75 Theses ~ Science Against Evolution

[David T]

What drugs are you on?

It's hilareous I bash the itellect as being fundemental and it whines like a jesus freak who believes in the resurrection as historical fact. Religious folks are lame.

 

[David T]

You like to re-use things a lot. Like your "Into the wilderness I go..." stuff. The funny part is that you don't seem to realize that these things you seem to feel are so profound rarely ever make your ultimate "point" (when you do have one, that is) any more cogent or pithy.

Take the above about the wind moving the flag versus the flag moving the wind... BOTH end up being true, just to varying degrees. Which is much the same with intellect. In large part, the world pushes what we think... and in smaller part, what each of us think on an individual basis pushes the world. I take you as one who would wholeheartedly reject the notion that you think in "black and white" - absolutes. But quoting the above without realizing the more subtle truth that exists beyond the surface of the comparison (a surface that you don't seem capable of breaking in a lot of different instances) is something that I feel belies the more true state of affairs.

I bash the intellect and it whines about it. A jesus freak with, without, or agnostic is still a jesus freak. Please grow up evolve already its not all about what's prattling in a tiny acorn section of your cranium do you ever wonder why you find religion so agreeably disagreeable? No you don't it's never dawned on you that would require more than rote reading. To lazy? To lazy to get past books, experts, TV, the Internet? Please we have been carrying on this conversation for thousands of years. Extinction that's where this is heading, cranium.

 

[SkepticThinker]

He already explained, it was a copy and paste from a online Dictionary source. The Supernatural by definition is beyond the natural world, beyond the realm of Science, there are no tools available to examine it. GOD is within the Supernatural, He exists outside Time and Space, meaning humans can never ever hope to Scientifically prove or disprove His existence definitively. Scientists usually don't even talk GOD, as it's within the realm of personal subjective 'faith' and of no consequence to the Scientific community and the tools they use to understand the World around us.

How do we even know it is there then, if it is undetectable??

 

[Altfish]

It's hilareous I bash the itellect as being fundemental and it whines like a jesus freak who believes in the resurrection as historical fact. Religious folks are lame.

Did you? Congratulations.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Oh please you love yourself way way to much and are too lazy to even think.

Whoah! Where did that come from??

REM wrote a song about you "losing my religion."you practice free speech believing it's actual thinking while its just rote it all starts with your cranium which is fundementalist nonsense. It's just vanilla, Normal no wonder you find affirmation in disagreement with creationism religion your are them. Rote.

Do you even have the first idea what my beliefs actually are?

Why do you have such a fragile ego?

 

[Sapiens]

...

Jeffrey P. Tomkins, Ph.D in genetics writes, “As scientific discovery advances in the field of genomics, the genome and its diversity of elaborate interlocking languages speaks of vast levels of intelligent bio-engineering, not purposeless random evolution.”

Tompkins is not a real authority, he is a well known dishonest quack. He is even featured in: "the Encyclopedia of American Loons."

 

[David T]

Whoah! Where did that come from??


Do you even have the first idea what my beliefs actually are?

Why do you have such a fragile ego?

 

[David T]

Whoah! Where did that come from??


Do you even have the first idea what my beliefs actually are?

Why do you have such a fragile ego?

You enjoy air conditioning.

 

[David T]

Did you? Congratulations.

Just the messenger.

But if you hurry you can go camping. Oh too late. Next year.

 

[james bond]

I've just come across this creationist website ...it looks very basic so may be old and abandoned but it is useful to help understand the mind of a creationist.

Science Against Evolution Official Home Page

One of the pages ....
Seventy-five Theses
.....is their 75 Theses "We hold these truths to be undeniable."

1. Initially, the Earth was a lifeless planet.
2. There is life on Earth now.
3. At some time in the past, life either originated on Earth, or came to Earth from outer space.
4. Regardless of where or when life originated, it had to originate sometime, somewhere, somehow.
5. Life either originated by purely natural processes, or else some supernatural element must have been involved.
6. Science, as defined by the American public school system, excludes supernatural explanations.
7. Science depends upon the “Scientific Method” for determining truth.
8. The Scientific Method involves testing hypotheses using repeatable experiments.
9. If there is a scientific explanation for the origin of life, it must depend entirely on natural, repeatable processes.
10. If life originated by a natural process under certain specific conditions, it should be possible to create life again under the same conditions.
11. For more than 50 years scientists have tried to find conditions that produce life, without success.
12. Fifty years of failed attempts to create life have raised more questions than answers about how life could have originated naturally.
13. Living things have been observed to die from natural processes, which can be repeated in a laboratory.
14. Life has never been observed to originate through any natural process.
15. “Abiogenesis” is the belief that life can originate from non-living substances through purely natural processes.
16. The theory of evolution depends upon abiogenesis as the starting point.
17. If the theory of abiogenesis is false, then the theory of evolution is false.
18. The American public school system teaches that somehow the first living cell formed naturally and reproduced.
19. There is no known way in which the first living cell could have formed naturally.
20. The first living cell would have needed some mechanism for metabolism.
21. There is no known natural process by which metabolism could originate in a lifeless cell.
22. The first living cell would have to grow and reproduce for life to continue past the first cell’s death.
23. Growth and reproduction require cell division.
24. Cell division is a complex process.
25. There is no known natural process by which cell division could originate by chance.
26. According to the theory of evolution, single-celled life forms evolved into multi-cellular life forms.
27. Multi-cellular life forms consist of an assembly of cells that have different functions.
28. There is no scientific explanation for how a single cell could or would naturally change function.
29. Single-celled organisms have a membrane which allows the cell to exchange some substances (“nutrients” and “waste”, for lack of better terms) with the environment.
30. Not all cells in larger multi-cellular organisms are in contact with the external environment.
31. Larger multi-cellular organisms need some method for the interior cells to exchange nutrients and waste with the external environment.
32. Very large multi-cellular animals require a complex system (typically including teeth, saliva, throat, stomach, and intestines) for absorbing nutrients from the environment.
33. Very large multi-cellular animals require a complex system (typically including lungs, intestines, heart, arteries, and veins) for distributing nutrients and oxygen to interior cells.
34. Very large multi-cellular animals require a complex system (typically including lungs, heart, arteries, veins, kidneys, and bladder) for removing waste from interior cells.
35. There is no satisfactory explanation how complex systems such as these could have originated by any natural process.
36. According to the theory of evolution, an invertebrate life-form evolved into the first vertebrate life-form.
37. Vertebrates have, by definition, a spine containing a nervous system.
38. The nervous system detects stimuli and reacts to them.
39. There is no satisfactory explanation for how the simplest nervous system could have originated by any natural process.
40. According to the theory of evolution, some of the first vertebrates were fish, which have eyes and a brain connected by a nervous system.
41. There is no satisfactory explanation how optical elements (typically including a lens, an iris and light sensors) could have assembled themselves by any natural process.
42. There is no satisfactory explanation how image processing algorithms could have originated in a fish brain by any natural process.
43. If the theory of evolution is true, then every characteristic of every living thing must be the result of a random mutation.
44. Mutations have been observed that increase or decrease the size of some portion (or portions) of a living organism.
45. Mutations have been observed that change the shape of a living organism.
46. Mutations have been observed that duplicate existing features (cows with two heads, flies with extra wings, etc.).
47. No mutation has ever been observed that provides a new function (sight, hearing, smell, lactation, etc.) in a living organism that did not previously have that function.
48. Cross-breeding and genetic engineering can transfer existing functionality from one living organism to another.
49. Cross-breeding cannot explain the origin of any new functionality in the first place.
50. Artificial selection enhances desired characteristics by removing genetic traits that inhibit the desired characteristics.
51. Artificial selection is more efficient than natural selection.
52. There are limits to the amount of change that can be produced by artificial selection.
53. Mutation and artificial selection have not been demonstrated to be sufficient to bring about new life forms from existing ones.
54. Similarity of features is not definite proof of common ancestry.
55. Similarity of features is often observed in objects designed by man.
56. The fact that one individual was born later than another individual died is not proof that the later individual is a biological descendant of the earlier one, especially if they are of different species.
57. Many different human evolutionary trees have been proposed.
58. There is disagreement about hominid lineage because the “evidence” is meager and highly speculative.
59. Darwin was correct when he said, “Any variation which is not inherited is unimportant for us.” 2
60. Acquired characteristics are not inherited because they do not cause any change in the DNA.
61. Explanations for how apelike creatures evolved into humans are fanciful speculations without experimental confirmation.
62. There is no evidence to suggest that offspring of animals that eat cooked food are smarter than offspring of the same species that eat raw food.
63. There is no evidence to suggest that mental exercises performed by parents will increase the brain size of their children.
64. There is no evidence that if apelike creatures sometimes stand upright to see over tall grasses, it will increase the brain size of their children.
65. There is no evidence that if apelike creatures sometimes stand upright to see over tall grasses, it will make it easier for their children to stand upright.
66. Sedimentary layers are formed in modern times by such things as floods, mudslides, and sandstorms.
67. The fossils in sedimentary layers formed in modern times contain the kinds of things living in that location.
68. The concept of geologic ages is based upon the evolutionary assumption that the kinds of fossils buried in sedimentary layers are determined by time rather than location.
69. All sedimentary layers formed in modern times are of the same geologic age, despite the fact that they contain different kinds of fossils.
70. Radiometric dating depends upon assumptions that cannot be verified about the initial concentrations of elements.
71. Radiometric dating of rocks brought back from the Moon is not a reliable method of determining the age of the Earth.
72. “Dark matter” and “dark energy” were postulated to explain why astronomical measurements don’t match predictions of the Big Bang theory.
73. When measurements don’t agree with theoretical predictions, it is generally because the theory was wrong.
74. “We didn’t see it happen, we can’t make it happen again, and we don’t know how it could possibly have happened, but it must have happened somehow!” is never a satisfactory scientific explanation.
75. Public schools should not teach any fanciful speculation that is inconsistent with experimentally verified laws as if it were true.

Perhaps we should got through these and comment on them - creationists please pile in too.

You found my good friend's website. I've posted the 75 before.

 

[Muslim-UK]

How do we even know it is there then, if it is undetectable??

Because He has raised Prophets and Messengers who have conveyed the purpose of life, and other information meant for us. Most of the Prophets and Messengers are unknown, but the ones we do know of were accompanied by signs and miracles affirming they were being supported by a supernatural force.

 

[Altfish]

Just the messenger. View attachment 19679
But if you hurry you can go camping. Oh too late. Next year. View attachment 19680

You have totally lost me.

 

[Altfish]

You found my good friend's website. I've posted the 75 before.

I'd like to say I'm surprised...but I'm not.

 

[james bond]

Why could it not be the Flying Spaghetti Monster within the mind boggling complexity of DNA?

Ha ha. There is no FSM except in the imagination. The DNA was created by God because it can't be replicated. It was part of an adult creature. The complexity cannot be overcome. I present scientific evidence for God and you present imaginary monsters.

 

[Altfish]

Ha ha. There is no FSM except in the imagination. The DNA was created by God because it can't be replicated. It was part of an adult creature. The complexity cannot be overcome. I present scientific evidence for God and you present imaginary monsters.

Can you prove the FSM doesn't exist?
I can't.

 

[Jumi]

To the creationist is more DNA more complex? As we know there are living things that have more base pairs than humans so we aren't close to being the crowning achievement of complexity there.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

I bash the intellect and it whines about it. A jesus freak with, without, or agnostic is still a jesus freak. Please grow up evolve already its not all about what's prattling in a tiny acorn section of your cranium do you ever wonder why you find religion so agreeably disagreeable? No you don't it's never dawned on you that would require more than rote reading. To lazy? To lazy to get past books, experts, TV, the Internet? Please we have been carrying on this conversation for thousands of years. Extinction that's where this is heading, cranium.

I don't think I am the only one who needs to "get over themselves" in this conversation. For example - you don't seem to be able to grasp that I will never accept your idle twaddle as anything even remotely nearing "profound"... or even "useful." You're so sure I hold "experts" or "books" or "TV" (this isn't even good for a laugh, to be honest) in such high esteem? You've already failed to pin me down. However, judging by your nicely heated response, I'd have to guess that I hit you pretty squarely.

 

[David T]

sorry I am not a southern Baptist that's your doppleganger not mine. A dog is most certainly an evolutionist, a cat most certainly is not an atheist. it's not that stupid.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Because He has raised Prophets and Messengers who have conveyed the purpose of life, and other information meant for us. Most of the Prophets and Messengers are unknown, but the ones we do know of were accompanied by signs and miracles affirming they were being supported by a supernatural force.

And how do we know that?
How do we know the supernatural even exists at all?

 

[Muslim-UK]

And how do we know that?

I can only speak for Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him. He was told Iron was sent from outer space, the Universe came from a singularity and is expanding, and would eventually lead to the Big Crunch. When did humans discover these facts? Within the last 100 years, yet the book he received 1,400 years ago mentions all of these facts, and hundreds of others.

How do we know the supernatural even exists at all?

What tools do you have to examine the Supernatural?