Why evolution did not comes like this ?

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

If natural selection cannot account for the diversity of life on Earth, Mohammad, how did this diversity come about? What mechanism, in your opinion, could account for it?

By choosing in sophisticated ways. That is to say, the freedom in the universe actually does something. It neither is a coincidence politics and our personal lives are focused on making decisions, nor that organisms appear to be designed. Freedom is actually central to the way the universe works.

 

[Sapiens]

By choosing in sophisticated ways. That is to say, the freedom in the universe actually does something. It neither is a coincidence politics and our personal lives are focused on making decisions, nor that organisms appear to be designed. Freedom is actually central to the way the universe works.

Organisms DO NOT appear to be designed except to those with no biological training and overactive supernatural beliefs..

Your post is semantically empty, it makes no sense.

 

[Valjean]

By choosing in sophisticated ways. That is to say, the freedom in the universe actually does something. It neither is a coincidence politics and our personal lives are focused on making decisions, nor that organisms appear to be designed. Freedom is actually central to the way the universe works.

I have no idea what this means, Mohammad, but it clearly does not address my question. What does "making making citified decisions" have to do with anything?

Again, by what mechanism did the diversity of life we observe come about?

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

I have no idea what this means, Mohammad, but it clearly does not address my question. What does "making making citified decisions" have to do with anything?

Again, by what mechanism did the diversity of life we observe come about?

There is no reasoning possible about this with people who don't accept freedom is real. And always it is an emotional rejection of this sort of knowledge. It is not like the basics of it are very complicated, that you have to study many books to get a grasp of it. So there is no explanation, it is obvious, it is right there in the common discourse which everybody uses in daily life.

You don't understand = you don't want to understand. So then you are ignorant about how choosing works.

 

[Valjean]

What does "freedom" have to do with anything, or "choosing???"
You're obviously using the word in some very specialised sense. Please define/clarify it.

I do really want to understand. I Thought it was a simple question.

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

What does "freedom" have to do with anything, or "choosing???"
You're obviously using the word in some very specialised sense. Please define/clarify it.

I do really want to understand. I Thought it was a simple question.

My argument remains, it is obvious, and therefore it means, you don't want to understand.

 

[Valjean]

I do want to understand, Mohammad, but I don't. I don't think anyone here does.
I don't even understand what your "argument" is about. What are you arguing? What are you trying to say?

 

[LuisDantas]

Use common sense, don't listen to evolution science.

When you see the enormous diversity of organisms it is very obvious that DNA in principle can contain the information for anything. That you can put the representation of a car into DNA, eventhough one cannot grow a car from DNA. So there is a whole world of objects in the DNA.

This explains the enormous amount of socalled non-coding DNA.
It explains development to adulthood, into a coherent whole organism.
It explains how organisms can be chosen to be the way they are.
etc.

You know something, Mohammad? I have come to suspect that you are simply misinformed.

You talk about DNA as if we had to resort to some variety of mysticism to have any clue about what it does or how it works.

DNA is not a mystery to anything near that extent. We have learned a whole lot about it. We do not have to guess, to take it on faith, to "believe".

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

I do want to understand, Mohammad, but I don't. I don't think anyone here does.
I don't even understand what your "argument" is about. What are you arguing? What are you trying to say?

That would only mean something if anybody here has any knowledge about how choosing works. I am the odd one out for having any knowledge about it. Not that you have different knowledge, you have no knowledge.

 

[LuisDantas]

That would only mean something if anybody here has any knowledge about how choosing works. I am the odd one out for having any knowledge about it. Not that you have different knowledge, you have no knowledge.

Wow, what a relief. For a while there I suspected you might be deluded or arrogant. Apparently everyone else is instead.

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

Wow, what a relief. For a while there I suspected you might be deluded or arrogant. Apparently everyone else is instead.

You all despise common discourse, yet in common discourse you will find the basic structure of how choosing works, and fairly rich sophisticated knowledge about it.

In science you will find a neurotic denial of it without any practical application, as you can see on the wiki on free will.

 

[Valjean]

That would only mean something if anybody here has any knowledge about how choosing works.

"Choosing" is the process of making a decision. It it a question for psychology or neurology. If you're going to use this word in some obscure sense, please define it so we can all understand what you're saying.

Again: Why is there such a diversity of life on Earth?

 

[LuisDantas]

You all despise common discourse, yet in common discourse you will find the basic structure of how choosing works, and fairly rich sophisticated knowledge about it.

That might even be true, except the part about our despising of "common discourse". I don't even know what that is.

I do however know that it can hardly be expected to somehow invalidate the existing knowledge of biology and DNA workings.

In science you will find a neurotic denial of it without any practical application, as you can see on the wiki on free will.

You are very good at expressing meaningless irony. It is sad that you probably did not mean to.

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

"Choosing" is the process of making a decision. It it a question for psychology or neurology. If you're going to use this word in some obscure sense, please define it so we can all understand what you're saying.

Again: Why is there such a diversity of life on Earth?

The issue here is that you are fantasizing about how choosing works while you write your posting. Like all evolutionists, you are just fantasizing about it, without any discipline, to just make the issue go away.

And it makes your view divorced from reality, because freedom is central to the way the universe works.

 

[J Ciresoli]

Godobeyer, Your question expresses a profound truth. The fossil record has consistently illustrated that the theory of evolution is invalid. Despite a few disproven claims, no fossil of any creature in transition from one species to another has ever been found. Even in the very oldest layers of strata, fossils of plants and animals are of creatures that first appeared on earth in their distinct, specialized forms.

Actually we do have hundreds of transitional forms in the fossil record and genome mapping has given solid genetic evidence for common ancestry, as published in Nature magazine in 2005. The genome research was conducted by the Human Genome Project, which is headed by an evangelical Christian and has other Christians on its research team. One of the researchers is Dr. Ken Miller and he did a very good lecture in which he broke down this information so that even those with a basic knowledge of science can understand it. He is a Roman Catholic unashamedly and admits that he believes this evidence (human chromosomes #2 & #4 showing as fused pairs) to be real and reliable. I would encourage you to watch his lecture on the evidence for evolution on YouTube. I hope you will find it interesting and informative. Best Regards.

 

[Valjean]

The issue here is that you are fantasizing about how choosing works while you write your posting. Like all evolutionists, you are just fantasizing about it, without any discipline, to just make the issue go away.

And it makes your view divorced from reality, because freedom is central to the way the universe works.

I'm not "fantasizing" about choosing at all. I don't even understand what you mean by "choosing."
Please stop telling my how I don't understand and CLARIFY YOURSELF! Make me understand.

"Evolutionists" believe in evolution because science is disciplined, facts are carefully reserched and the decisions drawn from them repeatedly tested -- with rigorous discipline.
Again: If all the different life forms did not develop through evolution, how did they get here?

 

[Sapiens]

On closer inspection all these socalled useless leftovers serve a function.

But you are right that evolution theory predicts lots of useless and inefficient organisms, due to the randomness of mutations. Evolution theory predicts organisms to be sort of monsters with lots of useless bulges and weird things which natural selection slowly weeds out. And mathematics show that the total chaos of random mutation wins against selection.

Evolutionary theory predicts nothing of the sort, in fact it predicts much the opposite, you see any organism that wastes energy producing useless structures is likely to find itself at a disadvantage, albeit a minor one, when it comes to fitness. Even a small disadvantage, carried out over a rather short time will result in the loss of the structure in most all of the population.

 

[dust1n]

Wow, what a relief. For a while there I suspected you might be deluded or arrogant. Apparently everyone else is instead.

Well, to be fair, we do know so little about freedom and common discourse; so little, in fact, that we can't even possibly be informed about this freedom. Which is unfortunate, because "this freedom" has so much to do with empiricism or scientific evidence, that's it is difficult to deflect his argument, which really has yet to be presented, because I am too dumb to get it in the first place. Also, DNA.

 

[NewGuyOnTheBlock]

I am totally and completely lost in trying to decipher this thread. One is stomping his feet, making statements about "choices" and "free will" while others are insisting that they have no idea what he's talking about and that it has nothing to do with DNA.

If someone smacks me upside my head, I am going to feel pain. To feel this pain is not a choice. I feel this pain because of biological processes of nerve endings sending messages to my brain.

If I lose my footing while on a ladder, I am going to fall. I am not going to choose to fall. I will fall because there is this thing called "gravity"; a principle that greater mass attracts lesser mass; and the earth has more mass than my tiny body, so I will be pulled to that greater mass. I will fall regardless of choice.

Yes, I am well aware of philosophical, sociological and psychological debates regarding whether or not people truly have "free will". Can we simply choose a given thing? Or are we simply products of our genetics and experiences? When presented with a fork in the road, am I truly free to choose my path; or is it inevitable that one part of my brain will be dominate and I, like any other animal, will simply do that which I will do? The jury is largely still out this philosophical debate; and this debate extends to scientific fields, such as neurology.

But even if we include our genetics and environment, our experience indicates that we have free will; the power to choose; so just for sake of argument, we'll capitulate that humans have free will. As a human being with free will, I can choose to go to the store or stay home. I can choose to behave morally or immorally. I can choose which god, if any, to believe in (and I truly believe that if we want to believe something bad enough, we have the power to convince ourselves of it).

But I can not choose whether or not to feel pain. I can not choose whether or not to be drawn towards the greater mass of the earth. I can not choose whether or not there is a god. I can not choose whether or not evolution is true. And I can not choose whether or not the principles of DNA exist.

 

[Doug Shaver]

The fossil record has consistently illustrated that the theory of evolution is invalid.

Your church disagrees with you.