The begining of life

[voice crying]

You'd be suprised actually, evolution is more important to you than you think.

I deal with evolution every day. I see it in the ground and in rocks.

I used to believe in Evolution(Ev) as it was taught in school(I had high marks in Biology). Later I revisited Ev while studying Physics, Electrical theory&Engineering. Fact must be separated from speculation. Too often, in various areas of science things get divided&treated as separate sections&subsets as Ev often is, narrow-focus Frames of Reference. Its like looking through several small windows, you only see what can be observed within each window.

We need to step back to much larger Frames of Reference to see if what we have observed in the small Frames of Reference still holds true when they are observed with what we can see within "Big Picture" POV&from other angles. Only then can we come to more accurate conclusions. My research:

W/o UNCUT film starting before 1st signs of life to today=speculation=similar species' parts in another are just more species. The scientific-method can't prove the BB/BBnc/Ev/Abiogenesis theories. They're billions of yrs old COLD cases&we DIDN'T SEE it done.

We don't have a common ancestor. Many call Ev whats ONLY Micro-adaptation, confuse truth(it often offends ppl)&hate or impose human limits&labels to God's abilities=dumb limits. The Bible says, "Ways"SEEM"right but its end=death."

Ev Creation processes=a blind man building a car he's never heard of, seen, touched, heard or rode in-it can't be done w/o 1st teaching him about car functions&parts assembly for it to work. Cells have same limits. W/o an IDr we'd not exist:

*1. We have 2 lungs, kidneys, ears, arms&legs-each has NEAR PERFECT 3D MIRROR-IMAGE companion organs/limbs(NOT A COPY). IT CAN'T B EXPLAINED AWAY. To make mirror-image organs takes FULL REVERSE ENGINEERING, knowledge of its companion's functions&purpose or it can't be created to perfection found in nature=2 WITNESSES in nature=KILLS Ev/Abiog claims).

2. Our bodies are highly symmetrical 1 side to the other-impossible w/o an outside overview POV for full knowledge of whole life-form.

3. Cells&organisms are just copies of, copy parents'&all ancestors' acts. You won't find a bird building a better nest than parents, chicks build even better nests&bears passing better life to cubs. Cells have 2 LIVES-1 copying parents&1 SECRET-working on changes or an IDr is the Creator.

4. Species splits within a species, subspecies&strains don't prove Ev. Changes are minimal when taken against millions of diverse species=limited adaptation. Also, any "new" non interbreeding limit taking place within a species isn't proof for Ev-i.e. fruit-flies/mice/finches don't become moths/rabbits/bats. Theres only adaptive changes within its species"kind".

5. The fossil record doesn't have millions of trial/error phyla that should exist if NatS or fittest survivor is the Creation source. Odds are so great against near perfection for many millions of greatly diverse species, such precision cant happen w/o 1st having full knowledge for what to do(even adding billions of yrs beyond start of this universe can't solve the problem). If not true millions more misfits with mistakes, having only 1/3 eyes in odd places, 1 leg growing out of a head, where a fin, arm, wing should be, etc would exist, not the perfection seen in nature.

6. Picture u boxed(+near 0 intelligence)within microscopic cell, smaller than a text period&no way to sense much beyond your cell=real limits, so how can you invent millions of such diverse species to perfection in nature? NO OTHER ORGANISMS EXISTED so cells are great geniuses or Ev's a lie.

7. Cells need DNA to function. DNA's useless w/o a cell so which came 1st a cell or DNA? DNA's very complex(esp for higher life-forms)so odds against figuring out&using DNA(in correct sequences/related processes)is many magnitudes higher than for pc prog code. Its useless w/o an IDr to identify&assign its proper order. Give apes books, they cant learn from whats written w/o intelligence. DNA's COMMON to ALL LIFE-98% of another species' DNA doesn't=Ev.

8. Look at the amount of ID, knowledge, time&energy used to create&improve(many mistakes)airplanes. If ppl didn't"learn"what to do we'd still be grounded.

9. Creation's astronomically more complex than airplanes. More complex an organism is, it multiplies ID&knowledge needed to create it. Creation source is God or it couldn't exist let alone evolve(adaptation not Ev is built in for survival).

10. Earth has the best orbit, gravity, axis, spin, atmosphere, magnetic field, water&the moon has the right size&orbit for tidal cycles. Also, many foods taste good for life. Just 1 or 2 small differences for orbits&environments&most likely life would be different, higher life-forms die in short time if it survived.

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

I used to believe in Evolution(Ev) as it was taught in school(I had high marks in Biology). Later I revisited Ev while studying Physics, Electrical theory&Engineering. Fact must be separated from speculation. Too often, in various areas of science things get divided&treated as separate sections&subsets as Ev often is, narrow-focus Frames of Reference. Its like looking through several small windows, you only see what can be observed within each window.

We need to step back to much larger Frames of Reference to see if what we have observed in the small Frames of Reference still holds true when they are observed with what we can see within "Big Picture" POV&from other angles. Only then can we come to more accurate conclusions. My research:

W/o UNCUT film starting before 1st signs of life to today=speculation=similar species' parts in another are just more species. The scientific-method can't prove the BB/BBnc/Ev/Abiogenesis theories. They're billions of yrs old COLD cases&we DIDN'T SEE it done.

We don't have a common ancestor. Many call Ev whats ONLY Micro-adaptation, confuse truth(it often offends ppl)&hate or impose human limits&labels to God's abilities=dumb limits. The Bible says, "Ways"SEEM"right but its end=death."

Ev Creation processes=a blind man building a car he's never heard of, seen, touched, heard or rode in-it can't be done w/o 1st teaching him about car functions&parts assembly for it to work. Cells have same limits. W/o an IDr we'd not exist:

*1. We have 2 lungs, kidneys, ears, arms&legs-each has NEAR PERFECT 3D MIRROR-IMAGE companion organs/limbs(NOT A COPY). IT CAN'T B EXPLAINED AWAY. To make mirror-image organs takes FULL REVERSE ENGINEERING, knowledge of its companion's functions&purpose or it can't be created to perfection found in nature=2 WITNESSES in nature=KILLS Ev/Abiog claims).

2. Our bodies are highly symmetrical 1 side to the other-impossible w/o an outside overview POV for full knowledge of whole life-form.

3. Cells&organisms are just copies of, copy parents'&all ancestors' acts. You won't find a bird building a better nest than parents, chicks build even better nests&bears passing better life to cubs. Cells have 2 LIVES-1 copying parents&1 SECRET-working on changes or an IDr is the Creator.

4. Species splits within a species, subspecies&strains don't prove Ev. Changes are minimal when taken against millions of diverse species=limited adaptation. Also, any "new" non interbreeding limit taking place within a species isn't proof for Ev-i.e. fruit-flies/mice/finches don't become moths/rabbits/bats. Theres only adaptive changes within its species"kind".

5. The fossil record doesn't have millions of trial/error phyla that should exist if NatS or fittest survivor is the Creation source. Odds are so great against near perfection for many millions of greatly diverse species, such precision cant happen w/o 1st having full knowledge for what to do(even adding billions of yrs beyond start of this universe can't solve the problem). If not true millions more misfits with mistakes, having only 1/3 eyes in odd places, 1 leg growing out of a head, where a fin, arm, wing should be, etc would exist, not the perfection seen in nature.

6. Picture u boxed(+near 0 intelligence)within microscopic cell, smaller than a text period&no way to sense much beyond your cell=real limits, so how can you invent millions of such diverse species to perfection in nature? NO OTHER ORGANISMS EXISTED so cells are great geniuses or Ev's a lie.

7. Cells need DNA to function. DNA's useless w/o a cell so which came 1st a cell or DNA? DNA's very complex(esp for higher life-forms)so odds against figuring out&using DNA(in correct sequences/related processes)is many magnitudes higher than for pc prog code. Its useless w/o an IDr to identify&assign its proper order. Give apes books, they cant learn from whats written w/o intelligence. DNA's COMMON to ALL LIFE-98% of another species' DNA doesn't=Ev.

8. Look at the amount of ID, knowledge, time&energy used to create&improve(many mistakes)airplanes. If ppl didn't"learn"what to do we'd still be grounded.

9. Creation's astronomically more complex than airplanes. More complex an organism is, it multiplies ID&knowledge needed to create it. Creation source is God or it couldn't exist let alone evolve(adaptation not Ev is built in for survival).

10. Earth has the best orbit, gravity, axis, spin, atmosphere, magnetic field, water&the moon has the right size&orbit for tidal cycles. Also, many foods taste good for life. Just 1 or 2 small differences for orbits&environments&most likely life would be different, higher life-forms die in short time if it survived.

I read the first part...then I read the rest of what you wrote...and I'm not sure what you are trying to say.

Earth has the best what? Most foods taste good for life? DNA common to all life...doesn't equal evolution? No, but it does show common descent. DNA isn't useless without a cell, since viruses aren't cells and they have DNA...viruses aren't even alive. No species is perfect as the adaptation for Evolution only rests within the scope of that creatures environment.

Over 90% of the species that have ever existed are extinct, I don't think that's a good sign for the rest. It means we beat them, it doesn't mean we beat the earth.

 

[Ouroboros]

Ev Creation processes=a blind man building a car he's never heard of, seen, touched, heard or rode in-it can't be done w/o 1st teaching him about car functions&parts assembly for it to work. Cells have same limits.

Except for thousands and thousands of fossils that we can see. And animals and humans checked with DNA sequencing over many years, which we can see and compare. Evolution isn't a guessing game. That we evolved and still evolving and the same for animals is a fact. The exact process for it might be debatable, but the fact that it has happened and is happening is not even in question anymore.

*1. We have 2 lungs, kidneys, ears, arms&legs-each has NEAR PERFECT 3D MIRROR-IMAGE companion organs/limbs(NOT A COPY). IT CAN'T B EXPLAINED AWAY. To make mirror-image organs takes FULL REVERSE ENGINEERING, knowledge of its companion's functions&purpose or it can't be created to perfection found in nature=2 WITNESSES in nature=KILLS Ev/Abiog claims).

Uhm... You grew from one single cell. Your body is built from the encoding in the DNA. It's a fact that biology has known about for a long time. You're saying that DNA can't do what it does? It's doing what you say can't be done for every single fetus.

2. Our bodies are highly symmetrical 1 side to the other-impossible w/o an outside overview POV for full knowledge of whole life-form.

No. It's not. The heart is on the left. The liver is oddly shaped. The intestines are not symmetrical. And many other examples like that. Not even the brain has the same functions on each side.

Bah... I don't care about your arguments. All too silly and inaccurate.

 

[Skwim]

I used to believe in Evolution(Ev) as it was taught in school(I had high marks in Biology). Later I revisited Ev while studying Physics, Electrical theory&Engineering. Fact must be separated from speculation. Too often, in various areas of science things get divided&treated as separate sections&subsets as Ev often is, narrow-focus Frames of Reference. Its like looking through several small windows, you only see what can be observed within each window.

We need to step back to much larger Frames of Reference to see if what we have observed in the small Frames of Reference still holds true when they are observed with what we can see within "Big Picture" POV&from other angles. Only then can we come to more accurate conclusions. My research:

W/o UNCUT film starting before 1st signs of life to today=speculation=similar species' parts in another are just more species. The scientific-method can't prove the BB/BBnc/Ev/Abiogenesis theories. They're billions of yrs old COLD cases&we DIDN'T SEE it done.

We don't have a common ancestor. Many call Ev whats ONLY Micro-adaptation, confuse truth(it often offends ppl)&hate or impose human limits&labels to God's abilities=dumb limits. The Bible says, "Ways"SEEM"right but its end=death."

Ev Creation processes=a blind man building a car he's never heard of, seen, touched, heard or rode in-it can't be done w/o 1st teaching him about car functions&parts assembly for it to work. Cells have same limits. W/o an IDr we'd not exist:

*1. We have 2 lungs, kidneys, ears, arms&legs-each has NEAR PERFECT 3D MIRROR-IMAGE companion organs/limbs(NOT A COPY). IT CAN'T B EXPLAINED AWAY. To make mirror-image organs takes FULL REVERSE ENGINEERING, knowledge of its companion's functions&purpose or it can't be created to perfection found in nature=2 WITNESSES in nature=KILLS Ev/Abiog claims).

2. Our bodies are highly symmetrical 1 side to the other-impossible w/o an outside overview POV for full knowledge of whole life-form.

3. Cells&organisms are just copies of, copy parents'&all ancestors' acts. You won't find a bird building a better nest than parents, chicks build even better nests&bears passing better life to cubs. Cells have 2 LIVES-1 copying parents&1 SECRET-working on changes or an IDr is the Creator.

4. Species splits within a species, subspecies&strains don't prove Ev. Changes are minimal when taken against millions of diverse species=limited adaptation. Also, any "new" non interbreeding limit taking place within a species isn't proof for Ev-i.e. fruit-flies/mice/finches don't become moths/rabbits/bats. Theres only adaptive changes within its species"kind".

5. The fossil record doesn't have millions of trial/error phyla that should exist if NatS or fittest survivor is the Creation source. Odds are so great against near perfection for many millions of greatly diverse species, such precision cant happen w/o 1st having full knowledge for what to do(even adding billions of yrs beyond start of this universe can't solve the problem). If not true millions more misfits with mistakes, having only 1/3 eyes in odd places, 1 leg growing out of a head, where a fin, arm, wing should be, etc would exist, not the perfection seen in nature.

6. Picture u boxed(+near 0 intelligence)within microscopic cell, smaller than a text period&no way to sense much beyond your cell=real limits, so how can you invent millions of such diverse species to perfection in nature? NO OTHER ORGANISMS EXISTED so cells are great geniuses or Ev's a lie.

7. Cells need DNA to function. DNA's useless w/o a cell so which came 1st a cell or DNA? DNA's very complex(esp for higher life-forms)so odds against figuring out&using DNA(in correct sequences/related processes)is many magnitudes higher than for pc prog code. Its useless w/o an IDr to identify&assign its proper order. Give apes books, they cant learn from whats written w/o intelligence. DNA's COMMON to ALL LIFE-98% of another species' DNA doesn't=Ev.

8. Look at the amount of ID, knowledge, time&energy used to create&improve(many mistakes)airplanes. If ppl didn't"learn"what to do we'd still be grounded.

9. Creation's astronomically more complex than airplanes. More complex an organism is, it multiplies ID&knowledge needed to create it. Creation source is God or it couldn't exist let alone evolve(adaptation not Ev is built in for survival).

10. Earth has the best orbit, gravity, axis, spin, atmosphere, magnetic field, water&the moon has the right size&orbit for tidal cycles. Also, many foods taste good for life. Just 1 or 2 small differences for orbits&environments&most likely life would be different, higher life-forms die in short time if it survived.

Whaaaaat? Your rambling is not making sense. I suggest you pick a specific topic and stick with that. Also, your formatting is difficult to read, which is off-putting. Meaning you probably won't get the response you're looking for.

 

[voice crying]

I read the first part...then I read the rest of what you wrote...and I'm not sure what you are trying to say.

Earth has the best what?

It would be 1 thing if it was just 1or2 things but it took many things to get to the point that life could survive on earth:

1. Its in the right orbit,

2. Has the right speed around the sun,

3. The right axis,

4. The right spin speed,

5. It tilts so that the right hemisphere is facing the sun for the northern summer, which is at our farthest distance in our elliptical orbit around the sun(larger land masses are in the northern hemisphere&if earth's northern hemisphere faced the sun at our closest point to the sun it would be much hotter-large land mass absorbs much more heat than water),

6. Has the right amount of water vs land mass,

7. The right atmosphere,

8. The right gravity strength,

9. The right magnetic field&strength,

10. The right soil consistency,

11. The Van Allen belt&Ozone layer that helps protect earth from large energy bursts&radiation from the sun,

12. Earth has the right size moon with the right spin&orbit(helps keep earth's wobble stabilized), which provide tidal cycles which in turn provides life with needed environments to support its life&life cycles, helped many keep track of months for planting&seasons&lights the night sky, navigation,

13. The Solar System happens to be in a particular spot in an arm of our Galaxy,

14. The Primordial Soup theory brings up another set of events&Laws of Probability against them.

Just 1or2 small differences for orbits, speeds&environments(&its small tolerance percents)&most likely life would be different, higher life-forms die in short time if it survived.

Many omit Laws of Probability. Each&every event has odds against it taking place on its own, which are then compounded by the sheer number of events that must take place to get us to today's conditions. U can't live long enough to count that high even if you could stay awake 24hrs a day=can't happen on its own. &Chaos can't produce order.

Most foods taste good for life?

Theres thousands of foods that taste good. The odds against even one let along a few appearing on their own is again, astronomical. Again, you can't live long enough to count that high. It did not happen on its own as theres too many&some just happen to be located in just the right places. Unless there was some communication btwn plants&other life as to what they would want to eat I seriously doubt that the right food magically appeared to accommodate particular animals where they decided to hang out.

&theres an enormous amount of plant life that I didn't address. When Laws of Probability are applied the odds against the plant life happening on its own are again so high you would have a better chance of winning millions of lotteries in a row.

DNA common to all life...doesn't equal evolution? No, but it does show common descent. DNA isn't useless without a cell, since viruses aren't cells and they have DNA...viruses aren't even alive. No species is perfect as the adaptation for Evolution only rests within the scope of that creatures environment.

"Common descent" like "common ancestor" are both just interpretations of whats been observed. However, when taken against the number of things I cite against Ev&Laws of Probability odds against all of them happening on their own, these interpretations are suspect at best&false if we are using common sense. In fact, the odds are so great you couldn't live long enough to count that high, even if you could stay awake 24hrs a day. I doubt that even your children&grandchildren could ever finish the count.

DNA is the building blocks for all life. Having similar DNA is just b/c that what is needed to build all life-forms. Again, w/o UNCUT film to the contrary starting from the first sign of life to today, any similarity in DNA sequences, etc. in organisms is speculation at best. Even if one species' DNA is 99.999% of another its not proof of Ev. Its just another species. Even just DNA, related processes&its many switches are so complicated it could never construct itself. Mindless Creation as Ev's source is=to a blind man creating a car he has no concept of. It couldn't happen. Again, no organisms existed before.

Ok, so DNA is useless w/o a cell or a virus but cells&viruses are useless w/o DNA. For a complex DNA setup needed to operate a"whole"cell to be incorporated into a cell that can't function w/o DNA makes it impossible w/o an IDr. Piece by piece additions wouldn't give cells what it needs for its proper operation. Plus any additions&its functions would also have to have been programmed into nuclei Mitochondria DNA for it to recognize, accept&use what was changed or added. It can't happen w/o God.

Also, theres 10s of 1000s of male&female genitalia that specifically match its copulation mechanics of their respective species(such matches would have to occur in the same generation in close proximity for most new species"kinds"to survive. Just for those many 1000s of differences the odds are so high against it happening you'd have a better chance of a 1000 pages, thrown in the air landing in the right order.

Over 90% of the species that have ever existed are extinct, I don't think that's a good sign for the rest. It means we beat them, it doesn't mean we beat the earth.

In fact, man is wiping out species probably faster than most past natural disasters accomplished, faster than any other point in history, another Biblical sign of the end-times.

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

It would be 1 thing if it was just 1or2 things but it took many things to get to the point that life could survive on earth:

1. Its in the right orbit,

2. Has the right speed around the sun,

3. The right axis,

4. The right spin speed,

5. It tilts so that the right hemisphere is facing the sun for the northern summer, which is at our farthest distance in our elliptical orbit around the sun(larger land masses are in the northern hemisphere&if earth's northern hemisphere faced the sun at our closest point to the sun it would be much hotter-large land mass absorbs much more heat than water),

6. Has the right amount of water vs land mass,

7. The right atmosphere,

8. The right gravity strength,

9. The right magnetic field&strength,

10. The right soil consistency,

11. The Van Allen belt&Ozone layer that helps protect earth from large energy bursts&radiation from the sun,

12. Earth has the right size moon with the right spin&orbit(helps keep earth's wobble stabilized), which provide tidal cycles which in turn provides life with needed environments to support its life&life cycles, helped many keep track of months for planting&seasons&lights the night sky, navigation,

13. The Solar System happens to be in a particular spot in an arm of our Galaxy,

14. The Primordial Soup theory brings up another set of events&Laws of Probability against them.

Just 1or2 small differences for orbits, speeds&environments(&its small tolerance percents)&most likely life would be different, higher life-forms die in short time if it survived.

Many omit Laws of Probability. Each&every event has odds against it taking place on its own, which are then compounded by the sheer number of events that must take place to get us to today's conditions. U can't live long enough to count that high even if you could stay awake 24hrs a day=can't happen on its own. &Chaos can't produce order.




Theres thousands of foods that taste good. The odds against even one let along a few appearing on their own is again, astronomical. Again, you can't live long enough to count that high. It did not happen on its own as theres too many&some just happen to be located in just the right places. Unless there was some communication btwn plants&other life as to what they would want to eat I seriously doubt that the right food magically appeared to accommodate particular animals where they decided to hang out.

&theres an enormous amount of plant life that I didn't address. When Laws of Probability are applied the odds against the plant life happening on its own are again so high you would have a better chance of winning millions of lotteries in a row.




"Common descent" like "common ancestor" are both just interpretations of whats been observed. However, when taken against the number of things I cite against Ev&Laws of Probability odds against all of them happening on their own, these interpretations are suspect at best&false if we are using common sense. In fact, the odds are so great you couldn't live long enough to count that high, even if you could stay awake 24hrs a day. I doubt that even your children&grandchildren could ever finish the count.

DNA is the building blocks for all life. Having similar DNA is just b/c that what is needed to build all life-forms. Again, w/o UNCUT film to the contrary starting from the first sign of life to today, any similarity in DNA sequences, etc. in organisms is speculation at best. Even if one species' DNA is 99.999% of another its not proof of Ev. Its just another species. Even just DNA, related processes&its many switches are so complicated it could never construct itself. Mindless Creation as Ev's source is=to a blind man creating a car he has no concept of. It couldn't happen. Again, no organisms existed before.

Ok, so DNA is useless w/o a cell or a virus but cells&viruses are useless w/o DNA. For a complex DNA setup needed to operate a"whole"cell to be incorporated into a cell that can't function w/o DNA makes it impossible w/o an IDr. Piece by piece additions wouldn't give cells what it needs for its proper operation. Plus any additions&its functions would also have to have been programmed into nuclei Mitochondria DNA for it to recognize, accept&use what was changed or added. It can't happen w/o God.

Also, theres 10s of 1000s of male&female genitalia that specifically match its copulation mechanics of their respective species(such matches would have to occur in the same generation in close proximity for most new species"kinds"to survive. Just for those many 1000s of differences the odds are so high against it happening you'd have a better chance of a 1000 pages, thrown in the air landing in the right order.




In fact, man is wiping out species probably faster than most past natural disasters accomplished, faster than any other point in history, another Biblical sign of the end-times.

Given that before man 90% of the species had already been extinct...no. Probably faster, use facts to back it up.

For 1000 of foods that taste Good, there are millions of other stuff that will kill you.

You do realize that "fruits" that taste good usually only taste good because that's what attracts animals, the sweet taste. It's their way of passing along their seeds, since when animals eat they don't avoid seeds, they eat them, and usually pass them through.

Have you ever had, uncooked fish, or chicken, or beef, or pork. Or cooked fish, or chicken, or beef, or pork that wasn't seasoned, marinated, and in any way unaltered by human hands? It's not "good" tasting, it's rather bland actually.

The earth isn't perfect. It's good for supporting life, but again 90% of life has been extinct and most of it before humans even "appeared" on the planet. Not to mention in a few billion years the Sun will have kinda gotten so big that earth would resemble Venus...but you know..."it's perfect" Soil consistency is not the same throughout the world, try growing stuff in the artic.

A viruse is literally DNA in a capsule, you could make the argument that it is just DNA...but there isn't just DNA there's also RNA which can do some pretty awesome stuff, so how is DNA useless without a cell?

You realize there are more bacteria and microbes than there are higher level organisms right?

And that a lot of this creatures don't even have genitals.

But you've got this into your head that it is perfect...so ok.

 

[johnhanks]

... Just 1or2 small differences for orbits, speeds&environments(&its small tolerance percents)&most likely life would be different...

Yes; but since they're all as we see them, life is as we see it. "If our circumstances were different, we would be different" is not a ground-breaking argument.

Theres thousands of foods that taste good. The odds against even one let along a few appearing on their own is again, astronomical...

Brains and taste buds evolved in such a way that beneficial chemicals generally elicit a pleasurable taste, harmful ones a nasty taste. No mystery here, and no need to conjure wild improbabilities.

&theres an enormous amount of plant life that I didn't address. When Laws of Probability are applied the odds against the plant life happening on its own are again so high you would have a better chance of winning millions of lotteries in a row.

It isn't at all clear what you're getting at here. Why shouldn't plant life "happen on its own"? My best guess is that you're saying "Gee, weren't those herbivores lucky that the plant life they depend on just happened to pop up of its own accord? What are the odds?" Again, no mystery: animals that depend on plants co-evolve with those plants. If the grass family had never evolved, the animal kingdom would be devoid of grazers; but there'd still be an animal kingdom, and those who think like you would still see it as it was "meant" to be.

Also, theres 10s of 1000s of male&female genitalia that specifically match its copulation mechanics of their respective species(such matches would have to occur in the same generation in close proximity for most new species"kinds"to survive. Just for those many 1000s of differences the odds are so high against it happening you'd have a better chance of a 1000 pages, thrown in the air landing in the right order.

Again, the co-evolution of male and female genitalia within a species poses no insoluble problems. Some good articles here.

In short, you have made what passes for your case out of two fallacies: puddle theory and argument from personal incredulity.

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

Back to the Food thing.

Have you ever tried to just live off the land Voice Crying?

 

[BioStudent]

Unless there was some communication btwn plants&other life as to what they would want to eat I seriously doubt that the right food magically appeared to accommodate particular animals where they decided to hang out.

I think you are mixing cause and effect here... food didn't appear where animals hang out, animals hang out where there is the right food. According to evolutionary theory, an animal that is able to use a food resource nobody else does will have an advanage, and eventually that species will become even better adapted for using that resource, and more dependent on it (if that is what is favorable in the environment). The food resource has to be there first though. No species will appear specially prepped to eat a food that doesn't exist!

 

[Enai de a lukal]

. 1 + 1 does not = 2 and can never =2.

Um, ok...

What this means is that if you accept a core belief you will never solve the question.

That's what "1=1 does not=2" means? Riiiiight.

The reallity is that as long as you are happy with your beliefs and not causing harm to anyone else you are fine.

Not necessarily. If I'm happy with my belief that I'm invincible, I may well not be "fine"- perhaps my belief leads me to walk into oncoming traffic and get creamed by an 18-wheeler.

But sure, most beliefs are innocuous enough that, even if they are false, you are still "fine"- but if your beliefs are false, and you have the resources available to realize they are false and yet hold them nevertheless, you are probably NOT "fine", in the sense that you are not being intellectually responsible or rational.

Legally, we have a right to believe whatever we want. That's the great thing about freedom. But intellectually, we have no such right; intellectual integrity demands that we critically examine our beliefs as best we can and reject those that don't stand up to scrutiny- even if they are beliefs that make us happy (such as belief in God, in a moral world order, in an afterlife or immortal soul, etc.).

 

[Skwim]

Um, ok...


That's what "1=1 does not=2" means? Riiiiight.


Not necessarily. If I'm happy with my belief that I'm invincible, I may well not be "fine"- perhaps my belief leads me to walk into oncoming traffic and get creamed by an 18-wheeler.

But sure, most beliefs are innocuous enough that, even if they are false, you are still "fine"- but if your beliefs are false, and you have the resources available to realize they are false and yet hold them nevertheless, you are probably NOT "fine", in the sense that you are not being intellectually responsible or rational.

Legally, we have a right to believe whatever we want. That's the great thing about freedom. But intellectually, we have no such right; intellectual integrity demands that we critically examine our beliefs as best we can and reject those that don't stand up to scrutiny- even if they are beliefs that make us happy (such as belief in God, in a moral world order, in an afterlife or immortal soul, etc.).

Just a posting hint here. You'll probably get a better response to your posts if you post them in the same thread to which you're replying.

 

[Enai de a lukal]

Just a posting hint here. You'll probably get a better response to your posts if you post them in the same thread to which you're replying.

That was the OP, genius.

 

[Skwim]

That was the OP, genius.

Yeah, I apologize. It's probably my computer, but when clicking on the link ↓

​

it brings up the relevant post with the thread title of "The beginning of life," rather than "The beginning of life (Jesus, Earth, salvation, beliefs, evolution) " I took the former as being a different thread Live and try to learn.

 

[Ouroboros]

It would be 1 thing if it was just 1or2 things but it took many things to get to the point that life could survive on earth:

1. Its in the right orbit,

The orbit changes about 10% in and out. And it used to be different in the long past. The days used to be longer. And a very long time ago, the planet was way too hot for life to live on.

Mars probably had the right temperature before our planet, and it's possible that life started there, not here.

2. Has the right speed around the sun,

It changes with the distance.

3. The right axis,

Which has changed several times in the past.

4. The right spin speed,

Which has changed a lot over the millions of years.

5. It tilts so that the right hemisphere is facing the sun for the northern summer, which is at our farthest distance in our elliptical orbit around the sun(larger land masses are in the northern hemisphere&if earth's northern hemisphere faced the sun at our closest point to the sun it would be much hotter-large land mass absorbs much more heat than water),

It just so happens that this kind of life require these kind of parameters, simply because this kind of life evolved from these kind of parameters.

6. Has the right amount of water vs land mass,

And exactly what ratio is that? The visible land mass is changing. Where do you get all this from?

7. The right atmosphere,

Which has changed many times.

8. The right gravity strength,

Which is different at different places on Earth. Which you should know if you knew anything about science.

9. The right magnetic field&strength,

Which changes and is not the same everywhere. Compass anyone? No? You haven't heard about that? Or the need of adjusting the compass on a boat? No? You didn't know about that? Funny...

10. The right soil consistency,

Which is plenty different all around the world, and the soil we can use is only some fraction of a percentage of the whole mass of Earth.

11. The Van Allen belt&Ozone layer that helps protect earth from large energy bursts&radiation from the sun,

Which has been different in the past.

12. Earth has the right size moon with the right spin&orbit(helps keep earth's wobble stabilized), which provide tidal cycles which in turn provides life with needed environments to support its life&life cycles, helped many keep track of months for planting&seasons&lights the night sky, navigation,

And the Moon is slowly moving away from us.

13. The Solar System happens to be in a particular spot in an arm of our Galaxy,

You're talking about the goldilock zone. Sure. We're in a tight zone in a spin around the galaxy, which fits about 10 million stars.

14. The Primordial Soup theory brings up another set of events&Laws of Probability against them.

Ok. Give the exact number and the exact computation giving you that number for that probability against it. Good luck. It's a guesstimate number only based on assumptions...

Just 1or2 small differences for orbits, speeds&environments(&its small tolerance percents)&most likely life would be different, higher life-forms die in short time if it survived.

You mean except for all the things actually being different in the past and has changed and is changing... other than that, yeah, whatever is left (nothing) is locked into a tight specific number.

Many omit Laws of Probability. Each&every event has odds against it taking place on its own, which are then compounded by the sheer number of events that must take place to get us to today's conditions. U can't live long enough to count that high even if you could stay awake 24hrs a day=can't happen on its own. &Chaos can't produce order.

The probability of you being born because of your grandparents getting together is extremely low. Based on statistical calculations, you don't exist at all because your parents could never have met.

For one person to meet another person in this world, it's a chance of 1 in 6 billion. That's how anti-science probability calculations are done. And they're wrong because they look at the wrong things.

Theres thousands of foods that taste good. The odds against even one let along a few appearing on their own is again, astronomical. Again, you can't live long enough to count that high. It did not happen on its own as theres too many&some just happen to be located in just the right places. Unless there was some communication btwn plants&other life as to what they would want to eat I seriously doubt that the right food magically appeared to accommodate particular animals where they decided to hang out.

There are new species, plants, animals, bacteria discovered each year, even in places that have been meticulously researched before and documented. There are new flies, lizards, birds, everywhere, all the time. There are even new species of animals on the Galapagos islands that Darwin studied and documented. New animals in our time! In just 150 years. And this happens everywhere and is being studied by several field researchers. So the facts contradicts your claim.

&theres an enormous amount of plant life that I didn't address. When Laws of Probability are applied the odds against the plant life happening on its own are again so high you would have a better chance of winning millions of lotteries in a row.

The probability of new plants evolving is 1:1. Simply because it is observed, and has been observed for many, many years.

Also, bugs. Many new bugs. There are new species of bugs that now can resist the GMO food. They didn't exist before GMO. And how do we know that? Because the GMO was made for that purpose to fight of the bugs. And now the bugs can resist the GMO. And how long did it take? About 10 years for the new bugs to appear!

 

[voice crying]

Except for thousands and thousands of fossils that we can see. And animals and humans checked with DNA sequencing over many years, which we can see and compare. Evolution isn't a guessing game. That we evolved and still evolving and the same for animals is a fact. The exact process for it might be debatable, but the fact that it has happened and is happening is not even in question anymore.

The Fossil record only proves that there were many, many species. It doesn't prove anything beyond that(appearance of something doesn't=its a fact). Again, w/o UNCUT film(not photos)starting from before the 1st signs of life to the present we can't prove what happened regarding how species came to be. B/c Ev reaches back billions of yrs into the past(billions of yrs old COLD cases)any conclusion put forth is nothing but&can never be anymore than speculation&conjecture. In other words, any claim that Ev is a fact is&can never be more than a theory.

Again, DNA is common to all life&its the building blocks for all organisms. Therefore, its not surprising that there would be 95 or even 98% of the same DNA present in at least some other species nor that theres similarities in their sequencing. Also, it wouldn't be surprising that less complex organisms might have lower percentages of DNA&more simple &/or some different sequencing. None of this can be proof of Evolution. Again, w/o UNCUT film of Ev in verifiable motion from the beginning of life until now Ev is&will always be just a theory. Its not&will never be a fact.

Uhm... You grew from one single cell. Your body is built from the encoding in the DNA. It's a fact that biology has known about for a long time. You're saying that DNA can't do what it does? It's doing what you say can't be done for every single fetus.

Isn't it amazing! All that we are is already present, crammed into that one cell's DNA once sperm enters the egg. I'm not saying DNA can't do what it does. What I am saying is that DNA is so complex it can't do what it does unless someone planned it all, that w/o an Intelligent Designer capable of gathering or having incredible knowledge of what DNA is, full knowledge how to &/or how its constructed, full knowledge&full understanding of the entire why, how, when&where its to be used or DNA would not exist or about as useful as a speck of dust.

Again, a microscopic cell has little awareness beyond itself. It has no way to sense much beyond itself. It certainly cannot ever hold, store nor handle nor comprehend the functions&purpose, meaning it can't design nor assign nor rearrange nor change anything to have any influence over species manipulation or changes. A cell would have to be a participant &/or an actor to cause such species diversity we see in nature.

A six month old baby has more awareness of its surroundings than a cell will ever have yet we it could never understand nor design anything like DNA. What we're missing here is that to create anything of substance that can do anything meaningful requires that someone be present who has the ability to think about&comprehend whats involved in&has the capability to make it work. To think that a cell has theses capabilities or that millions of incredibly diverse species invented themselves has no understanding of whats involved in the engineering required to execute&accomplish such a feat

No. It's not. The heart is on the left. The liver is oddly shaped. The intestines are not symmetrical. And many other examples like that. Not even the brain has the same functions on each side....

I'm talking about the overall outside of our bodies. In a normal human you don't find one arm twice the size of the other, one side weighing 20% or 40% more than the other, one side of your head being larger or any other off-center anomalies, etc. The point is a cell can't sense the size of say the finger its in let alone the size or any other things about the same finger on the other hand. A cell can't see outside itself so it can't have involvement in sensing nor making 3d objects. Since a cell is stuck inside its membrane its in no better position than a blind man building a car he has no concept of.

For people to believe that Evolution is a viable source&responsible for millions of extremely diverse species is one huge fraud on mankind&good indication of the vulnerability of many gullible people. I studied Engineering with respect to design of various machinery&w/o question Ev should be renamed "Jokes on mankind", an absolute absurdity. The heart is one of the most amazing pumps ever DESIGNED. Ev has not the capability to make left&right mirror image lungs&kidneys, an engineering feat of astronomical proportion.

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

The Fossil record only proves that there were many, many species. It doesn't prove anything beyond that(appearance of something doesn't=its a fact). Again, w/o UNCUT film(not photos)starting from before the 1st signs of life to the present we can't prove what happened regarding how species came to be. B/c Ev reaches back billions of yrs into the past(billions of yrs old COLD cases)any conclusion put forth is nothing but&can never be anymore than speculation&conjecture. In other words, any claim that Ev is a fact is&can never be more than a theory.

Again, DNA is common to all life&its the building blocks for all organisms. Therefore, its not surprising that there would be 95 or even 98% of the same DNA present in at least some other species nor that theres similarities in their sequencing. Also, it wouldn't be surprising that less complex organisms might have lower percentages of DNA&more simple &/or some different sequencing. None of this can be proof of Evolution. Again, w/o UNCUT film of Ev in verifiable motion from the beginning of life until now Ev is&will always be just a theory. Its not&will never be a fact.




Isn't it amazing! All that we are is already present, crammed into that one cell's DNA once sperm enters the egg. I'm not saying DNA can't do what it does. What I am saying is that DNA is so complex it can't do what it does unless someone planned it all, that w/o an Intelligent Designer capable of gathering or having incredible knowledge of what DNA is, full knowledge how to &/or how its constructed, full knowledge&full understanding of the entire why, how, when&where its to be used or DNA would not exist or about as useful as a speck of dust.

Again, a microscopic cell has little awareness beyond itself. It has no way to sense much beyond itself. It certainly cannot ever hold, store nor handle nor comprehend the functions&purpose, meaning it can't design nor assign nor rearrange nor change anything to have any influence over species manipulation or changes. A cell would have to be a participant &/or an actor to cause such species diversity we see in nature.

A six month old baby has more awareness of its surroundings than a cell will ever have yet we it could never understand nor design anything like DNA. What we're missing here is that to create anything of substance that can do anything meaningful requires that someone be present who has the ability to think about&comprehend whats involved in&has the capability to make it work. To think that a cell has theses capabilities or that millions of incredibly diverse species invented themselves has no understanding of whats involved in the engineering required to execute&accomplish such a feat




I'm talking about the overall outside of our bodies. In a normal human you don't find one arm twice the size of the other, one side weighing 20% or 40% more than the other, one side of your head being larger or any other off-center anomalies, etc. The point is a cell can't sense the size of say the finger its in let alone the size or any other things about the same finger on the other hand. A cell can't see outside itself so it can't have involvement in sensing nor making 3d objects. Since a cell is stuck inside its membrane its in no better position than a blind man building a car he has no concept of.

For people to believe that Evolution is a viable source&responsible for millions of extremely diverse species is one huge fraud on mankind&good indication of the vulnerability of many gullible people. I studied Engineering with respect to design of various machinery&w/o question Ev should be renamed "Jokes on mankind", an absolute absurdity. The heart is one of the most amazing pumps ever DESIGNED. Ev has not the capability to make left&right mirror image lungs&kidneys, an engineering feat of astronomical proportion.

And you can see the transition to making that pump. You also of course ignore all the thigns that go wrong. The mirror imaging of the lungs and kidney are also not perfectly symetrical.

Amoeba's are cells and they do just fine alone, Bacteria as well are cells, they do just as well alone.

So I'm confused to what exactly you mean that a cell can't see outside of it's membrane. Do you mean for multicellular organisms? If it could not see outside of its membrane then cells would not be able to respond to any outside stimuli.

 

[johnhanks]

I'm not saying DNA can't do what it does. What I am saying is that DNA is so complex it can't do what it does unless someone planned it all...

Here we go again: the good old argument from incredulity...

I'm talking about the overall outside of our bodies. In a normal human you don't find one arm twice the size of the other, one side weighing 20% or 40% more than the other, one side of your head being larger or any other off-center anomalies, etc. ... Ev has not the capability to make left&right mirror image lungs&kidneys, an engineering feat of astronomical proportion.

On the contrary, bilateral symmetry gives greater size and complexity at minimal coding cost: once you have a central axis the chemical signalling controlling development on one side need only be reversed to give a mirror image on the other. See here.

I studied Engineering ...

I think most of us had guessed it wasn't biology.

 

[Ouroboros]

The Fossil record only proves that there were many, many species. It doesn't prove anything beyond that(appearance of something doesn't=its a fact). Again, w/o UNCUT film(not photos)starting from before the 1st signs of life to the present we can't prove what happened regarding how species came to be. B/c Ev reaches back billions of yrs into the past(billions of yrs old COLD cases)any conclusion put forth is nothing but&can never be anymore than speculation&conjecture. In other words, any claim that Ev is a fact is&can never be more than a theory.

It's not quite true.

There are levels of strata with a huge amount of fossils and very tiny changes. I don't remember what they're called at the moment, but Donald Prothero's book talks about it.

It's like a film. A film in the movie theater is fixed pictures, 30 or so per second. Each picture is a fixed point in time, but when you play it, you see the movement (changes). And you can see this in several places in the fossil record.

Granted though it's only on a few species, and there are few on other species, but... the alternative to evolution here would be that animals species pop into existence every so often in the fossil record. Thousands of them, and then they disappear millions of years later. So is your belief that God is still creating new species all around us right here, right now? Where did they come from? The geological evidence for a very old earth, and the evidence for species just suddenly showing up in the fossil record are facts. Even Christian geologists accept this as truth.

Again, DNA is common to all life&its the building blocks for all organisms. Therefore, its not surprising that there would be 95 or even 98% of the same DNA present in at least some other species nor that theres similarities in their sequencing. Also, it wouldn't be surprising that less complex organisms might have lower percentages of DNA&more simple &/or some different sequencing. None of this can be proof of Evolution. Again, w/o UNCUT film of Ev in verifiable motion from the beginning of life until now Ev is&will always be just a theory. Its not&will never be a fact.

Then you're missing something. A huge part of the DNA isn't used at all. And there are "misprints" or synonymous mutations and markers, that don't contribute or change the decoding of the gene but shows traces of heritage. If we both have a gene BLAH, and your dad and you have a slight change to that gene. Instead of ABCDE it says ABCDe. I have the ABCDE, and you have the ABCDe. Both the same gene, producing the same protein. We now look who has this ABCDe variation. And we'll discover that people in your family has it, but not people outside your family. And then we can conclude that one of your ancestors got this mutation, and shared it in his/her lineage down to you and your father. So if we meet someone in your town and test them for this variation, if they have ABCDe, we can conclude that person is related to you. This is more than just having a common gene. It's about having common "misprints" in the DNA. And there are many other similar markers in the DNA that can be used this way.

For instance, only a few animals in the world can't produce C vitamins. You know we have to eat fruit, vitamins, etc to get C. 99.999% of animals never have to, because they have a gene that produces C in their body. There are a handful that can't. Two in special: humans and chimpanzees. Now, the other non-C animals have a defect gene in one way, but humans and chimpanzees have the same defect of the C gene. How is that possible? Statistically, it's highly improbable that we'd end up with the exact same flaw. But if we're related... it's an easy explanation. Now. You think, what's just one gene like that really mean anything? Well, there are 20 more like that, of that kind. Then there are some 20-30 of another kind of gene similarity that we share with chimps and chimps only. But I'm not going to overburden with all those things, because you can read about them in books that explain it all.

Isn't it amazing! All that we are is already present, crammed into that one cell's DNA once sperm enters the egg. I'm not saying DNA can't do what it does. What I am saying is that DNA is so complex it can't do what it does unless someone planned it all, that w/o an Intelligent Designer capable of gathering or having incredible knowledge of what DNA is, full knowledge how to &/or how its constructed, full knowledge&full understanding of the entire why, how, when&where its to be used or DNA would not exist or about as useful as a speck of dust.

Well, since you don't understand how DNA works and how they are able to use DNA to prove heritage and evolution, I think you shouldn't accuse the scientists of not knowing. From what I've seen, you really don't understand it at all. I'm an amateur and don't understand everything, but I can see that I understand more about this than you. I suggest that you pick up some books that talk about the evidence for evolution (not the Christian bullcrap but by real scientists) and learn what you've missed out on.

Again, a microscopic cell has little awareness beyond itself. It has no way to sense much beyond itself. It certainly cannot ever hold, store nor handle nor comprehend the functions&purpose, meaning it can't design nor assign nor rearrange nor change anything to have any influence over species manipulation or changes. A cell would have to be a participant &/or an actor to cause such species diversity we see in nature.

If there was intelligence behind speciation and evolution, there shouldn't be so many mistakes in the design. I suggest you read some books about it and see for yourself.

A six month old baby has more awareness of its surroundings than a cell will ever have yet we it could never understand nor design anything like DNA. What we're missing here is that to create anything of substance that can do anything meaningful requires that someone be present who has the ability to think about&comprehend whats involved in&has the capability to make it work. To think that a cell has theses capabilities or that millions of incredibly diverse species invented themselves has no understanding of whats involved in the engineering required to execute&accomplish such a feat

There are so many flaws that I'm sorry, but I can't agree. The cells are not that perfect. They work, and they work great, but they're not perfect. Far from it. There are duplications of functions in there that are completely unnecessary. Our modern diet is totally screwing up our metabolic system. You know, potato and tomato isn't really that great for us. If God wanted us to eat wheat, then why did he create celiac? Everything in nature points to evolution. It just does.

I'm talking about the overall outside of our bodies. In a normal human you don't find one arm twice the size of the other, one side weighing 20% or 40% more than the other, one side of your head being larger or any other off-center anomalies, etc. The point is a cell can't sense the size of say the finger its in let alone the size or any other things about the same finger on the other hand. A cell can't see outside itself so it can't have involvement in sensing nor making 3d objects. Since a cell is stuck inside its membrane its in no better position than a blind man building a car he has no concept of.

Usually one arm is bigger than the other. Usually one foot is bigger than the other. Usually the eyes are not perfectly equal in size. And much more. Someone with perfect match on both sides are unusual, and most of the time that's because of plastic surgery.

The way the "cell" knows is through a set of genes in the DNA while you gestate and grow up. Those genes turns of at certain points, through "kill switches" (has a specific scientific name I can't remember right now). This has been studied very deeply, and there are some animals (worm in particular) that has been decoded completely. All steps, and every gene that does it, has been identified. The DNA is responsible for the body structure. This is a fact, not a guess by the scientists. Do you really think they just invented it and spent the last 100 years farting around and not check if it was true? It's been tested and tried and research beyond anyone's comprehension. It would take you a lifetime to read all the material.

For people to believe that Evolution is a viable source&responsible for millions of extremely diverse species is one huge fraud on mankind&good indication of the vulnerability of many gullible people. I studied Engineering with respect to design of various machinery&w/o question Ev should be renamed "Jokes on mankind", an absolute absurdity. The heart is one of the most amazing pumps ever DESIGNED. Ev has not the capability to make left&right mirror image lungs&kidneys, an engineering feat of astronomical proportion.

Well, you're an engineer. You're not a biochemist, biologist, or geneticist. You're basically accusing thousands of serious scientists who spent just as long in school as you, studying these topics and going into research and spent years and years trying to prove AND disprove any current theories (which they have, not all things you hear about science is true, but scientists are the ones disproving the wrong ideas)... you're accusing all these people for not knowing what they're doing... but you do? You know what they don't?

 

[BioStudent]

A cell can't see outside itself so it can't have involvement in sensing nor making 3d objects. Since a cell is stuck inside its membrane its in no better position than a blind man building a car he has no concept of.

Actually, cells can sense chemicals ouside their membrane that tell them quite a bit about the outside world, like the presence of other cells, whether those cells are supposed to be there, whether hose cells are healthy, and so on. They can do some pretty amazing stuff with that information! The immune system uses it to controll invading organisms, an embryo uses this infromation to grow into its final shape, nerves use these sensors to pass signals so you can move...

Even very simple organisms can use these signals to assmble into relatively complex shapes. Check this out:
[youtube]bkVhLJLG7ug[/youtube]
John Bonner's slime mold movies - YouTube

Slime molds live as cingle-celled organisms when there is enough food, but when it becomes scarce they band together and form a stalk with a friuting body that sends slime mold spores floating on air currents to find new habitats with more food.

These are single cells, and yet they manage to find each other in the dirt, and "tell" each other what part of the fruiting body they are forming and what they need to do, all without a single concious thought! And, I might add, without divine intervention, at least in the present day

 

[voice crying]

The orbit changes about 10% in and out. And it used to be different in the long past. The days used to be longer. And a very long time ago, the planet was way too hot for life to live on.

I am quite aware that there are various tolerances(I also had mentioned the word tolerance)for all of the things I have mentioned&that in early earth history there were most likely more extreme &/or violent&other variants regarding the things I have listed here. However, these tolerance became more stable before, after or by the time man was introduced on the earth.

Mars probably had the right temperature before our planet, and it's possible that life started there, not here.

It doesn't matter as I seriously doubt that it has nothing to do with whats on earth. Again, Evolution is not provable&if you read my other post you might see that Ev is just a theory, one with a lot of problems.

It changes with the distance.

Which has changed several times in the past.

Which has changed a lot over the millions of years.

I am fully aware of all this but the changes are now(even if they weren't before)within tolerances life can survive with.

It just so happens that this kind of life require these kind of parameters, simply because this kind of life evolved from these kind of parameters.

Again, Evolution is just a theory that can never be proved. Well, its either Darwin's cell geniuses or an Intelligent Designer is responsible.

And exactly what ratio is that? The visible land mass is changing. Where do you get all this from?

Well if a land area the size of Africa disappeared or one that size appeared in the middle of Pacific ocean it would cause some major changes that might not allow higher life-forms to have a good environment to live in, especially if a couple of other things I mention here were outside tolerances for the survival of higher life-forms or had other differences.

Which has changed many times.

Right, but mostly since modern higher life-forms were introduced the atmosphere has remained relatively stable enough for all of them to survive until now&if it weren't it would most likely also have an adverse effect on soil&water. However, if man keeps going on the road he is on its just a matter of time until it all catches up with us.

Which is different at different places on Earth. Which you should know if you knew anything about science.

Like I said above I am aware of all these things. Its still too many things that just happen to be within relatively"good"environment tolerances for man to thrive.

Which changes and is not the same everywhere. Compass anyone? No? You haven't heard about that? Or the need of adjusting the compass on a boat? No? You didn't know about that? Funny...

Again, I am well aware of this(my granddad was a deep sea fisherman&physics does reach to&involve compasses). If the sun(I forgot to mention this in my list)were a little more unstable our magnetic fields might make a big difference in higher life-forms ability to survive.

Which is plenty different all around the world, and the soil we can use is only some fraction of a percentage of the whole mass of Earth.

Yes, but much of the soil around the world isn't so caustic &/or they have other toxic mixes that they are not conducive to the survival of life. Of course, human have the capacity to ruin it sooner than later.

Which has been different in the past.

Yes, but their current sizes&thickness, etc. are adequate for life's needs unless of course man's present activities has lasting effect upon them in some way or theres other changes in some of the things I list.

And the Moon is slowly moving away from us.

Except its only a couple of inches a century if I remember correctly so it will be a long time before changes have major effect on earth.

You're talking about the goldilock zone. Sure. We're in a tight zone in a spin around the galaxy, which fits about 10 million stars.

Well, at least its not located in an unstable or more dense area of our galaxy where bigger problems would be more frequent.

Ok. Give the exact number and the exact computation giving you that number for that probability against it. Good luck. It's a guesstimate number only based on assumptions...

Its more based on what ifs&sure educated guesses&depending on who is doing the calculating, various assumptions. But, again, this is concerning billions of yrs old cold cases that we didn't see take place, so what happened can never be proved by man.

You mean except for all the things actually being different in the past and has changed and is changing... other than that, yeah, whatever is left (nothing) is locked into a tight specific number.

Yet, these many things all just happen to be taking place in close proximity so life as we know it can thrive when in fact if they did not, probably man wouldn't be able to live here. The numerous&nearly endless possibilities that could have become earth's environment raises the odds against the particular one we are actually in to be too great to have happened w/o an Intelligent Designer designing&setting it in place&also creating us to inhabit it.

The probability of you being born because of your grandparents getting together is extremely low. Based on statistical calculations, you don't exist at all because your parents could never have met. For one person to meet another person in this world, it's a chance of 1 in 6 billion. That's how anti-science probability calculations are done. And they're wrong because they look at the wrong things.

If I didn't know an Intelligent Designer was involved I would probably be joining you as to the absurdity of using some types of statistical calculations regarding many of the issues I raise.

There are new species, plants, animals, bacteria discovered each year, even in places that have been meticulously researched before and documented. There are new flies, lizards, birds, everywhere, all the time. There are even new species of animals on the Galapagos islands that Darwin studied and documented. New animals in our time! In just 150 years. And this happens everywhere and is being studied by several field researchers. So the facts contradicts your claim. The probability of new plants evolving is 1:1. Simply because it is observed, and has been observed for many, many years. Also, bugs. Many new bugs. There are new species of bugs that now can resist the GMO food. They didn't exist before GMO. And how do we know that? Because the GMO was made for that purpose to fight of the bugs. And now the bugs can resist the GMO. And how long did it take? About 10 years for the new bugs to appear!

A great many we didn't begin to look for until after Darwin made his claims&instruments were designed, made &/or improved upon so that we could do ever greater research into what organisms exist on earth. Again, species changes within a species kind, its subsets or strains are just adaptation to environment variables, even if the result is that one can no longer mate with others within its own species kind-i.e. fruit-flies/mice/finches don't become moths/rabbits/bats.

Again, Ev theory's core base is regarding events billions of yrs in the past, a billions of yrs old COLD case, meaning that Ev is&will always be only a theory, mostly based in non provable speculation. Again, w/o uncut film starting before the first signs of life to the present Ev can never be any more than a theory. Just the sheer number of insect body types, features&appendages is evidence for an Intelligent Designer. Again, NO OTHER ORGANISMS EXISTED BEFORE so either cells are the greatest geniuses ever, there accomplishment greater than all mankind has capability for or an IDr created it all.

Ev is based in mindless, purposeless nonsense. There is no possibility that a blind cell(can't see outside itself, hardly aware of itself&can't even analyze its many parts)could invent many millions of extremely diverse species, especially since they can't retain the necessary knowledge nor understand what it is nor its purpose nor how to use it, let alone all that it would take to execute such an enormous task. Again, you'd have a better chance throwing a thousand pages up in the air&having them land in their correct order.