G
- Status
S
Scrubba
Guest
I’m cringing at some peoples’ ideas of evolution.
For the sake of reading (for the ‘scientifically illiterate’) PLEASE refrain from EVER using the word “suddenly” or any of its synonyms.
@“fish could suddenly gulp air”
Fish do respire you know, they just intake air differently to us. A fish species evolved the ability to breathe both in and out of water. It wouldn’t have been sudden though. Maybe just a short breathe out of the water before needing to return would save it from being caught by a predator. Slowly over time one breathe became two, two became three and so on.
I think whales are good examples of this. They are mammals so they need to breathe oxygen but have you ever seen a whale on land? Just because different animals have different means of eating/breathing/breeding/etc doesn’t mean they CAN’T do something.
For the sake of reading (for the ‘scientifically illiterate’) PLEASE refrain from EVER using the word “suddenly” or any of its synonyms.
@“fish could suddenly gulp air”
Fish do respire you know, they just intake air differently to us. A fish species evolved the ability to breathe both in and out of water. It wouldn’t have been sudden though. Maybe just a short breathe out of the water before needing to return would save it from being caught by a predator. Slowly over time one breathe became two, two became three and so on.
I think whales are good examples of this. They are mammals so they need to breathe oxygen but have you ever seen a whale on land? Just because different animals have different means of eating/breathing/breeding/etc doesn’t mean they CAN’T do something.
C
Charles_Darwin
Guest
I have never met anyone that understands evolution and rejects it. The Creationists on this site are that same, they don’t even reject evolution, they reject their own warped misunderstanding of evolution.
It really amuses me to see people that have no understanding of a subject thinking they are right and the combination of all the greatest experts in the world are wrong. Talk about arrogance.
B
buffalo
Guest
The language of DNA is a most wonderful thing leading to all kinds of adaptation.
R
reggieM
Guest
Thanks, Granny.I love your description of fingerprints.
I give you the credit of introducing that term though, which works so well.Well said. That does deserve more study. For life in general, there is another kind of fingerprinting referred to in a new book as the signature in the cell.
Exactly right. We can observe the process and effects of free choice in the physical being.
I fully agree. The many speculations (presented as fact) surrounding common descent need to be challenged and even the confusion on this subject that many scientists already quietly admit needs to be exposed. Within that deconstruction of evolutionary mythology there will be some new insights that will support the spiritual origin of human life – a creation event from two human parents.
Indeed, ask now concerning the former days which were before you, since the day that God created man on the earth, and inquire from one end of the heavens to the other. Has anything been done like this great thing, or has anything been heard like it? Deuteronomy 4:32
R
reggieM
Guest
What terms would you use to describe the Cambrian Explosion, Punctuated Equilibrium or saltations?
Punctuated Equilibrium
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punctuated_equilibrium
The **sudden **appearance and lack of substantial gradual change of most species in the geologic record—from their initial appearance until their extinction—has long been noted
Cambrian explosion
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambrian_explosion
Charles Darwin considered this **sudden **appearance of many animal groups with few or no antecedents to be the greatest single objection to his theory of evolution:
B
buffalo
Guest
The new discoveries in the cell are fascinating.Thanks, Granny.
Well said. That does deserve more study. For life in general, there is another kind of fingerprinting referred to in a new book as the signature in the cell.
Exactly right. We can observe the process and effects of free choice in the physical being.
I fully agree. The many speculations (presented as fact) surrounding common descent need to be challenged and even the confusion on this subject that many scientists already quietly admit needs to be exposed. Within that deconstruction of evolutionary mythology there will be some new insights that will support the spiritual origin of human life – a creation event from two human parents.Indeed, ask now concerning the former days which were before you, since the day that God created man on the earth, and inquire from one end of the heavens to the other. Has anything been done like this great thing, or has anything been heard like it? Deuteronomy 4:32
Look at this short video and the walker:
**The Inner Life of the Cell
Call this an argument from incredulity, but I am incredulous.
**
G
grannymh
Guest
Would you please tell me the best among many sources for “The language of DNA is a most wonderful thing leading to all kinds of adaptation.” Would DNA go all the way back to the roots of the domains? It seems to me that it or a component of DNA is common to the three domains but, mea culpa, I’ve misplaced my source.
Also, what do you know about evolutionary theory of Motoo Kimura (1924-1994) besides Wikipedia? Kimura achieved international recognition for his contributions to evolution and population genetics. He is the founder of the neutral theory of molecular evolution. Kimura received his Ph.D. from the University of Wisconsin in 1956 and then returned to Japan.
I have a research paper which looks like it follows Kimura’s theory. It is
© 2000 Society for Molecular Biology and Evolution
*Population Bottlenecks and Pleistocene Human Evolution **
John Hawks, Keith Hunley, Sang-Hee Leeand Milford Wolpoff3,
*Department of Anthropology, University of Utah; and
Department of Anthropology, University of Michigan; and
Department of Biosystems Science, Graduate University for Advanced Studies, Kanagawa, Japan
This paper contains information about reduced populations and human generations which I have not seen so far in research on Neo-Darwinism. Thus, I need someone to “interpret” it. Obviously, I have my own gut instinct about this.
Unfortunately, I don’t know how to link the article. The above link was at the top of the article. I believe you can use it and go to “Molecular Biology and Evolution” and put article title in search.
Blessings this beautiful morning,
granny
The quest is worthy of the adventures of the journey.
G
grannymh
Guest
Not only am I illiterate about the computer (what is the walker), but I don’t have sound. However, the pictures in your link were simply amazing and fueled my imagination.The new discoveries in the cell are fascinating.
Look at this short video and the walker:
The Inner Life of the Cell
Call this an argument from incredulity, but I am incredulous.**
B
buffalo
Guest
If you were able to play the video there is a bipedal transporter walking.Not only am I illiterate about the computer (what is the walker), but I don’t have sound. However, the pictures in your link were simply amazing and fueled my imagination.
B
buffalo
Guest
Since the discoveries are coming so fast books written even a few years ago do not reflect it. I am trying to keep up with current research paper releases.
You gave me a lot of work here - let me get back to you.
G
grannymh
Guest
One could say that there is already a challenge to common descent–the Japanese evolutionist Motoo Kimura. His theory is that evolutionary change and most of the variability within a species are caused at the molecular level. He also laid a strong foundation for a mathematical theory of evolution.
With two different evolutionary theories on the table, analysis comes into play. My gut instinct says that this analysis will lead to new insights regarding the two sole parents of the human race. From my limited understanding of both philosophy and natural science, a literal Adam and Eve as the source of the current human species is key. This is why a source on Motoo Kimura, either theist or non-theist, is important. Please refer to post 806 for previous comments.
Blessings this beautiful morning,
granny
The quest is worthy of the adventures of the journey.
B
buffalo
Guest
Correct - the neo-darwinists had to allow this in. They didn’t like the fact the neutral theory undermined natural selection.
G
grannymh
Guest
You are a sweetheart.
First – since you are very familiar with research papers, please look at the one I cited. Post 806
The thing I noticed was the references to what would cause both reduced population or expanded population plus the mathematical way to figure this in. I have only found one other reference to various explanations for human divergence and that was a brief opinion on the possible causes of the divergence (s) in the “Out of Africa” theory. As far as animal divergence, I’ve seen possible causes in the Founder Effect. I believe these were on either or
Regarding the paper I cited. I found Sang-Hee Lee in California, via Google. The home page was most interesting. I did send an inquiry e-mail to listed addresses. This being summer, I doubt if I will get a reply.
Another source is James F. Crow who is retired from University of Wisconsin. If you spot his name anywhere, please let me know. Or if you spot the “neutral theory of molecular evolution” , this should be a good source.
I found info about Kimura on www.bookrags.com/biography/motoo-kimura-wog/
Please note that I am a direct descendent of Thomas the Apostle… I never believe anything the first time I hear it – I need double proof.
Blessings,
granny
The quest is worthy of the adventures of the journey.
G
grannymh
Guest
Is that like the thing I used when I fractured my leg? I was too uncoordinated to use crutches. Kept falling backwards.
E
edwest2
Guest
This is just bad storytelling. Fish are designed to live in water, find food and avoid predators. There is no reason to believe that taking a few gulps of air causes anything to happen. None. There would be no motivation to try dry land since dry land is not the environment they were designed for.
Peace,
Ed
B
buffalo
Guest
I am working on it granny.You are a sweetheart.
First – since you are very familiar with research papers, please look at the one I cited. Post 806
The thing I noticed was the references to what would cause both reduced population or expanded population plus the mathematical way to figure this in. I have only found one other reference to various explanations for human divergence and that was a brief opinion on the possible causes of the divergence (s) in the “Out of Africa” theory. As far as animal divergence, I’ve seen possible causes in the Founder Effect. I believe these were on either or
Regarding the paper I cited. I found Sang-Hee Lee in California, via Google. The home page was most interesting. I did send an inquiry e-mail to listed addresses. This being summer, I doubt if I will get a reply.
Another source is James F. Crow who is retired from University of Wisconsin. If you spot his name anywhere, please let me know. Or if you spot the “neutral theory of molecular evolution” , this should be a good source.
I found info about Kimura on www.bookrags.com/biography/motoo-kimura-wog/
Please note that I am a direct descendent of Thomas the Apostle… I never believe anything the first time I hear it – I need double proof.
Blessings,
granny
The quest is worthy of the adventures of the journey.
The conclusions here are most interesting.
Mitochondrial Eve and Y-chromosomal Adam Diagrams
These diagrams show how one line of mitochondria and one line of Y-chromosomes become widespread over time.
B
buffalo
Guest
granny, what I am seeing is an amazement for the rapid changes that go against the long ages required.
The other main point is there doesn’t seem to be enough resolution to adequately determine the actual size of the bottleneck.
-sidebar - you know what is neat and is starting to mature - looking over the research and hashing it out as to what it really means. We are doing this independent of the scientific establishment and its bias. We are bringing in other disciplines. This is good!
The other main point is there doesn’t seem to be enough resolution to adequately determine the actual size of the bottleneck.
-sidebar - you know what is neat and is starting to mature - looking over the research and hashing it out as to what it really means. We are doing this independent of the scientific establishment and its bias. We are bringing in other disciplines. This is good!
A
Angel7
Guest
But if that fly mutated slowly over time along with other flies along with other flies. (rest of quote)
QUOTE]
With “Other” flies. Thats is exactly the problem with evolution! Can you really rely on the fact that another fly by chance has the same mutation? Such mutations would be come recessive, if not non existant in the next generation or so of flies.
ichthus.info/Evolution/evolution.html . I will quote what this site says, what is written here is from said link.
This is not a site that is trying to explain evolution to you; but for the sake of context, I will give a short overview of the theory of evolution
- Early Earth’s Atmopshere contains Hydrogen, Amnonia, Methana, and Nitrogen Gases.
- Lightning provided the energy to fuse the gases into amino acids.
- Amino acids clump together to form protien molecules
- Protien Collides to form living cells.
According to evolution, life started billions of years (nobody knows how long ago, and 15 billion years is a good estimate as any…) from anorganic matter
The first “life” is probably a “self-replicating molecule”… (they don’t know what that molecule look like…)
Note: protein molecules are not self-replicating; the two candidate molucules are DNA or RNA - something like a virus.
NOTE: Although virusses are “self-replicating”, they cannot replicate without a host. In fact, without the “chemical factories” inside a cell, a virus is dead
Anyway, when enough of the self-replicating molecules are made; they suddenly transform themselves into a primitive cell… (don’t ask me or them how, nobody has proposed a viable mechanism. There is only some hyposthesis about the steps (transitional forms), but there is absolutely no proposal on what mechanisms are at work to cause the change… As far as mechanism is concern, it’s magic…)
Then the genetic matter is gathered into a nucleus… (more magic)
- At First life was very simple and was based on self replicating molecules
- Later life learned to store Genetic info. in DNA.
- And even further on, single celled creatures learn to develop into multi-celled organisms.
Mutations alter the genetic matter and turn one specie into another (not completely magic, but close…)
Natural selection weeds out the weaker species and the stronger species continue the evolution…
(NOTE: This is a simple statement about waht Evolution is all about.)
Evolutionists commonly use these examples to showcase that “evolution is a proven fact” (which are debunked by Jonathan Wells in his book “Icons of Evolution”):
In 1953, Miller performed an experiment
In a vase, he put chemicals that he supposed to make up the primeordial earth atmosphere
Then he put the mixture under electrical sparks that simulate lightning.
He drained the result and found (a very small amount) of amino-acid — building blocks of living cells.
He boldly proclaimed that he showed that this is how life began…
Miller’s experiment was done in 1953 and assumed that the primitive Earth Atmosphere consists of
Hydrogen (H2), Nitrogen (N2), Carbon dioxide (CO2), Water (H2O), Ammonia (NH3), and Methane (CH4)
Furthermore, Miller assumed that the was no oxygen (O2) (he had to, because when you add O2 to the mixture, one spark and the whole atmosphere will blow up !!!)
Problems with this assumption:
Hydrogen (H2) is very light and will rise to the upper layers of the atmosphere very rapidly - in other words, hydrogen will not be present in the lower layers where the chemical reactions occur.
Since there is no oxygen in the atmosphere (this is necessary condition for the Miller experiment - when oxygen is present along with methane, lightning will cause a huge fireball…) there is no ozon layer to filter out the high energy rays from the sun !!!
Now, ammonia (NH3) and methane (CH4) in the atmosphere are susceptable to high energy radiation and these molecules will be split apart by ultra-violet and gamma raditions !!!
Hence, you will not find ammonia (NH3) and methane (CH4) in the atmosphere.
In the 1960’s Geologists questioned whether the primitive Earth Atmosphere had these gases
By mid 1975, Biochemist Marcel Florkin declared that the assumption of the primitive Earth Atmosphere was wrong
In 1995, Science magazine reported that experts now dismissed Miller’s experiment because the primitive Earth Atmosphere was nothing like what Miller had assumed:
Hydrogen (H2) would have escaped into deep space
Ammonia (NH3) and Methane (CH4) are easily obliterated by ultra violet light from the sun
Science now believe that the primitive Earth Atmosphere consists of:
Nitrogen (N2), Carbon dioxide (CO2), Water (H2O),
(And may even contain Oxygen according to NASA scientists !!!)
Now, when Miller’s experiment is REPEATED WITHOUT Hydrogen (H2), Ammonia (NH3) and Methane (CH4), we get:Formalehyde and cyanide, the onyl usefullness there chemicals have in reference to life, is emblaming dead bodies, by killing off bacteria.
Since Miller’s experiments, there have been many more proposals on theories about “how life began” (e.g., in mud, near sub-oceanic lava exhausts, etc).
No theory on “how life began” is accepted by all evolutionists - everyone has his/her favorite theory
In fact, the lack of ideas on how life began among the evolutionists cannot be over-stated: basically, they don’t have a clue on how life really began… only guesses without much substantial evidence…
The “tree of life” is the pictorial depiction on how different species evolved
Presumably, a single living “thing” was “made” some billions of years ago…
Then through mutation and natural selection – over many billions of years – it evolves and “changes” into different species.
When a new specie emerge, there is a new branch of the tree…
According to the theory of evolution, we should see only a few species at the beginning of time
Mutation and natural selection creates diversity over billions of years…
So the number of different species increases gradually in time
Number of species found in fossil record should increases with time…
ACTUAL DATA (this is REALITY) from fossil records shows the following:
Very FEW fossils found before a certain time (called “Precambrian era”)
Fossils of ALL SPECIES found in a relatively short period (millions of years instead of billions of years) after the "Precambrian era - further more, all species are FULLY developed, without INTERMEDIATE forms
Number of species found in fossil record decreases with time…
The fossil records DO NOT SUPPORT the “Tree of Life” which is a predictive outcome of the “Theory” of Evolution
In fact, the fossil record supports the creation scenario !!! (But you won’t hear that in any public school…)
A
Angel7
Guest
Haeckel drawing shows embroys of different species in different stages of development.
Notice the top row shows that embryos of ALL vertibrates in a stage where they appear almost identical… http://www.ichthus.info/Evolution/PICS/Haeckel-1.jpg
This picture is still used in biology books in 2004 - and unfortunately, many students did not know how fake these really were)
(Compare and contrast the Drawn Embryo’s top, to the actual Embryos bottom.)
It turns out that when Haeckel published his embryos drawing in 1874, the drawing were not trusted by his collegues - but they don’t have sufficient evidence to prove otherwise.
I like to share with you a few quotes from the “Science” article in 1975:
NOTE: “Science” is NOT some Religious Magazine, but a Scientific publication !!!
“Generations of biology students may have been MISLED by a famous set of drawings of embryos published 123 years ago by the German biologist Ernst Haeckel.”
“Not only did Haeckel ADD or OMIT features, Richardson and his collegues reported, but he (Haeckel) also FUDGED THE SCALE to EXAGERATE SIMILARITIES among species.”
“It looks like it’s turning out to be one of the most famous FAKES in Biology,” Richardson concludes.
The $6,000,000 Question:
WHY do school textbooks STILL promote this LIE ???
My experience is the “scientific community” is so NATURALISTICALLY INCLINED that they are BLIND to anything that has to do with the SUPERNATURAL…
Their PRIME Directive is:
EVERYTHING must be explained NATURALISTICALLY…
Now where did I read something like that… ???
**2Corinthians 4:3-4 ---- But our gospel is also hidden. It is hidden to those being lost, in whom the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving ones, so that the light of the glorious gospel of Christ (who is the image of God) should not dawn on them… **
In other words: The truth is hidden from the Evolutionists !!!
The past 2 posts, were all from ichthus.info/Evolution/evolution.html
I got all the text pictures, statements from there. I merely quoted with what was written there.
The Red is the Evolutionist point.
The blue is the counter arguement.
- Status