How do you define evolution?

[YoursTrue]

The better question is, why did your God create a bunch of creatures that couldn't survive on the earth "He" created for them?
How come 99.9 of all living creatures that have ever lived on earth have gone extinct, if all of this is so well designed by the God you worship?

HOWEVER, I will say that it is likely and possible that within the "kinds," He allowed things to happen.

 

[YoursTrue]

I'm sorry, but you don't get to decide what is evolution and what isn't.

I'm still waiting for you to respond to my points about genetics and relatedness. Still.

Thinking about the brain (and this related), let's just say that it is said that zebras are aggressive. And when a zebra mates with a donkey, it is said the zedonk can be very aggressive, therefore unsafe towards humans. Let's take that in the matter of genetics. Can aggressive traits be passed on to progeny (human)? Apparently, yes. Same with docile traits. But this is not evolution because -- humans remain humans. Want to argue that? Evolution means different things to different people. I answered you as far as genetics and relatedness. I would think that genetics of gorillas have a bit of a gap between genetics of humans where the breach cannot be put together.

 

[YoursTrue]

5th time

Quote any scientific reference that I have denied

Or else apologize for your lies and false accusations

Again -- he doesn't have to because he's shunyadragon.

 

[YoursTrue]

OK, good. Now, on to what radioactivity is.

There are three common forms of radioactivity: alpha, beta, and gamma rays. They two main ones we will be interested in are alpha and beta. All are *nuclear* reactions, happening in the nucleus and not with the electrons.

Ok...

Alpha radiation tends to happen in nuclei that have a lot of protons and a lot of neutrons. In it, the nucleus emits two protons and two neutrons as a single small nucleus, thereby changing itself into a different element. So, for example, U-238, an isotope of uranium, has 92 protons and 146 neutrons in its nucleus. After emitting an alpha particle (2 protons, and 2 neutrons), the new nucleus will have 90 protons and 144 neutrons, making it a nucleus of thorium-234.

Similarly, a Radium-226 nucleus will emit an alpha particle, starting with 88 protons and 138 neutrons and ending with 86 protons and 136 neutrons, which is a nucleus of Radon-222.

Like I said, alpha decay generally happens when there are both too many protons and too many neutrons for a nucleus to be stable. By eliminating two of each, it becomes *more* stable, but may still be radioactive.

Beta decay is a bit stranger. It happens when the number of neutrons is more than is required for stability, but the number of protons is about right. In beta decay, one of the neutrons turns into a proton and an electron is emitted (the beta particle). So, the number of neutrons goes down by one and the number of protons goes up by one.

An example is the decay of thorium-234 above. It starts with 90m protons and 144 neutrons and ends up with 91 protons and 143 neutrons. This is a nucleus of Protactinium-234.

Another example of this type of decay is that of carbon-14. It starts with 6 protons and 8 neutrons. After a beta decay, it will have 7 protons and 7 neutrons, leaving a Nitrogen-14 nucleus.

A third type of decay is called 'electron capture' and is, essentially, the reverse of beta decay: a proton 'captures' an electron surrounding the nucleus and changes into a neutron. For example, Potassium-40 can capture an electron and become Argon-40 OR it can go through beta decay and end with 20 protons and 20 neutrons, giving a calcium-40 nucleus.

One key thing here is that all of these happen in the nucleus, which is very small compared to the whole atom AND is surrounded by as many electrons as there were protons to start with. This means that ordinary chemistry doesn't have an effect on when these decays happen. Putting the atom under pressure doesn't affect the decay. Being hot or cold doesn't affect it (unless it is so hot that ALL of the electrons are pulled away, which can affect electron capture---but the temperatures required are hotter than the surface of the sun).

This is important: each type of isotope has its own rate of radioactive decay that depends on how many protons and neutrons are in the nucleus. The chemical environment, the temperature, the pressure, etc DO NOT AFFECT the rate of decay AT ALL. This has been verified with many different isotopes under a wide range of conditions.

Another important point: the atom before decay is chemically different than the one after decay. This is important because it is the chemical properties that determine what sorts of crystals the atom will join in and thereby what sorts of rocks it will be seen in. We can use this chemical information to know which atoms were NOT there when the crystal solidified: they would have been excluded by the chemical properties of the crystal.

Are we good so far?

Yes, I'm lost. I got lost somewhere between the alpha and other stuff and what constitutes radioactivity, so I'm out. Thank you for trying to explain it to me, maybe when I get older. I did, however, learn more about seeing through an electron microscope. One day I'm going to get a good beginner microscope. But then I'll probably need better glasses. Not making fun of this, telling you the truth as I see it. In the meantime, thanks for trying to explain to me, but as I said, I got lost at the beginning. Maybe one day I'll be up to it. Or you'll be up to starting with the a'b'c's to me because it's worse than learning a foreign language for me, which is hard enough. Some people learn different things at different paces. Genetics, I suppose. Again though, thank you for your patience, I'll try to follow subsequent conversations.

 

[Polymath257]

Ok...


Yes, I'm lost. I got lost somewhere between the alpha and other stuff and what constitutes radioactivity, so I'm out. Thank you for trying to explain it to me, maybe when I get older. I did, however, learn more about seeing through an electron microscope. One day I'm going to get a good beginner microscope. But then I'll probably need better glasses. Not making fun of this, telling you the truth as I see it. In the meantime, thanks for trying to explain to me, but as I said, I got lost at the beginning. Maybe one day I'll be up to it. Or you'll be up to starting with the a'b'c's to me because it's worse than learning a foreign language for me, which is hard enough. Some people learn different things at different paces. Genetics, I suppose. Again though, thank you for your patience, I'll try to follow subsequent conversations.

Well, we can go back to where you got lost. Did you understand about the composition of atoms? Electrons and nuclei? About what nuclei are made of and how the number of protons determines the chemical element?

 

[rational experiences]

Science sees patterns fallen on the ground and says their God is the alien.

We know he says we read the signs.

Human greed. I already own all powers of God the earth form in science. Now I will own the spatial form as the richest humans ever.

Outcome to have a state no other human ever owned.

As personal human life. Human status is involved first. In any choice or in any belief. Yet the thinker not owner says when I never existed as the owner. Ignored conscious advice.

Lies.

Patterns are falling in the same one inherited condition.

Variations he says. On the ground.

O God earth is a huge variable body. Cooling wanders and is interactive ever changing. The state is one only. Cooling.

O God earth Multi variables.
Evolution of form in space is science stating cooling.

As the topic is science only and science told science evolution was why variations existed in science.

Which has nothing at all to do with natural presence.

On earth after dinosaur death earths ice yearly began the stable new birth spirit gas cooling remassing via ice.

One state. One body. One form. Cooling multi forms into remassing only and not consuming. Same gases however.

Science pyramid God thesis only was in olden days. Scientists who say I know today. Yet humans were living and present not practicing science first.

God theists.

Science of holy brother said ice saved life as he was living involved in ice changing. Life living was sacrificed to discuss ice saviour holiness of the heavenly body.

Why dinosaur life never returned. Different life forms hotter heavens.

Spiritual humans state new pre owned spirit bodies if each new life came out of the eternal direct into manifested returned life.

As earths heavens changed back to what it once existed as. Cooler gas mass.

Water oxygen our heavenly bio life condition.

For a metal to be a metal above ground first it is converted from a particle into a cold metal. In water oxygen.

We are not any machine. Our life came directly out of a higher body the eternal body. Not 0 zero womb. Which is defined 0 womb as it cooled.

Empty space a womb.

Empty space not a science maths equation.
Humans never came out of empty space as a mathematical equation.

Science never knew.

Science uses and observes only what it chooses to discuss as a human.

Who pretend they don't exist yet when they are already present. Their thesis our destroyer.

Reason if they tried to eradicate genesis human presence to observe it in its living form first we don't come back. To say must learn a human anti position placing human in words before anti.

If they attack human form see it sacrificed and heal life returns to its pre owned presence human natural life. No data for an occultist.

Human known conscious advice was their mind wandering by AI feedback does not remain stable with self to tell any truth.

Wood combusted in past nature garden cooling imaged feedback as it wandered as wood images wandered. Man never built wood or an ark. They were irradiated brain affected.

Nature garden combusting was imaged cooling wandering feedback as the cause effect of life being attacked in UFO sciences of God.

Man in science confession I built the attack. Lucky life was saved as it was sacrificed.

Wood combusting attacked anywhere on earth wandered feedback. Wooden ark theme travelling in a combustion bush burning cause.

In life nature of wood had kept life safe. A life support.

Science in human presence combusted it.

Why it travelled in psyche advice. Cooling of wood saved life yet it never should have burnt. Not even pondered as relative advice.

Flooding of earths gases a state that saved life from irradiation fallout. Flooding a science status how the heavens had saved life.

As human scientific advice only.

So when humans travel inside a once burning metal mineral melt machine mass cooled by water oxygen by human design and leave earth inside a machine of gods radiation proved you never began as any alien.

Science determined God thesis from evil to form. False.

Based on giant dinosaurs were evil giants. Mind of theist is proven it wanders using evil data of the past non human presence.

They were irradiated first then snap frozen.

The ideal of we are not dinosaurs or never were dinosaurs now we are safe as humans is first advice.

No theory in between.

Yet we would die just like dinosaur in what you equated was the earth's gas atmosphere to dinosaur living pre history.

As theists do return dead things back into life by maths equations terms. Falsely. The warning.

Once he said never use zero in any term as it is not a number and is false.

How why maths science no mystery had life destroyed. Science never knew. It pretends it knows via cult ego human expressed ideals.

Always just a natural human first pretending. Just words.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I do read books about history from time to time. (Yes, time is limited...) I see many say that there is yet much to be discovered. And which they absolutely do not know about, meaning cities, civilizations, etc. So thanks for your comment which is apparently and obviously true. Anyway, that discovery about the town in Egypt is surely interesting.

I wonder how they concluded it was a Christian settlement, since there are no videos, photos or eyewitnesses?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Polymath, I appreciate your considerate responses. However, it seems to me that if there were ecological problems with the survival of an animal (or plant, I would say), the evolution couldn't be fast enough to enable them to survive. That's my opinion, of course, and I'm willing to look at the opposing opinion.

That is a good point. There are conditions which cannot be overcome by evolution and the end result is extinction. A catastrophic event can be beyond the scope of variation and selection to overcome. The Chicxulub impact 65 million years ago was an event that changed conditions so quickly that the dominant groups of organisms could not survive it.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Don't you understand? He's not going to -- because -- he knows what he knows and knows you don't. (Don't you get it?) And moreover, he is NOT going to explain anything.

This is not true at all.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

HOWEVER, I will say that it is likely and possible that within the "kinds," He allowed things to happen.

Of course, no one knows what 'kinds' means. So claiming that something was allowed within 'kinds' is meaningless.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Thinking about the brain (and this related), let's just say that it is said that zebras are aggressive. And when a zebra mates with a donkey, it is said the zedonk can be very aggressive, therefore unsafe towards humans. Let's take that in the matter of genetics. Can aggressive traits be passed on to progeny (human)? Apparently, yes. Same with docile traits. But this is not evolution because -- humans remain humans. Want to argue that? Evolution means different things to different people. I answered you as far as genetics and relatedness. I would think that genetics of gorillas have a bit of a gap between genetics of humans where the breach cannot be put together.

Heritable traits are a part of evolution. Evolution is not just phylogenesis. In science, evolution means change in populations over time. It does not say that the change has to be dramatic. You are just using that as a false means to dismiss facts and valid conclusions that you reject for belief only and without any other reason.

A small portion of the genes of gorillas and humans are different. However, the science employed in study these genes is the same. The genetics that occurs is the same. Genetics is another subject that you do not understand.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Again -- he doesn't have to because he's shunyadragon.

People explain things on here all the time to creationists. Creationists just ignore the explanations and claim there is no evidence, even after being shown the evidence and having it explained.

I am curious. In my view of Christianity, encouraging false witness is the same as bearing false witness. Is your understanding different than that?

 

[YoursTrue]

. I do not take anyone's word for anything that contradicts what the Bible says.
I do not agree with everyone's interpretation of what the Bible says.
Some things are figurative, such as the word 'day' as used in the creative days in Genesis, because it obviously does not mean a 24-hour period as we see time. Although some people think it does mean that.
There are many questions as to the construct of the idea of evolution.
I wasn't there when it happened.
I didn't know when I was conceived.
I don't know everything.
I feel certain that life did not come about by itself, i.e., without an intelligent force behind what is called life. Or things. I mean, rocks are generally not considered to be alive, but they did not make themselves. We could go on about that,such as avalanches and mudslides, but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm saying that however the surface of the earth happened, and is happening, that is not the type of evolution I am talking about. Suffice it to say that I don't believe 'light' just happens either, or that the mountains and seas came about without an intelligent force behind however they 'happened.'
I can't explain the precise how's. (Neither can evolutionists explain how molecules, dna, chromosomes, cells, came about OR how or why mutations occur. They may try, but they really cannot explain how molecules were formed and continue.)
And although I recognize the finding of dna, I do not believe it substantiates the theory that living things just happened to happen.
Do I believe that God causes mutations? No.
Do I believe that mutations occur? Yes.
Do I believe He allows them? Yes.
And I leave it at that for the moment.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

. I do not take anyone's word for anything that contradicts what the Bible says.
I do not agree with everyone's interpretation of what the Bible says.
Some things are figurative, such as the word 'day' as used in the creative days in Genesis, because it obviously does not mean a 24-hour period as we see time. Although some people think it does mean that.
There are many questions as to the construct of the idea of evolution.
I wasn't there when it happened.
I didn't know when I was conceived.
I don't know everything.
I feel certain that life did not come about by itself, i.e., without an intelligent force behind what is called life. Or things. I mean, rocks are generally not considered to be alive, but they did not make themselves. We could go on about that,such as avalanches and mudslides, but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm saying that however the surface of the earth happened, and is happening, that is not the type of evolution I am talking about. Suffice it to say that I don't believe 'light' just happens either, or that the mountains and seas came about without an intelligent force behind however they 'happened.'
I can't explain the precise how's. (Neither can evolutionists explain how molecules, dna, chromosomes, cells, came about OR how or why mutations occur. They may try, but they really cannot explain how molecules were formed and continue.)
And although I recognize the finding of dna, I do not believe it substantiates the theory that living things just happened to happen.
Do I believe that God causes mutations? No.
Do I believe that mutations occur? Yes.
Do I believe He allows them? Yes.
And I leave it at that for the moment.

Is it in your considered opinion that we should give up a scientific basis for treating a disease like leprosy and follow the recommendations of the Bible and smear the victims with dove blood? Modern medicine contradicts that recommendation of the Bible.

 

[YoursTrue]

People explain things on here all the time to creationists. Creationists just ignore the explanations and claim there is no evidence, even after being shown the evidence and having it explained.

I am curious. In my view of Christianity, encouraging false witness is the same as bearing false witness. Is your understanding different than that?

You got me here, because I wonder how you view the fact* in the Bible that "in the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth." Either it is true, or it's not true, what do you say about that?
*I say 'fact' because that is what is written. I don't say you view it as fact, but the fact is -- that is what the Bible says. Genesis 1:1 - In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.
P.S. I do not deny dna. Now you got me interested in exactly how the lightbulb came about

 

[YoursTrue]

Is it in your considered opinion that we should give up a scientific basis for treating a disease like leprosy and follow the recommendations of the Bible and smear the victims with dove blood? Modern medicine contradicts that recommendation of the Bible.

What scripture are you speaking of, and how was it treating the disease, like you say, or was the ill person rid of the illness by that time? Please let me know.

 

[rational experiences]

Science as humans are pretending by worded human explanations that their word usage states why any naturally present one form exists.....as if you are a God who created all things.

Which is self idolisation.

A human owned human taught reasoning for humans.

So if we say to any scientist when nothing at all existed in any form what relative conscious advice by observed identification do you personally and specifically own?

In a reality human group cult mentality and human egotism is arguing against natural self first observed whole form complete presence.

And you do it falsely by your introduced human science fake language.

Indoctrination of humans by humans for humans for status as a human.

Another observed natural teaching by humans.

Who have historically always been abused by the use and term dichtomy applied only in observations of any naturally present state of being.

As men separated self in mind theories as a branch natural human body of equality. To express egotism a human status.

For humans to write a thesis about science itself. Why no man is God.

As relative lived experienced human abuse of life sacrificed when natural owning balances was stated to be reasoned why equal one forms continued to exist by presence two of in existence.

As first highest advice as science is observed and is and always was natural first.

Totally ignored in human egotism. Stated to be creations destroyer. Humans who sin against all forms. Theorising unnatural separations by thinking first.

By false witness.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

What scripture are you speaking of, and how was it treating the disease, like you say, or was the ill person rid of the illness by that time? Please let me know.

Leviticus 14: 2-52.

You can't really wait leprosy out like you can a cold.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

You got me here, because I wonder how you view the fact* in the Bible that "in the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth." Either it is true, or it's not true, what do you say about that?
*I say 'fact' because that is what is written. I don't say you view it as fact, but the fact is -- that is what the Bible says. Genesis 1:1 - In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.
P.S. I do not deny dna. Now you got me interested in exactly how the lightbulb came about

You cannot provide a valid and substantial meaning for what is written. It can only be viewed metaphorically. It is not a fact. It is a claim. There is no evidence to support a literal interpretation of those words.

The lightbulb was the result of existing knowledge (at the time) and evidence, experimentation, observation and conclusions based on that knowledge and observations.

 

[rational experiences]

We state Christ consciousness as another human reasoning.

∆volcanic dust ash plus gas combustion began our heavens consciousness only of one God earth.

Ear. Heard. Human theisms.

So science human claiming beginnings said ashes to ashes dust to dust. When cold gases natural to life water oxygenation self combusted bio life was sacrificed....on the stone altar of gods body.

Already present in all one forms owning self reproduction by equal two of.

Science is first theories only by humans looking back. Stating removing time. As time is lived by aging. Time dies in other words as a sun times origin is getting smaller in age diminishing a body.

As the form body in space owning lights constant. Earth never owned it said science.

O earth stone seal gods owned temple. Altar stone of God combusted life.

Ignored human relativity advice.

When science said beginnings in cosmos they were always false thinkers in themes as stories. Humans living inside heavens cannot Idealise beginnings.

The lying status to claim 1 was the beginning. No beginning 0 was the holy status.

Falsified self idolisation humans in words as stories. First science theism.

If the bible was straight science data no stories it would not claim humans arose from gods combustion death. Ashes and dusts. Earth body.

Data only would equate data only.

But because humans told stories as theists first as sciences inventor then it was related back. Why human theists had combusted all life on earth by 2 X 2 separation multiple + cross thesis.

The cross on its side X said humans by Adam thesis science was why life was sacrificed and further separated by dichtomy of human liars.

Who then said they will cause that separation in multiples by destroyer mentality nuclear. The beginning Christ consciousness history.

Exactly the human teaching against humans in science. Who first owned satanist not the scientist title.

Changing your title does not remove you from your practice.

To theory anti the presence of our heavens naturally evolved gases. First gases are present.

To seek its beginnings removed their holy presence from existing.