Crackpot Challenge Part 2 - Evolution

  • Thread starter Thread starter Alethios
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
buffalo said:
I cannot resist. Granny, exactly what are your qualifications to ask this question?😉
Click to expand...
I so happen to have the best recommendation ever regarding my qualifications…

My four-year-old granddaughter declared: “granny knows everything about God.”👍

I cannot resist. Exactly how long will it take you to top those qualifications?
 
… There are no evolution questions on the test for driving a car, or an evolution quiz before you can buy groceries. Whether or not you believe their views of evolution has no effect on anyone’s daily secular life. …
Click to expand...
Darwinistas claim that evolution is the key to understanding biology and an irreplaceable tool of the medical profession, which has led to great advances in medicine.
Yet our family doctors are not aware what evolution advances are used in their work, or what predictions of evolution have benefited their practice, or even what evolution specifically predicts for the future. What new species will evolve? When? From what? What new functions will humans adapt?

We and others have tested dinosaur bones from across the US and found a range of ages from 7,000 to 55,000 years ago, contradicting the evolution legend of 65 million years since the extinction of the last dino.

When we spoke about this with one doctor, pointing out also the soft cells and blood found in 65 megayear T. Rex bone marrow, and the Indian paintings of dinosaurs, and the overlapping footprints of dinos and humans, she said that it makes sense - she always wondered why they find so many fossils if dinos lived so long ago!

See what happens when common sense and experiments are applied… way to go, doc!

AMDG
 
Alethios said:
Darwinistas claim that evolution is the key to understanding biology and an irreplaceable tool of the medical profession, which has led to great advances in medicine.
Yet our family doctors are not aware what evolution advances are used in their work, or what predictions of evolution have benefited their practice, or even what evolution specifically predicts for the future. What new species will evolve? When? From what? What new functions will humans adapt?

We and others have tested dinosaur bones from across the US and found a range of ages from 7,000 to 55,000 years ago, contradicting the evolution legend of 65 million years since the extinction of the last dino.

When we spoke about this with one doctor, pointing out also the soft cells and blood found in 65 megayear T. Rex bone marrow, and the Indian paintings of dinosaurs, and the overlapping footprints of dinos and humans, she said that it makes sense - she always wondered why they find so many fossils if dinos lived so long ago!

See what happens when common sense and experiments are applied… way to go, doc!

AMDG
Click to expand...
So we are to believe that medicine or our standard of living wouldn’t advance without evolutionist philosophy? I am not convinced.
 
Alethios said:
Darwinistas claim that evolution is the key to understanding biology and an irreplaceable tool of the medical profession, which has led to great advances in medicine.
Yet our family doctors are not aware what evolution advances are used in their work, or what predictions of evolution have benefited their practice, or even what evolution specifically predicts for the future. What new species will evolve? When? From what? What new functions will humans adapt? AMDG
Click to expand...
This would work very well on someone who is not an expert on this kind of subject, but I, a molecular biologist in training, can name an endless amount of things evolution contributed to humans.

For one, we can track the lineage of bacterial species and thus find out how to better defeat diseases today. We can group bacterial families and find out where their lineage is most weak. We can find out how bacteria gain certain resistances to certain antibiotics. We can find out how long ago certain animal groups split up and discover how to bring back extinct species through breeding. We can look at the evolution of plants and help farmers create better breeds through DNA manipulation.
 
Might I add if Darwin (father of evolution) and Mendel (father of genetics who was also a Catholic Priest) had met maybe evolution would have been guided by religion in its earlier history and not be twisted today to meet an atheist agenda…ahhh if only:shrug:
 
TheQuestioner said:
This would work very well on someone who is not an expert on this kind of subject, but I, a molecular biologist in training, can name an endless amount of things evolution contributed to humans.

For one, we can track the lineage of bacterial species and thus find out how to better defeat diseases today. We can group bacterial families and find out where their lineage is most weak. We can find out how bacteria gain certain resistances to certain antibiotics. We can find out how long ago certain animal groups split up and discover how to bring back extinct species through breeding. We can look at the evolution of plants and help farmers create better breeds through DNA manipulation.
Click to expand...
None of this is possible without evolution?
 
buffalo said:
None of this is possible without evolution?
Click to expand...
Right, its the usual conflating of “micro-evolution” with “macro-evolution”. The bacteria is still bacteria so there is no macro-evolution. Thus, the theory of evolution is irrelevant.
 
Luke65 said:
Right, its the usual conflating of “micro-evolution” with “macro-evolution”. The bacteria is still bacteria so there is no macro-evolution. Thus, the theory of evolution is irrelevant.
Click to expand...
You’ll have some work to do to convince the world’s scientists of this. To them, your quaint opinion is utterly irrelevant.
 
… The fact is that we have a lot better understanding of evolution than we have about gravity
… Evolution theory explains a whole lot more than fruit fly experiments …
Click to expand...
We do have a better understanding that evolution is contrary to our faith, to rational thought and to science standards from the evidence given before.
For neither evolution nor gravity has a credible mechanism been presented.
  • Mutations as an engine of genetic change have been thoroughly refuted by Sanford in his book, “Genetic Entropy”.
  • The underlying cause of gravity will remain a mystery, until the Einstein syndrome is broken and the existence of the aether - aka firmament - is seriously considered.
The fruit fly experiments - and similar radiation tests on plants - testify that evolution predicts what is contrary to the results. No beneficial mutations were observed in thousands of radiation-induced mutations; no new species evolved. The changes ranged from no visible effects to fatal structural changes and misplaced organs.
Mutations only explain extinctions, which are observed in nature.
The experiments also support stasis - genetic stability - in some cases. After a couple of generations the defects produced by mutation were repaired and the normal characteristics of Drosophilia restored.

AMDG
 
Alethios said:
We do have a better understanding that evolution is contrary to our faith, to rational thought and to science standards from the evidence given before.
For neither evolution nor gravity has a credible mechanism been presented.
  • Mutations as an engine of genetic change have been thoroughly refuted by Sanford in his book, “Genetic Entropy”.
  • The underlying cause of gravity will remain a mystery, until the Einstein syndrome is broken and the existence of the aether - aka firmament - is seriously considered.
The fruit fly experiments - and similar radiation tests on plants - testify that evolution predicts what is contrary to the results. No beneficial mutations were observed in thousands of radiation-induced mutations; no new species evolved. The changes ranged from no visible effects to fatal structural changes and misplaced organs.
Mutations only explain extinctions, which are observed in nature.
The experiments also support stasis - genetic stability - in some cases. After a couple of generations the defects produced by mutation were repaired and the normal characteristics of Drosophilia restored.

AMDG
Click to expand...
Is it time to play the Richard Dawkins Mutation Challenge?
 
buffalo said:
None of this is possible without evolution?
Click to expand...
Not that it would be impossible without evolution, but it would have been incredibly complicated without it. Bioinformatics can be used to determine the relatedness of species and thus researchers know where to start when searching for a cure for a disease. You may think that bacteria with the same morphology have the same characteristics but this is a terrible fallacy. Without the Theory of Evolution and thus the urge to look at the past and find which bacterial species are related, I could never say “The Escherichia genus is more vulnerable to Vancomycin” as I would just lump bacteria in groups such as “rod shaped, sphiracal, spiral, big, small, etc.”
 
TheQuestioner said:
Not that it would be impossible without evolution, but it would have been incredibly complicated without it. Bioinformatics can be used to determine the relatedness of species and thus researchers know where to start when searching for a cure for a disease. You may think that bacteria with the same morphology have the same characteristics but this is a terrible fallacy. Without the Theory of Evolution and thus the urge to look at the past and find which bacterial species are related, I could never say “The Escherichia genus is more vulnerable to Vancomycin” as I would just lump bacteria in groups such as “rod shaped, sphiracal, spiral, big, small, etc.”
Click to expand...
Perhaps science is constrained by evolutionary theory. How do you know that this road is the necessary right one? You have no way of knowing. All we know is where we are right know and perhaps something like adult stem cell therapy would have been on the scene years ago.
 
buffalo said:
Perhaps science is constrained by evolutionary theory. How do you know that this road is the necessary right one? You have no way of knowing. All we know is where we are right know and perhaps something like adult stem cell therapy would have been on the scene years ago.
Click to expand...
Maybe, it could be the same case with gas and electric cars. Who are we to know?
 
buffalo said:
So we are to believe that medicine or our standard of living wouldn’t advance without evolutionist philosophy? I am not convinced.
Click to expand...
First, bacteria have been found in dirt that were already resistant to natural and synthetic antibiotics.

Second, bacteria can exchange genetic material with other species of bacteria.

Third, evolution, as presented here, is change over time. Bacteria change but remain bacteria. Viruses change but remain viruses.

Ancient insects trapped in amber had legs and, in some cases, wings. They were quite complex and fully functional.

Yes, there are animals that are no longer around. But, so far, there is no evidence that this evolved into that. The fruit fly experiments proved that genetic information could be moved around but no new information was created.

Bioinformatics works only on living things not dead things.

I don’t think it has been shown that new information can be passed on in DNA that leads to functional results. I’ve seen photos of a cow with an extra pair of useless legs growing out of its chest, and frogs that developed an extra pair of legs, but it appears that an explanation of how new, useful information is created is lacking.

So, mutation in bacteria and viruses as a built-in function? Yes.

Functional mutations on the macro level? Highly questionable. Example: The eye is not just an eyeball, but an optic nerve and the optic nerve needs to be connected to a particular part of the brain and the brain must have the capability to interpret the incoming images in a useful way.

Peace,
Ed
 
In response to another poster, StA said:
StAnastasia said:
You’ll have some work to do to convince the world’s scientists of this. To them, your quaint opinion is utterly irrelevant.
Click to expand...
So exactly how do you know that the world’s scientists (all of them apparently) view someone’s opinion as quaint?
 
ricmat said:
In response to another poster, StA said:

So exactly how do you know that the world’s scientists (all of them apparently) view someone’s opinion as quaint?
Click to expand...
They are modern day gnostics with “secret” knowledge only they can understand.
😉
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top