The Physics Professor Poses Darwinian Question to Students

[dblack]

I met a physics professor and we had a cordial conversation regarding Darwin's Tautology: "Organisms survive because they're fit and they're fit because they survive." This isn't right. It isn't even wrong. - Wolfgang Pauli, Nobel Laureate in Physics

The physicist posed the question to every class: "How long would it take for a warehouse full of Tesla parts to assemble themselves?"

:::: crickets chirping ::::::::

It is of course a rhetorical question, because it is abundantly clear that no warehouse full of Tesla parts would ever assemble themselves. However there is a far more subtle point which I deduced and gave to the professor after giving his brilliant question a thorough analysis.

How long would it take for all of the parts to design themselves, gather the thousands of different raw materials, process and refine themselves so that they all conform perfectly in a finished product, and then transport themselves to the one warehouse in the world? THIS is a far more impossible task than the 10,000 different parts assembling themselves, which is of course impossible.

With the schematic plans for a Tesla, we can build one. With the schematic plans of a single-celled animal, we cannot. So much for Darwinian nonsense.

Great. Another "scientist" who doesn't understand evolution.

 

[Dadoalex]

I would have to consider a lot of other facts,
main one being, at the average intelligence of humans today we arent even close to understanding our own existence let alone the origins of life

Not talking about "origins of life"
No one knows the "origins" but
there is zero evidence anywhere of a "creator"
EVOLUTION, on the other hand,
has literally billions of years of evidence supporting the theory.

You have, however, admitted the issue with the "design" argument
It is a philosophical argument, not a scientific one.

 

[Dadoalex]

What does not survive does not pass on its genes. LMAO Nature itself contradicts that false premise everyday.........people are born with interrupted chains of DNA......"imperfect" DNA signatures they are called deformities. Its not always the fittest that passes their genes forward to the next generation.

Ever ask yourself the question? Just who did the offspring of Adam and Eve marry? Its basic logic.......they married their siblings. Incest you say? One can get no more incestuous than marrying yourself. (Genesis 2:21-22) Eve was created directly from the DNA of ADAM. Yet........Adam did not pass on his entire DNA signature. Eve was lacking something important.......the gene that made male offspring. Only Adam as a male can pass on his manhood. All children are created in the womb as FEMALE (EVE)......it takes male sperm from the male to decide the sex of the child.

Why no mutated deformities? In the beginning Human DNA was created perfect.......with no missing or weak links, man was created to evolve to adapt to his natural surroundings. With the first generations of human existence human DNA was not subject to being introduced to the agents that cause mutation (a corruption of a perfect DNA). With each passing generation mankind was evermore coming into contact with these corrupting agents.........thus the long life spans in the beginning, becoming shorter and shorter with each passing generation

In the beginning it was a perfectly acceptable practice to marry family members. After Adam had lived 130 yrs. he had a son...after his image, he named him Seth. After the birth of Seth Adams years numbered 830 years and he had SONS AND DAUGHTERS (it does not say how many, just that they were multiple). -- Genesis 5:3-4

Adam and Eve did not just have 3 sons (Cain, Able and Seth)....as stated there were other children, both male and female, thus simple logic dictates they married each other. Which was a common practice in the beginning because the chance of DNA corruption was small in the beginning with DNA being PERFECT beginning with ADAM.

When you read through the history of the Bible we see this practice of marrying family members slowly coming to an end.

Abraham married his Sister, half sister (Genesis 20:12). By the time Moses' generation came around the law forbid the marriage between close relatives. (Lev. 18:6-18). Continuing on today the law forbids marriage between 1st cousins. Even FDR was married to a distant cousin.

An argument about evolution that starts with Adam and Eve is flawed at the beginning and unworthy of discussion.

See the post about you and people like you failing to understand the difference between science and philosophy.

 

[progressive hunter]

Not talking about "origins of life"
No one knows the "origins" but
there is zero evidence anywhere of a "creator"
EVOLUTION, on the other hand,
has literally billions of years of evidence supporting the theory.

You have, however, admitted the issue with the "design" argument
It is a philosophical argument, not a scientific one.

if there is billions of yrs of evidence why is it being hidden??

 

[Hollie]

1. The simplest life form we know is impossibly complex. It consists of hundreds of proteins.
The number of zeroes in the denominator may decrease substantially but it's still effectively zero probability.
2. Have you any IDEA whatsoever of what living cells are made of? It's not peanut butter and jelly.
3. We have these proteins in our bodies. YOU claim that they made themselves. The onus is on you to explain precisely how, including chirality, folding, amino acid selection, and precise chemical bonding. Trillions of times.
4. One biochemist did experiments showing that only 1 in 10 to the 170th power of proteins randomly assembled are biologically active. Since all mutations are random, that must be the starting point for your Darwinian Fantasy. You may ONLY *select* from a random mutation.
Nobody gives you the schematic in advance.

Afternote: Abu giggles because science is so far over his head, that's all he knows how to do, giggle. Unfortunate, but these are the kinds of people who voted for Clown Biden and Whore Harris.

The above represents the distillation of all the nonsense on all the crank fundie ministry websites.

“It’s too complicated for it to have happened in nature, therefore, my version of gods did it”

 

[Clyde 154]

An argument about evolution that starts with Adam and Eve is flawed at the beginning and unworthy of discussion.

See the post about you and people like you failing to understand the difference between science and philosophy.

Funny as Hades. Another left winger feigning intelligence that just taught us another lesson of their faith, "Don't do as I do, Do as I say." You charge others of dismissing science and replacing it with philosophy.........yet you offer no scientific evidence of Fact to support the philosophy of EVOLUTION that in reality is nothing but a THEORY.....i.e., based not upon facts in evidence, but conjecture, speculation and assumption, as the Scientific Method debunks the basic tenet of Life arising from "NOTHING"......dead matter.

If you have no "foundation".........you have nothing to build upon. The argument that you are presenting is muck like suggesting that the Empire State Building is floating on air at its base.....and you expect others to believe this absurd position as a fact. What? You don't have to explain it because you declare it has taken billions of years for nature to allow this floating foundation that looks like magic to the IGNORANT because they are just to stupid to agree with you?

If such is not the cause.........present the experiment that makes evolution the LAW OF EVOLUTION
Of course.........anything that can't be addressed by a humanist because there is NO ANSWER is "Unworthy". Such as the scientific CAUSE of creation. Is your response much like the response of Stephen Hawking? The universe "created" itself from "NOTHING"?

In REAL SCIENCE........every event must have a superior CAUSE. Please explain in scientific terms the source of energy that caused the effect known as the Universe. No theories, facts of science only. Theories are nothing but philosophical arguments based upon conjecture, speculation and assumptions.

 

[task0778]

if there is billions of yrs of evidence why is it being hidden??

It is not hidden, but you gotta go look for it. You can start here:

Evolution, Evidence for - Biology Encyclopedia - body, function, human, process, different, organisms, DNA, organs, life, used

www.biologyreference.com

 

[progressive hunter]

It is not hidden, but you gotta go look for it. You can start here:

Evolution, Evidence for - Biology Encyclopedia - body, function, human, process, different, organisms, DNA, organs, life, used

www.biologyreference.com

those are assumptions not evidence,,

 

[task0778]

those are assumptions not evidence,,

There are none so blind as those who will not see. For instance:

On a molecular level, some of the strongest support for evolution lies in the deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) of organisms. New techniques allow scientists to extract and replicate DNA sequences that can then be compared to sequences from other animals. Because DNA ultimately controls both morphological and behavioral features in organisms, similarities and differences among DNA sequences can clearly reveal the path of evolution.

I am curious to know what the alternative to evolution is. Did God do it? Is there an alternative scientific theory, and if so what might that be?

 

[toobfreak]

I met a physics professor and we had a cordial conversation regarding Darwin's Tautology: "Organisms survive because they're fit and they're fit because they survive." This isn't right. It isn't even wrong. - Wolfgang Pauli, Nobel Laureate in Physics

The physicist posed the question to every class: "How long would it take for a warehouse full of Tesla parts to assemble themselves?"

:::: crickets chirping ::::::::

It is of course a rhetorical question, because it is abundantly clear that no warehouse full of Tesla parts would ever assemble themselves. However there is a far more subtle point which I deduced and gave to the professor after giving his brilliant question a thorough analysis.

How long would it take for all of the parts to design themselves, gather the thousands of different raw materials, process and refine themselves so that they all conform perfectly in a finished product, and then transport themselves to the one warehouse in the world? THIS is a far more impossible task than the 10,000 different parts assembling themselves, which is of course impossible.

With the schematic plans for a Tesla, we can build one. With the schematic plans of a single-celled animal, we cannot. So much for Darwinian nonsense.

Your entire argument is nonsensical. You can't compare organic compounds with active chemical processes to a garage full of inert car parts.

 

[progressive hunter]

There are none so blind as those who will not see. For instance:

On a molecular level, some of the strongest support for evolution lies in the deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) of organisms. New techniques allow scientists to extract and replicate DNA sequences that can then be compared to sequences from other animals. Because DNA ultimately controls both morphological and behavioral features in organisms, similarities and differences among DNA sequences can clearly reveal the path of evolution.

I am curious to know what the alternative to evolution is. Did God do it? Is there an alternative scientific theory, and if so what might that be?

they are still assuming it,,

just because I dont have an alternative doesnt mean on kind of animal magically turned into another,,

fact is we dont know for sure and to believe in evolution means I believe in magic because they/you told me to,,

 

[task0778]

just because I dont have an alternative doesnt mean on kind of animal magically turned into another,,

It ain't magic, what a silly thing to say. I'm sure you are aware of the new COVID virus that is different from the original Coronavirus we all had to deal with last year, causing people to get sick. The effectiveness of our vaccines against the new variant is unproven, but here's the deal in a nutshell:

Viruses constantly change through mutation. When a virus has one or more new mutations it’s called a variant of the original virus. Currently, several variants of the virus (SARS-CoV-2) that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are creating concern in the U.S.

COVID-19 variants: What's the concern?

Find out what's known about the new COVID-19 variants.

www.mayoclinic.org

Keyword there is mutation, which is a change or transformation in chromosomes and genes, which typically manifests physically. Sometimes the change in beneficial and if it helps the organism to survive, the change becomes pervasive throughout the population of the organism and voila, you have evolution. Or the environment changes and the organism does not mutate and it goes extinct. THERE IS NO MAGIC INVOLVED.


"we dont know for sure and to believe in evolution means I believe in magic because they/you told me to"

Evolution is a scientific theory, it's not a law of science because it cannot be proven. Which does not mean it is therefore wrong or that there is no evidence to support it. And nobody is telling you what to believe, certainly not in "magic". The only alternative as far as I know in explaining how and why every species mutates and adapts or dies, is religion. God did it. And I'm not sure that even if God exists and created life that he also might've created evolution to diversify life on this planet.

Now - if you don't accept either idea, that's fine. But if you can't come up with something else, or some logical reason why evolution is wrong and offer some data to back that up, then you're argument is somewhat weak. And don't give me this "magic" crap, that's merely a denigration with no substance behind it. There is no denying that organisms do mutate. The fossil record shows that some species successfully mutated to survive a changing environment, while others did not and went extinct. This is not magic and it's not assumption; it is reality.

 

[progressive hunter]

did

It ain't magic, what a silly thing to say. I'm sure you are aware of the new COVID virus that is different from the original Coronavirus we all had to deal with last year, causing people to get sick. The effectiveness of our vaccines against the new variant is unproven, but here's the deal in a nutshell:

Viruses constantly change through mutation. When a virus has one or more new mutations it’s called a variant of the original virus. Currently, several variants of the virus (SARS-CoV-2) that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are creating concern in the U.S.

COVID-19 variants: What's the concern?

Find out what's known about the new COVID-19 variants.

www.mayoclinic.org

Keyword there is mutation, which is a change or transformation in chromosomes and genes, which typically manifests physically. Sometimes the change in beneficial and if it helps the organism to survive, the change becomes pervasive throughout the population of the organism and voila, you have evolution. Or the environment changes and the organism does not mutate and it goes extinct. THERE IS NO MAGIC INVOLVED.


"we dont know for sure and to believe in evolution means I believe in magic because they/you told me to"

Evolution is a scientific theory, it's not a law of science because it cannot be proven. Which does not mean it is therefore wrong or that there is no evidence to support it. And nobody is telling you what to believe, certainly not in "magic". The only alternative as far as I know in explaining how and why every species mutates and adapts or dies, is religion. God did it. And I'm not sure that even if God exists and created life that he also might've created evolution to diversify life on this planet.

Now - if you don't accept either idea, that's fine. But if you can't come up with something else, or some logical reason why evolution is wrong and offer some data to back that up, then you're argument is somewhat weak. And don't give me this "magic" crap, that's merely a denigration with no substance behind it. There is no denying that organisms do mutate. The fossil record shows that some species successfully mutated to survive a changing environment, while others did not and went extinct. This is not magic and it's not assumption; it is reality.

did covid turn into a cat or some other kind of animal?? no it didnt, its still a virus,,
thats like saying I had a german shepard and after several yrs of breeding you have a collie,, you still have a dog,,

but you feel free to believe what youre told to believe,,

 

[task0778]

did covid turn into a cat or some other kind of animal?? no it didnt, its still a virus,,
thats like saying I had a german shepard and after several yrs of breeding you have a collie,, you still have a dog,,

but you feel free to believe what youre told to believe,,

It's still a virus, but it's a different virus. After several years of breeding you still have a dog, but it's a different dog. You said it yourself.

I do not understand where you are coming from, you are acknowledging that species can change either by natural selection or by human intervention. That is the basis for evolution, species mutate (evolve) and if the mutation is beneficial and helps the species survive the changing world it lives in, then the species has evolved. And if the world changes (which it always does sooner or later) and the species does not adapt (evolve), then it goes extinct. That's what evolution is, adapting and changing to survive as a species.

 

[progressive hunter]

It's still a virus, but it's a different virus. After several years of breeding you still have a dog, but it's a different dog. You said it yourself.

I do not understand where you are coming from, you are acknowledging that species can change either by natural selection or by human intervention. That is the basis for evolution, species mutate (evolve) and if the mutation is beneficial and helps the species survive the changing world it lives in, then the species has evolved. And if the world changes (which it always does sooner or later) and the species does not adapt (evolve), then it goes extinct. That's what evolution is, adapting and changing to survive as a species.

and thats not evolution in the sense science is claiming,,

thats nothing more than breeding and adaptation,,

science claims that there are a change of kinds of animals,,
like the dinosaur changing to birds and a cow changing into a whale,,

 

[Hollie]

did

did covid turn into a cat or some other kind of animal?? no it didnt, its still a virus,,
thats like saying I had a german shepard and after several yrs of breeding you have a collie,, you still have a dog,,

but you feel free to believe what youre told to believe,,

It's always the same, identifiable cabal of Jimmy Swaggert groupies who are the science deniers.

 

[task0778]

thats nothing more than breeding and adaptation,,

Dude - that's what evolution is, breeding and adapting. IOW, changing.

The jury is still out about birds and dinosaurs, some scientists say it is at at least possible while others say both existed at the same time. Similarly, the thing with cows and whales is as far as I know, unsubstantiated BUT that does not mean that evolution itself has been debunked. Scientists offer different hypotheses for one adaptation or another, from species to species, but science itself does not accept any hypotheses as fact without proof. If enough substantial evidence has been provided as evidence of the truth of a particular hypotheses, then it is regarded as a valid theory by most scientists. That's what evolution is, an accepted theory. An individual species may or may not evolved from another earlier species, like birds from dinosaurs; maybe they both shared a common ancestor and they both evolved from that. Similarly, mankind may have evolved from a common ancestor from which monkeys, apes, and gorillas may also have evolved. It may never be scientifically proved, but there's a lot of genetical data that supports that idea. And that may be hard for some to believe, and that's fine, believe what you want. BUT - there can be no doubt that the Coronavirus has adapted into a new variant; mutation and adaption is true without question. And THAT is the essence of evolution, that life forms will genetically change over time; i.e., they EVOLVE.

 

[progressive hunter]

Dude - that's what evolution is, breeding and adapting. IOW, changing.

The jury is still out about birds and dinosaurs, some scientists say it is at at least possible while others say both existed at the same time. Similarly, the thing with cows and whales is as far as I know, unsubstantiated BUT that does not mean that evolution itself has been debunked. Scientists offer different hypotheses for one adaptation or another, from species to species, but science itself does not accept any hypotheses as fact without proof. If enough substantial evidence has been provided as evidence of the truth of a particular hypotheses, then it is regarded as a valid theory by most scientists. That's what evolution is, an accepted theory. An individual species may or may not evolved from another earlier species, like birds from dinosaurs; maybe they both shared a common ancestor and they both evolved from that. Similarly, mankind may have evolved from a common ancestor from which monkeys, apes, and gorillas may also have evolved. It may never be scientifically proved, but there's a lot of genetical data that supports that idea. And that may be hard for some to believe, and that's fine, believe what you want. BUT - there can be no doubt that the Coronavirus has adapted into a new variant; mutation and adaption is without question. And THAT is the essence of evolution, that life forms will genetically change over time; i.e., they EVOLVE.

you can call that micro evolution if you want,,
macro evolution is the one that claims the changing of the kinds of animals and that we evolved from the primordial soup into several different kinds until we became human or other animals,,

 

[rightwinger]

I have to laugh at a so called “Physics Professor” who doesn’t understand the difference between biological organisms and mechanical objects

 

[ChemEngineer]

Darwin's Puppets have run rampant, as they ALWAYS DO. They trot out the same tired arguments over and over again, feigning "science" and "intelligence."

1. "It's proven." (No, Darwinism is not.)
2. "Most scientists accept it." (Consensus is not science.)
3. "DNA similarities!" (Watermelon is 96% water. Did it evolve from clouds?"
4. "Science, science, science!" (Countless mathematicians, statisticians, computer experts, biologists, paleontologists, and biochemists find Darwin's Tautology utterly lacking as I have quoted dozens of times. Darwin's Puppets ignore scientists who don't follow their archaic and trivial tautology, viz., organisms survive because they are fit and they are fit because they survive.
Please, stop with the 160 year old nonsense.)

One of many examples of fraudulent "science" parroted for a century:

Haeckel’s drawings ostensibly demonstrating “ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny.”
They were challenged in 1868 by Ludwig Rutimeyer in Archiv für Anthropogenie immediately after their publication. Some biology texts published as late as 2001, such as one by Bruce Alberts, former head of the National Academy of Sciences, showed this fraud.

Famed Harvard evolutionist George Gaylord Simpson wrote, for example: “It is now firmly established that ontogeny [development of the individual] does not repeat phylogeny [development of the race]”
In any case, Haeckel had a passion for promoting the recapitulation theory, which he termed “the fundamental biogenetic law.” And, as one writer has noted:
“To support his theory, however, Haeckel, whose knowledge of embryology was self-taught, faked some of his evidence. He not only altered his illustrations of embryos but also printed the same plate of an embryo three times, and labeled one a human, the second a dog and the third a rabbit ‘to show their similarity’” (Bowden 1977, 128).
Haeckel was exposed by professor L. Rutimeyer of Basle University. He was charged with fraud by five professors, and ultimately convicted in a university court. During the trial, Haeckel admitted that he had altered his drawings, but sought to defend himself by saying:
“I should feel utterly condemned and annihilated by the admission, were it not that hundreds of the best observers and biologists lie under the same charge. The great majority of all morphological, anatomical, histological, and embryological diagrams are not true to nature, but are more or less doctored, schematized and reconstructed” (Bowden, Malcolm. 1977. Ape-Men: Fact or Fallacy? Bromley, England: Sovereign Publications, p. 128)