Darkforum.com - Dark Stories, Dark Art, Poetry, Photography, Debates and Discussions
Home Register FAQ
Go Back   Darkforum.com - Dark Stories, Dark Art, Poetry, Photography, Debates and Discussions > Discussions > Topic Discussions
Reload this Page Science Disproves Evolution
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-16-11   #241
thefr0g
Ooglemagthorpe
Admin
 
thefr0g's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 7,832
thefr0g will become famous soon enough
Credits: 50,472,344
Hey DM, I'm headed out to the Market, would you like me to pick up a bag of Troll food for you? Looks like we're almost out.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-11   #242
Dark Messiah
Half-Wit Intellectual
Admin
 
Dark Messiah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Beautiful Sona-nyl
Posts: 14,943
Dark Messiah will become famous soon enough
Credits: 5,643
Yeah. Also I'm almost out of milk.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-11   #243
Pahu
Feared by the Devil
 
Pahu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 744
Pahu is on a distinguished road
Credits: 174,436
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Messiah View Post
You're going to have to clarify. Are you asking what proof is there that the term isn't used, or what proof is there that life is transitional? Because the second I already provided, and the former is an undue shifting of the burden of proof.
What proof did you provide that all life is transitional into different species?
__________________
Truth Frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-11   #244
Dark Messiah
Half-Wit Intellectual
Admin
 
Dark Messiah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Beautiful Sona-nyl
Posts: 14,943
Dark Messiah will become famous soon enough
Credits: 5,643
The fruit fly experiment, the existence of ring species. Alternately, we can look on the small scale at human biology; the way that skin tone changes to meet different levels of UV radiation, for instance, or how people in areas which have long had agriculture like the Middle East, China, etc., have little problem with obesity despite a high-carb diet, whereas in places where agriculture was very recent (Pacific Islands, for instance), obesity is endemic with the modern diet.

The tendency of life to change over time in response to different environments and stimuli is pretty well established.

We could look at all the different species of dogs bred for specific purposes, for another example.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-11   #245
Pahu
Feared by the Devil
 
Pahu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 744
Pahu is on a distinguished road
Credits: 174,436
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Messiah View Post


The fruit fly experiment, the existence of ring species.
I am not familiar with ring species. Fruit flies are something else. A century of fruit fly experiments, involving 3,000 consecutive generations, gives absolutely no basis for believing that any natural or artificial process can cause an increase in complexity and viability. No clear genetic improvement has ever been observed in any form of life, despite the many unnatural efforts to increase mutation rates. http://www.creationscience.com/onlin...html#wp1048910

Quote:
Alternately, we can look on the small scale at human biology; the way that skin tone changes to meet different levels of UV radiation, for instance, or how people in areas which have long had agriculture like the Middle East, China, etc., have little problem with obesity despite a high-carb diet, whereas in places where agriculture was very recent (Pacific Islands, for instance), obesity is endemic with the modern diet.

The tendency of life to change over time in response to different environments and stimuli is pretty well established.
All the above are simply examples of the built in ability of all life forms to adapt to changes in their environments. In none of your examples is there any evidence of evolution into a different species, as required by evolution.

Quote:
We could look at all the different species of dogs bred for specific purposes, for another example.
Selective breeding, done by intelligence, only makes use of that built in ability to adapt. You still have dogs.


Figure 3: Dog Variability. When bred for certain traits, dogs become different and distinctive. This is a common example of microevolution—changes in size, shape, and color—or minor genetic alterations. It is not macroevolution: an upward, beneficial increase in complexity, as evolutionists claim happened millions of times between bacteria and man. Macroevolution has never been observed in any breeding experiment.

Not only do Mendel’s laws give a theoretical explanation for why variations are limited, broad experimental verification also exists (a). For example, if evolution happened, organisms (such as bacteria) that quickly produce the most offspring should have the most variations and mutations. Natural selection would then select the more favorable changes, allowing organisms with those traits to survive, reproduce, and pass on their beneficial genes. Therefore, organisms that have allegedly evolved the most should have short reproduction cycles and many offspring. We see the opposite. In general, more complex organisms, such as humans, have fewer offspring and longer reproduction cycles (b). Again, variations within existing organisms appear to be bounded.

Organisms that occupy the most diverse environments in the greatest numbers for the longest times should also, according to macroevolution, have the greatest potential for evolving new features and species. Microbes falsify this prediction as well. Their numbers per species are astronomical, and they are dispersed throughout practically all the world’s environments. Nevertheless, the number of microbial species is relatively few (c). New features apparently don’t evolve.

a. “...the discovery of the Danish scientist W. L. Johannsen that the more or less constant somatic variations upon which Darwin and Wallace had placed their emphasis in species change cannot be selectively pushed beyond a certain point, that such variability does not contain the secret of ‘indefinite departure.’ ” Loren Eiseley, Darwin’s Century (Garden City, New York: Doubleday & Co., Inc., 1958), p. 227.

b. “The awesome morphological complexity of organisms such as vertebrates that have far fewer individuals on which selection can act therefore remains somewhat puzzling (for me at least), despite the geological time scales available...” Peter R. Sheldon, “Complexity Still Running,” Nature, Vol. 350, 14 March 1991, p. 104.

c. Bland J. Finlay, “Global Dispersal of Free-Living Microbial Eukaryote Species,” Science, Vol. 296, 10 May 2002, pp. 1061–1063.

[From “In the Beginning” by Walt Brown
http://www.creationscience.com/onlin...tml#wp1053690]
__________________
Truth Frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-11   #246
Pahu
Feared by the Devil
 
Pahu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 744
Pahu is on a distinguished road
Credits: 174,436

Ape-Men? 1

For over a century, studies of skulls and teeth have produced unreliable conclusions about man’s origin (a). Also, fossil evidence allegedly supporting human evolution is fragmentary and open to other interpretations. Fossil evidence showing the evolution of chimpanzees, supposedly the closest living relative to humans, is nonexistent (b).

Stories claiming that fossils of primitive, apelike men have been found are overstated (c).

It is now universally acknowledged that Piltdown “man” was a hoax, yet Piltdown “man” was in textbooks for more than 40 years (d).

a. “... existing phylogenetic hypotheses about human evolution [based on skulls and teeth] are unlikely to be reliable.” Mark Collard and Bernard Wood, “How Reliable Are Human Phylogenetic Hypotheses?” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 97, No. 9, 25 April 2000, p. 5003.

In 1995, nine anthropologists announced their discovery of early representatives of Homo habilis and Homo ergaster in China. [See Huang Wanpo et al., “Early Homo and Associated Artifacts from Asia,” Nature, Vol. 378, 16 November 1995, pp. 275–278.] Fourteen years later the same journal published a retraction. The discovery was of a “mystery ape.” [See Russell L. Ciochon, “The Mystery Ape of Pleistocene Asia,” Nature, Vol. 459, 18 June 2009, pp. 910–911.]

How many more mystery apes are there, and do they explain other so-called “ape-men”?

b. “Fossil evidence of human evolutionary history is fragmentary and open to various interpretations. Fossil evidence of chimpanzee evolution is absent altogether.” Henry Gee, “Return to the Planet of the Apes,” Nature, Vol. 412, 12 July 2001, p. 131.

c. Lord Zuckerman candidly stated that if special creation did not occur, then no scientist could deny that man evolved from some apelike creature “without leaving any fossil traces of the steps of the transformation.” Solly Zuckerman (former Chief Scientific Advisor to the British Government and Honorary Secretary of the Zoological Society of London), Beyond the Ivory Tower (New York: Taplinger Publishing Co., 1970), p. 64.

Bowden, pp. 56–246.

Duane T. Gish, Battle for Creation, Vol. 2, editor Henry M. Morris (San Diego: Creation-Life Publishers, 1976), pp. 193–200, 298–305.

d. Speaking of Piltdown man, Lewin admits a common human problem even scientists have:

“How is it that trained men, the greatest experts of their day, could look at a set of modern human bones—the cranial fragments—and “see” a clear simian signature in them; and “see” in an ape’s jaw the unmistakable signs of humanity? The answers, inevitably, have to do with the scientists’ expectations and their effects on the interpretation of data.” Lewin, Bones of Contention, p. 61.”

[From “In the Beginning” by Walt Brown
http://www.creationscience.com/onlin...tml#wp3179991]
__________________
Truth Frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-11   #247
Dark Messiah
Half-Wit Intellectual
Admin
 
Dark Messiah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Beautiful Sona-nyl
Posts: 14,943
Dark Messiah will become famous soon enough
Credits: 5,643
Attention

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pahu View Post
Fruit flies are something else. A century of fruit fly experiments, involving 3,000 consecutive generations, gives absolutely no basis for believing that any natural or artificial process can cause an increase in complexity and viability.
Quote:
All the above are simply examples of the built in ability of all life forms to adapt to changes in their environments.
These two statements cannot both be true.

The "complexity" argument, to the extent that such a thing is measurable, is categorically untrue.

And viability is adaption to an environment. There's no other meaningful definition of viability.

Quote:
In none of your examples is there any evidence of evolution into a different species, as required by evolution.
Quote:
I am not familiar with ring species.
Now would be a good time to read up, since understanding that is key to understanding why your first quote here doesn't make sense.

As genetic drift increases, the odds of a successful breeding decrease until they reach zero between two genetic codes. Many breeds of dog, for instance, have great difficulty cross-breeding, although they may still successfully breed with intermediary species and so exchange genetic information.

Also, levels of speciation have been observed in the fruit fly experiments, as well as many plants.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-11   #248
thefr0g
Ooglemagthorpe
Admin
 
thefr0g's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 7,832
thefr0g will become famous soon enough
Credits: 50,472,344
I'm no fancy pants "reader" who has been to a lot of websites with blue text, but correct me if I'm wrong. The whole "there's no evidence of one species evolving into a completely new species" is kind of dumb. I look at it like mixing paint colors.

Say you have a can of yellow paint. Over the course of thousands of years you add microscopic amounts of blue paint every day. As time wears on that yellow paint will ever so slowly turn slightly toward the green side, and eventually you're going to end up with a can of green paint. There's no magic switch between yellow and green, there is just a gradual change.

Is this metaphor accurate or am I an idiot?
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-11   #249
Dark Messiah
Half-Wit Intellectual
Admin
 
Dark Messiah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Beautiful Sona-nyl
Posts: 14,943
Dark Messiah will become famous soon enough
Credits: 5,643
It's pretty accurate. The creationist argument basically assumes that it's "unscientific" to look at the behavior of things and assume that those behaviors tend to apply to the past. Like the Sun may have moved along the outer spiral arm of the Milky Way Galaxy since we started measuring such things, but that doesn't somehow mean it's going to keep orbiting. Creationists argue that it's unreasonable to assume that the Sun's current position is a result of past movement instead of it simply having been created that way while moving six thousand years ago.

It's a surprisingly solipsistic argument.

Also, where's my milk?
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-11   #250
thefr0g
Ooglemagthorpe
Admin
 
thefr0g's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 7,832
thefr0g will become famous soon enough
Credits: 50,472,344
Oh sorry, got distracted tossing a few handfulls of troll feed into the yard.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-11   #251
Sik Simon
Ate God
Overlord
 
Sik Simon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: The hood, US
Posts: 17,808
Sik Simon is on a distinguished road
Credits: 26,977
Quote:
Originally Posted by thefr0g View Post
I'm no fancy pants "reader" who has been to a lot of websites with blue text, but correct me if I'm wrong. The whole "there's no evidence of one species evolving into a completely new species" is kind of dumb. I look at it like mixing paint colors.

Say you have a can of yellow paint. Over the course of thousands of years you add microscopic amounts of blue paint every day. As time wears on that yellow paint will ever so slowly turn slightly toward the green side, and eventually you're going to end up with a can of green paint. There's no magic switch between yellow and green, there is just a gradual change.

Is this metaphor accurate or am I an idiot?
Intricate metaphor to the max, it was like I was there in the paint and shit, However, evolution is not a gradual change per say, it is something that happens. A fish needs a fucking oxygen molecule so it does some shit.
__________________
*Saunters by with a devil-may-care look in my eye.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-11   #252
Sik Simon
Ate God
Overlord
 
Sik Simon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: The hood, US
Posts: 17,808
Sik Simon is on a distinguished road
Credits: 26,977
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Messiah View Post
It's pretty accurate. The creationist argument basically assumes that it's "unscientific" to look at the behavior of things and assume that those behaviors tend to apply to the past. Like the Sun may have moved along the outer spiral arm of the Milky Way Galaxy since we started measuring such things, but that doesn't somehow mean it's going to keep orbiting. Creationists argue that it's unreasonable to assume that the Sun's current position is a result of past movement instead of it simply having been created that way while moving six thousand years ago.

It's a surprisingly solipsistic argument.

Also, where's my milk?
To quote brak: "Hah! Nature."
__________________
*Saunters by with a devil-may-care look in my eye.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-11   #253
surreal
.
 
surreal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 4,919
surreal is on a distinguished road
Credits: 105,127
You got something on your face there Chester. Wipe it off.

Have a heaping helping of our hospitality.
also
Quote:
I'm no fancy pants "reader" who has been to a lot of websites with blue text, but correct me if I'm wrong.
That was lulz
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-11   #254
Sik Simon
Ate God
Overlord
 
Sik Simon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: The hood, US
Posts: 17,808
Sik Simon is on a distinguished road
Credits: 26,977
Haha, we were just talking about chesters in the chatroom. new programming: Chesters in the classroom. A pedofile experiment.
__________________
*Saunters by with a devil-may-care look in my eye.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-11   #255
surreal
.
 
surreal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 4,919
surreal is on a distinguished road
Credits: 105,127
That's bullshit and you know it.
Wait, what am I pissed off about?
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-11   #256
Sik Simon
Ate God
Overlord
 
Sik Simon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: The hood, US
Posts: 17,808
Sik Simon is on a distinguished road
Credits: 26,977
Chesters in the classroom
__________________
*Saunters by with a devil-may-care look in my eye.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-11   #257
surreal
.
 
surreal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 4,919
surreal is on a distinguished road
Credits: 105,127
Piece of shit chesters.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-11   #258
Pahu
Feared by the Devil
 
Pahu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 744
Pahu is on a distinguished road
Credits: 174,436

Ape-Men? 2

Since 1953, when Piltdown man was discovered to be a hoax, at least eleven people have been accused of perpetrating the hoax. These included Charles Dawson, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, creator of Sherlock Holmes.

The hoaxer now appears to have been Martin A. C. Hinton, who had a reputation as a practical joker and worked in the British Museum (Natural History) when Piltdown man was discovered. In the mid-1970s, an old trunk, marked with Hinton’s initials, was found in the museum’s attic. The trunk contained bones stained and carved in the same detailed way as the Piltdown bones. [For details, see Henry Gee, “Box of Bones ‘Clinches’ Identity of Piltdown Palaeontology Hoaxer,” Nature, Vol. 381, 23 May 1996, pp. 261–262.]

Before 1977, evidence for Ramapithecus was a mere handful of teeth and jaw fragments. We now know these fragments were pieced together incorrectly by Louis Leakey (e) and others into a form resembling part of the human jaw (f). Ramapithecus was just an ape (g).


Figure 13: Ramapithecus. Some textbooks still claim that Ramapithecus is man’s ancestor, an intermediate between man and some apelike ancestor. This mistaken belief resulted from piecing together, in 1932, fragments of upper teeth and bones into the two large pieces. This was done so the shape of the jaw resembled the parabolic arch of man. In 1977, a complete lower jaw of Ramapithecus was found. The true shape of the jaw was not parabolic, but rather U-shaped, distinctive of apes.

The only remains of Nebraska “man” turned out to be a pig’s tooth.


Figure 14: Nebraska Man. Artists’ drawings, even those based on speculation, powerfully influence the public. Nebraska man was mistakenly based on one tooth of an extinct pig. Yet in 1922, The Illustrated London News published a picture showing our supposed ancestors. Of course, it is highly unlikely that any fossil evidence could support the image conveyed of a naked man carrying a club.

e. Allen L. Hammond, “Tales of an Elusive Ancestor,” Science 83, November 1983, pp. 37, 43.

f. Adrienne L. Zihlman and J. Lowenstein, “False Start of the Human Parade,” Natural History, Vol. 88, August–September 1979, pp. 86–91.

g. Hammond, p. 43.

“The dethroning of Ramapithecus—from putative [supposed] first human in 1961 to extinct relative of the orangutan in 1982—is one of the most fascinating, and bitter, sagas in the search for human origins.” Lewin, Bones of Contention, p. 86.

[From “In the Beginning” by Walt Brown
http://www.creationscience.com/onlin...tml#wp1127769]
__________________
Truth Frees! Evolution is evidence free speculation masquerading as science.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-11   #259
renovate
Dark Thrall
 
renovate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: downtown Toronto
Posts: 4,296
renovate is on a distinguished road
Credits: 80,475
You all are slaves to the idea of science. It is better not to know!
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


|reno|
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-11   #260
Sik Simon
Ate God
Overlord
 
Sik Simon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: The hood, US
Posts: 17,808
Sik Simon is on a distinguished road
Credits: 26,977
I feel like i'm in a chassroom whenever I'm in this thread...Why AM I reading this shit?
__________________
*Saunters by with a devil-may-care look in my eye.
is Offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The last person to post on this thread is the WINNER!!! pt2 gArGOyLe^^ Topic Discussions 4130 07-22-17 11:06
Interesting Science News articles. Panthera66 Topic Discussions 3 05-28-10 07:10
the evolution debate ShotDownStar Topic Discussions 66 12-08-06 19:14
The warped minds of the wholesome christians. Lenina Topic Discussions 122 09-21-05 01:18
Science 101! SilentShade Topic Discussions 39 07-07-04 20:37

Recent Threads
MiaOw and Lenina
2 Days Ago 03:05
by Kendra
Last post by Dark Messiah
23 Hours Ago 18:36
I hope there's no...
5 Days Ago 16:55
Last post by Sic Simon
5 Days Ago 16:55
I Got Da' News Baby!
4 Weeks Ago 21:10
Last post by Sic Simon
5 Days Ago 16:20
Spent my last dollar on...
4 Weeks Ago 13:27
Last post by Wicked Lady
1 Week Ago 12:43
Snakes are gonna take...
05-21-18 22:15
Last post by Sic Simon
3 Weeks Ago 15:52
What Are you Listening...
03-21-05 06:40
By Cucking Funt
Last post by Sic Simon
3 Weeks Ago 15:05
Who used to like the...
3 Weeks Ago 14:06
Last post by Sic Simon
3 Weeks Ago 14:06
If you've never heard of...
05-03-18 18:00
Last post by Baphamett
4 Weeks Ago 17:28
Online Users: 76
0 members and 76 guests
No Members online
Most users ever online was 1928, 06-09-15 at 18:20.
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.0 RC2


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Skin developed by: vBStyles.com

© 2006 - 2016 Dark Forum | About Dark Forum | Advertisers | Investors | Legal | A member of the Crowdgather Forum Community