    "The trouble with people isn't that they don't know, but that they know so much that ain't so."
    - Anonymous

+ Reply to Thread

Similar Threads

  1. Evolution
    By spot in forum Science
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 10-11-2008, 05:12 PM
  2. Normal Science is Lamp-Post Science
    By coberst in forum Philosophy
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-12-2008, 01:43 PM
  3. Evolution
    By SnoozeControl in forum People
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-14-2006, 03:48 PM
  4. Evolution
    By SnoozeControl in forum Just For The Fun Of It
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 10-26-2006, 09:39 PM
  5. Did you know that evolution....
    By metalstorm in forum Did You Know?
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 12-28-2004, 06:28 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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

Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.5.2