Quote:
Originally Posted by lee9786
What came first - the protein needed to make the DNA/ information or the information required to make the protein.
Not to mention cell membrane to prevent cell lysis which consists of proteins, phospholipids (requiring fat synthesizes accomplished by smooth endoplasmic reticulum which in itself is extremely complex).
It's all FANTASY. A dangerous Religion which historically has led to Genocide.
|
You predictably take a complex end-product of millions of years of trial and error Evolution, and with great fanfare consisting of your own incredulity, proclaim the nonsense above: to wit, that it has led to genocide.
Links please. Meantime, of course, you'll deny (or openly ignore...) The Spanish Inquisition, the organized and governmental crucifixion of your own savior, the mass murder of so many under the Euro church's
pogroms against literally anyone who thought badly of The Holy Church, and so on. Right up to the righteous Pedophilia of today's Holy RC Church.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius
How did millions of different species of bugs, birds, and all kinds of animals burst onto the scene all at once? How does natural selection work with that?
Natural selection does not make a man out of a fish. That would be unnatural selection. Fish make fish. Humans make humans. Chimps make chimps. Elephants make elephants.
I watched scientist on t.v. describe how fish grew arms and legs and climbed out of the water and eventually shed their swim suit and grew hair and turned into chimpanzees and those chimps turned into humans. Really. I'm not making this up. I recorded it. They should relinquish their title of "scientist." They are anything but.
|
The vast over-reach of such statements only confirms your huge illiteracy.
(BTW, are these the same "millions of species of bugs, birds and all kind of animals [not to mention plants...] that your buddy Noah had to cram, in multiples of several hundred, minimum of each, and paired where sexually required, onto that undersized and ill-prepared windowless barge? Just curious you understand, where the outright lunacy and incredibility of fundamentalist Christianity starts and ends...)
Neither could your mythical and imaginary God have made
the entire universe in one day! And then, in vast amazement in His own accomplishment, proclaim it upon viewing it for the first time
"to be good!" As in "Oh goody! I actually did it! I'm so amazing. Wasn't sure if I could, but apparently yes, I did! I'm so durned wonderful! Thus I proclaim it to be "
done"!!
And yet, it so very obviously is NOT yet done (See Hubble's findings of an expanding (thus "evolving") universe, the ongoing generational plus contemporaneous erosional geology of this planet, and the current production of all-new solar systems, plus the concurrent and witnessed super-nova deaths of star systems.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lee9786
Imagined speculation. That's all Evolution Theology is riding on.
|
Such a patently mindless dismissal of all the obvious processes around us. You truly are stuck in your immature denialism.
I challenge you, as I have the Big-Bloviator
Eusebius (but so far, he's categorically refused to thereby be shown up both in his hugely inadequate education & knowledge, as well as in his own common-sense thinking! He just did a big
"No, you show ME!! Nyah-Nyah!" response.
Wow! How compelling, similar to your erstwhile blurtations here. And all without
any technical or logical merit, but blurted out nonetheless, as if THAT were a valid debating technique!
Also known in the Christian bully-playground as
"I know you are, but what am I?" approach to valid debating and discussion amongst adult participants!
Quote:
Originally Posted by lee9786
This chart falls on contrived speculations and demonstrated deliberate frauds.
Back to how the simple cell could never have evolved. More mere speculation. Good story for children's Star Trek Science fiction comic books. Not good for their textbooks.
|
Oh? Specifically, even in a layman's level of technical detail, and with links to published results, which elements of Evolution are
contrived, pray tell? Kindly... elucidate
in useful detail which part(s) of Evolution
do not work or do not happen, have
not been documented over and over and in ever-improving detail, and have failed in the recent experiments of Ventner, Lenski, Kingsley, Pelchel, Blount and Borland, to mention just a few of the technical front-runners.
BTW, as to your reference to textbooks,
do indeed watch the
next generation of biological textbooks coming soon to a good university book store near you
(though I sincerely doubt you'll be perusing any such levels of accepted knowledge any time soon, eh boyz?)
Quote:
Originally Posted by benmiller
The overarching questionability in evolutionary systems is the inference of the candidate solution. The candidate solution is proposed to be the area in a chain of cells that serve the function of determining the path of mutation of the whole.
what does this have to do with anything? everything, since all actual evolutionary progress stems from the behavior of these cells (hypothetically).
Basically, "natural selection" is dependent on this group of cell's ability to "know" how to mutate.
So, if THIS is true, we literally have reason to suppose evolution on it alone. If not, evolution is an arbitrary blanket proposition.
|
Wow! Where on earth did you come up with this one,
ben m'lad?? Such a silly prediction of pre-determined Evolutionary process,
based entirely on the decisions of a group of candidate cells? Demonstrably preposterous on it's face!
I'd love to see this highly speculative hypothesis of yours discussed in detail. First, however, please do provide us all a credible technical explanation ( a link, if you would be so kind..) and the provision of a technical demonstration of such cellular groupings and their ability to "direct" subsequent Evolution. This is pure dismissive denialism, at once both a creative and imaginative invention at it's worst, and drivel at best.
There is no group of cells within
any organism that "directs" it's future Evolution in
any particular direction or timing! If this were so, how then could an original single celled organism Evolve at all? Where
exactly would it's group of candidate determinant cells exist? And why this subterfuge on their parts? Are they
ditto under the specific tutelage of your imagined God entity?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius
The only way it could occur is a sudden creation by a Divine, all powerful Being.
By the way, just because you say the question is idiotic does not mean it really was. It is just that it upsets atheists when someone smears the evolutionist's face into their own doodoo.
Evolution is nothing but voodoo science.
The Cambrian fossil record proves a sudden explosion of animals on the scene. It contradicts the neo-Darwinism.
“A growing number of respectable scientists are defecting from the
evolutionist camp...moreover; for the most part these “experts” have
abandoned Darwinism, not on the basis of religious faith or biblical
persuasions, but on strictly scientific grounds, and in some instances,
regretfully.”
—Dr. Wolfgang Smith, physicist and mathematician
|
Ahh yes: the AiG gang ( or worse: see the *asterisk'd* blog site I've noted below for anyone's even
mildly critical review, and it's nonsensical and unsupportable dismissive presentations, herein
re-played by our unchallenging and non-critically thinking
Big-E...)again and again!
Here's Dr. Smith's notable and
up-to-date CV in the rapidly changing fields of Evolutionary biology and Biochemistry. (Note: my highlights in
blue, as usual...):
"Smith graduated
in 1948 from Cornell University
with a B.A. in Philosophy, Physics and Mathematics. Two years later he obtained his
M.S. in Physics from Purdue University and, some time later, a Ph.D in Mathematics from Columbia University."
He worked as a physicist in Bell Aircraft corporation,
researching aerodynamics and the problem of atmospheric re-entry. He was a mathematics professor at MIT, UCLA and Oregon State University, doing research
in the field of differential geometry and publishing in academic journals such as the Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the American Journal of Mathematics, and others.
He retired from academic life in 1992."
Hmmm. I must have missed ref'ing his PhD in
anything even vaguely biological, biochemical, geological, or Evolutionary!
In fact, his
entire intellectual approach is based in
Traditionalism, defined as follows:
"The term Traditionalist School (whose perspective is generally referred to as Traditionalism or Perennialism) is used... to denote a school of thought based upon a belief in a universal, objective religion."
Please direct me to the link to his studies in some more relevant areas to the question at hand,
Big-E. Meantime, you missed
my CV in these exact areas.
What? "Am I just chopped livah?"
You happily quote such obviously biased and uneducated drivel by a highly biased and notably completely
out-of-date academic in unrelated areas (the physics & mathematics of re-entry?) , in support of your rancidly outdated and errant tripe, and yet you openly refuse to participate in any effort to provide us with more direct proofs, proofs which we can in fact produce
all day long.
Your trembling fear of the obvious is growing tiresome and repetitive to those who have their mental faculties still intact. Give it up: you've lost, and on an
EPIC level. Time and Time Again. Repeatedly.
De-Javu, all over again, to quote the
obviously far more technically lucid evolutionary scientist Yogi Berra.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur
Good grief,  get an education...The Cambrian period lasted for more than 50 million years, not exactly sudden....How suddenly did life poof into existence in your creation myth....You need to stop playing "let's pretend". |
Exactly,
sanspeur. While this (relatively) rapid Evolutionary event is reliably mentioned in
all the denialist Christian sites as "contradictory to the mandated long-term requirements of Darwinian Evolution!", it was
far from Instant, as you so correctly note.
Conditions were simply "right" for a suitable pre-existing population of organisms ripe for checking out all the potential new niches, plus the positive conditions on earth for such an "explosion". Hardly "instant" however, except in the unthinking eyes and hapless minds of the rabid Creationist mindset.
At this point, however, it's all of no great surprise to me, nor probably to you or any other clear-headed individual not trembling in fear for their eventual mortal salvation.
____________________
*
In Defense of the Christian Faith: Is Evolution a Scientific Fact?
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Can we dare to hope that at least you have finally taken on board the answer to your first idiotic question? It would not be other than long overdue.
) and your idiotic misunderstanding of the cambrian explosion (if that's what you were referring to (1) I'd say that the debate is only being perpetuated by the religious side inspired to idiocy by blind Faith in Creation.
Predictable nonsense in place of reasoned thinking. Won't work; so sorry!
