The False Science of the Evolution Theory

[Enow]

1 Timothy 6:[SUP]20 [/SUP]O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:[SUP]21 [/SUP]Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen.

Science is about what can be observed and thus can be proven. Science also includes the theoritical, sometimes derived from what has been observed like the theory of gravity, but not always, like the theory of macroevolution which is basically what the theory of evolution is about which can never be observed and thus can never be proven.

This false science tries to steal a page from the Law of Biogenesis by citing microevolution from it and even go so far as to rewrite the law of Biogenesis as if it does not entail that life begets similar life at all so as to make macroevolution believable. The irony is that as this Law of Biogenesis disproves spontaneous generation, they blur that line of truth in science by waving a magic wand of millions of years as if spontaneous generation can happen outside the realm of observation and provability.

If you look all across the internet at evolution sites, universities, and online dictionaries, the definitions for micro evolution and macro evolution are not consistent as some will have it stand apart, and yet some will blur the lines and be one and the same.

Then you really see the theory of evolution for the false science that it is when Stephen Jay Gould developed the Theory of Punctual Equilibrium or "Rapid Macroevolution" because of the huge gaps in the fossil records for transitional fossils. He, and other leading evolutionary scientists today favor this theory and Gould had theorized that the explosion in the fossil records happened in around a specific period per the evolutionary timetable and declared that a global flood had to be the cause for tapping that capacity.

Wow. So close and yet so far, as they will never see the truth as long as they look at the evidence only according to the theorized evolutionary timetable.

As it is, all that you have heard about gradual macroevolution being a fact; that there was so much evidence for transitional fossils in the fossil records as hyped for the evolution theory to be true when it never was true; because that was why the Theory of Punctual Equilibrium was developed, because everything they had said about Gradual Macroevolution was never a fact, let alone observed, and thus never proven. And guess what? Neither is this new favored theory for macroevolution; Punctual Equilibrium. It is still in the realm of the theoritical. of the mind; which cannot be observed nor proven.

Hence a fairy tale running amok in science; as it always has been and always will be.

Yes... you will come across the ignorants & mockers in this false science that will tell you both are true while ignoring why Punctual Equilibrium was theorized so as to disprove gradual macroevolution.

No one can prove how old the earth is by science. They can only theorized.

We can prove how old the earth is by the Bible; as we trust the Lord to tell us the truth through the prophets as moved by the Holy Ghost.

Uncorrupted science agrees that what can be observed and proven is real science and since the evolution theory cannot be observed nor proven, then it is a false science and believers should heed Paul's words to Timothy not to heed false science or false knowledge, especially when it goes against the written word; His words as scripture.

2 Peter 1:[SUP]19 [/SUP]We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:[SUP]20 [/SUP]Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.[SUP]21 [/SUP]For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

So believe His unchangeable words in the scripture over the ever changing words of false science in the evolution theory.

Hebrews 13:[SUP]8 [/SUP]Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever. [SUP]9 [/SUP]Be not carried about with divers and strange doctrines.

Do not listen to those that try to compromise His words for the false science that is the evolution theory. Believe Him.

May those that have gone astray, go before that throne of grace and listen to Him & His words to see the evolution theory for what it is; a false science.

 

[trofimus]

Where is the clear boundary between micro and macro evolution according to you? What would be a macroevolution you would accept?

 

[trofimus]

"Claim:
No new species have been observed.

Response:

New species have arisen in historical times. For example:

A new species of mosquito, isolated in London's Underground, has speciated from Culex pipiens (Byrne and Nichols 1999; Nuttall 1998).

Helacyton gartleri is the HeLa cell culture, which evolved from a human cervical carcinoma in 1951. The culture grows indefinitely and has become widespread (Van Valen and Maiorana 1991).

A similar event appears to have happened with dogs relatively recently. Sticker's sarcoma, or canine transmissible venereal tumor, is caused by an organism genetically independent from its hosts but derived from a wolf or dog tumor (Zimmer 2006; Murgia et al. 2006).

Several new species of plants have arisen via polyploidy (when the chromosome count multiplies by two or more) (de Wet 1971). One example is Primula kewensis (Newton and Pellew 1929).

Incipient speciation, where two subspecies interbreed rarely or with only little success, is common. Here are just a few examples:

Rhagoletis pomonella, the apple maggot fly, is undergoing sympatric speciation. Its native host in North America is Hawthorn (Crataegus spp.), but in the mid-1800s, a new population formed on introduced domestic apples (Malus pumila). The two races are kept partially isolated by natural selection (Filchak et al. 2000).
The mosquito Anopheles gambiae shows incipient speciation between its populations in northwestern and southeastern Africa (Fanello et al. 2003; Lehmann et al. 2003).
Silverside fish show incipient speciation between marine and estuarine populations (Beheregaray and Sunnucks 2001).

Ring species show the process of speciation in action. In ring species, the species is distributed more or less in a line, such as around the base of a mountain range. Each population is able to breed with its neighboring population, but the populations at the two ends are not able to interbreed. (In a true ring species, those two end populations are adjacent to each other, completing the ring.) Examples of ring species are

the salamander Ensatina, with seven different subspecies on the west coast of the United States. They form a ring around California's central valley. At the south end, adjacent subspecies klauberi and eschscholtzi do not interbreed (Brown n.d.; Wake 1997).
greenish warblers (Phylloscopus trochiloides), around the Himalayas. Their behavioral and genetic characteristics change gradually, starting from central Siberia, extending around the Himalayas, and back again, so two forms of the songbird coexist but do not interbreed in that part of their range (Irwin et al. 2001; Whitehouse 2001; Irwin et al. 2005).
the deer mouse (Peromyces maniculatus), with over fifty subspecies in North America.
many species of birds, including Parus major and P. minor, Halcyon chloris, Zosterops, Lalage, Pernis, the Larus argentatus group, and Phylloscopus trochiloides (Mayr 1942, 182-183).
the American bee Hoplitis (Alcidamea) producta (Mayr 1963, 510).
the subterranean mole rat, Spalax ehrenbergi (Nevo 1999).

Evidence of speciation occurs in the form of organisms that exist only in environments that did not exist a few hundreds or thousands of years ago. For example:
In several Canadian lakes, which originated in the last 10,000 years following the last ice age, stickleback fish have diversified into separate species for shallow and deep water (Schilthuizen 2001, 146-151).
Cichlids in Lake Malawi and Lake Victoria have diversified into hundreds of species. Parts of Lake Malawi which originated in the nineteenth century have species indigenous to those parts (Schilthuizen 2001, 166-176).
A Mimulus species adapted for soils high in copper exists only on the tailings of a copper mine that did not exist before 1859 (Macnair 1989).

There is further evidence that speciation can be caused by infection with a symbiont. A Wolbachia bacterium infects and causes postmating reproductive isolation between the wasps Nasonia vitripennis and N. giraulti (Bordenstein and Werren 1997).

Some young-earth creationists claim that speciation is essential to explain Noah's ark. The ark was not roomy enough to carry and care for all species, so speciation is invoked to explain how the much fewer "kinds" aboard the ark became the diversity we see today. Also, some species have special needs that could not have been met during the flood (e.g., fish requiring fresh water). Creationists assume that they evolved from other, more tolerant organisms since the Flood. (Woodmorappe 1996)"

Taken from talkorigins.org:
CB910: New species

 

[Dino246]

One quick comment: Stephen Jay Gould's theory is "Punctuated Equilibrium", not "Punctual Equilibrium".

 

[Enow]

One quick comment: Stephen Jay Gould's theory is "Punctuated Equilibrium", not "Punctual Equilibrium".

Thanks for the correction.

 

[Enow]

Where is the clear boundary between micro and macro evolution according to you? What would be a macroevolution you would accept?

When a cow is no longer a cow but something else that can no longer reproduce with that cow.

 

[trofimus]

When a cow is no longer a cow but something else that can no longer reproduce with that cow.

There are dozens of such cases. Some are listed in my previous post.

 

[Enow]

"Claim:
No new species have been observed.

Response:

New species have arisen in historical times. For example:

A new species of mosquito, isolated in London's Underground, has speciated from Culex pipiens (Byrne and Nichols 1999; Nuttall 1998).

Helacyton gartleri is the HeLa cell culture, which evolved from a human cervical carcinoma in 1951. The culture grows indefinitely and has become widespread (Van Valen and Maiorana 1991).

A similar event appears to have happened with dogs relatively recently. Sticker's sarcoma, or canine transmissible venereal tumor, is caused by an organism genetically independent from its hosts but derived from a wolf or dog tumor (Zimmer 2006; Murgia et al. 2006).

Several new species of plants have arisen via polyploidy (when the chromosome count multiplies by two or more) (de Wet 1971). One example is Primula kewensis (Newton and Pellew 1929).

Incipient speciation, where two subspecies interbreed rarely or with only little success, is common. Here are just a few examples:

Rhagoletis pomonella, the apple maggot fly, is undergoing sympatric speciation. Its native host in North America is Hawthorn (Crataegus spp.), but in the mid-1800s, a new population formed on introduced domestic apples (Malus pumila). The two races are kept partially isolated by natural selection (Filchak et al. 2000).
The mosquito Anopheles gambiae shows incipient speciation between its populations in northwestern and southeastern Africa (Fanello et al. 2003; Lehmann et al. 2003).
Silverside fish show incipient speciation between marine and estuarine populations (Beheregaray and Sunnucks 2001).

Ring species show the process of speciation in action. In ring species, the species is distributed more or less in a line, such as around the base of a mountain range. Each population is able to breed with its neighboring population, but the populations at the two ends are not able to interbreed. (In a true ring species, those two end populations are adjacent to each other, completing the ring.) Examples of ring species are

the salamander Ensatina, with seven different subspecies on the west coast of the United States. They form a ring around California's central valley. At the south end, adjacent subspecies klauberi and eschscholtzi do not interbreed (Brown n.d.; Wake 1997).
greenish warblers (Phylloscopus trochiloides), around the Himalayas. Their behavioral and genetic characteristics change gradually, starting from central Siberia, extending around the Himalayas, and back again, so two forms of the songbird coexist but do not interbreed in that part of their range (Irwin et al. 2001; Whitehouse 2001; Irwin et al. 2005).
the deer mouse (Peromyces maniculatus), with over fifty subspecies in North America.
many species of birds, including Parus major and P. minor, Halcyon chloris, Zosterops, Lalage, Pernis, the Larus argentatus group, and Phylloscopus trochiloides (Mayr 1942, 182-183).
the American bee Hoplitis (Alcidamea) producta (Mayr 1963, 510).
the subterranean mole rat, Spalax ehrenbergi (Nevo 1999).

Evidence of speciation occurs in the form of organisms that exist only in environments that did not exist a few hundreds or thousands of years ago. For example:
In several Canadian lakes, which originated in the last 10,000 years following the last ice age, stickleback fish have diversified into separate species for shallow and deep water (Schilthuizen 2001, 146-151).
Cichlids in Lake Malawi and Lake Victoria have diversified into hundreds of species. Parts of Lake Malawi which originated in the nineteenth century have species indigenous to those parts (Schilthuizen 2001, 166-176).
A Mimulus species adapted for soils high in copper exists only on the tailings of a copper mine that did not exist before 1859 (Macnair 1989).

There is further evidence that speciation can be caused by infection with a symbiont. A Wolbachia bacterium infects and causes postmating reproductive isolation between the wasps Nasonia vitripennis and N. giraulti (Bordenstein and Werren 1997).

Some young-earth creationists claim that speciation is essential to explain Noah's ark. The ark was not roomy enough to carry and care for all species, so speciation is invoked to explain how the much fewer "kinds" aboard the ark became the diversity we see today. Also, some species have special needs that could not have been met during the flood (e.g., fish requiring fresh water). Creationists assume that they evolved from other, more tolerant organisms since the Flood. (Woodmorappe 1996)"

Taken from talkorigins.org:
CB910: New species

A new kind of mosquito from another specie of mosquito is not macroevoluton; in according to the theory of evolution; that is microevolution. The same goes for the fly and the salamander and anything else. Just because they show a variance in outward appearance, do not overlook the fact that they are still a mosquito, a fly, and a salamander.

So when they start blurring the lines and start blending microevolution as macroevolution, then no one can say they are citing facts.

If you are a believer in the Lord Jesus Christ, do not play their game by reading all about their technical speech in explaining their findings when it is being given only in respect to the evolution theory as assuming it to be true when it is not.

All I can ask you to do is set aside all their hypothesizing and believe Jesus Christ in His words when He validated the first marriage of mankind and even validated the creation of the seventh day thus validating the scripture of Genesis as true.

When behemoth as descibed in Job 40th chapter can be nothing else but a dinosaur as testified as created with man & living with man, then the evolution theory is false, because it cites dinosaurs as extinct millions of years before man came.

AND death was not in the world before Adam had sinned. Therefore robbing the whole point as to why Jesus had to come and die for our sins as the creature ( nature ) awaits the manifestations of the sons of God in redemption for nature will be delivered as well.

To cite death was in the world before man came unto the scene or even to cite God playing around with evolution before He got man right to say it was good.... runs contrary to His words when it was evening & morning each day of creation.

So while evolutionists play around in the dark with their fallible devices and their fallible ever changing perspective in the false science that is the evolution theory, I believe in Jesus Christ and in His words that never changes.

 

[chickenkiller]

If you want a close up view of evolution you can find it underground.

 

[Enow]

There are dozens of such cases. Some are listed in my previous post.

If you can believe that site. It cannot be proven that the new species came from that other species, now can they? They are not "God" to observe that.

I know that they can interbreed a lion with a tiger by design and get a liger, both female & male, but they cannot reproduce. Just because they are of the cat family, that it means they are compatible. Same with what you are citing.

And I know about that site as it was started out as a punking site on believers at Delphi Forums. In was in its beginnings that they got caught lying to believers at Delphi forums. They would argue about some fossil, saying that it is a real fossil when it was proven by science that it was not. One believer got them to finally admit it, but meanwhile, they kept pushing the lie on other believers until that believer that proved them wrong, caught them still lying about it as being real.

So... I do not take anything at that site at face value seriously. Go to their science source & confirm it, before accepting it.

Macro evolution has always been about transforming into another different kind entirely as being a transitional creature and not being the same thing at all or of that species at all.

And Punctuated Equilibrium is the favoured theory disproving gradual macroevolution so you cannot refer to microevolution as a means by how macro evolution happened.

This is why I am not playing this game any more. I know that the evolution theory is false.

If you want to lose yourself in it, and yet you are a believer, then I ask you to pray to Jesus to prove everything that you think is true about the evolution theory, because there are liars at that site; and no lie can be of the truth, right?

Intelligence is over rated when men lose themselves in their attempts to prove the evolution theory when they should be relying on His wisdom to see the truth outside of the evolution theory.

Like... prove that they had actually observed this new bird coming from that other bird that they no longer interbred by rather than just give some vague generalization of what has been generally known about the island or place to say.. oh wow.. this came out of nowhere... when in fact, it was probably there all along; but not seen as much.

I am sure as you live in an area, you think you have seen all the birds that are regularly seen in your area and then out of the blue, a strange bird visits your neighborhood. That is not evidence of macro evolution either.

So I believe His words over any self proclaimed peer review paper when the whole point of scientists getting grants from the government is favored towards those proving the evolution theory as true.

[video=youtube;V5EPymcWp-g]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5EPymcWp-g[/video]

 

[chickenkiller]

You can believe in evolution and believe in god. People tend to forget that.

 

[Enow]

If you want a close up view of evolution you can find it underground.

Such a vague reference does require further explanation of what it is that we can observe underground that would prove macroevolution.

If I pointed out the frog as evidence of macroevolution as we can see it go from the egg to the tadpole and then to the frog or point to the caterpillar then the cocoon and then the butterfly, evolutionists would laugh at me, because it is in its DNA to do that.

And yet they fail to see how macroevolution can never happen because no additional genetic information has never been observed as being added to a living organism to make it cease to be that living organism but something else entirely.

But they dream big.

So feel free to cite an example of what we can observe underground of this evolution theory, otherwise, all I can see is nothing.

 

[Enow]

You can believe in evolution and believe in god. People tend to forget that.

Believers have tried, but they do so in error, and at cost of disbelieving some parts of the Bible and eventually Jesus's own words when He validated the scripture as a whole that cannot be broken.

Since no lie can be of the truth, such believers may find themselves not defending the faith in Jesus Christ at all when they permit doubts in His words about the world around us and thus doubts in His words about other things too, like salvation.

 

[BeyondET]

Huh well in just ninth months, you went from a ball of soup to a thing with a tail to fully develop baby huh. Now I'm not much on the theories behind some of these folks who think they may have found the right path of evolution but I am believer that God is the great farmer and nothing was done it short order. In time the right evolve path that humans took from dirt to bone to flesh will be. Does anyone know what dirt is made of? what makes up dirt? What is evening and morning, well it is 4am to 10am morning time, evening time is 10pm to 4am time frames. Hebrew I think it's the moment the sun comes up is morning time and evening is when the sun is setting yet both of these time frames light is visible. isn't there twelve hours in a day and twelve hours in a night indeed, yet Genesis never mentions and there was morning and evening and day and night thus complete 24 hour day.

[video=youtube;LcgXN5UAMOQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LcgXN5UAMOQ[/video]

 

[chickenkiller]

Such a vague reference does require further explanation of what it is that we can observe underground that would prove macroevolution.

If I pointed out the frog as evidence of macroevolution as we can see it go from the egg to the tadpole and then to the frog or point to the caterpillar then the cocoon and then the butterfly, evolutionists would laugh at me, because it is in its DNA to do that.

And yet they fail to see how macroevolution can never happen because no additional genetic information has never been observed as being added to a living organism to make it cease to be that living organism but something else entirely.

But they dream big.

So feel free to cite an example of what we can observe underground of this evolution theory, otherwise, all I can see is nothing.

How much time have you spent underground? Every moment I spend underground I see changes.

 

[chickenkiller]

Believers have tried, but they do so in error, and at cost of disbelieving some parts of the Bible and eventually Jesus's own words when He validated the scripture as a whole that cannot be broken.

Since no lie can be of the truth, such believers may find themselves not defending the faith in Jesus Christ at all when they permit doubts in His words about the world around us and thus doubts in His words about other things too, like salvation.

Im just saying you can believe in A god and evolution.

 

[Dino246]

You can believe in evolution and believe in god. People tend to forget that.

Sure, if you define evolution as "change with respect to time". But that is not the topic of this thread.

One cannot consistently believe rightly in the God of the Bible and in macroevolution.

 

[BeyondET]

Sure, if you define evolution as "change with respect to time". But that is not the topic of this thread.

One cannot consistently believe rightly in the God of the Bible and in macroevolution.

Huh I must have miss that post where chickenkiller mentioned macro evolution. I see he mentions evolution but not macro.

 

[Dino246]

Huh I must have miss that post where chickenkiller mentioned macro evolution. I see he mentions evolution but not macro.

Exactly. He's either promoting a ridiculous and unbiblical idea or he's engaging in the fallacy of equivocation.

 

[BeyondET]

Exactly. He's either promoting a ridiculous and unbiblical idea or he's engaging in the fallacy of equivocation.

Well that's your take on it, I agree with him, and I know I'm ridiculous too, but I do believe the dirt mention in the bible is the same dirt that is made up of all kinds of things, that what God said He made man from the dirt. Check out what makes up dirt.