Evolutionary Science is a fairytale

[consol]

Nothing is more humorous than when an evolutionist pokes fun at creationists or IDists for not putting forth a scientific theory to explain life.

First of all, life is not scientific -- life is spirtual. Contrary to what evolutionists say, what makes us human is not the shape of our jaw bone or the size of our heads. Life is something that controls and manipulates the matter it occupies. Thus, those who claim to be able to describe life scientifically are kidding themselves because life is more than material -- it's metaphysical, which by defintion is in conflict with science. Science is the study of the material world.

So when evolutionists scoff at Creationists for not putting forth a scientific theory for life, I believe they are asking us to play a game, which includes defining life according to a flawed premise.

But what's truly laughable about all this is that the "science" evolutionists put forth is not science at all. Like I said, "science" is (or should be) the study of the material world. But what the world's evolutionists have forced down our kids' throats is not science. Instead it's long list of "what ifs," "probablys," "maybes," and "more-than-likelys." What they're attempting to sell the unsuspecting public is not to be found in nature -- it's found in their books.

And their so-called evidence is NEVER visible. Never. For example, every creature on earth is said to have evolved from a common ancestor. Thus there must, be thousands and thousands of common ancestors that link each creature to the next. For example, lions and tigers must have a common ancestor....man and ape must have a common ancestor...squirrels and skunks must have a common ancestor...bats and whales must have a common ancestor. Of course none of these common ancestors have been found -- or will ever be found -- but we're just supposed to take their word for it because they know more than us. But the reality is, this is not science -- this is nothing but brain-rotting blind faith in an intellectually bankrupt theory.

But the fairytale doesn't stop there. Evolutionists have made a living the past 75 years on the Big Joke that is the unseen beneficial random mutation. I honestly believe this is the most ridiculous aspect of the whole theory. The notion that a once-in-a-multi-million chance mutation can be beneficial and spread throughout a population via sexual reproduction is truly outrageous -- especially when you consider that populations are often separated by hundreds or thousands of miles and mutations are 99% destructive and/or deadly. Not only that, but a grand total of only 4,000 hominid bones have been dug up...(this includes humans, australopithecus, Neanderthals, Homo erectus, etc) Thus, there simply is not enough of a population for the likely occurrence of beneficial random mutations. Of course cumulative selection of thousands of such mutations has never -- and will never -- be witnessed.

And the fairytale continues. THE most crucial aspect to the whole evolutionary farce is natural selection. This, as well, has never been documented, studied or witnessed. As far as I know there have never been controlled experiments on animals in an attempt to prove this concept. Once again, we are supposed to fall in love with the theory -- not any actual evidence.

So there's the backbone to evolutionary theory -- and there is no real science to it -- it's all nothing but a wild fairytale....a fairytale dreamed up by a select few who have no intention of actually studying the material world -- as real science requires. Instead, their only intention is to give atheists around the world a vessel to latch on to so they can justify their own existence without having to acknowledge the truth of the Almighty Creator.
__________________
"Evolution is a fairy tale for grown-ups. This theory has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless." Professor Louis Bounoure, National Center of Scientific Research.

Am I right in thinking this is what you would like every one to teach their children?
and this would be taught in a science class if creationists had their way?

 

[Baggins]

I already have. Where do you think I got my information from?

That was rather my point, you didn't seem to have any information. You rather grandly claimed that you had reviewed the literature and come to an opposite conclusion to the majority of cosmologists.

Not impressed; I doubt you have read any of the primary literature, I doubt you'd understand it if you did, and I don't find your claims that dark matter is bunk particularly convincing.

What do you want me to do, go to every single link? They all say the same thing.

And yet you have come to the opposite conclusion

Why don't I just send you to google so you can punch in the keywords "evidence against evolution" then I'll just tell you "that takes care of this argument"

Because that search wouldn't bring up any peer reviewed scientific literature. Just a lot of ill-considered bunk by religious fanatics

This is the day that the Lord hath made!

Jolly good

 

[Morcova]

I'll get to Wiccan later but first you Lancer. What are you doing on a Christian forum? If you don't like our views you don't have to be here. Nobody twisting your arm. In fact when whenever we want to teach something out of the bible you step into our territory just like you're doing now acting all concerned that we be decieving people.

So unable to actually answer the question you've come down to "YOU AIN'T CHRISTIAN SO LEAVE!", the moment you own the board you can make the rules, till then....

Answer the questions if you can... or continue to dodge.

 

[Losangeleschristian]

Argument from ignorance, eh? From the wikipedia article:

The observed phenomena consistent with dark matter observations include the rotational speeds of galaxies, orbital velocities of galaxies in clusters, gravitational lensing of background objects by galaxy clusters such as the Bullet cluster, and the temperature distribution of hot gas in galaxies and clusters of galaxies. Dark matter also plays a central role in structure formation and galaxy evolution, and has measurable effects on the anisotropy of the cosmic microwave background. All these lines of evidence suggest that galaxies, clusters of galaxies, and the universe as a whole contain far more matter than that which interacts with electromagnetic radiation: the remainder is called the "dark matter component".

Basically the evidence: There is more matter than we can see. We call the matter we can't see dark matter.



But we do - it's extra mass. Everything is exactly consistent with it being extra mass. It's just we can't see the mass with electromagnetic radiation.



I guess it's not a fact that you exist, since you can't prove it.



Well, we'll prove you evolved from slime (or, better, from a common ancestor with apes. Let's deal with slime later) just as soon as you prove that you exist. Or Ohm's law. Or anything scientific really.



Photo: light. The image was created with a tunneling electron microscope, I believe - electricity is not light. (Although the two are related)

You sound like a very bright individual so you can tell me do scientists know how that dark matter is distributed throughout space? Is there any dark matter in our own solar system? I would think there got to be some since the scientists say over 90% of matter in the universe it come from dark matter. Why they can't find dark matter in solar sytem?

This is the day that the Lord hath made! I will rejoice and be glad in it!

 

[necroforest]

You sound like a very bright individual so you can tell me do scientists know how that dark matter is distributed throughout space? Is there any dark matter in our own solar system? I would think there got to be some since the scientists say over 90% of matter in the universe it come from dark matter. Why they can't find dark matter in solar sytem?


This is the day that the Lord hath made! I will rejoice and be glad in it!

He's back folks. Maybe he had enough of "his own kind."

From my understanding, Dark Matter doesn't emit EM waves, which is why it's "Dark". EM waves are the way we typically directly detect objects in space (and on earth too).

 

[Losangeleschristian]

He's back folks. Maybe he had enough of "his own kind."

From my understanding, Dark Matter doesn't emit EM waves, which is why it's "Dark". EM waves are the way we typically directly detect objects in space (and on earth too).

So if it nearby our planet how we know its there?

 

[necroforest]

So if it nearby our planet how we know its there?

Gravitational effects that aren't accounted for by Sol and friends?

 

[DeathMagus]

So if it nearby our planet how we know its there?

We can observe its effects - such as gravity - on visible matter.

 

[Losangeleschristian]

We can observe its effects - such as gravity - on visible matter.

but they say more than 90% of the universe made out of it. That why i ask you how it distributed. How they launch all them rockets and probes out into space without taking into account the effects of dark matter and they still work according to their calculations?

 

[notto]

but they say more than 90% of the universe made out of it. That why i ask you how it distributed. How they launch all them rockets and probes out into space without taking into account the effects of dark matter and they still work according to their calculations?

Do you know what the word 'negligible' means? Plug the mass of a standard rocket or probe into any of the calculations with relevance and the answer to your question becomes apparent.

The mass of a rocket or probe is most directly impacted by earth and sun (or other planets) because their range and scope is very limited and their mass compared to these masses is so small.

Can you show us a calculation where you think they need to take this into account and where the effects of dark matter would make a difference?

 

[Losangeleschristian]

Do you know what the word 'negligible' means? Plug the mass of a standard rocket or probe into any of the calculations with relevance and the answer to your question becomes apparent.

The mass of a rocket or probe is most directly impacted by earth and sun (or other planets) because their range and scope is very limited and their mass compared to these masses is so small.

Can you show us a calculation where you think they need to take this into account and where the effects of dark matter would make a difference?

No sir. Those calculations they make only have masses of those far off planets accounted for, nothing else. No dark matter and the scientist be saying dark matter over 90% all mass in the universe. if dark matter be in the solar system it has to be accounted for if they want their rockets fo go where they designed them. that why I ask how they know where and how it spread out but I get no answer. And besides we launch a probe back in 77 that head straight out the solar system and it keep sending back signals in the 90's. Why it not crash into something like dark matter if it be there?

 

[notto]

No sir. Those calculations they make only have masses of those far off planets accounted for, nothing else. No dark matter and the scientist be saying dark matter over 90% all mass in the universe. if dark matter be in the solar system it has to be accounted for if they want their rockets fo go where they designed them. that why I ask how they know where and how it spread out but I get no answer. And besides we launch a probe back in 77 that head straight out the solar system and it keep sending back signals in the 90's. Why it not crash into something like dark matter if it be there?

Please provide evidence for your claims or just stop making stuff up.

What calculations are you talking about? Please be specific.

Please show us a calculation where dark matter needs to be accounted for because it's effect is anything but negligible within its context and area of influence within the solar system. Don't forget your units.

We don't account for relativity in all acceleration or gravitational calculations because it is negligible for most.

By your logic, relativistic affects don't happen.

 

[Losangeleschristian]

Please provide evidence for your claims or just stop making stuff up.

What calculations are you talking about? Please be specific.

Please show us a calculation where dark matter needs to be accounted for because it's effect is anything but negligible within its context and area of influence within the solar system. Don't forget your units.

We don't account for relativity in all acceleration or gravitational calculations because it is negligible for most.

By your logic, relativistic affects don't happen.

Im not making up anything. I found it here in my encyclopedia-the universal law of gravitation. You just tying to test me. that cool. I understand where you coming from.

it telling me that force on the rocket got to go up more if you got something with more mass around. If most of your mass is coming from dark matter it got to affect your flight pattern.

How can dark matter be ignored like you say if 90% of it is out there like they say?? that force got to be taking effect on the flight too if it in our solar system. And the whereabouts of the dark matter-where is it?? And how is it spread out??

I keep asking but no one answering because they dont know either. I dont know and you dont know.

Even if it out toward the back end somewhere, the mass is 90% of what out there and it be taking effect on the flight pattern.

And my last question you skipped over too. how did the probe keep sending back signals without hitting dark matter if so much of it be around??

 

[Losangeleschristian]

and i understand what you saying Notto about relativity in acc. & grav. calculations but the simple thing you keep looking over and i dont know how you can, is that the scientists are saying OVER 90% of all the mass in the univers is made up of dark matter. They didnt say 10% they said over 90% of it and that have to be taken into your calculations if you want you rockets and probes to go where you want them.

 

[notto]

and i understand what you saying Notto about relativity in acc. & grav. calculations but the simple thing you keep looking over and i dont know how you can, is that the scientists are saying OVER 90% of all the mass in the univers is made up of dark matter. They didnt say 10% they said over 90% of it and that have to be taken into your calculations if you want you rockets and probes to go where you want them.

This assumes that matter is evenly distributed. It is not. We know this based on observation. You assumptions about dark matter demonstrate a lack of knowledge on the subject.

You should read some more about it before you make more silly claims.

Our solar system mass is concentrated at the sun yet we don't need to take it into account when calculating acceleration on earth.

The affects of mass on acceleration and gravity diminish with distance.

Unless you can show where anybody is saying that there is more dark matter in our solar system than is represented by the mass of the planets and sun, you are basically fighting a strawman of your own making.

 

[Losangeleschristian]

This assumes that dark matter is evenly distributed. It is not. We know this based on observation. You assumptions about dark matter demonstrate a lack of knowledge on the subject.

You should read some more about it before you make more silly claims.

Our solar system mass is concentrated at the sun yet we don't need to take it into account when calculating acceleration on earth.

The affects of mass on acceleration and gravity diminish with distance.

Unless you can show where anybody is saying that there is more dark matter in our solar system than is represented by the mass of the planets and sun, you are basically fighting a strawman of your own making.

how it be distributed then? You said "We know based on observation". I asked you three times and you dont answer.

Not only that but the probe be out in space all throughout every distance till it fly on out of here and it still going where they tell it to just like they program it.

You talking about flight patterns on earth not affected by the sun but the probe and rockets be flying out away from earth towards mars, venus, jupiter and all up between there in space. that what i be getting at. And you still havent told me why the probe havent run into dark matter. They just be lucky then huh?

 

[notto]

how it be distributed then? You said "We know based on observation". I asked you three times and you dont answer.

Not only that but the probe be out in space all throughout every distance till it fly on out of here and it still going where they tell it to just like they program it.

You talking about flight patterns on earth not affected by the sun but the probe and rockets be flying out away from earth towards mars, venus, jupiter and all up between there in space. that what i be getting at. And you still havent told me why the probe havent run into dark matter. They just be lucky then huh?

http://www.cfht.hawaii.edu/News/Lensing/

Now, can you stop making stuff up that doesn't make sense.

Compared to the galaxy and most of the universe, our solar system is a small area of condensed matter. Our space probes and rockets have not come anywhere close to being affected by dark matter or other elements within our galaxy. The main matter that impacts them is our sun and the other planets.

For somebody who claimed to have read up on dark matter you seem to have a very poor understanding of it.

You certainly did not read enough before making silly statements about it.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

and i understand what you saying Notto about relativity in acc. & grav. calculations but the simple thing you keep looking over and i dont know how you can, is that the scientists are saying OVER 90% of all the mass in the univers is made up of dark matter. They didnt say 10% they said over 90% of it and that have to be taken into your calculations if you want you rockets and probes to go where you want them.

No, it doesn't: when it comes to launching rockets, the extra mass of the dark matter is neglible. The Earth, the Moon, the Sun, and the rocket, are all high concentrations of 'normal' matter. Dark matter, while nine times more common in a galaxy than normal matter, is not found in such concentrations, and instead is spread relatively evenly throughout galaxy.

Basically, from the rocket's point of view, the dark matter is spread evenly around it, so there is no net gravitational effect. It is only when we look at distant galaxies that we can see distinct clumps of dark matter.

 

[FishFace]

You sound like a very bright individual so you can tell me do scientists know how that dark matter is distributed throughout space? Is there any dark matter in our own solar system? I would think there got to be some since the scientists say over 90% of matter in the universe it come from dark matter. Why they can't find dark matter in solar sytem?

There are different things at work here - working out that there is dark matter somewhere in a given, very large, part of space (e.g. a galactic cluster) and working out how it's distributed.
Working out that it's somewhere is easy - it's something like weighing a lump of lead and finding that it's 9 times as heavy as the lead you can see. Looking inside the lead, it all just looks like lead - and yet it's too heavy. You know there's some extra mass somewhere, but it's somehow not obviously visible. In fact it's worse - it's invisible because it doesn't interact with light.
To find out where dark matter is we need some way of looking at mass that's got finer gradation than the astronomical equivalent of a set of scales. One way is by examining gravitational lensing. However, our solar system is far too small to cause noticeable gravitational lensing, plus we're inside it.

 

[Losangeleschristian]

No, it doesn't: when it comes to launching rockets, the extra mass of the dark matter is neglible. The Earth, the Moon, the Sun, and the rocket, are all high concentrations of 'normal' matter. Dark matter, while nine times more common in a galaxy than normal matter, is not found in such concentrations, and instead is spread relatively evenly throughout galaxy.

Basically, from the rocket's point of view, the dark matter is spread evenly around it, so there is no net gravitational effect. It is only when we look at distant galaxies that we can see distinct clumps of dark matter.

that not what Notto be saying. he say it NOT evenly distributed and you say it is but even if so then if it spread out even why the probe not run into it?