Evoloution is Just Bad Science

[n0va]

What makes young earth creationism "good science"?

Yea you need faith, like you do in evolution.
The morality that comes with creation makes the world a better place.
It is a much better philosophy.

 

[Dal M.]

Yea you need faith, like you do in evolution.
The morality that comes with creation makes the world a better place.
It is a much better philosophy.

Setting aside for the moment the fact that the theory of evolution doesn't come packaged with any form of morality, do you think it's worthwhile to believe in something because you think it "makes the world a better place"? Doesn't your concience require you to maintain only beliefs which appear, to the best of your knowledge, to be true?

 

[raphael_aa]

Yea you need faith, like you do in evolution.
The morality that comes with creation makes the world a better place.
It is a much better philosophy.

Ah, you mean like the morality of Genisis. Like:

* Animal sacrifice
* slavery
* genocide
* invasion
* rape
* Human Sacrifice
* betrayal
* trickery
* lying
* racism

All perpetrated by the 'patriachs' supposedly in response to or by direction from this very moral God. One has to do a fair amount of 'interpretation' to get a consistent moral approach from Genisis.

 

[notto]

Yea you need faith, like you do in evolution.
The morality that comes with creation makes the world a better place.
It is a much better philosophy.

A philosophy based on the disbelief in gravity could make the world a better place but unfortunately, science and reality don't conform to our whims or beliefs, no matter how much we tell ourselves or others that it should or does.

 

[Tomk80]

Lets say that giraffes did have shorter necks when they first evolved. So for that time being everything is going fine, and no trouble happens yet. Evolution for the most part happens for a reason. There are several reasons why giraffes could have evolved taller necks.

1. To see over the tall savannh grass for predators
2. To reach a higher food source(the tops of eucalyptus trees) because there's is diminishing. (just a couple)

Most likely is sexual selection, as this explains the long neck without the need for tall trees (giraffes usually don't feed from tall trees). It also explains the male fighting rituals (bumping against each other with the neck).

So whatever the case was, they needed to evole taller necks. There are a few problems with this. First, DNA carries all the information to create proteins that keep an organism healty and running. It doesn't however contain information to change(or add to) this information. That is why natural selection depends om mutations, to change(add on information) to the genetic code. So right there, unless there is a mutation that not only adds information to DNA(which has never been found), it needs to add information for the production of proteins that will enable the growth of a taller neck. And since DNA can't gain foreign information, it can't obtain this information unless it is there because it was passed down from either of the giraffe's parents. Which leads into the next problem.

But this is simply not true, because a longer neck is just a change. It doesn't need more information, it just needs information to tell the neck to grow for a longer period of time. So in fact, a change in the information for neck length is all that is needed (especially since a giraffe neck has exactly the same neck vertebra as any other mammal). If what you say was true, a taller human would also need an increase in DNA in comparison to a smaller human. So my brother would need more DNA than my mother and father (probably growing bigger than both), which would constitute more information which would be impossible according to you.

Parents pass down half of their genes to their offspring. If none of the giraffes' ancestors had a long neck, where did this gene come from? So evolutionists added the need for a rare positive mutation that adds this information to the DNA. They just need to keep searching for a mutation that adds information to DNA.

And we have found such mutations happen in nature. Not to say that it is very questionable that such a mutation would be needed in the first place.

Finally, lets say that all of this could happen. There is still the matter of that sponge-like material that lies in-between the giraffe's brain and the artery that transports blood from the heart to the brain. Since there is no advance thinking involved in evolution, there is nothing to realize that it needs this to limit the blood pressure on the brain when it lowers its neck. Naturally, it wouldn't appear so as soon as the giraffes(now with longer necks) bend down to drink, they blow their brains out.

Of course not, don't be silly. This would evolve simultaniously. In other words, giraffe ancestors with slightly longer necks would already need to be slightly accomodated for the longer neck length. You seem to be assuming here that the neck would elongate first, and then the mechanism for blood pressure would subsequently evolve. Of course, this kind of thinking is pretty silly.

 

[DJ_Ghost]

Yea you need faith, like you do in evolution..

You do not need faith in evolution at all, all the evidence we have supports it, none of the evidence falsifies it. Science does not require faith, therefore if creationism requires faith its not science.

The morality that comes with creation makes the world a better place.
It is a much better philosophy.

How so? Creationism does not come with morality, and evolution does not preclude morality, ir are you claiming that Theistic Evolutionists are less moral than creationists?

Ghost

 

[Jet Black]

Parents pass down half of their genes to their offspring. If none of the giraffes' ancestors had a long neck, where did this gene come from? So evolutionists added the need for a rare positive mutation that adds this information to the DNA. They just need to keep searching for a mutation that adds information to DNA.

you don't get "genes for long necks" like that, but genes control growth rates. hypotheticalls we could have a gene controlling the growth rate of the neck that mutates, resulting in a longer neck. we see this sort of thing happening in really tall humans who have long tibia for example.

Finally, lets say that all of this could happen. There is still the matter of that sponge-like material that lies in-between the giraffe's brain and the artery that transports blood from the heart to the brain. Since there is no advance thinking involved in evolution, there is nothing to realize that it needs this to limit the blood pressure on the brain when it lowers its neck. Naturally, it wouldn't appear so as soon as the giraffes(now with longer necks) bend down to drink, they blow their brains out.

can't you see that your argument is a strawman argument? why would the giraffe evolve some feature and then later evolve a feature to deal with problems? why can it not evolve both simultaneously? I see this rather strange argument from creationists quite alot, why do you do it?

 

[ptgd1st]

What are your qualifications? Have you been teaching at a respected university? Have you published any scientific papers? Written any books?

I really dislike this type of answer. All this is is a cheap shot. All of those things do not make any individual any better than another. You know that. Someone can be a genius or very insightful, or have a credible argument and not have any of those things. We could ask the same about you and then if the answer is no, automatically invalidate any of your arguments. Think of something original.


But all that said, where did the OP go. It is true that if you make an assertion, you should be prepared to back it up.

 

[Jet Black]

Their ancestors' necks where still long compared to other animals. Just not as long as they are now. Besides, they would still die with those short necks. Their food source is at least 20 feet high. They couldn't reach it. Therefore, they would still die out. [/color][/size]

of course it has already been demonstrated that giraffes can eat bushes, which are not twenty feet in the air, but for those organisms that fit an extremely narrow niche, such as humming birds and so on, the answer is in coevolution, where say, both the plant and the bird coevolve. coevolution is pretty easy to imagine occuring, so no biggie there. It seems your analysis of the way evoution works is really excessively primitive, and you keep putting forward strawman arguments before you have thought about them.

 

[Jet Black]

But all that said, where did the OP go. It is true that if you make an assertion, you should be prepared to back it up.

it'S called a post and run. creationists do it all the time here.

 

[ForsakeAll2FollowJesus]

"We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of the failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so-stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is an absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door" (Evolutionist Richard Lewontin, "The New York Review," January, 1997, p. 31).

[TBC: From time to time, the real reason for supporting the decrepit edifice of evolution emerges.]

 

[Phred]

[TBC: From time to time, the real reason for supporting the decrepit edifice of evolution emerges.

Thanks for the out-of-context quote mining. It's really useful. Of course, you're not addressing the overwhelming evidence that leads to such a theory, you're just annoyed that the scientific world won't give you respect for your mythology.

Bummer.

.
​

 

[Wonderfulcross]

Of course not, don't be silly. This would evolve simultaniously. In other words, giraffe ancestors with slightly longer necks would already need to be slightly accomodated for the longer neck length.


How could they evolve simultaneously. I assume you are thinking about Darwin's finches and how there was a variation in beak structure from the start. If that was the case then some would obviously have longer necks and some would have shorter necks. Giraffes don't have a very long lifespan. Especially not long enough for the giraffes with the longer necksto evolve that necessary structure. Since there wouldn't be enough time to evolve in anyones life time the gene for long necks would be destroyed.

Even if there was enough time, where would the DNA get the blueprints to create such a structure.

 

[gluadys]

How could they evolve simultaneously.

Why not? Evolution is not limited to working on one feature at a time.

Giraffes don't have a very long lifespan.

Irrelevant. Lifespan has nothing to do with ability to evolve. Even bacteria with lifespans of about 20 minutes evolve.

Even if there was enough time, where would the DNA get the blueprints to create such a structure.

Ever hear of mutations? Do you know what they are? And why they make life span irrelevant?


It seems you have a Lamarkian view of evolution. Lamarck's ideas have been proven false.

 

[blitz576]

I can't believe so many people believe Evoloution is true!
What could they be thinking?

 

[jesusfreak22]

WILL ANYBODY GET THIS IN THIER HEAD!?

Whether evolution is true or not is based on your religion. Evolution is not based on science. No matter your religion, you should know that God works in SUPERNATURAL ways. Have you ever heard that! If not, i don't know where you have been. But, you all should know that he works in those kind of ways. He could do stuff that NONE of our science garbage can figure out. And the creation of man kind is one of those things. We as humans know but a small fraction of what God knows. You need to have FAITH in God and the Bible. IT IS ALL ABOUT YOUR FAITH! God is something that NO science can even touch!

 

[Bargainfluger]

Whether evolution is true or not is based on your religion. Evolution is not based on science. No matter your religion, you should know that God works in SUPERNATURAL ways. Have you ever heard that! If not, i don't know where you have been. But, you all should know that he works in those kind of ways. He could do stuff that NONE of our science garbage can figure out. And the creation of man kind is one of those things. We as humans know but a small fraction of what God knows. You need to have FAITH in God and the Bible. IT IS ALL ABOUT YOUR FAITH! God is something that NO science can even touch!

So you say there is no possibility of God ever obeying the laws he himself put into effect? God could not act naturally ever?

 

[caravelair]

WILL ANYBODY GET THIS IN THIER HEAD!?

using a big font isn't going to get anyone to take you more seriously. if you want to convince people on this forum, you've gotta do it with arguments.

Whether evolution is true or not is based on your religion.

completely false. religion is irrelevant to whether or not evolution is true. only the evidence matters. this is obvious from the fact that people of many different religions (including christians) believe in evolution.

Evolution is not based on science.

yes it is. it is based solely on science.

No matter your religion, you should know that God works in SUPERNATURAL ways.

well i think that would depend on your religion, actually.

But, you all should know that he works in those kind of ways.

says you.

He could do stuff that NONE of our science garbage can figure out.

the irony of someone using a computer to badmouth science is unbearable. yes, god could do things we can't investigate with science. how would we know if he did that?

And the creation of man kind is one of those things.

says you. of course, man's existence is easily explained without resorting to magic.

You need to have FAITH in God and the Bible.

no i don't.

IT IS ALL ABOUT YOUR FAITH!

no it's not.

God is something that NO science can even touch![/b]

right, which is why we leave god OUT of science. because science cannot investigate such claims.

 

[Arikay]

Here I am listening to all these scientists who have spent a long time studying evolution, genetics, geology, biology, chemistry, etc. boy do I feel stupid, I should have listened to someone who hasn't done any research but can post in big size letters on a forum.
Here I am typing on my science garbage computer, pretending it works. Boy do I feel stupid.
Where's that rolleyes emoticon when it's really needed?


Ugh, the arrogance.

 

[notto]

How could they evolve simultaneously. I assume you are thinking about Darwin's finches and how there was a variation in beak structure from the start. If that was the case then some would obviously have longer necks and some would have shorter necks. Giraffes don't have a very long lifespan. Especially not long enough for the giraffes with the longer necksto evolve that necessary structure. Since there wouldn't be enough time to evolve in anyones life time the gene for long necks would be destroyed.

Even if there was enough time, where would the DNA get the blueprints to create such a structure.

Populations evolve, not individuals. In any population their is variety. Where does the DNA get the blueprints that make me 3 inches taller than my mom or dad? Why would the same not be true in a giraffe populations?

What ever it is you are talking about, it is not evolution. You die with the genes you are born with. Individuals do not evolve.

So, your comments on giraffes, how they feed, and evolution in general have been incorrect. I would recommend that you simply start to ask questions instead of making assertions without research or an understanding of what you are saying.

If you want to defeat evolution and show how false it is, you need to understand it first.