School project on evolution

by Leonie1234 17 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • Sea Breeze
    Sea Breeze

    Hi A. Mous

    It is fine to have an alternative viewpoint, but you have to be able to substantiate it and prove it in a materialistic way.

    I agree. Can you give a materialist, provable, incremental method by which the chicken and egg problem is resolved?

    "But there would be no egg without a chicken to produce it. Without an egg there can be no chicken, but without a chicken there can be no egg. How could the system have evolved one small functional step at a time? It’s an old question, one that Darwinists would like you to think they have answered satisfactorily, and long ago. They haven’t.

    The chicken-and-egg problem is the archetypal example of causal circularity. To get A we need B, but to get B we first need A. We can’t have one without the other. To get both together, we need foresight — an engineer capable of planning for the future. ... There are no demonstrated examples of unguided, mindless processes anticipating and solving problems that require a sophisticated orchestration of fine-tuned parts"

    - Biochemist Marcos Eberlin, a member of the Brazilian Academy of Sciences, who has published over 800 scientific articles and is author of the new book Foresight: How the Chemistry of Life Reveals Planning and Purpose.

    Evolution REQUIRES that parts of a system be held in stasis - for eons of time - while the remaining parts of the system get "developed" by random mutation/natural selection. In other words, these parts are somehow magically immune to entropy.

    There are tens of thousands of chicken and egg problems in Darwinian Evolution.

  • cofty

    Leonie - I apologise for Sea Breeze. As you can see some of us never got over our cult indoctrination and never learned to critique sources.

    He/she is in a minority and we are working on helping him/her but progress is slow.

    Evolution is a Fact...

  • cofty

    Here is some perspective on the list of so-called scientists who dissent from Darwinism. By the way many of the signatories were deceived and have asked to have their names removed.

    Here is a list of scientists called Steve who assent to the following statement. - "Evolution is a vital, well-supported, unifying principle of the biological sciences, and the scientific evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of the idea that all living things share a common ancestry. Although there are legitimate debates about the patterns and processes of evolution, there is no serious scientific doubt that evolution occurred or that natural selection is a major mechanism in its occurrence. It is scientifically inappropriate and pedagogically irresponsible for creationist pseudoscience, including but not limited to 'intelligent design,' to be introduced into the science curricula of our nation's public schools."


  • Half banana
    Half banana

    Chicken and egg problem, which came first?

    The evidence is present to exit from this conundrum, there is no need to be stuck in a loop. Instead there is a continuum of life. Eggs came before chickens -- and birds can be traced from fossils in the geological record back to therapods, egg laying 'dinosaurs'.

    Evidence for evolution is found in the fossils showing that all life has evolved from the same archaic biological material (DNA) back in the Precambrian period.

    Why would anyone want to deny evidence? Only because fossil evidence denies the need for a god.

  • Sea Breeze
    Sea Breeze

    Hi Half Banana,

    I think that exchanging the word "chicken" with the word "bird" or "dinosaur" doesn't resolve the problem.

    Which came first the dinosaur or the egg? Same problem, different chicken.

    Getting down to the root of the problem, Researchers may one day exhaustively understand complete human cells, but they don't now. To understand how far contemporary science is from this milestone, we first require estimates of the complexity of human cells. One reference suggests that a human sperm cell has a volume of 30 cubic micrometers, while another reveals that most human cells have densities quite similar to that of water (a thousand kilograms per cubic meter). Using the final fact that the molar mass of water is 18 grams, a quick calculation suggests that human sperm cells contain roughly a trillion atoms. For another datapoint, assuming neuronal cell volume of 6000 cubic micrometers, the analogous number for neurons is roughly 175 trillion atoms per cell.

    THE COMPLEXITY OF THE CELL The cell is the most complex and most elegantly designed system man has ever witnessed. Professor of biology Michael Denton, in his book entitled Evolution: A Theory in Crisis, explains this complexity with an example: "To grasp the reality of life as it has been revealed by molecular biology, we must magnify a cell a thousand million times until it is twenty kilometers in diameter and resembles a giant airship large enough to cover a great city like London or New York.

    What we would then see would be an object of unparalelled complexity and adaptive design. On the surface of the cell we would see millions of openings, like port holes of a vast space ship, opening and closing to allow a continual stream of materials to flow in and out. If we were to enter one of these openings we would find ourselves in a world of supreme technology and bewildering complexity... (a complexity) beyond our own creative capacities, a reality which is the very antithesis of chance, which excels in every sense anything produced by the intelligence of man..."

    Professor Klaus Dose, the president of the Institute of Biochemistrat the University of Johannes Gutenberg, states: More than 30 years of experimentation on the origin of life in the fields of chemical and molecular evolution have led to a better perception of the immensity of the problem of the origin of life on Earth rather than to its solution. At present all discussions on principal theories and experiments in the field either end in stalemate or in a confession of ignorance.

    The problem is that we have advanced our observational capabilities by several orders of magnatude than where they were just fifty years ago.

    Fifty years ago, the first molecular dynamics papers allowed scientists to exhaustively simulate systems with a few dozen atoms for picoseconds. Today ...due to significant gains in algorithmic sophisticiation from fifty years of research, modern scientists can simulate systems with hundreds of thousands of atoms for milliseconds at a time. Put another way, scientists today can study systems tens of thousands of times larger, for billion of times longer than they could fifty years go.

    This capability has revealed a cell complexity beyond anything ever previously imagined and has traditional darwinian evolutionists running for their lives.

    Mutations happen at known rates with the vast majority being destructive to the system. This known rate allows researches to calculate how long it might take to get a cell. The numbers are in the quadrillions of years and beyond.

    Here they run into a problem with astronomers who are able to accurately calculate the age of the universe by observing the expanding universe and running it backwards. They come up with around 13 billion years. Not enough time. Darwinists have hit a time wall with astronomers.

    Darwinian evolution is being taken down by other fields of research, that because of advances in observational techniques, has revealed a complexity beyond anything conceivable.

    This is all pretty cutting edge stuff and your grandfathers' evolutionist is simply not keeping up with modern discoveries of complexity.

    Chandra Wickramasinghe, one of the grearest scientists who ever lived, describes the reality he faced as a scientist who had been told throughout his life that life had emerged as a result of chance coincidences: From my earliest training as a scientist, I was very strongly brainwashed to believe that science cannot be consistent with any kind of deliberate creation. That notion has had to be painfully shed. At the moment, I can't find any rational argument to knock down the view which argues for conversion to God. We used to have an open mind; now we realize that the only logical answer to life is creation-and not accidental random shuffling.

    All of the parts shown, plus many more that there is not enough space to draw, plus the processes of those micro systems that would take volumes to describe, must all be present AT THE SAME TIME in order for the cell to "live".

    175 trillion atoms all perfectly arranged, AT THE SAME INSTANT IN TIME... for the purpose of life.

  • LoveUniHateExams

    Which came first the dinosaur or the egg? -

    ^^^ The egg still came first. Eggs with hard shells existed before dinosaurs came on the scene.

  • cofty

    SB you aren't parroting lots of facile objections that have been answered repeatedly.

    Have you ever invested the time to actually read some science books that present the evidence for evolution?

    I'm predicting the answer is no and that you won't answer the question.

  • cofty

    I've made that prediction about 20 times now on this forum and been right every single time,

Share this