What is the greatest evidence against the theory of evolution...?

[ClothedInGrace]

Perhaps if you asked properly. You are assuming that there is "design". Would you care to ask again without using leading questions?

Okay, sure: how does an incredibly complex organ which transmits light waves into electrical impulses that the brain can piece together into something the organism can see, arise with no intelligence whatsoever?

 

[Subduction Zone]

You still have a problem of getting that replicator to assemble first.

And moving the goalposts again. If you want to discuss abiogenesis, you first have to be honest enough to admit that life evolved. These are two different problems.

 

[ClothedInGrace]

Not only do you need to explain how the eye itself came to be through evolutionary processes, but you also must explain the brain and how the two connect and evolved to form images the organism can perceive.

 

[ClothedInGrace]

And moving the goalposts again. If you want to discuss abiogenesis, you first have to be honest enough to admit that life evolved. These are two different problems.

No, you must be honest and admit that life simply could not have evolved. You must admit that we were created. Then we can discuss Genesis. You see how the tables turn?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Okay, sure: how does an incredibly complex organ which transmits light waves into electrical impulses that the brain can piece together into something the organism can see, arise with no intelligence whatsoever?

Why do you think that an intelligence is needed in the first place. You don't need one to see right now, aside from your own that is.

When you are ready to slow down and to read and understand the answers given to your I will answer this question. Right now you are frantically grasping at straws. I would be wasting my time if I explained this to you right now.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, you must be honest and admit that life simply could not have evolved. You must admit that we were created. Then we can discuss Genesis. You see how the tables turn?

You are simply being dishonest and ignoring the evidence again. When you say that the Genesis account is true you are claiming that God lied. The evidence, which would have been created by God too, all says that life evolved. Even when I was a Christian I knew that it was blasphemy to say that God lied so I accepted the reality of evolution.

 

[ClothedInGrace]

Why do you think that an intelligence is needed in the first place. You don't need one to see right now, aside from your own that is.

I believe that intelligence is needed for something so intelligently crafted to be able to exist.

When you are ready to slow down and to read and understand the answers given to your I will answer this question. Right now you are frantically grasping at straws. I would be wasting my time if I explained this to you right now.

Okay, well I'll wait patiently then. In the mean time, can anyone else explain how the brain and eye evolved together to transmit light into electrical signals that are translated by the brain into an image the organism can perceive?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Every organ has a purpose in the system we call 'organism'.
An organism is an organised bunch of interdependent systems.
it is made up of high end nano technological units we call cells.
It is irreducibly complex on many levels.
From eco system to organelles.

Prove it. So far all of Behe's claims of irreducible complexity have been refuted.

 

[ClothedInGrace]

One big problem I see with evolution is that all the parts of life fit together. The eye doesn't work without the brain, and the brain doesn't work without the heart, and the heart doesn't work without the rest of the body. Cells don't work without DNA, and DNA doesn't work without cells. How does the evolutionary perspective explain this?

 

[ClothedInGrace]

You are simply being dishonest and ignoring the evidence again. When you say that the Genesis account is true you are claiming that God lied. The evidence, which would have been created by God too, all says that life evolved. Even when I was a Christian I knew that it was blasphemy to say that God lied so I accepted the reality of evolution.

You have yet to provide the evidence that the evolution of the eye is even possible.

 

[Loudmouth]

I simply don't believe any eye of any sort can arise from evolutionary processes.

Reality is not required to conform to your beliefs.

 

[ClothedInGrace]

Reality is not required to conform to your beliefs.

Reality is not required to conform to yours either. Address this if you can:

One big problem I see with evolution is that all the parts of life fit together. The eye doesn't work without the brain, and the brain doesn't work without the heart, and the heart doesn't work without the rest of the body. Cells don't work without DNA, and DNA doesn't work without cells. How does the evolutionary perspective explain this?

Or this:

Okay, sure: how does an incredibly complex organ which transmits light waves into electrical impulses that the brain can piece together into something the organism can see, arise with no intelligence whatsoever?

Thanks

 

[Loudmouth]

Care to explain how our eyes came to be without a designer? How design arises from chaos?

Darwin already explained it.

"In the Articulata we can commence a series with an optic nerve merely coated with pigment, and without any other mechanism; and from this low stage, numerous gradations of structure, branching off in two fundamentally different lines, can be shown to exist, until we reach a moderately high stage of perfection. In certain crustaceans, for instance, there is a double cornea, the inner one divided into facets, within each of which there is a lens shaped swelling. In other crustaceans the transparent cones which are coated by pigment, and which properly act only by excluding lateral pencils of light, are convex at their upper ends and must act by convergence; and at their lower ends there seems to be an imperfect vitreous substance. With these facts, here far too briefly and imperfectly given, which show that there is much graduated diversity in the eyes of living crustaceans, and bearing in mind how small the number of living animals is in proportion to those which have become extinct, I can see no very great difficulty (not more than in the case of many other structures) in believing that natural selection has converted the simple apparatus of an optic nerve merely coated with pigment and invested by transparent membrane, into an optical instrument as perfect as is possessed by any member of the great Articulate class."--Charles Darwin, "Origin of Species"
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/origin/chapter6.html

 

[Subduction Zone]

I believe that intelligence is needed for something so intelligently crafted to be able to exist.

Yes, we know that. But you have not shown a logical reason for you to believe that.

Okay, well I'll wait patiently then. In the mean time, can anyone else explain how the brain and eye evolved together to transmit light into electrical signals that are translated by the brain into an image the organism can perceive?

I am sure that they could. Until you are ready to learn I do not think that it will do any good to tell you the answer.

 

[ClothedInGrace]

Darwin already explained it.

"In the Articulata we can commence a series with an optic nerve merely coated with pigment, and without any other mechanism; and from this low stage, numerous gradations of structure, branching off in two fundamentally different lines, can be shown to exist, until we reach a moderately high stage of perfection. In certain crustaceans, for instance, there is a double cornea, the inner one divided into facets, within each of which there is a lens shaped swelling. In other crustaceans the transparent cones which are coated by pigment, and which properly act only by excluding lateral pencils of light, are convex at their upper ends and must act by convergence; and at their lower ends there seems to be an imperfect vitreous substance. With these facts, here far too briefly and imperfectly given, which show that there is much graduated diversity in the eyes of living crustaceans, and bearing in mind how small the number of living animals is in proportion to those which have become extinct, I can see no very great difficulty (not more than in the case of many other structures) in believing that natural selection has converted the simple apparatus of an optic nerve merely coated with pigment and invested by transparent membrane, into an optical instrument as perfect as is possessed by any member of the great Articulate class."--Charles Darwin, "Origin of Species"
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/origin/chapter6.html

This is only a discussion of the diversity present within the animal kingdom: He fails to explain where these cones and optic nerves come from. Mutations, I assume?

 

[Loudmouth]

Reality is not required to conform to yours either.

That's why I present facts instead of beliefs.

Address this if you can:
One big problem I see with evolution is that all the parts of life fit together. The eye doesn't work without the brain, and the brain doesn't work without the heart, and the heart doesn't work without the rest of the body. Cells don't work without DNA, and DNA doesn't work without cells. How does the evolutionary perspective explain this?

Planaria have neither a brain nor a heart, and yet they have eyes.

That we all descended from a common ancestral population of cells that have DNA is one of the major conclusions of biology. How is that a problem? Are you saying that you accept universal common ancestry for all species?

Or this:
Okay, sure: how does an incredibly complex organ which transmits light waves into electrical impulses that the brain can piece together into something the organism can see, arise with no intelligence whatsoever?

The process of embryonic development and biological reproduction both occur without any detection of intelligence anywhere in the process.

 

[Hieronymus]

Prove it. So far all of Behe's claims of irreducible complexity have been refuted.

Every system is irreducibly complex.
It simply needs the essential parts to function.
Take away an essential part, and it doesn't function anymore.

How can a sane person even doubt this?

 

[ClothedInGrace]

Yes, we know that. But you have not shown a logical reason for you to believe that.

You have not shown there is a logical reason to believe that we evolved.

 

[Loudmouth]

This is only a discussion of the diversity present within the animal kingdom: He fails to explain where these cones and optic nerves come from. Mutations, I assume?

You asked how eyes like ours could evolve. That includes a round eyeball with a lens, along with other features. I just gave you that description. There are tons of functional intermediate stages, with each evolutionary step increasing the function of the eye.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Our eyes were created perfect, but ever since sin we have had to deal with death and decay. But, you don't believe that, and there is nothing I can do to prove to you it is the case.

So all you have is an unreasonable belief. We have reasoned beliefs and massive supporting evidence. There is no reliable evidence for creationism.