Darwin's Tree Of Life Cut Down

[Dagosa]

Everyone is ignorant in science. That is why research is ongoing everywhere in the world, in every subject.

Especially those who pretend they know more then they do……like the periodic table. That was hilarious. That was a revealing post. Really, anyone who took chem class and didn’t fall sleep knew what a periodic table was and why it was named that way

. Most don’t know enough about science I agree, but most don’t pretend they do. I don’t pretend to be an expert by any means like some here. . But, I’m smart enough to refer “those“ who are. Now, go ahead and try to rehab yourself in front of your conservative minions .

 

[Dagosa]

On the other hand, the stereotypical, hyper-religious types cut and paste the same ''what are the odds'', nonsense with no understanding of biological systems.

Yup

This deserves special attention. They are pompous a-holes who sit there and search the net trying to find a few nit wit posts that agree with them when the truth on evolution is published nearly everywhere. How arrogant does one have to be to diss thousands of sources that dedicate their collective lives to mankind and not politics…..”Tucker”.

 

[Dagosa]

On the other hand, the stereotypical, hyper-religious types cut and paste the same ''what are the odds'', nonsense with no understanding of biological systems.

I doubt they ever had an original thought other then, ”when’s my social security check due ?”

 

[Dagosa]

Seymour, my Friend, I have many here on Ignore including Dagosa. So I had to click the link to show what he said and as usual, I'm sorry I did. People on my Ignore List never post anything worth reading.

And he’ll put me back on ignore after his fraudulent post about claiming “every high school and college in the world wrongly labels the Periodic Table. “

Of course, if I’m that ignorant as you claim
and I had to correct you as to why the Periodic Table is labeled correctly……..that must mean you’re worse then ignorant.

 

[surada]

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/

Where did you find the source for this massive cut and paste?

 

[JustAGuy1]

Daniel is not considered a prophet, but an historian.

Isaiah’s Amazing Cyrus Prophecy — The One True God Against “the gods”

Sometime around the year 700 BC, the prophet Isaiah gave an amazing prophecy, in which he stated that God would use someone named Cyrus to deliver His people from captivity. This was fulfilled in …

mindrenewers.com

Only by a few heretics like yourself. So you are a Darwinian christian?

 

[surada]

Only by a few heretics like yourself. So you are a Darwinian christian?

Nope I just study scripture.. probably my years in Sunday school and Wednesday night Bible study. How about you?

The book of Daniel was written in 164 BC.

 

[JustAGuy1]

Nope I just study scripture.. probably my years in Sunday school and Wednesday night Bible study. How about you?

The book of Daniel was written in 164 BC.

According to you and a few other heretics, you are simply a minority faction of heretical group of deniers. Look, ANYBODY who claims prophecy was written after the fact is not worth listening to. I have a degree from a small Christian College in Ne. The entirety of the Bible is the God breathed love letter to mankind.

Has Jesus come back a second time yet?

 

[ChemEngineer]

And he’ll put me back on ignore after his fraudulent post about claiming “every high school and college in the world wrongly labels the Periodic Table. “

Of course, if I’m that ignorant as you claim
and I had to correct you as to why the Periodic Table is labeled correctly……..that must mean you’re worse then [SIC] ignorant.

1. The table is NOT periodic, just as the "black man's eye" is incorrect.
2. You did NOT correct me. You simply said everyone knows why it is called (incorrectly) the periodic table.
3. You don't even know the difference between "then" and "than."
Grammar is far simpler than science and you fail at simple grammar.

Like the others on my Ignore List, you can't discuss points. All you can do is attack the messenger. I point out your mistakes precisely. You call names and think yourself clever.

ciao

 

[Dagosa]

1. The table is NOT periodic, just as the "black man's eye" is incorrect.
2. You did NOT correct me. You simply said everyone knows why it is called (incorrectly) the periodic table.
3. You don't even know the difference between "then" and "than."
Grammar is far simpler than science and you fail at simple grammar.

Like the others on my Ignore List, you can't discuss points. All you can do is attack the messenger. I point out your mistakes precisely. You call names and think yourself clever.

ciao

Ha ha. You embarrassed yourself. You’re a fraud. You claimed the periodic table was misnamed because you had no idea what the periodic table represented. And, you claim to be an “ expert ?“ Geesus, this is basic high school chemistry…..and you failed it. Like Trump, you’re a BS artist who impresses no one but other science illiterates. Then, you become a grammar teacher when called out.…..what a FRAUD. I never pretended to be an expert. I’m not the fraud; you are.

 

[Dagosa]

You did NOT correct me. You simply said everyone knows why it is called (incorrectly) the periodic table.

Everyone who took chem in high school was taught why the periodic table is named as it is. Look it up fraud instead pretending you have a clue. It’s correctly named dufus.

 

[Dagosa]

The table is NOT periodic, just as the "black man's eye" is incorrect.

You’re still making a claim you are totally unqualified to make.
Geesus, you don’t even now what “periodic” refers to in chemistry do you ?
ChemEngineer, that’s a laugh. Here, you have the entire internet to educate yourself at any accredited school web site in the world, but you continue to play the buffoon
.

 

[Dagosa]

1. The table is NOT periodic, just as the "black man's eye" is incorrect.
2. You did NOT correct me. You simply said everyone knows why it is called (incorrectly) the periodic table.
3. You don't even know the difference between "then" and "than."
Grammar is far simpler than science and you fail at simple grammar.

Like the others on my Ignore List, you can't discuss points. All you can do is attack the messenger. I point out your mistakes precisely. You call names and think yourself clever.

ciao

Imagine, not only do you claim to be smarter then every accredited university in the world that uses the periodic table, but no one but you since 1890 when the table began use, has ever produced anyone smart enough ( like you claim to be) to pick it up. Of course, the word “ period” has a bit different application in chemistry that your home schooling hasn’t picked up…..fraud. You’re a joke. The net is filled with you lunatics who pretend they have a degree printed on the toilet paper you use to wipe your collective buttocks with.

 

[surada]

According to you and a few other heretics, you are simply a minority faction of heretical group of deniers. Look, ANYBODY who claims prophecy was written after the fact is not worth listening to. I have a degree from a small Christian College in Ne. The entirety of the Bible is the God breathed love letter to mankind.

Has Jesus come back a second time yet?

A small bible college in Nevada? That's explains a lot.

 

[surada]

1. The table is NOT periodic, just as the "black man's eye" is incorrect.
2. You did NOT correct me. You simply said everyone knows why it is called (incorrectly) the periodic table.
3. You don't even know the difference between "then" and "than."
Grammar is far simpler than science and you fail at simple grammar.

Like the others on my Ignore List, you can't discuss points. All you can do is attack the messenger. I point out your mistakes precisely. You call names and think yourself clever.

ciao

Periodic Table of Elements

Interactive periodic table with up-to-date element property data collected from authoritative sources. Look up chemical element names, symbols, atomic masses and other properties, visualize trends, or even test your elements knowledge by playing a periodic table game!

pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[JustAGuy1]

A small bible college in Nevada? That's explains a lot.

Nebraska oh "educated" one. You aren't my league. You are quite literally a condescending little biatch whose opinion of herself is wholly unwarranted. You and your husband sleep in different rooms don't you?

 

[surada]

Nebraska oh "educated" one. You aren't my league. You are quite literally a condescending little biatch whose opinion of herself is wholly unwarranted. You and your husband sleep in different rooms don't you?

Those little Bible colleges are usually poor academically and fundamentalist ..

 

[JustAGuy1]

Those little Bible colleges are usually poor academically and fundamentalist ..

You will never see heaven, you don't believe in it.

 

[surada]

You will never see heaven, you don't believe in it.

Now you think you're God. I don't believe what you have been taught.

 

[ChemEngineer]

The table of periodic elements is the correct name.
The man's black eye is the correct description.
It is NOT "the black man's eye" just as it is NOT "the periodic table of elements" despite the fact
that it has been misnamed lo these 140+ years.
It is interesting that this is roughly the same length of time that evolution has erroneously been called "science."

"Science advances one funeral at a time." - Physicist Max Planck

Thanks to my good Bud, TwoIron:

António Caetano de Abreu Freire Egas Moniz
The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 1949

Born: 29 November 1874, Avanca, Portugal

Died: 13 December 1955, Lisbon, Portugal

Affiliation at the time of the award: University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal; Neurological Institute, Lisbon, Portugal

Prize motivation: “for his discovery of the therapeutic value of leucotomy in certain psychoses”