Scientists Refuting Darwinism

[ChemEngineer]

You're being a world class idiot.

I happen to be an expert on stochastic differential equations, and a PhD in biochemistry. I don't need to "think through" an elementary statistics problem. By inspection, I can tell you straight up YOUR MATH IS WRONG. Things don't work that way. Sorry bud.

You want to go up against me on a math issue? Bring it. You'll be nice and toasty in time for tomorrow's lunch.

Don't waste time bleating, show me your math. So I can show you where you went wrong. You're dealing with molecules in solution. Why don't you start by showing us how YOU calculate how frequently two peptide molecules bump into each other.

1. There are thousands of polypeptides in humans. Thousands.

2. Each one HAD TO BE originally synthesized by some means. The frequency of amino acids "bumping into each other" is quite immaterial in the context of the insuperable statistics of their original assembly.

3. "Peptide" refers to the specific bond between amino acids. You jumped the amino acid gun, PhD.
The speed of a reaction is immaterial to the impossibility of its naturalistic synthesis. Flip a coin or deal cards fast, slow, the probability doesn't change. "Bud."

4. You're "a PhD in biochemistry"? Bad grammar, "bud."

Ciao brutto
You wasted my time bleating.

 

[scruffy]

1. There are thousands of polypeptides in humans. Thousands.

2. Each one HAD TO BE originally synthesized by some means. The frequency of amino acids "bumping into each other" is quite immaterial in the context of the insuperable statistics of their original assembly.

3. "Peptide" refers to the specific bond between amino acids. You jumped the amino acid gun, PhD.
The speed of a reaction is immaterial to the impossibility of its naturalistic synthesis. Flip a coin or deal cards fast, slow, the probability doesn't change. "Bud."

4. You're "a PhD in biochemistry"? Bad grammar, "bud."

Ciao brutto
You wasted my time bleating.

In other words you can't respond because you have no fucking idea what you're talking about.

I model chemical kinetics for a living. There is zero chance of you slipping any bullshit by me.

Your math is wrong, and you're wrong

End of story.

 

[scruffy]

.
Flip a coin or deal cards fast, slow, the probability doesn't change.

Yes, actually it does.

IN the right environment.

This is BASIC chemistry, if you were truly a "chemical engineer" you would know this.

Kinetics are subject to long range interactions. Which are not seen until the proper ENVIRONMENTAL conditions are achieved.

Study the Belusov-Zhabotinsky reaction. A Nobel Prize was awarded for its explanation.

 

[scruffy]

Yes, actually it does.

IN the right environment.

This is BASIC chemistry, if you were truly a "chemical engineer" you would know this.

Kinetics are subject to long range interactions. Which are not seen until the proper ENVIRONMENTAL conditions are achieved.

Study the Belusov-Zhabotinsky reaction. A Nobel Prize was awarded for its explanation.

For those interested in the math, study Szekely's "half coins".

 

[scruffy]

the frequency of amino acids "bumping into each other" is quite immaterial in the context of the insuperable statistics of their original assembly.

Yeah really?

You just jumped off the boat? Came through the time tunnel from 1855?

Dude, you're here arguing against a viewpoint which is LONG obsolete, like, dozens of years.

Dumbass, if two molecules don't collide then they don't react. Duh?

Your FIRST order of business is not the reaction kinetics, it's the diffusion radius of the random walk in solution.

Which has attractors. It is HIGHLY non-linear, and YES, the probabilities change just like in physics. If you don't believe me you're not a chemical engineer, you're a dinosaur.

Only dumbass fucktards argue that anything is impossible. The intelligent among us ask "how is it possible".

 

[Dagosa]

1. You haters prattle nonsense and then pat yourselves on the back as if it were substantive when it is
nothing of the sort.

2. Many thousands of scientists and atheists reject Darwin's archaic nonsense on the basis of science, not anything else.
Try to get a grip and discuss science and stop thumping the Bible... for a change.

3. You people don't prattle facts, you just generalize and pretend to know.
Dagosa doesn't even know the difference between "then" and "than."

4. Many of you are on ignore but unfortunately your nonsense continues to peek through
in others' posts and in some of my emails, unfortunately.
Dagosa's ignorance is tragic. I pointed out the grammatical error implicit in the name of "The Periodic Table" and
he jumps the rails and cites mathematics, which has nothing to do with the points I made. Zero.
I have a published inspirational science book, a patent pending on a new tennis racket design, chemical engineering degree, MBA, pilot's license, extensive world travel experience, earned millions, and Mister Big Mouth can't differentiate between "then" and "than."
But, hey, he's got a cute mustache, like so many other homosexuals wear, to hide their stretch marks.

And you don’t know the difference between a lie ( you’re a chem engineer ) and the truth ( you’re a fraud).
You don’t even know the periodic table. And worse, you’re a coward.

 

[Hector12]

Moderator said I should post my thoughts before quoting others'.
Here they are.
1. The Godless Left preaches Darwinism under claim of "fact, fact, fact." That is utterly preposterous in view of the many tens of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands of biochemists, biologists, medical doctors, mathematicians, statisticians, computer experts and other learned people who have studied and continue to study how impossible is the claim of random mutations transmogrifying water dripping on rocks to human beings.

 

[sealybobo]

Oh, but they do. Monkey to man. See the monk monk? Your grandpa?
View attachment 728330
That was the evolution they taught. Cro Magnum man was a plaster caste of part of a skull and a jawbone that they had in a drawer. That stage never existed. And the one with the spear? Extinct! The evolutionary train stopped there!
Google single celled organisms. One celled organisms were always complex otherwise they would not have existed.
Eyes are complex. There was never such a thing as a simple eye.
Google DNA. It is a design incapable of being produced by a pond...

Neanderthals are known to contribute up to 1-4% of the genomes of non-African modern humans, depending on what region of the word your ancestors come from, and modern humans who lived about 40,000 years ago have been found to have up to 6-9% Neanderthal DNA

If we all came from the same tribe of humans that means early humans left Africa, got lighter and fucked other species.

We all came from the same black humanoids. Whites weren't here back in the beginning.

We are all related.

 

[The Irish Ram]

Researchers recently inspected the upper and lower jaw of an ancient European ape. Their conclusions suggest that humanity’s forebearers may have arisen in Europe before migrating to Africa, potentially upending a scientific consensus that has stood since Darwin’s day.

New fossils suggest human ancestors evolved in Europe, not Africa

Experts argue the jaws of an ancient European ape reveal a key human ancestor.

bigthink.com