Challenge: Is Evolution REALLY a theory in crisis?

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

From the online etymology dictionary:

CRISIS: decisive point in the progress of a disease," also "vitally important or decisive state of things, point at which change must come, for better or worse,

Examples in evolution:

Pangenesis went into crisis and was worsened to the point of being dropped.

Lamarckism was obsoleted by Natural Selection.

Vitalism was obsoleted by organic chemistry.

Maternal impression was obsoleted by genetic theory.

Preformationism was obsoleted by cytology.

Haeckel's theory of embryo development is now considered defunct.

Telegony is now considered defunct.

Scientific racism was obsoleted by human evolutionary genetics.

Lampreys-as-Ancestory now considered defunct (after 150 years).

Evolution is a theory in crisis.

All your showing is old theories bring replaced by newer ones as more information. As had been explained to you many times: that's just how science works.

And you're just doing ehsg the others do: just saying that evolution is a theory in crisis but not actually saying HOW.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Could there be an evolution? Sure, but what about the forces that are driving it, where do they come from?

Where do laws of physics come from? How is it possible that gravity, energy etc can be messured? How can that there be equations so precise?

If you say there is no God, then life is just a coincidence, and so is your brain, how can you then trust your brain, how can you trust your conclusions and judgement? If you say we can trust our minds, that's the effect, what caused that? We trust ourselves because we were created, if we were not, why do people trust each other when everything is just random and nothing has any meaning? If you can trust your thoughts, then it is because your brain was designed. It is the reason why we trust our computers for example. Would you trust a computer if it was not designed?

C.S Lewis once said this:

“Supposing there was no intelligence behind the universe, no creative mind. In that case, nobody designed my brain for the purpose of thinking. It is merely that when the atoms inside my skull happen, for physical or chemical reasons, to arrange themselves in a certain way, this gives me, as a by-product, the sensation I call thought. But, if so, how can I trust my own thinking to be true? It's like upsetting a milk jug and hoping that the way it splashes itself will give you a map of London. But if I can't trust my own thinking, of course I can't trust the arguments leading to Atheism, and therefore have no reason to be an Atheist, or anything else. Unless I believe in God, I cannot believe in thought: so I can never use thought to disbelieve in God.”

How can our bodies be complex if no one designed them? If there is no creator, how can there be life from no life?

Evolution (if you say there is no God) never made any sense in the first place. It's bunch of non-sense, because if we say we were not created, then everything is just random and so are our brains, so how can we trust them for science?

Law of Biogenesis says that in nature, life comes from previously existing life of its own kind. Every single science experiment ever done in Biology proves this to be true.

Evolution? Maybe, but only because there is a creator.

That whole comment in no way makes an attempt to address the thread topic. Try again or just leave.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

This eye ball was designed. Best optics on the planet, the mantis shrimp.

View attachment 335306

it's one of a kind, humans are studying it trying to figure out the complexity of it. Possibly creating something better than blue ray.

The amount of bio technology that can be learned from it is huge.

Gold from supernova's, nature didn't design humans to need it in their bodies to support electrical current in brainwaves etc. Gold is important for thought.

Nothing in here that addresses the actual thread topic. Go back, read the thread OP and try and answer that instead of what you think the OP said, or just don't bother responding.

 

[Gene2memE]

it's one of a kind,

Not really. There are a couple of dozen different mantis shrimp species, and their eyes are quite varied. Stomatopods generally have more complex eyes than those of other crustaceans, but the difference is quantitative not qualitative.

humans are studying it trying to figure out the complexity of it. Possibly creating something better than blue ray.

Eh. It's not that special. Human eyes outperform them in certain tasks.

Mantis shrimp's super colour vision debunked - Nature

One of the animal kingdom’s most complex eyes is really quite simple.

www.nature.com

The amount of bio technology that can be learned from it is huge.

There's lot of things that can be gained from natural mimicry. For instance, a new type of surgical syringe was recently patented, based on a study of bee stingers.


But, not of this supports your assertion that it's designed. Or speaks to the OP's topic of evidence establishing that evolution is in crisis.

 

[RileyG]

This is a claim I've seen bandied around more times than once; that evolution is a 'theory in crisis'.

And yet not one person I've seen make that claim is able to actually say how or why it's in crisis.

So, this is my challenge: show me how and/or why the theory of evolution is a 'theory in crisis'?

If you say it's not, don't comment saying it's not, since that's not need for this thread.

Why would it be "a theory in crisis"?

 

[RileyG]

It's always in crisis and always changing, each branch of science holds to differing views of evolution.

Science is always gathering more information, that's true. Evolution is accepted because the sheer number of evidence that is accepted. Until something else proves it's false, it will be accepted by the scientific community and academics.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Why would it be "a theory in crisis"?

... that's why I'm asking the question. I even asked the question in the part your quoted.

 

[RileyG]

... that's why I'm asking the question. I even asked the question in the part your quoted.

Goodness, I need to slow down (!!)

Reading some of these responses really makes me think...which is a good thing

Take care

 

[AV1611VET]

"Since the 1990s, large numbers of Americans have left Christianity to join the growing ranks of U.S. adults who describe their religious identity as atheist, agnostic or “nothing in particular.”

1 Timothy 4:1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;

This accelerating trend is reshaping the U.S. religious landscape, leading many people to wonder what the future of religion in America might look like...

All they have to do is read the Bible.

 

[jayem]

All they have to do is read the Bible.

"Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived"​

---Isaac Asimov​

 

[AV1611VET]

"Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived"​

---Isaac Asimov​

Atheists know how to properly read the Bible?

Is that why they harp on: slavery, the Inquisition, the Salem Witch Trials, Hitler's belt buckle proving He was a Christian, and a host of other things?

Isaac Asimov is in Aitch.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

"Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived"​

---Isaac Asimov​

Atheists know how to properly read the Bible?

Is that why they harp on: slavery, the Inquisition, the Salem Witch Trials, Hitler's belt buckle proving He was a Christian, and a host of other things?

Isaac Asimov is in Aitch.

Neither of these has anything to do with th thread topic. Take the schoolyard BS to another thread.

 

[AV1611VET]

Neither of these has anything to do with th thread topic. Take the schoolyard BS to another thread.

Jayem started it!

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Jayem started it!

You're just as bad if not worse.

 

[AV1611VET]

You're just as bad if not worse.

I'm telling mommy you cussed!

 

[BeyondET]

Not really. There are a couple of dozen different mantis shrimp species, and their eyes are quite varied. Stomatopods generally have more complex eyes than those of other crustaceans, but the difference is quantitative not qualitative.



Eh. It's not that special. Human eyes outperform them in certain tasks.

Mantis shrimp's super colour vision debunked - Nature

One of the animal kingdom’s most complex eyes is really quite simple.

www.nature.com

There's lot of things that can be gained from natural mimicry. For instance, a new type of surgical syringe was recently patented, based on a study of bee stingers.


But, not of this supports your assertion that it's designed. Or speaks to the OP's topic of evidence establishing that evolution is in crisis.

There's only one mantis shrimp species regardless if they have different functions and structures. Its unique on the planet.

Humans can see different color variations with 3 color receptors. Mantis shrimp have 16 receptors and see far beyond what humans can. Color is only one aspect of optic technology.

The 16 photoreceptors allows the shrimp to see UV, visible and polarised light.

Its a fact that they are the only animals known to detect circularly polarised light, which is when the wave component of light rotates in a circular motion rather clockwise or counterclockwise.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

There's only one mantis shrimp species regardless if they have different functions and structures. Its unique on the planet.

Humans can see different color variations with 3 color receptors. Mantis shrimp have 16 receptors and see far beyond what humans can. Color is only one aspect of optic technology.

The 16 photoreceptors allows the shrimp to see UV, visible and polarised light.

Its a fact that they are the only animals known to detect circularly polarised light, which is when the wave component of light rotates in a circular motion rather clockwise or counterclockwise.

And this thread isn't about the Mantis Shrimp or its eyes...

 

[BeyondET]

Nothing in here that addresses the actual thread topic. Go back, read the thread OP and try and answer that instead of what you think the OP said, or just don't bother responding.

Evolution without intelligent design is becoming a crisis. The more it's studied the more chance or blind interaction isn't cutting the mustard.

 

[BeyondET]

And this thread isn't about the Mantis Shrimp or its eyes...

It's about proving evolution isn't in a crisis,

 

[Hans Blaster]

Evolution without intelligent design is becoming a crisis. The more it's studied the more chance or blind interaction isn't cutting the mustard.

That's the start of a claim. Got any thing to back this claim? (Also intelligent design is just crypto-creationism, keep that in mind.)