What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Darwin's Tree Of Life Cut Down

ChemEngineer

Diamond Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2019
Messages
3,393
Reaction score
2,779
Points
1,940
If evolution is true, then it should seem at least reasonably possible that DNA could have come about by means of a series of chance events. If the Bible is true, then DNA should provide strong evidence that it is the product of an orderly, intelligent mind.

“One gram of DNA, which when dry would occupy a volume of approximately one cubic centimeter, can store as much information as approximately one trillion CDs [compact discs].”20

“The genome is a very clever book, because in the right conditions it can both photocopy itself and read itself.”22



One science book calls this efficient packaging system “an extraordinary feat of engineering.”18 Does the suggestion that there was no engineer behind this feat sound credible to you? If this museum had a huge store with millions of items for sale and they were all so tidily arranged that you could easily find any item you needed, would you assume that no one had organized the place? Of course not! But such order would be a simple feat by comparison.



In 1999 biologist Malcolm S. Gordon wrote: “Life appears to have had many origins. The base of the universal tree of life appears not to have been a single root.” Is there evidence that all the major branches of life are connected to a single trunk, as Darwin believed? Gordon continues: “The traditional version of the theory of common descent apparently does not apply to kingdoms as presently recognized. It probably does not apply to many, if not all, phyla, and possibly also not to many classes within the phyla.”29 *



In reality, the vast majority of fossils show stability among types of creatures over extensive amounts of time. The evidence does not show them evolving from one type into another. Unique body plans appear suddenly. New features appear suddenly. For example, bats with sonar and echolocation systems appear with no obvious link to a more primitive ancestor.

In fact, more than half of all the major divisions of animal life seem to have appeared in a relatively short period of time. Because many new and distinct life forms appear so suddenly in the fossil record, paleontologists refer to this period as “the Cambrian explosion.” When was the Cambrian period?

Let us assume that the estimates of researchers are accurate. In that case, the history of the earth could be represented by a time line that stretches the length of a soccer field (1). At that scale, you would have to walk about seven eighths of the way down the field before you would come to what paleontologists call the Cambrian period (2). During a small segment of that period, the major divisions of animal life show up in the fossil record. How suddenly do they appear? As you walk down the soccer field, all those different creatures pop up in the space of less than one step!



The relatively sudden appearance of these diverse life forms is causing some evolutionary researchers to question the traditional version of Darwin’s theory. For example, in an interview in 2008, evolutionary biologist Stuart Newman discussed the need for a new theory of evolution that could explain the sudden appearance of novel forms of life. He said: “The Darwinian mechanism that’s used to explain all evolutionary change will be relegated, I believe, to being just one of several mechanisms—maybe not even the most important when it comes to understanding macroevolution, the evolution of major transitions in body type.”33





Regarding the time spans that separate many of these fossils, zoologist Henry Gee says: “The intervals of time that separate the fossils are so huge that we cannot say anything definite about their possible connection through ancestry and descent.”34 *

Commenting on the fossils of fish and amphibians, biologist Malcolm S. Gordon states that the fossils found represent only a small, “possibly quite unrepresentative, sample of the biodiversity that existed in these groups at those times.” He further says: “There is no way of knowing to what extent, if at all, those specific organisms were relevant to later developments, or what their relationships might have been to each other.”35 *





Consider the statement made in 2008 in Scientific American Mind: “Scientists have failed to find a correlation between absolute or relative brain size and acumen among humans and other animal species. Neither have they been able to discern a parallel between wits and the size or existence of specific regions of the brain, excepting perhaps Broca’s area, which governs speech in people.”49



Bibliography

1. How Did Life Begin?


1. How Life Began—Evolution’s Three Geneses, by Alexandre Meinesz, translated by Daniel Simberloff, 2008, pp. 30-33, 45.

a. Life Itself—Its Origin and Nature, by Francis Crick, 1981, pp. 15-16, 141-153.

2. Scientific American, “A Simpler Origin for Life,” by Robert Shapiro, June 2007, p. 48.

a. The New York Times, “A Leading Mystery of Life’s Origins Is Seemingly Solved,” by Nicholas Wade, May 14, 2009, p. A23.

3. Scientific American, June 2007, p. 48.

4. Scientific American, June 2007, pp. 47, 49-50.

5. Information Theory, Evolution, and the Origin of Life, by Hubert P. Yockey, 2005, p. 182.

6. NASA’s Astrobiology Magazine, “Life’s Working Definition—Does It Work?” (National Aeronautics and Space Administration vision/universe/starsgalaxies/ life’s_working_definition.html), accessed 3/17/2009.

7. Princeton Weekly Bulletin, “Nuts, Bolts of Who We Are,” by Steven Schultz, May 1, 2000, (Princeton University pr/pwb/00/0501/p/brain.shtml), accessed 3/27/2009.

a. “The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2002,” Press Release, October 7, 2002, (The official website of the Nobel Prize - NobelPrize.org nobel_prizes/medicine/laureates/2002/ press.html), accessed 3/27/2009.

8. “The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2002,” October 7, 2002.

9. Encyclopædia Britannica, CD 2003, “Cell,” “The Mitochondrion and the Chloroplast,” subhead, “The Endosymbiont Hypothesis.”

10. How Life Began—Evolution’s Three Geneses, p. 32.

11. Molecular Biology of the Cell, Second Edition, by Bruce Alberts et al, 1989, p. 405.

12. Molecular Human Reproduction, “The Role of Proteomics in Defining the Human Embryonic Secretome,” by M. G. Katz-Jaffe, S. McReynolds, D. K. Gardner, and W. B. Schoolcraft, 2009, p. 271.

13. Between Necessity and Probability: Searching for the Definition and Origin of Life, by Radu Popa, 2004, p. 129.

14. Between Necessity and Probability: Searching for the Definition and Origin of Life, pp. 126-127.

15. Origin of Mitochondria and Hydrogenosomes, by William F. Martin and Miklós Müller, 2007, p. 21.

16. Brain Matters—Translating Research Into Classroom Practice, by Pat Wolfe, 2001, p. 16.

17. Research News Berkeley Lab, (Please see http://www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/ LSD-molecular-DNA.html), article: “Molecular DNA Switch Found to Be the Same for All Life,” contact: Lynn Yarris, p. 1 of 4; accessed 2/10/2009.

18. Life Script, by Nicholas Wade, 2001, p. 79.

19. Bioinformatics Methods in Clinical Research, edited by Rune Matthiesen, 2010, p. 49.

20. Scientific American, “Computing With DNA,” by Leonard M. Adleman, August 1998, p. 61.

21. Nano Letters, “Enumeration of DNA Molecules Bound to a Nanomechanical Oscillator,” by B. Ilic, Y. Yang, K. Aubin, R. Reichenbach, S. Krylov, and H. G. Craighead, Vol. 5, No. 5, 2005, pp. 925, 929.

22. Genome—The Autobiography of a Species in 23 Chapters, by Matt Ridley, 1999, pp. 7-8.

23. Essential Cell Biology, Second Edition, by Bruce Alberts, Dennis Bray, Karen Hopkin, Alexander Johnson, Julian Lewis, Martin Raff, Keith Roberts, and Peter Walter, 2004, p. 201.

24. Molecular Biology of the Cell, Fourth Edition, by Bruce Alberts et al, 2002, p. 258.

25. No Ordinary Genius—The Illustrated Richard Feynman, edited by Christopher Sykes, 1994, photo with no page number supplied; note caption.

a. New Scientist, “Second Genesis—Life, but Not As We Know It,” by Bob Holmes, March 11, 2009, (http://www.newscientist.com/article/ mg20126990.100) accessed 3/11/2009.

26. The Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence—A Philosophical Inquiry, by David Lamb, 2001, p. 83.

27. Associated Press Newswires, “Famous Atheist Now Believes in God,” by Richard N. Ostling, December 9, 2004.

28. Intelligent Life in the Universe, Second Edition, by Peter Ulmschneider, 2006, p. 125.

29. Biology and Philosophy, “The Concept of Monophyly: A Speculative Essay,” by Malcolm S. Gordon, 1999, p. 335.

30. New Scientist, “Uprooting Darwin’s Tree,” by Graham Lawton, January 24, 2009, p. 34.

31. New Scientist, January 24, 2009, pp. 37, 39.

32. Field Museum of Natural History Bulletin, “Conflicts Between Darwin and Paleontology,” by David M. Raup, January 1979, p. 23.

33. Archaeology, “The Origin of Form Was Abrupt Not Gradual,” by Suzan Mazur, October 11, 2008, (www.archaeology.org/online/ interviews/newman.html), accessed 2/23/2009.

34. In Search of Deep Time—Beyond the Fossil Record to a New History of Life, by Henry Gee, 1999, p. 23.

35. Biology and Philosophy, p. 340.

36. National Geographic, “Fossil Evidence,” November 2004, p. 25.

37. The Evolutionists—The Struggle for Darwin’s Soul, by Richard Morris, 2001, pp. 104-105.

(Box) What About Human Evolution?

38. The Human Lineage, by Matt Cartmill and Fred H. Smith, 2009, Preface, p. xi.

39. Fossils, Teeth and Sex—New Perspectives on Human Evolution, by Charles E. Oxnard, 1987, Preface, pp. xi, xii.

a. From Lucy to Language, by Donald Johanson and Blake Edgar, 1996, p. 22.

b. Anthropologie, XLII/1, “Palaeodemography and Dental Microwear of Homo Habilis From East Africa,” by Laura M. Martínez, Jordi Galbany, and Alejandro Pérez-Pérez, 2004, p. 53.

c. In Search of Deep Time—Beyond the Fossil Record to a New History of Life, p. 22.

40. Critique of Anthropology, Volume 29(2), “Patenting Hominins—Taxonomies, Fossils and Egos,” by Robin Derricourt, 2009, pp. 195-196, 198.

41. Nature, “A New Species of Great Ape From the Late Miocene Epoch in Ethiopia,” by Gen Suwa, Reiko T. Kono, Shigehiro Katoh, Berhane Asfaw, and Yonas Beyene, August 23, 2007, p. 921.

42. Acta Biologica Szegediensis, Volume 46(1-2), “New Findings—New Problems in Classification of Hominids,” by Gyula Gyenis, 2002, pp. 57, 59.

43. New Scientist, “A Fine Fossil—But a Missing Link She’s Not,” by Chris Bead, May 30, 2009, p. 18.

44. The Guardian, London, “Fossil Ida: Extraordinary Find Is ‘Missing Link’ in Human Evolution,” by James Randerson, May 19, 2009, (http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/ may/19/ida-fossil-missing-link), accessed 8/25/2009.

45. New Scientist, May 30, 2009, pp. 18-19.

46. Critique of Anthropology, Volume 29(2), p. 202.

47. Science and Justice, Vol. 43, No. 4, (2003) section, Forensic Anthropology, “Anthropological Facial ‘Reconstruction’—Recognizing the Fallacies, ‘Unembracing’ the Errors, and Realizing Method Limits,” by C. N. Stephan, p. 195.

48. The Human Fossil Record—Volume Three, by Ralph L. Holloway, Douglas C. Broadfield, and Michael S. Yuan, 2004, Preface xvi.

49. Scientific American Mind, “Intelligence Evolved,” by Ursula Dicke and Gerhard Roth, August/September 2008, p. 72.

50. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, “How Neandertals Inform Human Variation,” by Milford H. Wolpoff, 2009, p. 91.

51. Conceptual Issues in Human Modern Origins Research, Editors G. A. Clark and C. M. Willermet, 1997, pp. 5, 60.

a. Wonderful Life—The Burgess Shale and the Nature of History, by Stephen Jay Gould, 1989, p. 28.

https://www.jw.org/en/library/books...stions/is-it-reasonable-to-believe-the-bible/
 

occupied

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2011
Messages
29,762
Reaction score
10,399
Points
900
Does it matter that much? You exist right now, what are you going to do about it?
 

rightwinger

Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
235,198
Reaction score
59,483
Points
2,190
DNA proves Evolution occurred

It is a clear roadmap
 

Hollie

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
42,429
Reaction score
6,257
Points
1,830
If evolution is true, then it should seem at least reasonably possible that DNA could have come about by means of a series of chance events. If the Bible is true, then DNA should provide strong evidence that it is the product of an orderly, intelligent mind.

“One gram of DNA, which when dry would occupy a volume of approximately one cubic centimeter, can store as much information as approximately one trillion CDs [compact discs].”20

“The genome is a very clever book, because in the right conditions it can both photocopy itself and read itself.”22



One science book calls this efficient packaging system “an extraordinary feat of engineering.”18 Does the suggestion that there was no engineer behind this feat sound credible to you? If this museum had a huge store with millions of items for sale and they were all so tidily arranged that you could easily find any item you needed, would you assume that no one had organized the place? Of course not! But such order would be a simple feat by comparison.



In 1999 biologist Malcolm S. Gordon wrote: “Life appears to have had many origins. The base of the universal tree of life appears not to have been a single root.” Is there evidence that all the major branches of life are connected to a single trunk, as Darwin believed? Gordon continues: “The traditional version of the theory of common descent apparently does not apply to kingdoms as presently recognized. It probably does not apply to many, if not all, phyla, and possibly also not to many classes within the phyla.”29 *



In reality, the vast majority of fossils show stability among types of creatures over extensive amounts of time. The evidence does not show them evolving from one type into another. Unique body plans appear suddenly. New features appear suddenly. For example, bats with sonar and echolocation systems appear with no obvious link to a more primitive ancestor.

In fact, more than half of all the major divisions of animal life seem to have appeared in a relatively short period of time. Because many new and distinct life forms appear so suddenly in the fossil record, paleontologists refer to this period as “the Cambrian explosion.” When was the Cambrian period?

Let us assume that the estimates of researchers are accurate. In that case, the history of the earth could be represented by a time line that stretches the length of a soccer field (1). At that scale, you would have to walk about seven eighths of the way down the field before you would come to what paleontologists call the Cambrian period (2). During a small segment of that period, the major divisions of animal life show up in the fossil record. How suddenly do they appear? As you walk down the soccer field, all those different creatures pop up in the space of less than one step!



The relatively sudden appearance of these diverse life forms is causing some evolutionary researchers to question the traditional version of Darwin’s theory. For example, in an interview in 2008, evolutionary biologist Stuart Newman discussed the need for a new theory of evolution that could explain the sudden appearance of novel forms of life. He said: “The Darwinian mechanism that’s used to explain all evolutionary change will be relegated, I believe, to being just one of several mechanisms—maybe not even the most important when it comes to understanding macroevolution, the evolution of major transitions in body type.”33





Regarding the time spans that separate many of these fossils, zoologist Henry Gee says: “The intervals of time that separate the fossils are so huge that we cannot say anything definite about their possible connection through ancestry and descent.”34 *

Commenting on the fossils of fish and amphibians, biologist Malcolm S. Gordon states that the fossils found represent only a small, “possibly quite unrepresentative, sample of the biodiversity that existed in these groups at those times.” He further says: “There is no way of knowing to what extent, if at all, those specific organisms were relevant to later developments, or what their relationships might have been to each other.”35 *





Consider the statement made in 2008 in Scientific American Mind: “Scientists have failed to find a correlation between absolute or relative brain size and acumen among humans and other animal species. Neither have they been able to discern a parallel between wits and the size or existence of specific regions of the brain, excepting perhaps Broca’s area, which governs speech in people.”49



Bibliography

1. How Did Life Begin?


1. How Life Began—Evolution’s Three Geneses, by Alexandre Meinesz, translated by Daniel Simberloff, 2008, pp. 30-33, 45.

a. Life Itself—Its Origin and Nature, by Francis Crick, 1981, pp. 15-16, 141-153.

2. Scientific American, “A Simpler Origin for Life,” by Robert Shapiro, June 2007, p. 48.

a. The New York Times, “A Leading Mystery of Life’s Origins Is Seemingly Solved,” by Nicholas Wade, May 14, 2009, p. A23.

3. Scientific American, June 2007, p. 48.

4. Scientific American, June 2007, pp. 47, 49-50.

5. Information Theory, Evolution, and the Origin of Life, by Hubert P. Yockey, 2005, p. 182.

6. NASA’s Astrobiology Magazine, “Life’s Working Definition—Does It Work?” (National Aeronautics and Space Administration vision/universe/starsgalaxies/ life’s_working_definition.html), accessed 3/17/2009.

7. Princeton Weekly Bulletin, “Nuts, Bolts of Who We Are,” by Steven Schultz, May 1, 2000, (Princeton University pr/pwb/00/0501/p/brain.shtml), accessed 3/27/2009.

a. “The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2002,” Press Release, October 7, 2002, (The official website of the Nobel Prize - NobelPrize.org nobel_prizes/medicine/laureates/2002/ press.html), accessed 3/27/2009.

8. “The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2002,” October 7, 2002.

9. Encyclopædia Britannica, CD 2003, “Cell,” “The Mitochondrion and the Chloroplast,” subhead, “The Endosymbiont Hypothesis.”

10. How Life Began—Evolution’s Three Geneses, p. 32.

11. Molecular Biology of the Cell, Second Edition, by Bruce Alberts et al, 1989, p. 405.

12. Molecular Human Reproduction, “The Role of Proteomics in Defining the Human Embryonic Secretome,” by M. G. Katz-Jaffe, S. McReynolds, D. K. Gardner, and W. B. Schoolcraft, 2009, p. 271.

13. Between Necessity and Probability: Searching for the Definition and Origin of Life, by Radu Popa, 2004, p. 129.

14. Between Necessity and Probability: Searching for the Definition and Origin of Life, pp. 126-127.

15. Origin of Mitochondria and Hydrogenosomes, by William F. Martin and Miklós Müller, 2007, p. 21.

16. Brain Matters—Translating Research Into Classroom Practice, by Pat Wolfe, 2001, p. 16.

17. Research News Berkeley Lab, (Please see http://www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/ LSD-molecular-DNA.html), article: “Molecular DNA Switch Found to Be the Same for All Life,” contact: Lynn Yarris, p. 1 of 4; accessed 2/10/2009.

18. Life Script, by Nicholas Wade, 2001, p. 79.

19. Bioinformatics Methods in Clinical Research, edited by Rune Matthiesen, 2010, p. 49.

20. Scientific American, “Computing With DNA,” by Leonard M. Adleman, August 1998, p. 61.

21. Nano Letters, “Enumeration of DNA Molecules Bound to a Nanomechanical Oscillator,” by B. Ilic, Y. Yang, K. Aubin, R. Reichenbach, S. Krylov, and H. G. Craighead, Vol. 5, No. 5, 2005, pp. 925, 929.

22. Genome—The Autobiography of a Species in 23 Chapters, by Matt Ridley, 1999, pp. 7-8.

23. Essential Cell Biology, Second Edition, by Bruce Alberts, Dennis Bray, Karen Hopkin, Alexander Johnson, Julian Lewis, Martin Raff, Keith Roberts, and Peter Walter, 2004, p. 201.

24. Molecular Biology of the Cell, Fourth Edition, by Bruce Alberts et al, 2002, p. 258.

25. No Ordinary Genius—The Illustrated Richard Feynman, edited by Christopher Sykes, 1994, photo with no page number supplied; note caption.

a. New Scientist, “Second Genesis—Life, but Not As We Know It,” by Bob Holmes, March 11, 2009, (http://www.newscientist.com/article/ mg20126990.100) accessed 3/11/2009.

26. The Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence—A Philosophical Inquiry, by David Lamb, 2001, p. 83.

27. Associated Press Newswires, “Famous Atheist Now Believes in God,” by Richard N. Ostling, December 9, 2004.

28. Intelligent Life in the Universe, Second Edition, by Peter Ulmschneider, 2006, p. 125.

29. Biology and Philosophy, “The Concept of Monophyly: A Speculative Essay,” by Malcolm S. Gordon, 1999, p. 335.

30. New Scientist, “Uprooting Darwin’s Tree,” by Graham Lawton, January 24, 2009, p. 34.

31. New Scientist, January 24, 2009, pp. 37, 39.

32. Field Museum of Natural History Bulletin, “Conflicts Between Darwin and Paleontology,” by David M. Raup, January 1979, p. 23.

33. Archaeology, “The Origin of Form Was Abrupt Not Gradual,” by Suzan Mazur, October 11, 2008, (www.archaeology.org/online/ interviews/newman.html), accessed 2/23/2009.

34. In Search of Deep Time—Beyond the Fossil Record to a New History of Life, by Henry Gee, 1999, p. 23.

35. Biology and Philosophy, p. 340.

36. National Geographic, “Fossil Evidence,” November 2004, p. 25.

37. The Evolutionists—The Struggle for Darwin’s Soul, by Richard Morris, 2001, pp. 104-105.

(Box) What About Human Evolution?

38. The Human Lineage, by Matt Cartmill and Fred H. Smith, 2009, Preface, p. xi.

39. Fossils, Teeth and Sex—New Perspectives on Human Evolution, by Charles E. Oxnard, 1987, Preface, pp. xi, xii.

a. From Lucy to Language, by Donald Johanson and Blake Edgar, 1996, p. 22.

b. Anthropologie, XLII/1, “Palaeodemography and Dental Microwear of Homo Habilis From East Africa,” by Laura M. Martínez, Jordi Galbany, and Alejandro Pérez-Pérez, 2004, p. 53.

c. In Search of Deep Time—Beyond the Fossil Record to a New History of Life, p. 22.

40. Critique of Anthropology, Volume 29(2), “Patenting Hominins—Taxonomies, Fossils and Egos,” by Robin Derricourt, 2009, pp. 195-196, 198.

41. Nature, “A New Species of Great Ape From the Late Miocene Epoch in Ethiopia,” by Gen Suwa, Reiko T. Kono, Shigehiro Katoh, Berhane Asfaw, and Yonas Beyene, August 23, 2007, p. 921.

42. Acta Biologica Szegediensis, Volume 46(1-2), “New Findings—New Problems in Classification of Hominids,” by Gyula Gyenis, 2002, pp. 57, 59.

43. New Scientist, “A Fine Fossil—But a Missing Link She’s Not,” by Chris Bead, May 30, 2009, p. 18.

44. The Guardian, London, “Fossil Ida: Extraordinary Find Is ‘Missing Link’ in Human Evolution,” by James Randerson, May 19, 2009, (http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/ may/19/ida-fossil-missing-link), accessed 8/25/2009.

45. New Scientist, May 30, 2009, pp. 18-19.

46. Critique of Anthropology, Volume 29(2), p. 202.

47. Science and Justice, Vol. 43, No. 4, (2003) section, Forensic Anthropology, “Anthropological Facial ‘Reconstruction’—Recognizing the Fallacies, ‘Unembracing’ the Errors, and Realizing Method Limits,” by C. N. Stephan, p. 195.

48. The Human Fossil Record—Volume Three, by Ralph L. Holloway, Douglas C. Broadfield, and Michael S. Yuan, 2004, Preface xvi.

49. Scientific American Mind, “Intelligence Evolved,” by Ursula Dicke and Gerhard Roth, August/September 2008, p. 72.

50. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, “How Neandertals Inform Human Variation,” by Milford H. Wolpoff, 2009, p. 91.

51. Conceptual Issues in Human Modern Origins Research, Editors G. A. Clark and C. M. Willermet, 1997, pp. 5, 60.

a. Wonderful Life—The Burgess Shale and the Nature of History, by Stephen Jay Gould, 1989, p. 28.

https://www.jw.org/en/library/books...stions/is-it-reasonable-to-believe-the-bible/
Well, honestly, if you're cutting and pasting from the JW's one can only chuckle.
 

james bond

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Messages
11,483
Reaction score
1,446
Points
170
You give atheists the big evidence and then their stupid faith takes over. They even turn the truth into a lie they themselves believe. All one can do is laugh at their futility in their belief in lies :auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg:.
 

WinterBorn

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2011
Messages
43,684
Reaction score
13,260
Points
2,260
Location
Atlanta
You give atheists the big evidence and then their stupid faith takes over. They even turn the truth into a lie they themselves believe. All one can do is laugh at their futility in their belief in lies :auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg:.

I find it amusing that you are one of the ones demanding that atheists stay out of religious conversations. And yet you take great pleasure in posting reams of Cut & Paste nonsense attacking any scientific theories that do not match your biblical beliefs.

I think the word I am looking for is "Hypocrisy".
 

rightwinger

Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
235,198
Reaction score
59,483
Points
2,190
You give atheists the big evidence and then their stupid faith takes over. They even turn the truth into a lie they themselves believe. All one can do is laugh at their futility in their belief in lies :auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg:.
Your evidence is mere faith
 

james bond

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Messages
11,483
Reaction score
1,446
Points
170
I find it amusing that you are one of the ones demanding that atheists stay out of religious conversations. And yet you take great pleasure in posting reams of Cut & Paste nonsense attacking any scientific theories that do not match your biblical beliefs.

I think the word I am looking for is "Hypocrisy".
I never demand atheists stay out of religious conversations. What usually happens is because science and religion are two sides of the same coin, we end up mixing the two. I was just answering a question posed to me by an atheist "religioner." Her loving term made up term to criticize me. Since you are noob atheist "religioner," you don't know these things.

Here's an example for science and heinous crimes. John Wayne Gacy, the notorious serial killer (he was the first to be deemed such as the term "serial killer" took off with him), was Catholic from a Catholic family. However, it was his homosexuality that turned him into a serial killer. He killed boys for sex. Certainly, this is why homosexuality is an abomination.
 

Iamartiewhitefox

VIP Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2021
Messages
1,257
Reaction score
192
Points
63
If evolution is true, then it should seem at least reasonably possible that DNA could have come about by means of a series of chance events. If the Bible is true, then DNA should provide strong evidence that it is the product of an orderly, intelligent mind.

“One gram of DNA, which when dry would occupy a volume of approximately one cubic centimeter, can store as much information as approximately one trillion CDs [compact discs].”20

“The genome is a very clever book, because in the right conditions it can both photocopy itself and read itself.”22



One science book calls this efficient packaging system “an extraordinary feat of engineering.”18 Does the suggestion that there was no engineer behind this feat sound credible to you? If this museum had a huge store with millions of items for sale and they were all so tidily arranged that you could easily find any item you needed, would you assume that no one had organized the place? Of course not! But such order would be a simple feat by comparison.



In 1999 biologist Malcolm S. Gordon wrote: “Life appears to have had many origins. The base of the universal tree of life appears not to have been a single root.” Is there evidence that all the major branches of life are connected to a single trunk, as Darwin believed? Gordon continues: “The traditional version of the theory of common descent apparently does not apply to kingdoms as presently recognized. It probably does not apply to many, if not all, phyla, and possibly also not to many classes within the phyla.”29 *



In reality, the vast majority of fossils show stability among types of creatures over extensive amounts of time. The evidence does not show them evolving from one type into another. Unique body plans appear suddenly. New features appear suddenly. For example, bats with sonar and echolocation systems appear with no obvious link to a more primitive ancestor.

In fact, more than half of all the major divisions of animal life seem to have appeared in a relatively short period of time. Because many new and distinct life forms appear so suddenly in the fossil record, paleontologists refer to this period as “the Cambrian explosion.” When was the Cambrian period?

Let us assume that the estimates of researchers are accurate. In that case, the history of the earth could be represented by a time line that stretches the length of a soccer field (1). At that scale, you would have to walk about seven eighths of the way down the field before you would come to what paleontologists call the Cambrian period (2). During a small segment of that period, the major divisions of animal life show up in the fossil record. How suddenly do they appear? As you walk down the soccer field, all those different creatures pop up in the space of less than one step!



The relatively sudden appearance of these diverse life forms is causing some evolutionary researchers to question the traditional version of Darwin’s theory. For example, in an interview in 2008, evolutionary biologist Stuart Newman discussed the need for a new theory of evolution that could explain the sudden appearance of novel forms of life. He said: “The Darwinian mechanism that’s used to explain all evolutionary change will be relegated, I believe, to being just one of several mechanisms—maybe not even the most important when it comes to understanding macroevolution, the evolution of major transitions in body type.”33





Regarding the time spans that separate many of these fossils, zoologist Henry Gee says: “The intervals of time that separate the fossils are so huge that we cannot say anything definite about their possible connection through ancestry and descent.”34 *

Commenting on the fossils of fish and amphibians, biologist Malcolm S. Gordon states that the fossils found represent only a small, “possibly quite unrepresentative, sample of the biodiversity that existed in these groups at those times.” He further says: “There is no way of knowing to what extent, if at all, those specific organisms were relevant to later developments, or what their relationships might have been to each other.”35 *





Consider the statement made in 2008 in Scientific American Mind: “Scientists have failed to find a correlation between absolute or relative brain size and acumen among humans and other animal species. Neither have they been able to discern a parallel between wits and the size or existence of specific regions of the brain, excepting perhaps Broca’s area, which governs speech in people.”49



Bibliography

1. How Did Life Begin?


1. How Life Began—Evolution’s Three Geneses, by Alexandre Meinesz, translated by Daniel Simberloff, 2008, pp. 30-33, 45.

a. Life Itself—Its Origin and Nature, by Francis Crick, 1981, pp. 15-16, 141-153.

2. Scientific American, “A Simpler Origin for Life,” by Robert Shapiro, June 2007, p. 48.

a. The New York Times, “A Leading Mystery of Life’s Origins Is Seemingly Solved,” by Nicholas Wade, May 14, 2009, p. A23.

3. Scientific American, June 2007, p. 48.

4. Scientific American, June 2007, pp. 47, 49-50.

5. Information Theory, Evolution, and the Origin of Life, by Hubert P. Yockey, 2005, p. 182.

6. NASA’s Astrobiology Magazine, “Life’s Working Definition—Does It Work?” (National Aeronautics and Space Administration vision/universe/starsgalaxies/ life’s_working_definition.html), accessed 3/17/2009.

7. Princeton Weekly Bulletin, “Nuts, Bolts of Who We Are,” by Steven Schultz, May 1, 2000, (Princeton University pr/pwb/00/0501/p/brain.shtml), accessed 3/27/2009.

a. “The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2002,” Press Release, October 7, 2002, (The official website of the Nobel Prize - NobelPrize.org nobel_prizes/medicine/laureates/2002/ press.html), accessed 3/27/2009.

8. “The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2002,” October 7, 2002.

9. Encyclopædia Britannica, CD 2003, “Cell,” “The Mitochondrion and the Chloroplast,” subhead, “The Endosymbiont Hypothesis.”

10. How Life Began—Evolution’s Three Geneses, p. 32.

11. Molecular Biology of the Cell, Second Edition, by Bruce Alberts et al, 1989, p. 405.

12. Molecular Human Reproduction, “The Role of Proteomics in Defining the Human Embryonic Secretome,” by M. G. Katz-Jaffe, S. McReynolds, D. K. Gardner, and W. B. Schoolcraft, 2009, p. 271.

13. Between Necessity and Probability: Searching for the Definition and Origin of Life, by Radu Popa, 2004, p. 129.

14. Between Necessity and Probability: Searching for the Definition and Origin of Life, pp. 126-127.

15. Origin of Mitochondria and Hydrogenosomes, by William F. Martin and Miklós Müller, 2007, p. 21.

16. Brain Matters—Translating Research Into Classroom Practice, by Pat Wolfe, 2001, p. 16.

17. Research News Berkeley Lab, (Please see http://www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/ LSD-molecular-DNA.html), article: “Molecular DNA Switch Found to Be the Same for All Life,” contact: Lynn Yarris, p. 1 of 4; accessed 2/10/2009.

18. Life Script, by Nicholas Wade, 2001, p. 79.

19. Bioinformatics Methods in Clinical Research, edited by Rune Matthiesen, 2010, p. 49.

20. Scientific American, “Computing With DNA,” by Leonard M. Adleman, August 1998, p. 61.

21. Nano Letters, “Enumeration of DNA Molecules Bound to a Nanomechanical Oscillator,” by B. Ilic, Y. Yang, K. Aubin, R. Reichenbach, S. Krylov, and H. G. Craighead, Vol. 5, No. 5, 2005, pp. 925, 929.

22. Genome—The Autobiography of a Species in 23 Chapters, by Matt Ridley, 1999, pp. 7-8.

23. Essential Cell Biology, Second Edition, by Bruce Alberts, Dennis Bray, Karen Hopkin, Alexander Johnson, Julian Lewis, Martin Raff, Keith Roberts, and Peter Walter, 2004, p. 201.

24. Molecular Biology of the Cell, Fourth Edition, by Bruce Alberts et al, 2002, p. 258.

25. No Ordinary Genius—The Illustrated Richard Feynman, edited by Christopher Sykes, 1994, photo with no page number supplied; note caption.

a. New Scientist, “Second Genesis—Life, but Not As We Know It,” by Bob Holmes, March 11, 2009, (http://www.newscientist.com/article/ mg20126990.100) accessed 3/11/2009.

26. The Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence—A Philosophical Inquiry, by David Lamb, 2001, p. 83.

27. Associated Press Newswires, “Famous Atheist Now Believes in God,” by Richard N. Ostling, December 9, 2004.

28. Intelligent Life in the Universe, Second Edition, by Peter Ulmschneider, 2006, p. 125.

29. Biology and Philosophy, “The Concept of Monophyly: A Speculative Essay,” by Malcolm S. Gordon, 1999, p. 335.

30. New Scientist, “Uprooting Darwin’s Tree,” by Graham Lawton, January 24, 2009, p. 34.

31. New Scientist, January 24, 2009, pp. 37, 39.

32. Field Museum of Natural History Bulletin, “Conflicts Between Darwin and Paleontology,” by David M. Raup, January 1979, p. 23.

33. Archaeology, “The Origin of Form Was Abrupt Not Gradual,” by Suzan Mazur, October 11, 2008, (www.archaeology.org/online/ interviews/newman.html), accessed 2/23/2009.

34. In Search of Deep Time—Beyond the Fossil Record to a New History of Life, by Henry Gee, 1999, p. 23.

35. Biology and Philosophy, p. 340.

36. National Geographic, “Fossil Evidence,” November 2004, p. 25.

37. The Evolutionists—The Struggle for Darwin’s Soul, by Richard Morris, 2001, pp. 104-105.

(Box) What About Human Evolution?

38. The Human Lineage, by Matt Cartmill and Fred H. Smith, 2009, Preface, p. xi.

39. Fossils, Teeth and Sex—New Perspectives on Human Evolution, by Charles E. Oxnard, 1987, Preface, pp. xi, xii.

a. From Lucy to Language, by Donald Johanson and Blake Edgar, 1996, p. 22.

b. Anthropologie, XLII/1, “Palaeodemography and Dental Microwear of Homo Habilis From East Africa,” by Laura M. Martínez, Jordi Galbany, and Alejandro Pérez-Pérez, 2004, p. 53.

c. In Search of Deep Time—Beyond the Fossil Record to a New History of Life, p. 22.

40. Critique of Anthropology, Volume 29(2), “Patenting Hominins—Taxonomies, Fossils and Egos,” by Robin Derricourt, 2009, pp. 195-196, 198.

41. Nature, “A New Species of Great Ape From the Late Miocene Epoch in Ethiopia,” by Gen Suwa, Reiko T. Kono, Shigehiro Katoh, Berhane Asfaw, and Yonas Beyene, August 23, 2007, p. 921.

42. Acta Biologica Szegediensis, Volume 46(1-2), “New Findings—New Problems in Classification of Hominids,” by Gyula Gyenis, 2002, pp. 57, 59.

43. New Scientist, “A Fine Fossil—But a Missing Link She’s Not,” by Chris Bead, May 30, 2009, p. 18.

44. The Guardian, London, “Fossil Ida: Extraordinary Find Is ‘Missing Link’ in Human Evolution,” by James Randerson, May 19, 2009, (http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/ may/19/ida-fossil-missing-link), accessed 8/25/2009.

45. New Scientist, May 30, 2009, pp. 18-19.

46. Critique of Anthropology, Volume 29(2), p. 202.

47. Science and Justice, Vol. 43, No. 4, (2003) section, Forensic Anthropology, “Anthropological Facial ‘Reconstruction’—Recognizing the Fallacies, ‘Unembracing’ the Errors, and Realizing Method Limits,” by C. N. Stephan, p. 195.

48. The Human Fossil Record—Volume Three, by Ralph L. Holloway, Douglas C. Broadfield, and Michael S. Yuan, 2004, Preface xvi.

49. Scientific American Mind, “Intelligence Evolved,” by Ursula Dicke and Gerhard Roth, August/September 2008, p. 72.

50. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, “How Neandertals Inform Human Variation,” by Milford H. Wolpoff, 2009, p. 91.

51. Conceptual Issues in Human Modern Origins Research, Editors G. A. Clark and C. M. Willermet, 1997, pp. 5, 60.

a. Wonderful Life—The Burgess Shale and the Nature of History, by Stephen Jay Gould, 1989, p. 28.

https://www.jw.org/en/library/books...stions/is-it-reasonable-to-believe-the-bible/
God is going to make all things new. Don't Bible people know this? That means this: DNA cannot prove that God exit's. It takes faith. Faith has been made to be a belief system, obliterating the consept of faith as it is, blinding people. DNA as we know it did not exist before death. Blood did not exist. Asteroids, singularities, and nebula did not exist.
 
Last edited:

surada

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
27,635
Reaction score
13,085
Points
1,288
I never demand atheists stay out of religious conversations. What usually happens is because science and religion are two sides of the same coin, we end up mixing the two. I was just answering a question posed to me by an atheist "religioner." Her loving term made up term to criticize me. Since you are noob atheist "religioner," you don't know these things.

Here's an example for science and heinous crimes. John Wayne Gacy, the notorious serial killer (he was the first to be deemed such as the term "serial killer" took off with him), was Catholic from a Catholic family. However, it was his homosexuality that turned him into a serial killer. He killed boys for sex. Certainly, this is why homosexuality is an abomination.

Baloney. Most homosexuals don't ever kill anyone. What is wrong with you?
 

james bond

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Messages
11,483
Reaction score
1,446
Points
170
Baloney. Most homosexuals don't ever kill anyone. What is wrong with you?
Where did I say that? You don't read too well. WTF is wrong with you? Fruity?

Pogo_the_Clown_-_01-191x300.jpg


This is John Wayne Gacy we are discussing. Did you read or watch anything about him or are you going fruity again?

Never trust an atheist.

"
The Diagnosis


John Wayne Gacy was a proven psychopath who felt no remorse over the murder over his victims. I believe he had a psychological complex that lead him to feel powerful when he killed his victims. I also believe that he had a deeply-set self hatred for his homosexuality, punishing his partners for the way he felt after satisfying himself. Instead of punishing himself, he punished those that did what he wanted. John Wayne Gacy lived a terrifying and twisted existence, and the world is much better off now that he’s no longer able to terrorize it. Also…


Never trust a clown."

 

surada

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
27,635
Reaction score
13,085
Points
1,288
You give atheists the big evidence and then their stupid faith takes over. They even turn the truth into a lie they themselves believe. All one can do is laugh at their futility in their belief in lies :auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg:.

Charles Darwin - The Evolutionary Tree of Life - three ...

Charles Darwin & the Tree of Life. Charles Darwin made several major approaches to the Tree of Life concept in his evolutionary theory. A one-time theology student in training to become a minister of religion, albeit one with a passionate interest in natural history field studies, Darwin was informally recruited as a geological advisor to accompany british naval Captain Fitzroy on a surveying voyage to
 

james bond

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Messages
11,483
Reaction score
1,446
Points
170
Charles Darwin - The Evolutionary Tree of Life - three ...

Charles Darwin & the Tree of Life. Charles Darwin made several major approaches to the Tree of Life concept in his evolutionary theory. A one-time theology student in training to become a minister of religion, albeit one with a passionate interest in natural history field studies, Darwin was informally recruited as a geological advisor to accompany british naval Captain Fitzroy on a surveying voyage to
So where's the proof? I see nothing. There is no evidence for tree of life nor millions or billions of YEARS. We can't even relate to millions/billions of years such a millions of bugs, dollars, stars, etc.
 

surada

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
27,635
Reaction score
13,085
Points
1,288
So where's the proof? I see nothing. There is no evidence for tree of life nor millions or billions of YEARS. We can't even relate to millions/billions of years such a millions of bugs, dollars, stars, etc.

Every culture has a tree of life. Darwin was just trying to create a visual for his theory.. After all Darwin was a theology student so he would have thought of that.
 

james bond

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Messages
11,483
Reaction score
1,446
Points
170
Your evidence is mere faith
I showed the evidence for a global flood. I showed the witnesses from both sides for The Resurrection of Jesus. Those are the biggest supernatural events I can think of. What do you want? The parting of the Red Sea?

I also showed atheists and their scientists stole singularity (infinite temperature, infinite density) from the Bible. They also stole natural selection and turned it into evolution. Nothing of evolution is observable. Even the fossils don't line up as they have C14 remaining and soft tissue inside.
 

Hollie

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
42,429
Reaction score
6,257
Points
1,830
So where's the proof? I see nothing. There is no evidence for tree of life nor millions or billions of YEARS. We can't even relate to millions/billions of years such a millions of bugs, dollars, stars, etc.
It's understood that you can't relate to science and acquiring knowledge and reasoning as a human endeavor.
 

surada

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
27,635
Reaction score
13,085
Points
1,288
I showed the evidence for a global flood. I showed the witnesses from both sides for The Resurrection of Jesus. Those are the biggest supernatural events I can think of. What do you want? The parting of the Red Sea?

I also showed atheists and their scientists stole singularity (infinite temperature, infinite density) from the Bible. They also stole natural selection and turned it into evolution. Nothing of evolution is observable. Even the fossils don't line up as they have C14 remaining and soft tissue inside.

LOLOL.. There is NO geological evidence for a global flood.

I don't think you understand natural selection.. Offspring who adapt and survive to breed are all about evolution /natural selection.
 

Hollie

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
42,429
Reaction score
6,257
Points
1,830
I showed the evidence for a global flood. I showed the witnesses from both sides for The Resurrection of Jesus. Those are the biggest supernatural events I can think of. What do you want? The parting of the Red Sea?

I also showed atheists and their scientists stole singularity (infinite temperature, infinite density) from the Bible. They also stole natural selection and turned it into evolution. Nothing of evolution is observable. Even the fossils don't line up as they have C14 remaining and soft tissue inside.
There is no evidence of a global flood. There were no witnesses to any claimed "resurrection". Dead people don't magically "un-die".

Stop the nonsense.
 

james bond

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2015
Messages
11,483
Reaction score
1,446
Points
170
Every culture has a tree of life. Darwin was just trying to create a visual for his theory.. After all Darwin was a theology student so he would have thought of that.

iu


Every culture has a tree of life as there is a tree of life from the Bible. Not Darwin and his visual lol.
LOLOL.. There is NO geological evidence for a global flood.

I don't think you understand natural selection.. Offspring who adapt and survive to breed are all about evolution /natural selection.
Why don't you give us your credentials such as what school you went to?

You can't even explain 3/4 of Earth's surface covered by water with fountains of the deep circling the world. What caused all the water erosion in Earth geological features? Show me another planet like Earth.

Today, why is NASA looking for another habitable planet with plate tectonics and oceans of water below the surface? They also want a magnetic field. The answer is there isn't another planet like Earth.

I can provide my credentials and you have provided nothing. It's just like evolution with nothing observable.
 

surada

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
27,635
Reaction score
13,085
Points
1,288
iu


Every culture has a tree of life as there is a tree of life from the Bible. Not Darwin and his visual lol.

Why don't you give us your credentials such as what school you went to?

You can't even explain 3/4 of Earth's surface covered by water with fountains of the deep circling the world. What caused all the water erosion in Earth geological features? Show me another planet like Earth.

Today, why is NASA looking for another habitable planet with plate tectonics and oceans of water below the surface? They also want a magnetic field. The answer is there isn't another planet like Earth.

I can provide my credentials and you have provided nothing. It's just like evolution with nothing observable.

Do you have a degree in geology? We aren't talking about NASA..This ring of fountains.. are you talking about the ring of fire?
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$90.00
Goal
$350.00

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top