One of the most needy of posters wrote:
“You're going to post something other than an attack on evolution? It will explain what we find in the natural world without resorting to Darwinian evolution or supernatural intervention? I eagerly await...”
The Pretense Called Evolution
As we find in Matthew 7:7 "Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you.”
So…..the biology term for history? Evolution.
1. I’ve never met anyone whose claim it is that every living thing we see on earth today was always here, just as it is now. I’m gonna believe that most will understand this:
"Anyone who thinks that nature prefers humans and our environment or any species we know and love should consider that 99.9 percent of the billions of species that have lived on earth over the past 3.5 billion years have been dismissed into oblivion."
Kaufman, "No Turning Back," p. 12
Think about how we know that…
2. That’s the history of biology, and a statement that most would agree is ‘evolution.’ Living things come and go, and are known to change within specific limitations.
That’s not Darwinism. Darwin's thesis the explanation for said history.
Darwin’s theory is a very specific set of dictates in an attempt to explain today’s diversity of life…..but none of those dictates has been proven, and most have been disproven.
Which makes intelligent and curious souls question why it is the only ‘explanation’ taught in government school….and why it is taught as fact.
3. Animal husbandry, farming domestication, is based on the sort of random modifications that Darwin was getting at. No one doubts it. It was practiced well before Darwin. But while these folks knew that these modifications are almost always harmful, and deadly, the changes are always within limit of the species.
Darwin said they accumulate until a new species is the result. This has never happened. And that’s where Darwinism deviates into a political view, and not a scientific one.
In 1997, evolutionary biologist Keith Stewart Thomson wrote: “A matter of unfinished business for biologists is the identification of evolution's smoking gun,” and “the smoking gun of evolution is speciation, not local adaptation and differentiation of populations.” Before Darwin, the consensus was that species can vary only within certain limits; indeed, centuries of artificial selection had seemingly demonstrated such limits experimentally.
“Darwin had to show that the limits could be broken,” wrote Thomson, “so do we.” Keith Stewart Thomson, “Natural Selection and Evolution’s Smoking Gun,” American Scientist 85 (1997): 516-518.
And….
“Breeders have been using artificial selection to produce descent with modification for centuries—within existing species. Natural selection has also been observed to do the same in the wild—but again, only within existing species.”
Jonathan Wells
Thus, anyone who claims that Darwinian Evolution is a ‘fact, proven,’ is proof of the government school political persuasion, and knows nothing of science.
The question of why there is any dispute at all is that there are scientists by vocation, but are Marxists by religion, and need to advance atheism for their religion. If not for the influence of Marxism, there would be no conflict over what evolution is, and what it means.
As of this moment......there has never been any proof of the mechanism that Darwin offered.
Never.
“You're going to post something other than an attack on evolution? It will explain what we find in the natural world without resorting to Darwinian evolution or supernatural intervention? I eagerly await...”
The Pretense Called Evolution
As we find in Matthew 7:7 "Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you.”
So…..the biology term for history? Evolution.
1. I’ve never met anyone whose claim it is that every living thing we see on earth today was always here, just as it is now. I’m gonna believe that most will understand this:
"Anyone who thinks that nature prefers humans and our environment or any species we know and love should consider that 99.9 percent of the billions of species that have lived on earth over the past 3.5 billion years have been dismissed into oblivion."
Kaufman, "No Turning Back," p. 12
Think about how we know that…
2. That’s the history of biology, and a statement that most would agree is ‘evolution.’ Living things come and go, and are known to change within specific limitations.
That’s not Darwinism. Darwin's thesis the explanation for said history.
Darwin’s theory is a very specific set of dictates in an attempt to explain today’s diversity of life…..but none of those dictates has been proven, and most have been disproven.
Which makes intelligent and curious souls question why it is the only ‘explanation’ taught in government school….and why it is taught as fact.
3. Animal husbandry, farming domestication, is based on the sort of random modifications that Darwin was getting at. No one doubts it. It was practiced well before Darwin. But while these folks knew that these modifications are almost always harmful, and deadly, the changes are always within limit of the species.
Darwin said they accumulate until a new species is the result. This has never happened. And that’s where Darwinism deviates into a political view, and not a scientific one.
In 1997, evolutionary biologist Keith Stewart Thomson wrote: “A matter of unfinished business for biologists is the identification of evolution's smoking gun,” and “the smoking gun of evolution is speciation, not local adaptation and differentiation of populations.” Before Darwin, the consensus was that species can vary only within certain limits; indeed, centuries of artificial selection had seemingly demonstrated such limits experimentally.
“Darwin had to show that the limits could be broken,” wrote Thomson, “so do we.” Keith Stewart Thomson, “Natural Selection and Evolution’s Smoking Gun,” American Scientist 85 (1997): 516-518.
And….
“Breeders have been using artificial selection to produce descent with modification for centuries—within existing species. Natural selection has also been observed to do the same in the wild—but again, only within existing species.”
Jonathan Wells
Thus, anyone who claims that Darwinian Evolution is a ‘fact, proven,’ is proof of the government school political persuasion, and knows nothing of science.
The question of why there is any dispute at all is that there are scientists by vocation, but are Marxists by religion, and need to advance atheism for their religion. If not for the influence of Marxism, there would be no conflict over what evolution is, and what it means.
As of this moment......there has never been any proof of the mechanism that Darwin offered.
Never.