Evolution is illogical and non sense

[ttechsan]

Explain this to me evolutionist. In science they can explain in specific detail many functions found in nature. Photosynthesis etc. All about systems, Muscular, Nerve and it goes on. Yet evolution never can explain evolution is that type detail. You can not give one proven example of evolution of one species to another higher order species. You can't tell us what it started at and what it became. You can't explain the no. of steps it took and what each step entailed to get there. That is not like the science I am referring to above. So evolution is really non science non sense.

Plus explain this. You say An explosion of energy started all the extreme order and precision we see in creation. Yet in no other example can you give where an explosion of energy ever produces order, precision etc. When I see storms, explosions etc. Much less energy than the Big Bang supposedly had and the aftermath is anything but order, precision, intracate design etc. My logic and common sense just doesn't buy it.

Evolution says the Design we see in creation only appears designed. Well that might be correct if talking about a cloud. But we are talking about FUNCTIONAL DESIGN etc. That is a big big difference. It is what makes life possible since that Function makes life possible.

Evolution has no real thinking brain. Yet you act as if it did. It reminds me of the illustration I like to give.
Mother Nature decides to form the faces on Mt Rushmore. So it gets the forces and processes of nature to join together and uses rain, wind, erosion and time to form those faces. It shows design (we know it was) yet it isn't life. But see life not only shows Design, it is functional and makes real life possible.

In all of my life, I have yet to see where I find functional Design, Engineering, Programming etc not have intelligent brains behind it. Yet evolution tries to sell me that what we have occured w/o an actual intelligent brain behind it. Really? Like Mother Nature and the faces on Mt Rushmore?

Even atheist mathematician Fred Hoyle admitted it took intelligence and evolution was impossible. He described it thusly. The odds for evolution are the same as a tornado going through a junkyard and forming a 747 ready for take off on a runway! How did he get around the obvious intelligence needed that he acknowledged. He said it had to have come from outer space! That is sure pure science huh!

Sir Isaac Newton had an atheist friend that he couldn't convince him of God. So he went to a skilled carpenter friend. He asked him to make for him a copy to a scale of our solar system. After it was finished Sir Isaac Newton went and picked it up after paying for it. The work was exquisite. He placed it on a prominate place in his house. Not too long afterwards his atheist friend came by. He couldn't help but notice the great artistic replica of our solar system. He asked Sir Isaac Newton who made it. Newton replied No one it just appeared out of no where. The friend kept asking and Newton kept replying the same. Finally the friend got really mad. Then Sir Isaac Newton explained what he had done and the purpose for it. He told him, This is basically what you keep telling me about our solar system etc. I wanted to show you how absurd that really is. Then the friend got the point. I hope you do too.

I want examples where precise intricate Design Engineering Programming has ever occurred w/o actual intelligence behind it? Gee, if I walk upon a beach and see a cell phone, computer etc I know it took intelligence to Design, Engineer and Program it? Why can't you admit the obvious?

Dawkins the Blind watchmaker has always amused me. Why? Regardless of whether a watchmaker was blind or not. He couldn't make Design, Engineer or Program the watch w/o actual intelligent thinking brain could he?

There are two books you should read. First one is "A Closer Look at the Evidence" by Richard and Tina Kleiss and "Inspired Evidence" by Bruce Malone. They are two books that are daily readings of one page each day. They go over many areas of science etc and show how when evolution has to get specific it falls flat on its face. Ironically, when you read evolutionist own words they actually betray the truth of the fraud and horrible science it truly is.

http://www.searchforthetruth.net/

BTW isn't it interesting that man's "evolved" brain still can't match what evolution says a non thinking intelligence Designed, Engineered and Programmed. Man study's nature to learn how to better things for man and still can't match it. Yet evolution did it so much better before mankind had "evolved" yet! How silly do you think I am! Worse is what man has tried to match, Kidney, heart machines etc. Mankind can't come close to matching. Yet evolution did it better than our top of the line "evolved" brain can do! Please explain how that is possible. Mother Nature example again!

So I want logical common sense replies to disprove my logical, comon sense "evolved" brain. Stick to the subject and don't use your usual tactics of avoidance and changing the subject to avoid answering what you can't. Much less personal attacks showing you can't answer so you attack saying I don't understand evolution. See the problem is I actually do. That is why, like Fred Hoyle, I realize it is impossible and took a supreme Intelligence. Difference I acknowledge God, Jesus the actual creator God. Colossians first Chapter and part of chapter 2 and Romans chapter 1.

That is the site you can go to the purchase those books.

BTW I taught a lesson on "How to filter evolutionary teaching using their own words" last Sunday. I had it recorded. I hope to post it on You Tube fairly soon. I am not a techno person. So my friend will have to help me. He has been real sick with strep throat. So not sure when we will be able to post it.

God Bless You All.

 

[Nietzsche]

The reason everything works is because the stuff that doesn't work doesn't survive to reproduce. Evolution is the sum-total process of numberless generations being slightly different from their precursors. Those differences add up & compound over time. The changes that are beneficial, or at least harmless, get passed down. The ones that are obstructive tend to either die before reproduction or reproduce less, and across generations they are weeded out through competition with other animals and their environment.

Technically speaking you, myself, everyone is an evolutionary step, because we are slightly different from our parents, as our parents are slightly different from theirs, so on and so forth. If I were to grab one of your ancestors from 3-4,000 years ago he would look nothing like you other than being human. But you're still related. This is true at larger scales as well, only you're dealing with the collective species.

 

[NewGuyOnTheBlock]

Evolution is illogical and nonsense to you simply because you don't understand it; but your level of understanding evolution is not a statement on whether or not it is illogical and nonsense. You're level of understanding of evolution is a statement only on your level of knowledge; nothing else.

• Inability to explain the precise steps of the evolutionary process no more discredits evolution than a 14th century physician unable to explain the causes of disease discredits germ theory.
• The birth of the universe is not evolution, no matter how much you want it to be so and no matter how many theists say it is. Evolution is about biodiversity; thus evolution begins when the basic building blocks of genetic information begins; and can not begin before.
• Your argument about "functional design" fails. Learn about evolution from people who actually know about evolution and learn for yourself why this argument fails.
• Fred Hoyle makes a false comparison. He is comparing biology to weather phenomenon. Ridiculous. The same goes for the tired arguments about Mount Rushmore (since when do we apply the laws of erosion to the laws of biology?). The same goes for computer programs writing themselves. But you may want to rethink using that one b/c we are making a lot of progress in the field of Artificial Intelligence. In time, computer programs (possibly "artificial intelligence" will be able to write other computer programs.
  
• Isaac's little tidbit of the solar system (provided the story is even true) doesn't cut the cake either. Once again, an apologist wants evolutionary biologists to explain the origin of everything. Evolution is about biodiversity; not about the formation of our solar system.

Since you have "learned" about evolution from this perspective, this video series should serve you well at starting your journey towards true understanding of Evolution; as this series does much to explain Evolution starting with where you are now:

 

[dust1n]

Explain this to me evolutionist. In science they can explain in specific detail many functions found in nature. Photosynthesis etc. All about systems, Muscular, Nerve and it goes on. Yet evolution never can explain evolution is that type detail.

What type of detail?

 

[dust1n]

In science they can explain in specific detail many functions found in nature. Photosynthesis etc.

"The modern synthesis bridged the gap between the work of experimental geneticists and naturalists, and paleontologists. It states that:[3][4][5]

1. All evolutionary phenomena can be explained in a way consistent with known genetic mechanisms and the observational evidence of naturalists.
2. Evolution is gradual: small genetic changes regulated by natural selection accumulate over long periods. Discontinuities amongst species (or other taxa) are explained as originating gradually through geographical separation and extinction. This theory contrasts with the saltation theory of Bateson (1894).[6]
3. Natural selection is by far the main mechanism of change; even slight advantages are important when continued. The object of selection is the phenotype in its surrounding environment.
4. The role of genetic drift is equivocal. Though strongly supported initially by Dobzhansky, it was downgraded later as results from ecological genetics were obtained.
5. Thinking in terms of populations, rather than individuals, is primary: the genetic diversity existing in natural populations is a key factor in evolution. The strength of natural selection in the wild is greater than previously expected; the effect of ecological factors such as niche occupation and the significance of barriers to gene flow are all important.
6. In palaeontology, the ability to explain historical observations by extrapolation from microevolution to macroevolution is proposed. Historical contingency means explanations at different levels may exist. Gradualism does not mean constant rate of change."
   
   Modern evolutionary synthesis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
   
   
   Which of these do you feel isn't strongly supported by scientific evidence?

 

[Sapiens]

Explain this to me evolutionist. In science they can explain in specific detail many functions found in nature. Photosynthesis etc. All about systems, Muscular, Nerve and it goes on. Yet evolution never can explain evolution is that type detail. You can not give one proven example of evolution of one species to another higher order species. You can't tell us what it started at and what it became. You can't explain the no. of steps it took and what each step entailed to get there. That is not like the science I am referring to above. So evolution is really non science non sense.

Let us begin on a properly pedantic note, the word is "nonsense," not "non sense."

You are simply wrong, there are many clear examples of speciation. But to properly answer your question you must provide a clear defintion of "species" and "higher order species."

Plus explain this. You say An explosion of energy started all the extreme order and precision we see in creation. Yet in no other example can you give where an explosion of energy ever produces order, precision etc. When I see storms, explosions etc. Much less energy than the Big Bang supposedly had and the aftermath is anything but order, precision, intracate design etc. My logic and common sense just doesn't buy it.

It is unclear what you want explained and how it relates to evolution.

Evolution says the Design we see in creation only appears designed. Well that might be correct if talking about a cloud. But we are talking about FUNCTIONAL DESIGN etc. That is a big big difference. It is what makes life possible since that Function makes life possible.

So? the "design" (if you must call it that) is provided by natural selection.

Evolution has no real thinking brain. Yet you act as if it did. It reminds me of the illustration I like to give.
Mother Nature decides to form the faces on Mt Rushmore. So it gets the forces and processes of nature to join together and uses rain, wind, erosion and time to form those faces. It shows design (we know it was) yet it isn't life. But see life not only shows Design, it is functional and makes real life possible.

No one "acts" as if evolution has a "thinking" brain. Mutation provides the raw material and natural selection filters it into winners and losers.

In all of my life, I have yet to see where I find functional Design, Engineering, Programming etc not have intelligent brains behind it. Yet evolution tries to sell me that what we have occured w/o an actual intelligent brain behind it. Really? Like Mother Nature and the faces on Mt Rushmore?

All your life you have been blinded and blinkered by preconceived notions and have been unable to see the actual world around you. As far as Mt. Rushmore is concerned, that is a specious analogy, attempting to compare a man made physical feature that we actually know the mechanisms by which it was created with a living and organically reacting system. You see the work of God in everything because you are assuming that because there must have been a creator for the carvings on Mt. Rushmore then by extension – and a fallacy in logical deduction – so too must the wonder/beauty and complex nature of life have a creator, But it ain't necessarily so, you've fallen into the teleological trap.

wiki: A teleology is any philosophical account that holds that final causes exist in nature, meaning that design and purpose analogous to that found in human actions are inherent also in the rest of nature.


A teleological or design argument is an a posteriori argument for the existence of God based on apparent design and purpose in the universe. The argument is based on an interpretation of teleology wherein purpose and design appear to exist in nature beyond the scope of any such human activities. The teleological argument suggests that, given this premise, the existence of a designer can be assumed, typically presented as God.

Even atheist mathematician Fred Hoyle admitted it took intelligence and evolution was impossible. He described it thusly. The odds for evolution are the same as a tornado going through a junkyard and forming a 747 ready for take off on a runway! How did he get around the obvious intelligence needed that he acknowledged. He said it had to have come from outer space! That is sure pure science huh!

That's just the Mt. Rushmore teleology redux.

Sir Isaac Newton had an atheist friend that he couldn't convince him of God. So he went to a skilled carpenter friend. He asked him to make for him a copy to a scale of our solar system. After it was finished Sir Isaac Newton went and picked it up after paying for it. The work was exquisite. He placed it on a prominate place in his house. Not too long afterwards his atheist friend came by. He couldn't help but notice the great artistic replica of our solar system. He asked Sir Isaac Newton who made it. Newton replied No one it just appeared out of no where. The friend kept asking and Newton kept replying the same. Finally the friend got really mad. Then Sir Isaac Newton explained what he had done and the purpose for it. He told him, This is basically what you keep telling me about our solar system etc. I wanted to show you how absurd that really is. Then the friend got the point. I hope you do too.

I want examples where precise intricate Design Engineering Programming has ever occurred w/o actual intelligence behind it? Gee, if I walk upon a beach and see a cell phone, computer etc I know it took intelligence to Design, Engineer and Program it? Why can't you admit the obvious?
[/quote]The story is false, it's source is a JW tract: gh (1976)chap. 6 p. 54 par. 10 The Source of Good News—“God”. The analogy fails for the same reasons as Mt. Rushmore and the 747. Try again with something that was not made up out of the whole cloth.

Dawkins the Blind watchmaker has always amused me. Why? Regardless of whether a watchmaker was blind or not. He couldn't make Design, Engineer or Program the watch w/o actual intelligent thinking brain could he?

Clearly you did not read it or perhaps you tried to but did not understand it.

There are two books you should read. First one is "A Closer Look at the Evidence" by Richard and Tina Kleiss and "Inspired Evidence" by Bruce Malone. They are two books that are daily readings of one page each day. They go over many areas of science etc and show how when evolution has to get specific it falls flat on its face. Ironically, when you read evolutionist own words they actually betray the truth of the fraud and horrible science it truly is.

Every single claim that the Kleisses make is clearly debunked in Talk.Origins, just use the search function, the same goes for Malone's trash. Try taking that one page a day, posting the claim here and permit me to show you how wrong it is. It would take only a few minutes out of my day.

BTW isn't it interesting that man's "evolved" brain still can't match what evolution says a non thinking intelligence Designed, Engineered and Programmed. Man study's nature to learn how to better things for man and still can't match it. Yet evolution did it so much better before mankind had "evolved" yet! How silly do you think I am! Worse is what man has tried to match, Kidney, heart machines etc. Mankind can't come close to matching. Yet evolution did it better than our top of the line "evolved" brain can do! Please explain how that is possible. Mother Nature example again!

Perhaps it is a second language issue, but this paragraph is almost indecipherable. Could you reword it please?

So I want logical common sense replies to disprove my logical, comon sense "evolved" brain. Stick to the subject and don't use your usual tactics of avoidance and changing the subject to avoid answering what you can't. Much less personal attacks showing you can't answer so you attack saying I don't understand evolution. See the problem is I actually do. That is why, like Fred Hoyle, I realize it is impossible and took a supreme Intelligence. Difference I acknowledge God, Jesus the actual creator God. Colossians first Chapter and part of chapter 2 and Romans chapter 1.

Logical fallacy: argument from ignorance.

BTW I taught a lesson on "How to filter evolutionary teaching using their own words" last Sunday. I had it recorded. I hope to post it on You Tube fairly soon. I am not a techno person. So my friend will have to help me. He has been real sick with strep throat. So not sure when we will be able to post it.

God Bless You All.

Be careful with those strep throats, untreated they can result in kidney failure.

 

[outhouse]

So evolution is really non science non sense.

Ridiculous statement based on your own ignorance to biology and the scientific methodology that explains such.

Sir. Evolution is fact. Its not up for debate because you know nothing about it.


Gravity is fact but we cannot explain it in full either. How do you explain that with your uneducated fallacies???????????????

 

[Monk Of Reason]

Oh this is delightful.

Explain this to me evolutionist. In science they can explain in specific detail many functions found in nature. Photosynthesis etc. All about systems, Muscular, Nerve and it goes on. Yet evolution never can explain evolution is that type detail. You can not give one proven example of evolution of one species to another higher order species. You can't tell us what it started at and what it became. You can't explain the no. of steps it took and what each step entailed to get there. That is not like the science I am referring to above. So evolution is really non science non sense.

All of the above is false. We have just as much intricate detail in our understanding of the process of evolution as we do of many functions we see in biology today. In fact only through the lens of evolution do many of these functions make sense. Prior to even really starting in on this debate you've shown a lack of understanding of evolution. The very springboard of this post is meaningless fluff that isn't founded in the real world. I mean go to google and type in some of your questions that you don't understand. Then click on non-creationists sources and I'm willing to bet almost if not all of them will have detailed and professional answers for your questions. Instead I get the feeling your trying to do a "gotcha!" for evolution.

Plus explain this. You say An explosion of energy started all the extreme order and precision we see in creation. Yet in no other example can you give where an explosion of energy ever produces order, precision etc. When I see storms, explosions etc. Much less energy than the Big Bang supposedly had and the aftermath is anything but order, precision, intracate design etc. My logic and common sense just doesn't buy it.

While the big bang is the current theory of how the universe was brought to its current form it is far from being the driving force of life. I don't see you questioning planets and suns having come from an explosion.

Evolution says the Design we see in creation only appears designed. Well that might be correct if talking about a cloud. But we are talking about FUNCTIONAL DESIGN etc. That is a big big difference. It is what makes life possible since that Function makes life possible.

Function does not require design. Simple as that. And I don't know of any design in nature.

Evolution has no real thinking brain. Yet you act as if it did. It reminds me of the illustration I like to give.
Mother Nature decides to form the faces on Mt Rushmore. So it gets the forces and processes of nature to join together and uses rain, wind, erosion and time to form those faces. It shows design (we know it was) yet it isn't life. But see life not only shows Design, it is functional and makes real life possible.

This is based off of common misunderstandings and misinformations. Are you just regurgitating what your preacher told you?

In all of my life, I have yet to see where I find functional Design, Engineering, Programming etc not have intelligent brains behind it. Yet evolution tries to sell me that what we have occured w/o an actual intelligent brain behind it. Really? Like Mother Nature and the faces on Mt Rushmore?

Perhaps this is because design is actually defined by the fact that it had a designer and is in contrast to what we find naturally. Naturally occuring things are not considered design regardless of functionality or complexity.

Even atheist mathematician Fred Hoyle admitted it took intelligence and evolution was impossible. He described it thusly. The odds for evolution are the same as a tornado going through a junkyard and forming a 747 ready for take off on a runway! How did he get around the obvious intelligence needed that he acknowledged. He said it had to have come from outer space! That is sure pure science huh!

doubtful. But please source your quotemine so I can find it in the correct context.

Sir Isaac Newton had an atheist friend that he couldn't convince him of God. So he went to a skilled carpenter friend. He asked him to make for him a copy to a scale of our solar system. After it was finished Sir Isaac Newton went and picked it up after paying for it. The work was exquisite. He placed it on a prominate place in his house. Not too long afterwards his atheist friend came by. He couldn't help but notice the great artistic replica of our solar system. He asked Sir Isaac Newton who made it. Newton replied No one it just appeared out of no where. The friend kept asking and Newton kept replying the same. Finally the friend got really mad. Then Sir Isaac Newton explained what he had done and the purpose for it. He told him, This is basically what you keep telling me about our solar system etc. I wanted to show you how absurd that really is. Then the friend got the point. I hope you do too.

This sounds like a bull**** story someone made up to try and make themselves seem smart by having Issac newton on their side. Issac newton never once invoked god in any of his scientific findings. The only times he ever did was when he didn't understand something and even those things were later found out to be "not god".

I want examples where precise intricate Design Engineering Programming has ever occurred w/o actual intelligence behind it? Gee, if I walk upon a beach and see a cell phone, computer etc I know it took intelligence to Design, Engineer and Program it? Why can't you admit the obvious?

Life. Organisms, river systems, weather, continental plates.

Dawkins the Blind watchmaker has always amused me. Why? Regardless of whether a watchmaker was blind or not. He couldn't make Design, Engineer or Program the watch w/o actual intelligent thinking brain could he?

Probably not but life is not a watch. complexity has little to do with design.

There are two books you should read. First one is "A Closer Look at the Evidence" by Richard and Tina Kleiss and "Inspired Evidence" by Bruce Malone. They are two books that are daily readings of one page each day. They go over many areas of science etc and show how when evolution has to get specific it falls flat on its face. Ironically, when you read evolutionist own words they actually betray the truth of the fraud and horrible science it truly is.

http://www.searchforthetruth.net/

I'll think about reading it. But usually when I read creationist books they are filled with so much misinformation and logical fallacies that it makes me want to burn it. How people can stand there and say baseless lies and worse BELIEVE IT.

BTW isn't it interesting that man's "evolved" brain still can't match what evolution says a non thinking intelligence Designed, Engineered and Programmed. Man study's nature to learn how to better things for man and still can't match it. Yet evolution did it so much better before mankind had "evolved" yet! How silly do you think I am! Worse is what man has tried to match, Kidney, heart machines etc. Mankind can't come close to matching. Yet evolution did it better than our top of the line "evolved" brain can do! Please explain how that is possible. Mother Nature example again!

The fact that a process that has occured for billions of years has finally created a creature that has the mental capacity to do what we do and it surprises you that the product of such a processes has a hard time matching up to the process itself? You can be surprised all you want but it changes nothing.

So I want logical common sense replies to disprove my logical, comon sense "evolved" brain. Stick to the subject and don't use your usual tactics of avoidance and changing the subject to avoid answering what you can't. Much less personal attacks showing you can't answer so you attack saying I don't understand evolution. See the problem is I actually do. That is why, like Fred Hoyle, I realize it is impossible and took a supreme Intelligence. Difference I acknowledge God, Jesus the actual creator God. Colossians first Chapter and part of chapter 2 and Romans chapter 1.

Common sense is often wrong as many findings are counter intuitive. Is that common sense enough for you? Or are you bound and determined that god is the only answer ever?

That is the site you can go to the purchase those books.

I refuse to line the pockets of charlatans and liars.

BTW I taught a lesson on "How to filter evolutionary teaching using their own words" last Sunday. I had it recorded. I hope to post it on You Tube fairly soon. I am not a techno person. So my friend will have to help me. He has been real sick with strep throat. So not sure when we will be able to post it.

When you do I'll watch it. I won't click adds but I'll watch it. But the fact that you don't seen to even have an elementary understanding of evolution lends me to the belief that you won't be able to effectively use evolutionary vocabulary at a level necessary to do anything other than humiliate yourself. I hope I'm wrong but we'll see.

God Bless You All.

Hail Satan Brother. Hail Satan.

 

[Jumi]

Evolution doesn't deal with Big Bang.

 

[`mud]

SERIOUSLY.........AGAIN ????
~
'mud

 

[Acintya_Ash]

My logic and common sense just doesn't buy it.

Don't work your heard too much around it, Evolution is not oxygen that you cannot breathe without it. Its just a theory, an inductive speculation based on certain amount of evidences. Believe what comforts you, there's nothing wrong in that, just don't force yourself, let things happen naturally. Believing in God didn't comfort Darwin so he looked up for Alternative and ended up proposing Evolution.
Here's an inspiring quote that i lately read:
"You can either agree or disagree but you can't make conclusions. Any conclusion is mere reflection of your own experiences of life, surroundings,upbringing since the day your mind was introduced to this world which will make you biased regardless of anything else. First lift yourself from your biased mind then you will be a better visionary."

 

[Valjean]

Ttechsan, your post makes it clear that you really don't understand the first thing about the Theory of Evolution.
Before you decide you don't buy it, look into what it actually says.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

It's like someone discussing Star Wars who has never watched any of the movies.
Like someone who has never watched Star Trek trying to debate a Trekkie on Star Trek.
The misunderstandings of science are just as obvious as a non-programmer trying to debate coding with a programmer.

 

[NewGuyOnTheBlock]

Don't work your heard too much around it, Evolution is not oxygen that you cannot breathe without it. Its just a theory, an inductive speculation based on certain amount of evidences. Believe what comforts you, there's nothing wrong in that, just don't force yourself, let things happen naturally. Believing in God didn't comfort Darwin so he looked up for Alternative and ended up proposing Evolution.
Here's an inspiring quote that i lately read:
"You can either agree or disagree but you can't make conclusions. Any conclusion is mere reflection of your own experiences of life, surroundings,upbringing since the day your mind was introduced to this world which will make you biased regardless of anything else. First lift yourself from your biased mind then you will be a better visionary."

I couldn't disagree more; first from minimizing the vast amounts of data affirming Evolution to mere "inductive speculation"; and second, "believing what comforts you" without looking at the facts. Much harm has been done by people "believing what comforts them" (such as, I don't need to take my daughter to the doctor; I don't believe that, God is going to heal her, that comforts me, so that is what I will believe); and third, conclusions being nothing more than subjective.

It is always those who either don't know or don't understand evolution (or both) who are the ones always denying it. This would be a good time to "free oneself" from a biased mind and ponder what that is telling you ... that it's always those who either don't know or don't understand evolution (or both) who are the ones always denying it.

 

[Acintya_Ash]

without looking at the facts.

the so-called Evidences are just plea, for convincing the public.
there are no facts only interpretations ~ Friedrich Nietzsche

I don't need to take my daughter to the doctor; I don't believe that, God is going to heal her, that comforts me, so that is what I will believe

I addressed that in a moderate tone, please don't take extreme examples Our conscience can guide us quite well.

It is always those who either don't know or don't understand evolution (or both) who are the ones always denying it

Honestly, i don't understand evolution since i skipped Biology at my high school.

 

[NewGuyOnTheBlock]

If you do not understand evolution, then how can you make this claim:

the so-called Evidences are just plea, for convincing the public."

 

[ttechsan]

I am going to give you just one example from the two books I discussed. This will illustrate exactly what I have discussed. When specific evolution falls completely apart. These two books have 365 daily examples. One for each day. So with both books if you dare to get them. You can't read them and stay fooled any longer. There are many other ones even better. I just picked the one I read today.

Did you know the African Gazelle has a radiator in his nose? When chased by a lion, the African gazelle can reach speeds up to 50 mph. This raises the gazelle's body temperature. However, when scientist measured the temperature of the gazelle's brain after extreme exertion, they found the temperature to be remarkably low. Scientist were surprised to find out that the gazelle has its own totally unique blood cooling system.

Before the gazelle's blood goes to the brain it passes through a cool pool of blood near the nasal cavity. This allows the gazelle to be "cool blooded" in the heat of flight from a lion. How long did it take a gazelle to come up with this radiator in its nose? Picture this: Mr. Gazelle is being chased by a lion w/o the radiator, he boils his brain and dies. If he slows down (in order to not overheat) he is caught by the lion and dies. Either way, unless everything is in place, from the start he dies. (Extinction occurs since due to survival of the fittest there wasn't time to develop this by random trial and error) It had to all work from the start to survive!

What Mr. Gazelle needed was a radiator allowing him to escape predatory animals. And that is what the Master Designer gave him. It was preprogrammed into the gazelle at the time of creation and ready for future environments after the fall when he would become a meal for lions. God thought of everything in advance.

See evolution can't and doesn't have the time nor brain to allow, before extinction, of animals for situations like this.

You do realize with Natural Selection there is a big big problem. Lets just use the Finch for example. The Finch adapted. Yet evolution can't tell us what it started as and what it evolved to as higher order species. Here is the problem. It adapted to its environment. Once adapted, just beak size due to moisture, it was now "fittest" for survival as the Finch had adapted to but never became a non higher order non Finch. It always remained a Finch.

Yet evolution says now it was the start of a long process of evolving to become more fit. Why? It was already "fittest" due to its adaptation. You do realize it has gone back and forth on beak size right? It had no need to adapt or evolve now did it? So now any additional changes until it got to whatever it was going to become, which we don't know. Each step of the way, It was now "unfittest" for survival of the fittest. Each step of the way until the ultimate "goal" which evolution's non brain didn't even know. It lacked something during each stage and every one of those stages until complete. So it goes from FITTEST to UNFIT and vulnerable each step, whatever each step entailed, and the no. of steps we don't know. Until it got to its new higher order species. Yet real science can tell me each step of photosythesis, what they entail etc. True for so much other process etc. Evolution can't do it for evolution like other real science processes and systems, like muscular, nervous and so so and so forth

So now the supposed Finch is working against its own survival. Survival of the fittest. It is moving from fittest to unfit each step, whatever it entails and however many they are until it reaches its new higher order species. That problem exists for everything that you say evolved.

You say I don't understand it. I say you are willfully blind. I asked for answers to my questions. I get none but as I said I would. I get told I don't understand it. But since you do so well then enlighten me and explain each step and give me ONE proven example and explain each step and how many steps for ONE evolved species. Gee, the rest of science can get real specific. Evolution as "scientific fact" can't! Why not? Because as Dr. Lewontin admits, It is fraud and just so stories and not honest true science.

I can come back on here the days my health allows and quote from those two books validating my points. I dare anyone to buy them and then disprove them and prove evolution is true.

Your problem is you are emotionally invested in your atheism so you are willfully ignoring the obvious. I am highly educated and highly analytical with common sense and logic. I don't have enough faith to believe as you do!

When I look around, I look and I have no other option but to acknowledge a superior power intelligence far above what we have. That is common sense and logic. The experience in all I see in the world validates that to me. You can't give me one example to prove otherwise. I keep asking and never get one. Why? Because there isn't any. You know it but won't admit it

 

[psychoslice]

I think if the title was "religion is illogical and non sense" then it would have made sense.

 

[outhouse]

. I just picked the one I read today.

It is a book of pseudoscience that is considered garbage.

It carries no academic credibility.


Its why you did not provide any sources. Because you have no credible source here. Just apologetic rhetoric

 

[outhouse]

When specific evolution falls completely apart.

Sir. Evolution is fact. Its not up for debate because you know nothing about it.