Evolution flaws which proves it fallacy.

[Ouroboros]

Here's another source for education about evolution: Evolution | Natural History Museum

 

[idav]

idav, can we call the media to interview you? because you discovered something that the world scientists don't know.

Nobody knows how the universe physical laws or physical constants came into existence.
So please! be gentle on your self.

I didn't say anything about how it came to exist. When you have a chance you should watch the video from my first post. A biologist would know more about the history and evolution of biology.

 

[jake0333]

johnhanks, Thank you.

If you admit that the first single cell need to be guided by the written DNA information then you break the evolution theory and you prove the existence of God.

you choose.

 

[idav]

How does a non-sentient fire know only to consume flammable material. That's the real mystery.

No mystery. Obviously fire has the intelligence to choose flammable materials.

 

[Sunstone]

johnhanks, Thank you.

If you admit that the first single cell need to be guided by the written DNA information then you break the evolution theory and you prove that existence of God.

you choose.

Feel free to explain your reasoning.

 

[Sunstone]

No mystery. Obviously fire has the intelligence to choose flammable materials.

Well, I guess that wraps it up, then. Thanks!

 

[Ouroboros]

Ask your Mom how much she enjoyed pushing you out as a baby. Then ask her how much she'd have enjoyed pushing out "a whole complete man".
Seriously, are you really asking why we go through embryonic development? You do realise, don't you, that sexual reproduction has to start with a single cell?

That's funny and so true.

If we were plopping out as "whole complete man", it would prove creationism and how special God made us. The fact that we have to go through a long process of developing from one cell to a complete person (which doesn't end until death since we're switching out almost all cells in our body within a 7 year period) rather supports our natural origin. If God had made us different and special, why isn't there anything different and special with our bodies or biological system? Why can't our bodies live without food? Why do we have to breathe, sleep, get injured, have to strengthen muscles, and so on? I don't understand why God had to create humans in such a way that we share over 95% of DNA code (much of it dormant code) with an animal? It's just ridiculous how much effort God went through to leave traces of evolution instead of creationism. It would make God a liar. And that doesn't make much sense. Nature preachers about God's true nature. What nature is, that's how God does it. Creationists really need to get with the program... (This wasn't a rant against you, btw )

 

[jmn]

It's up to you to find these sources and research.

Ignorance is a choice in the age of information.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

ImmortalFlame, is it possible for evolution to sense directions?

No. Evolution is the name we give to a process, it is not conscious.

When a turtle baby hatch from a buried egg it digs up, not down or left or right. once the turtle above the ground it runs in complete darkness toward water, even when turtle never once saw anybody els doing it before.

Inside your lungs there are small hairlike structures which are brushing dirt upwards towards the exist of the trachea, they are not brushing the dirt downwards into the lungs.

so the question again... can evolution with the help of nature selection sense directions?

Yes. Those traits which you just described are the result of evolutionary processes.

If evolution is not self-aware then why the lungs is brushing dirt outside of it?

Because obviously a mutation which did that would result in lower survivability, thus natural selection would select those mutations out of the gene pool.

why there is a mucus that acts as glue and cilia to brush the dirt outside of the lungs?

See above.

without this cleaning mechanism the lungs' airways will be blocked in a matter of few weeks and the living creature will suffocate to death.

If evolution is without a consciousness then who knew that fishes need gills to breath oxygen from water and humans need lungs to breath oxygen from air?

Nobody had to "know" anything, these things were a natural result of mutation and environmental attrition. The clouds don't "know" that plants need water and that's why they rain - the rain was a resource that was available to the plants and thus natural selection and mutation lead to them being able to use that resource. Fishes absorbing of oxygen works on the exact same principle. I strongly suggest you do some research on evolution.

you need a consciousness to understand those things.

But you don't need to "understand" something for a biological or chemical system to make use of it. Your argument is nonsensical.

 

[painted wolf]

Does water understand how to make a snowflake?

How did dirt know how to make the Rocky Mountains?

Clearly chance can't have made the "Indian with an iPod".

Arguments from incredulity and ignorance are not generally well received... especially when you insist that you don't want to know how evolution actually works.

wa:do

 

[Sunstone]

"The tides go in, the tides go out -- no one can explain it." Paraphrase of the ever astute Bill O'Reilly.

 

[jake0333]

i conclude.

1-without a female body and male carrying the half part of the DNA information, the reproduction process is not possible.
2-without the DNA guidance the reproduction processes are not possible
3- the development of the human body must go through stages, so evolution knows when to start which is step A and it knows when to end which is step Z.
4- evolution evolved living parts and it knew how to write the DNA code for the reproduction to happen inside the female body.
5- evolution and natural selections are unconscious processes, but they knew how to write and store the DNA reproduction informations so they must be conscious but you don't know yet? " i know that defy rationality and logic, but it's your choice "
6- evolution understand how to encode the sense of directions inside the DNA so a bird can migration and a hatched turtle babies know the direction of the water in darkness and for the cilia to know how to brush dirt toward the outside of the lungs.
7- the body can sense the missing part and with the help of evolution who can design it, they both made a mucus lining inside the stomach to stop the acid from digesting the stomach with the food.
8- evolution knows how to speak to light particle or light photons so we can seeing and it knew how to deal with sound wave kinetic energy so we can hear?
9- evolution knows that fishes need gills to breathe oxygen from water and that mammals need lungs to breathe oxygen from air?
10- evolution knows that the chest ribs must be flexible and it knew that the ribs must be engulfed in intercostal muscles to compress the chest cavity to force air outside the lungs? but is that even possible without the atmospheric pressure? so evolution made it too?

my conclusion is that evolution is ironicalness theory.

 

[Sunstone]

my conclusion is that evolution is ironicalness theory.

How ironic.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

hello! i have few questions if you guys have the time to reponse to them.

is evolution a sentient thing? is it self-aware? is the process conscious?

if the answer is no! then...

is your stomach self-aware? is it conscious ?

when your stomach produce a mucous lining to protect itself from being digested by the acid, that's not because it can understands the risk of the acid, but because it was taught to operate that way.

If you swallow a liquid which is a poison, your stomach will absorb that liquid, because that's what it meant for it to do and from there it goes to your blood stream and once that poison is inside the body
it will be used. It's not the fault of your stomach that made you get poisoned and it's not it's responsibility to check what your throw in it, but it's you who has a consciousness to understand that this is wrong.

how does a tree knows what it's fruit should taste like to humans? so it makes them so sweet with tempting smell, looks and colors? why the fruit supply us with important nurtrients and it's not posionous?

is the tree a sentient thing? is it self-aware? is it conscious? if the answer again is no! then...

if an it " evolution" doesnt know and an it " tree " doesnt know then who does?

Please stay on the topic and don't try to explain evolutoin to me. if you disgree with my points then....

you are telling that evolution is capable of desiging us without having a consciousness or thoughts or knowledge or even a reason for it ?

you are telling me that evolution understand when to start evolving an organ and it knows when to stop?

you are telling me that evolution finished evolving living parts and it wrote a full set of instrctions on each specific part, so that a heart will be reproduced as a heart and a lung will be reproduced as a lung
and a stomach will be reproduced as a stomach, but in another human body? and it designed the female body to be capable of receiving and understanding those instructions?

all of this from mindless evolution without...

Any understandings of it's surroundings, brain, thoughts, without knowing what it's actions are, and without realizing what the reasons are.

Rather than debate and point out every flaw of your position, I invite you to study and learn biology and all of your questions will be answered. A very large part of the answer is out DNA is indeed "programmed" to do what it does, but of course due the countless replications things get crossed, switched, and sometimes goes wrong, which is what drives biodiversity, which is evolution.
But no, evolution is not sentient, is not aware, is nothing more than a term to describe one of the mechanisms of nature, very much to how we use the term gravity to describe the effects of larger objects having a pull on smaller objects.

 

[Valjean]

All of these objections you keep throwing out are easily countered, but if you tell us "don't try to explain evolution to me" you sabotage the whole discussion. You can't claim heavier than air flight is impossible then forbid anyone from bringing up the physics involved.

This is a debate forum. If you want us to answer your arguments you can't forbid us from citing the salient facts.

Q: If the arguments and examples you cite were so reasonable, don't you think biologists would have realized this by now and dropped their theory?

 

[Agnostic75]

This thread is ridiculous since evolution discusses "what happens", not "how things happen." Michael Behe agrees with Darwin about macro evolution, meaning that he agrees with Darwin about "what happens." He only disagrees with Darwin about "how evolution happens," or, as Behe put it, "the mechanisms that are responsible for evolution.

It is the job of biologists, and biochemists, to observe "what happens," not to explain why things happen.

Millions of Christians have no problems with macro evolution. Why should they since they believe that God is responsible for macro evolution?

Any biologist knows that evolution does not address the existence of God. The National Academy of Sciences
is neutral on the existence of God, but it accepts macro evolution.

 

[mycorrhiza]

how does a tree knows what it's fruit should taste like to humans? so it makes them so sweet with tempting smell, looks and colors? why the fruit supply us with important nurtrients and it's not posionous?

Well, the fruits we eat today are the results of centuries of controlled breeding. Most wild fruits aren't that tempting for humans.

The fruits of various plants are used for seed dispersal by having hooks and thorns that get stuck in the fur animals or by being tasty, just to give two examples. Plants that developed mechanisms that meant that their seeds were able to get further away from the mother plant, even if it was just a tiny bit, gained an advantage and were more likely to spread and survive.

The thing we most often call fruits are parts we and other animals eat, and then the seeds are dispersed unharmed together with excrement, which gives a good boost when it comes to growing. Some fruits are buried by animals that hoard and are thus "planted". Fruits that were tasty, if only a little, were more likely to get eaten or saved as food. The plants never chose to produce tasty fruits, but the ones that had tastier fruits than the others were more likely to survive and spread.

When it comes to poisonous fruits that are toxic to humans, they are often tolerated by other species.

To use a simplified fictional example:
1. A plant produces bitter fruits. None of the unicorns want to eat it.
2. A mutation blocks the part that produces the bitterness and thus the fruit tastes more neutral. A few unicorns start eating it and the fruit with the neutral taste becomes the dominant one after many generations.
3. Another mutations leads a big amount of the sugars produced by the plants into the fruits. Now the unicorns all go crazy about it and eat lots of it! Soon the sweet fruit is dominant.

 

[Valjean]

But evolution theory does explain "how things happen," Agnostic, and macro-evolution is just accumulated micro-evolution.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

i conclude.

1-without a female body and male carrying the half part of the DNA information, the reproduction process is not possible.

It isn't as simple as "each carries half the DNA information", DNA replication isn't just 50% mum and 50% dad. Also, asexual reproduction exists.

2-without the DNA guidance the reproduction processes are not possible

Is DNA Guidance some kind of molecular sat-nav? Because, as far as I'm aware, that phrase means nothing.

3- the development of the human body must go through stages, so evolution knows when to start which is step A and it knows when to end which is step Z.

You clearly do not understand what evolution is or how it works. It has little to do with human embryological development, and there is no point at which evolution "stops" occurring. It doesn't "know" in advance what it is aiming for any more than a river "knows" its heading for a lake.

4- evolution evolved living parts and it knew how to write the DNA code for the reproduction to happen inside the female body.

Evolution of sexual reproduction - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

5- evolution and natural selections are unconscious processes, but they knew how to write and store the DNA reproduction informations so they must be conscious but you don't know yet? " i know that defy rationality and logic, but it's your choice "

Again, you clearly have no idea what you are talking about. Evolution doesn't "write and store" things, that's totally meaningless nonsense.

6- evolution understand how to encode the sense of directions inside the DNA so a bird can migration and a hatched turtle babies know the direction of the water in darkness and for the cilia to know how to brush dirt toward the outside of the lungs.

This is called "natural instincts", which are a result of physiological developments in the brain which are a result of evolutionary processes. Again, it's not conscious, it's just the result of selective environmental pressures working on living populations.

7- the body can sense the missing part and with the help of evolution who can design it, they both made a mucus lining inside the stomach to stop the acid from digesting the stomach with the food.

Yep.

8- evolution knows how to speak to light particle or light photons so we can seeing and it knew how to deal with sound wave kinetic energy so we can hear?

Again, it doesn't "know" anything. These things were part of our environment, so we adapted to incorporate the ability to sense these things.

9- evolution knows that fishes need gills to breathe oxygen from water and that mammals need lungs to breathe oxygen from air?

See above.

10- evolution knows that the chest ribs must be flexible and it knew that the ribs must be engulfed in intercostal muscles to compress the chest cavity to force air outside the lungs? but is that even possible without the atmospheric pressure? so evolution made it too?

Yes, evolution did all of that. Unconsciously.

my conclusion is that evolution is ironicalness theory.

Based on the fact that you don't understand how it did these things? That's called an argument from ignorance. I suggest you go and read up on evolution theory and come back when you at least have a working understanding of how evolution theory accounts for these things, since you've clearly not made the least bit of effort to do so. These arguments are as silly as someone going to a forum that discusses gravity and saying "What makes no sense to me about gravity is how it KNOWS that the planets need to move and the earth should go around the sun. Obviously its sentient, so the theory is just absurd!"

 

[Kilgore Trout]

How does my mouth know how to laugh when I read ridiculously funny things? It is a mystery that can only be explained by the fevered imaginings of ancient desert nomads!