Evolution flaws which proves it fallacy.

[jake0333]

Evolution is the emergent property changing life forms over generations in the stochastic system comprising
gene mutation, changing environment, reproduction & natural selection. Does this clear things up?

Basically, your scientist said that everything in existence is the product of randomness and chaotic processes, but by chance all the phyiscal laws and order came into exitance.

and you also telling me to believe in a mindless, unconscious processes that created all the complexity in life which we can observe and understand the reasoning behind their existance.. but they are also the product of chance?!

I call you and them crazy people!

 

[LuisDantas]

If the Universe was simple and much more time had occurred since the beginning I would even believe you. I know math a little. I realize how many successful changes (without direction) needed to occur to get what we have and I can't believe enough time has passed for it. When counting one must consider all the unsuccessful changes too.

The vialibility of previous generations does however provide some direction. While the changes themselves are essentially random, the degree to which they contribute to the survival and reproductive success of the individual is directed by the environment it lives in.

 

[idav]

If the Universe was simple and much more time had occurred since the beginning I would even believe you. I know math a little. I realize how many successful changes (without direction) needed to occur to get what we have and I can't believe enough time has passed for it. When counting one must consider all the unsuccessful changes too.

We find ourselves in an optimum mode because the 99% of the rest of the planet went extinct. This universe is hostile, we will be lucky to last as long as the dinos did.

 

[jake0333]

Matter does not come from nothing nor tend to gather nor self assemble nor self replicate by itself without guidness. Physical laws or useful energy or matter will not assmble itself into precise order from nothing or by nothing.

try to explain to me how a nothing created something from nothing.

 

[LuisDantas]

Basically, your scientist said that everything in existence is the product of randomness and chaotic processes, but by chance all the phyiscal laws and order came into exitance.

Biologists rarely make statements about the origin of physical laws. That is a valid subject, but not really very connected to the Theory of Evolution.

At least, not from a scientific perspective.

 

[LuisDantas]

Matter does not come from nothing nor tend to gather nor self assemble nor self replicate by itself without guidness.

Are you denying that salt crystals usually organize themselves in a roughly cubic shape, for instance?

There is a lot of space between the extremes of directed guidance by some sort of conscious creator and this apparent extreme chaos that you may believe to be the only other alternative.

Physical laws or useful energy or matter will not assmble itself into precise order from nothing or by nothing.

How do you know that they did not?

try to explain to me how a nothing created something from nothing.

That would serve which purpose? What does that have to do with anything?

 

[painted wolf]

You do not understand the question it seems. Food did not evolve for people, that is the truth. So why does it appear it did evolve for people and animals? That was the question.

Because you're looking at the question backwards...

Food is just dead other things... unless you suggest that fish evolved for us to eat them and for no other reason... then the fact we find them tasty is simply coincidental.

They happen to have the fats and proteins that we find "taste good" because they are made of flesh... fats and proteins.

wa:do

 

[jake0333]

Everything in the universe follows fixed, discoverable, unchangeable laws and nothing can operate outside these laws, right?

Everything in existence is made out of atoms, what is the atom made of? Atoms are made of protons, neutrons and electrons.

The core of the atom is the nucleus, which is made of protons and neutrons, electrons orbit the nucleus; my question is why it is that way?

Now, about gravity, gravity will always pull the planets into an orbit around the sun in the milky way or else each planet will move in a straight line away from the sun; why?

Gravity is what holds us on the ground and prevents everything from flying into Earth's orbit; why?

If you combine two hydrogen atoms with one oxygen atom you will always get water, why is that? why it won't come out as a rock or glass?

If you mix red, green and blue in a certain proportion you will get white. You will never get black, why not?


Now let's move closer to your evolution theory. Before it all started you need a very well balanced environment with gravity, solid ground, air and water, minerals for food and a very well balanced temperature . Not too cold that it will freeze the cell and not too hot that it will cook or even kill the cell.

You also need light but the sun emits harmful radiation and the sun is about 150 millions kilometers away from us. Maybe your evolution started there after which it came into the earth's orbit and made the ozone layer so it won't die from the harmful sun radiation. Then it went straight through our atmosphere at temperature of 3000'F without being cooked and down to the ocean floor where it started to split and multiply?

Also don't forget that the water in our environment needs to be preserved by making the upper atmospheric layer cold so water will be trapped inside earth's atmosphere.
Else water will escape out into space and we will all die. If you look at top of a mountain you will find it covered with ice while no ice in the middle or at the bottom
of the mountain, do you know why is this so? Once water hits the upper atmospheric layer it will condensate into clouds and then it will come back to earth in the form of rain.

 

[Revoltingest]

Basically, your scientist said that everything in existence is the product of randomness and chaotic processes, but by chance all the phyiscal laws and order came into exitance.

He's not my scientist.
And if he said that that it's all by chance, then he doesn't know about the concept of a fitness function in a stochastic process.

and you also telling me to believe in a mindless, unconscious processes that created all the complexity in life which we can observe and understand the reasoning behind their existance.. but they are also the product of chance?!
I call you and them crazy people!

Again, it is not the product of pure chance, but rather a probabilistic system with a fitness function effectively "guiding" the emergent property we call "evolution". Think of an analogy...Boyle's law for ideal gases. The reason that pressure increases if volume decreases depends upon probability, ie, that individual molecules will interact in a statistical way. But the result is always a particular pressure vs volume relationship. "Chance" becomes virtual certainty on a large enuf scale, without any divine guidance whatsoever.

Hmmm....looking at the above, I see my explanation is not terribly effective. But it's late, & I can't give a course in probabilistic systems analysis or statistical mechanics (thermodynamics).

 

[LuisDantas]

Everything in the universe follows fixed, discoverable, unchangeable laws and nothing can operate outside these laws, right?

I don't know. Nor do I see how anyone could.

Everything in existence is made out of atoms, what is the atom made of? Atoms are made of protons, neutrons and electrons.

That is not really very accurate either. Even from a strictly scientific perspective, not everything is made of atoms. There are ions, eletrons, various forms of energy and of subatomic particles. Lighting bolts, for instance, are not made of atoms.

The core of the atom is the nucleus, which is made of protons and neutrons, electrons orbit the nucleus; my question is why it is that way?

I think that what you actually mean to ask is "who made it so". I happen to believe that the answer is "no one", but it is a fairly open question.

Now, about gravity, gravity will always pull the planets into an orbit around the sun in the milky way or else each planet will move in a straight line away from the sun; why?

Not always. Only when the circunstances allow it. Our sun is expected to swallow our planet at some point far away in the future, for instance.

And again, your suggestion that there must be a purpose behind those circunstances does not have to be agreed with.

Gravity is what holds us on the ground and prevents everything from flying into Earth's orbit; why?

Not sure what you mean here. Why is gravity gravity? It just is, I suppose.

If you combine two hydrogen atoms with one oxygen atom you will always get water, why is that? why it won't come out as a rock or glass?

Not always, actually. It takes certain conditions for that to be possible, albeit fairly easy to find ones. And of course, a single molecule of water and water proper are not quite the same thing.

As for why chemistry is not fully random... why should it be?

If you mix red, green and blue in a certain proportion you will get white. You will never get black, why not?

Because it doesn't work that way (although, again, you are making some perhaps excessive assumptions).

Now let's move closer to your evolution theory.

Very slightly closer... we have got a long distance to go before even approaching biology.

Before it all started you need a very well balanced environment with gravity, solid ground, air and water, minerals for food and a very well balanced temperature . Not too cold that it will freeze the cell and not too hot that it will cook or even kill the cell.

Not really. Evolution did not begin with cells proper, and the first few living beings probably did not require "solid ground" or air, at the very least.

You also need light but the sun emits harmful radiation and the sun is about 150 millions kilometers away from us.

It is difficult to reach meaningful conclusions when you are making so many hurried assumptions. For instance, the sun is hardly the only source of light in existence, and even today it is not necessarily needed by any and all lifeforms.

As for the distance, what is your point? Sunlight travels for long distances, yes. So?

Maybe your evolution started there after which it came into the earth's orbit and made the ozone layer so it won't die from the harmful sun radiation.

Uh? "My" evolution? Maybe it is best if you come back after thinking this a bit more.

 

[painted wolf]

Everything in the universe follows fixed, discoverable, unchangeable laws and nothing can operate outside these laws, right?

Everything in existence is made out of atoms, what is the atom made of? Atoms are made of protons, neutrons and electrons.

The core of the atom is the nucleus, which is made of protons and neutrons, electrons orbit the nucleus; my question is why it is that way?

Now, about gravity, gravity will always pull the planets into an orbit around the sun in the milky way or else each planet will move in a straight line away from the sun; why?

Gravity is what holds us on the ground and prevents everything from flying into Earth's orbit; why?

If you combine two hydrogen atoms with one oxygen atom you will always get water, why is that? why it won't come out as a rock or glass?

If you mix red, green and blue in a certain proportion you will get white. You will never get black, why not?

I'm going to ignore all this because it has nothing to do with evolution and I'm not a physicist.

Now let's move closer to your evolution theory. Before it all started you need a very well balanced environment with gravity, solid ground, air and water, minerals for food and a very well balanced temperature . Not too cold that it will freeze the cell and not too hot that it will cook or even kill the cell.

Actually, life isn't as fragile as you portray it.
Life does just fine in a range of temperatures from above boiling and well below freezing.
It does just fine without any sunlight at all or without any oxygen at all.
It survives in pressures that would crush your skull like an egg under a steam roller or in the vacuum of space itself.
Heck, it can live in acid that would burn you to death.

Life doesn't really care about what works for humans... it's not fussy.

You also need light but the sun emits harmful radiation and the sun is about 150 millions kilometers away from us. Maybe your evolution started there after which it came into the earth's orbit and made the ozone layer so it won't die from the harmful sun radiation. Then it went straight through our atmosphere at temperature of 3000'F without being cooked and down to the ocean floor where it started to split and multiply?

Actually a lot of basal microbes are just fine with high levels of UV radiation. Cyanobacteria love it and can survive quite happily with levels of UV radiation far higher than anything found on Earth today. They literally eat it up.

Also don't forget that the water in our environment needs to be preserved by making the upper atmospheric layer cold so water will be trapped inside earth's atmosphere.
Else water will escape out into space and we will all die. If you look at top of a mountain you will find it covered with ice while no ice in the middle or at the bottom
of the mountain, do you know why is this so? Once water hits the upper atmospheric layer it will condensate into clouds and then it will come back to earth in the form of rain.

And you will find microbes living there on top of the mountain happy as can be.

In fact there are microbes that live in our upper atmosphere anyway. They really don't care about the cold. There is no place on Earth that is too extreme for life to not exist there (except in molten lava itself).

For every "life needs ___" you can come up with... I can find something that lives without it.

wa:do

 

[jake0333]

painted wolf, i see that you have a dog picture as you avatar.

Do you know that we can cross breed any dog with a wolf because they have 78 chromosomes and they are genetically compatible and they also have the same DNA sequence?

It is not possible to cross breed a dog with a red fox which has a 38 chromosomes... so for humans it's impossible without extensive genetic engineering.

now the question is... who wrote the new DNA information when the cell evolved?

if evolution is not a conscious self-aware process? not just the new DNA information but who change the DNA sequence so only same spcies can reproduce?

 

[secret2]

now the question is... who wrote the new DNA information when the cell evolved?

Information? What information? You are so fixated on this mistake.

To reiterate my earlier response to this, syntax and semantics are independent for the English language. For DNA, semantics is nothing but syntax, which in turn is nothing but molecule arrangement.

 

[johnhanks]

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.

What makes you think there was an identifiable "first single cell"? Full cellularity no doubt emerged in small incremental steps, some of which we have clues to. There is much current debate between "genes first" and "metabolism first" models of abiogenesis, but no-one is proposing that a complete gene-driven metabolising cell popped into existence all at once.

 

[johnhanks]

Wow. Hit him again with all your rhetoric, why don't you? Blah blah blah. Everyone is so busy calling the poor poster stupid, no one thought to answer his question.

Why does food taste good?

Same reason sex feels good. Ancestors rewarded with pleasurable sensations from activities that promoted their survival and reproduction lived longer and left descendants. Us.

 

[ArtieE]

It is not possible to cross breed a dog with a red fox which has a 38 chromosomes... so for humans it's impossible without extensive genetic engineering.

now the question is... who wrote the new DNA information when the cell evolved?

if evolution is not a conscious self-aware process? not just the new DNA information but who change the DNA sequence so only same spcies can reproduce?

As I understand it you are saying that a genetic engineer you call a god personally sat down and designed the genome of every living thing that has ever existed up through the ages. Then he created elementary particles and assembled them into atoms and molecules until he had produced the entire genome of every different organism. And this he did from the first replicating system all the way through dinosaurs up until today. Is that correct?

 

[mycorrhiza]

So trees uses this mechanism to spread it's seeds around by temping mammals into it's tasty fruits? it took advantage of mammals to spread it's seed around?

A tree is with ears, eyes and conscious intelligent mind for it to be able to choose to do so? it can see it's surrounding environments and it can understand how to trick mammals?

evolution is with ears, eyes and conscious intelligent mind also?
Thank you for openning my eyes to the truth.

Ah, I see that you didn't bother actually reading what I wrote. The tree didn't decide to do anything, but a beneficial mutation (like giving it bigger or sweeter fruit) meant that the trees that had this mutation were more likely to spread than the ones who didn't, and thus they became dominant. If they instead got a mutation that made their fruit taste more sour or look less appealing, then they would be less likely to spread and thus probably die out.

Plants do take advantage of animals, but they don't have a mind to decide to do so. They just happened to evolve that way.

 

[johnhanks]

Plants do take advantage of animals, but they don't have a mind to decide to do so.

Absolutely. Think how hard we humans work to feed wheat plants with fertiliser, kill off their competitors and prepare the soil for their seeds; and all it has had to do in return is grow larger and more easily harvested grains*. A neutral observer from another planet could as easily conclude that wheat has domesticated humans for its own advantage as vice versa.


*And to forestall any creationist interjections, no, it doesn't need to "know" how to do this: we even do that work for it, by selecting the plants with those characteristics.

 

[savagewind]

Because you're looking at the question backwards...

Food is just dead other things... unless you suggest that fish evolved for us to eat them and for no other reason... then the fact we find them tasty is simply coincidental.

They happen to have the fats and proteins that we find "taste good" because they are made of flesh... fats and proteins.

wa:do

You would be absolutely right if there existed one, ten, a hundred things that tastes good. It might be a coincidence. But it is not the case, is it?

I understand that natural selection is a determining factor. The animals who ate because food tasted good to them lived. The animals who would not eat because the food tasted bad died. How long do you think that took? I think it must have taken much longer and with many more coincidental happenings than atheists are willing to admit.

I hear people say they cannot imagine God sitting at the desk planning out every combination of attractions. That is right. I am quite sure God did not do that.

Then how? I believe God created everything by God's very nature. God said "BECOME" and things cooperate according to God's will. Everything is the reflection of God's SELF. Matter can fall away from the Order of YHVH but substance cannot rebel successfully against it.

 

[Sunstone]

I think it must have taken much longer and with many more coincidental happenings than atheists are willing to admit.

You're talking out of your butt because you are unqualified to estimate how long it "should" have taken. Typical "internet expertise".