The Lie of Evolution......

[prove-all]

Not one “missing link” has been discovered. This represents a huge piece of the evolutionary pie
that is missing, and it cannot rationally be ignored. But that is exactly what pro-evolution scientists
do. They refuse to release their grip on evolution even when the evidence contradicts their claims.

Even Darwin was aware of the missing evidence for evolution. Evolutionist Sir Edmund Leach stated
in Nature 293:19 (1981), “Missing links in the sequence of fossil evidence were a worry to Darwin.
He felt sure they would eventually turn up, but they are still missing and seem likely to remain so.”

 

[Jewel5712]

I believe the Biblical creation and am excited when science uncovers things to PROVE the Bible as fact..however..i also believe that man..plamts animals etc have all environmentally evoloved.

 

[rlm68]

There is micro evolution and macro evolution. Micro evolution creates different breeds in a species and for thousands of years men have created different breeds in the domesticated animals. Never ever have they created a new species. The closest they came is the sterile mule.

The dogs I breed I purchased from a retired zoologist who is/ and now I am/ helping to restore the breed (Tibetan Mastiffs). They have an extensive lineage because on dog charts they are still considered 95% wolf and 5% domesticated. They were the very first successful (now breed of dog) to be bred from the actual wolf, and why they still maintain 95% wolf. In fact, mine look exactly like a wolf, but have a thick mane to protect their throats from all animals and from neck up resemble lions. It is quite amazing to understand the dynamics behind this breed and then how from that we have miniature dogs.

Of course, the zoologist is atheist and believes nothing like I do. But I still learn from his education and perspective even if I disagree with much of it.

 

[rlm68]

What you ignore is science has seen absolutely no macro evolution only micro evolution within the species. In fact there is the Cambrian explosion of species without any species going from one to another species. All of a sudden the thousands of species just sprung into existence. Creation anybody?

I completely understand that without biologists playing God they would have no leg to stand on (with their single cell dividing into new species theory). I understand it's been over 150+ years using the microscope with literally billions of single cell test samples, and they have yet to see the process of evolution take place naturally. And one would think with all of those samples used as test subjects, at least one sample would be near the point of evolving. It's a definite lost cause for them. And had biologists not interfered, they would have no grant monies to continue this fantasy of theirs.

 

[rlm68]

You are looking at DNA losing information to create different charisterics in a species. In dogs for example breeds with droopy ears has lost the DNA for cartelege in the ears. As a result these breeds are prone to ear infections. Always always information has been lost to create different breeds in a species.

Yep, the genomes are struggling hahahaha

 

[prove-all]

Darwin’s natural selection.
And this “natural selection” has become the “answer to everything.”

Ever wonder why humans are the only “hairless” creatures of our “furry primate family”?
What we do know is that it must have happened through natural selection. But then there is
the scientific problem of why we retain such concentration of hair on our scalp, face, armpits,
pubic area (and Uncle Joe’s flowering chest). If our furry selves were naturally selected out,
why did hair in these areas remain, especially so ornately around the head?

We are left to speculate.

Ever wonder why men are nearly always taller, heavier, stronger than women?
That’s natural selection they say. Ever wonder why men don’t have a baculum?

Ever wonder why humans are the only “primates” that walk solely upright,
on two legs? Natural selection.

Why are human females the only mammals, aside from orca whales and pilot whales,
to go through menopause—living far beyond childbearing age?

Here’s one you may not have considered—what about blushing?
So how did this somewhat embarrassing trait come to be prevalent in humans?

Evolution, the fact. Natural selection, the theory—yet the answer to everything.
Is there no other way? These theories of natural selection go on and on.
-

What if man isn’t, in fact, part of the primate family, and thus could never have been
naturally selected from within it? What if he isn’t even a part of the animal kingdom,
and thus never could have been naturally selected from it?

Perhaps man was created after a different “species” (Genesis 1:24-26).
Perhaps he has hair around his head because it was designed as an ornament
(Proverbs 20:29; 1 Corinthians 11:15).

Perhaps men were designed to be taller, heavier and stronger in order to protect
and serve women and children (Proverbs 20:29; 1 Peter 3:7).

Maybe men don’t have a baculum because God intended sex among humans to be
more than just for success in occasional brute offspring reproduction (Genesis 2:24;
1 Corinthians 7:3-5).

Maybe mankind is the most upright appearing of any bipedal creatures on Earth
because that is the way his Creator looks (Genesis 1:26; Revelation 1:13-16)—
because it allows man to build and create things like his Maker.

Perhaps women continue to live after childbearing age because there are other roles
ordained for them in their later years (Titus 2:3-5). Maybe man exhibits physical
reactions, like blushing, to moral dilemmas because there was created in him the
ability to perceive morality (Titus 1:15; 1 Timothy 4:2).

Maybe man is the way he is because he was designed by a Creator.

Actually, not maybe. “Maybe,” “could be,” “possibly,” “perhaps,” ad nauseam,
are all for the realm of the evolutionary journals. The Bible states unequivocally
that this is the way it is.

 

[prove-all]

What about the very creation of the human brain, the assume power of the mind?

There is virtually no difference in shape and construction between animal brain
and human brain. But what causes that vast difference?

Science cannot adequately answer. Some scientists in the field of brain research con-
clude that, of necessity, there has to be some nonphysical component in human brain
that does not exist in animal brain. But most scientists will not admit the possibility
of the existence of the nonphysical.

What other explanation is there? Actually, outside of the very slight degree of physical
superiority of human brain, science has no explanation, due to unwillingness to concede
even the possibility of the spiritual.

'The burden of the word of the Lord for Israel, saith the Lord, which stretcheth forth the
heavens, and layeth the foundation of the earth, and formeth the spirit of man within him.

- science calls it youre concience, they can't see, or feel, or touch it, calling it human nature.

'But there is a spirit in man: and the inspiration of the Almighty giveth them understanding.

- This it what imparts thought, it seperates mans brain and thoughts from animals instints,
but science cant understand it.

When man refuses to admit even the very existence of his own Maker, he shuts out of his
mind vast oceans of basic true knowledge, fact and understanding. When he substitutes
fable for truth, he is of all men most ignorant, though he professes himself to be wise.

When man, in the name of science, denies—or by indifference, ignores—his Maker,
he blinds his mind to what he is, why he is, where he is going, and what is the way!
No wonder this world is filled with evils! There has to be a cause for every effect!

Science, try as it may, simply cannot explain how this mind works. Modern science deals
only with the physical dimension. This is why it has to accept evolution as fact, even though
it can only theorize how it happens. It can’t explain why the makeup of the physical human
brain is essentially the same as the brain of primates and other animals, yet the difference
in output is colossal.


The God I believe in isn’t unreasonable. “Come now, and let us reason together,”
He says (Isaiah 1:18). Let’s think about it. Let’s have an educated belief—not a
blind faith, either in evolution or religion.

 

[FirstLovedByHim]

But new DNA does not equal new information. You do not need more keys on your keyboard to write all kinds of various commands for your computer.

If you could switch off/on some genes you have inside of you, you would grow something only fish have. For example. Its in you, but not activated.

.



Saints this is a must see

WOW,WOW,WOW, WOW, WOW SOOOOOO cool!!!!!! Thank you for adding this to the discussion. God Bless!

 

[FirstLovedByHim]

the father of the theory of evolution Darwin said, and I have his book, he said "If I can not witness signs of evolution in my lifetime then I will conclude that all my theories are false"

well guess what? He didnt witness evolution so according to the inventor of evolution theory it is false, yet so many still believe it....


https://www.newsweek.com/dinosaur-era-frilled-shark-insane-teeth-found-portugal-708764
Updated | The rare frilled shark is considered a “living fossil” because evidence of its existence dates back to at least 80 million years ago. This summer, researchers found one alive and thriving off the coast of Portugal, uncovering more clues about the resilience of this ancient sea creature.
The researchers who discovered the shark off the Algarve coast were working on a European Union project in the area, the BBC reported. The goal of the project was to "minimize unwanted catches in commercial fishing," the researchers told SIC Noticisas TV, as the BBC noted, but the team unknowingly unearthed one of the rarest and most ancient animals on the planet.
Scientists believe the frilled shark has remained the same, both inside and out, since the Cretaceous Period, when the Tyrannosaurus rex and Triceratops still roamed the planet. The creature, known by scientists as Chlamydoselachus anguineus, is incredibly simple and unevolved, most likely due to the lack of nutrients found in its deep-sea dwellings. A Japanese study of the shark found in Suruga Bay, Japan, revealed that its diet is 61 percent cephalopods—the class to which squids and octopus belong.

Interesting.

 

[trofimus]

Experiments are done in a lab, have you seen one? There are all kinds ones for chemists, chemical engineers, mechnical engineers, neuroscientists, medical doctors etc., etc.,

Yup, scientific theory is as broad as you want make it.

Yet no reputable medical doctor who wants to keep his/her license administers medication unless it has been through clinical trials, I wonder why that is after all we could just rely on theory and speculation that it won't kill you with the first dose or that it actually does what we hope it will do.

You are just mixing apples and oranges. Trials of medication (many pills and other treatments are based on evolution principle like resistence of bacterias) is not experiment of scientific theory.

I have already by Paul's words shown that death came to all living things.

I do not remember Paul saying the rule of thumb if I say it three times then it is truth.

Your thesis that death only affected Adam/Eve is refuted.

Where does Paul say that the sin of Adam made death to come to all living things (animals, plants, insects, fish...)?

 

[trofimus]

Not one “missing link” has been discovered.

Are you serious?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_transitional_fossils
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/List_of_transitional_forms

Evolution of horses or whales is especially well documented.

 

[FirstLovedByHim]

Are you serious?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_transitional_fossils
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/List_of_transitional_forms

Evolution of horses or whales is especially well documented.

The whale to a horse or vice versa? Adaptation or completely new species? I"ll take a look. The whale is still a whale and the horse is still a horse Point?

 

[trofimus]

The whale to a horse or vice versa? Adaptation or completely new species? I"ll take a look. The whale is still a whale and the horse is still a horse Point?

Lol. No. The evolution of horse and the evolution of whales is especially well documented.

No, horses are not from whales.

Point - to say "there are no transitional forms" is just an agenda. Its wrong.

 

[trofimus]

Who is interested, here is a debate between:

YEC
Progressive creationist
Theistic evolutionist

In a civil manner. But its very long

 

[FirstLovedByHim]

Lol. No. The evolution of horse and the evolution of whales is especially well documented.

No, horses are not from whales.

Point - to say "there are no transitional forms" is just an agenda. Its wrong.

Think about your answer. Is that what I am talking about?

 

[Embankment]

It seems there is a faction or cult in Christianity that makes it their focus to take on evolution and science in general. To do this they find a need to do the job of science using the Bible. The Bible is not a scientific book. It is a spiritual book. If God wanted his book to to be a manual of science instead of a manual for life he would have written more than two chapters about it.
Anyway , hard core creationists have there on agenda and it’s not on Jesus.

 

[Noose]

Nothing evolves ever. Truth is in the east, evolution is in the west.

Just one thing that totally destroys evolution- Human language.
Human language is words with certain meanings and pronunciation that is externally acquired through learning from experienced humans/knowledgeable sources (knowledge about the meanings and pronunciations of the said words).

Facts:

1. No matter how far back we go, we will never reach a point where words and their meanings were never taught or a meaning and a pronunciation came out of some mutations.

2. No matter how far back we go (billions of years), we will never reach a point where words and their meanings were obtained from non knowledgeable sources. IOW, it requires time to calibrate a person on the meaning of word with reminders every-time they forget. The reminder will always come from knowledgeable sources who can not forget the meaning- in our times, a dictionary/record would do that perfectly.

3. No matter how far back we go, we will never reach a point of transition from innate (gene controlled) animal sounds to sounds with meanings that are externally acquired through learning.

 

[trofimus]

Nothing evolves ever. Truth is in the east, evolution is in the west.

When you go to the east, you will get to the west, after some time ;-)

To the rest of your post, I am not sure why you think it destroys evolution.

 

[Noose]

When you go to the east, you will get to the west, after some time ;-)

East and west are Geographical reference points and not places. No matter how far you go eastwards, you will never get to a place called east because east will still be on your east and west on your west. It is a mirage just like Evolution.

To the rest of your post, I am not sure why you think it destroys evolution.

When you open your eyes call me.

 

[UnderGrace]

Nothing evolves ever. Truth is in the east, evolution is in the west.

Just one thing that totally destroys evolution- Human language.
Human language is words with certain meanings and pronunciation that is externally acquired through learning from experienced humans/knowledgeable sources (knowledge about the meanings and pronunciations of the said words).

Facts:

1. No matter how far back we go, we will never reach a point where words and their meanings were never taught or a meaning and a pronunciation came out of some mutations.

2. No matter how far back we go (billions of years), we will never reach a point where words and their meanings were obtained from non knowledgeable sources. IOW, it requires time to calibrate a person on the meaning of word with reminders every-time they forget. The reminder will always come from knowledgeable sources who can not forget the meaning- in our times, a dictionary/record would do that perfectly.

3. No matter how far back we go, we will never reach a point of transition from innate (gene controlled) animal sounds to sounds with meanings that are externally acquired through learning.

I would say the eye is a main stumbling block too.

Why would an eyeless creature begin a hundred-million-year project of forming an eye which would be of no use to it whatsoever until the hundred million years were over? Did these microscopic animals think they were developing something that would be useful after a period of time of which even humans cannot even begin to conceive? And how many more million years for a fish eye to evolve to be useful out of water?

At least we have one scientist that can be honest about where evolution completely fails.

Professor Murray Eden, of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, points out that the human genes contain about a billion nucleotides. (A nucleotide is the smallest unit of information in our genes --like a letter in a chemical alphabet. Groups of nucleotides convey messages to the developing embryo: messages such as "This white rat shall have pink eyes" or "This child shall be left-handed like its Dad.") He has shown that however you made the calculations, you ended up with the same conclusion: the length of time life has been on earth was not nearly long enough for all those nucleotides--all that information--to have been generated by chance mutations.

"Mathematical Challenges to the Neo-Darwinian Interpretation of Evolution"

In evolution God builds up the earth based only on death and carnage, it is antithetical to the very nature of God, under selective mutation and survival of the fittest this would have been the Sermon on the Mount........

"For the health of the population as a whole, the weak and the sick in your midst need to be left to die. Giving food to those incapable of passing on healthy genes might seem nice, but in the long run it will hurt everyone."


All science aside, this notion of natural selection and survival of the fittest has been the philosophical underpinning of the most heinous acts of murder in human history Nazism, Soviet Communism, Chinese Communism and Eugenics and I suspect we have yet to see its full dire implications for this world as the OP has rightly suggested.


That any Christian could align themselves with this scientific philosophy that has led to so much destruction baffles my mind.