Consider This Article

[Kevin Snow]

New Genetic Study Seriously Challenges Darwin’s ‘Theory Of Evolution’

They scramble for a new theory of evolution to explain their findings that every single creature appears to have appeared all at once. The blind leading the blind will both fall into a pit but thanks be to God in Jesus Christ our Lord who has shown us the truth forever that we might walk in it.

 

[Invalidusername]

And sadly the media and the scientific community will ignore this. Arguing this with a group of people who believe GENDER is a spectrum is pointless since they aren't even looking for facts at this point.

It's been widely known for a long time that we LOSE DNA information over time rather than gaining it. Evolution has been proven false over and over again but is still being taught in schools.

 

[pitabread]

It's been widely known for a long time that we LOSE DNA information over time rather than gaining it.

No, this is not true as far as I know. Creationist sources like to claim the genome is "degenerating" somehow but that's usually based on flawed understanding of how genetics works and misuse of the term "information" with respect to DNA.

 

[Rubiks]

Evolution is a scientific fact. How it happened, however, is open for debate.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

... In the article, they talk about alien's creating life.

 

[AV1611VET]

New Genetic Study Seriously Challenges Darwin’s ‘Theory Of Evolution’

They scramble for a new theory of evolution to explain their findings that every single creature appears to have appeared all at once. The blind leading the blind will both fall into a pit but thanks be to God in Jesus Christ our Lord who has shown us the truth forever that we might walk in it.

2 Timothy 3:7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

 

[sfs]

New Genetic Study Seriously Challenges Darwin’s ‘Theory Of Evolution’

They scramble for a new theory of evolution to explain their findings that every single creature appears to have appeared all at once. The blind leading the blind will both fall into a pit but thanks be to God in Jesus Christ our Lord who has shown us the truth forever that we might walk in it.

I considered the article. The description is a breathlessly overexcited report about a deeply flawed -- I would go so far as to say hopelessly flawed -- study. I'm not surprised that the original study appeared in a lower tier journal.

 

[Ophiolite]

I have not yet had time to thoroughly study the research paper, but a speed-read was sufficient to reveal that the misrepresentation/misunderstanding of the research findings expressed in the direct link Collective Evolution) are deep and extensive. Detailing the errors, selective quoting and the like would not be worth the effort, since those who doubt evolution will ignore it and those who understand evolution can likely recognise the manipulations for themselves. However, f anyone is genuinely unsure about evolution and finds the Collective Evolution article somewhat convincing I would be willing to put in the effort. Let me know by PM.

I commend the original article to those who wish to explore in depth an interesting contribution to evolutionary theory. The authors are not the first to have their work misquoted to support a creationist agenda. They won't be the last.

And sadly the media and the scientific community will ignore this. Arguing this with a group of people who believe GENDER is a spectrum is pointless since they aren't even looking for facts at this point.

The scientific community will likely pay considerable attention to the research, but you are correct that they will completley ignore the manipulative misintrepretation of the findings.

I suggest you check the rules. I'm reasonable sure your sideways swipe at the LGBT community breaks them. It's certainly incorrect and in bad taste.

It's been widely known for a long time that we LOSE DNA information over time rather than gaining it.

Citation required.

Evolution has been proven false over and over again but is still being taught in schools.

Provide one instance of where it has been proven false. Alternatively, wise up and retract the statement.

 

[Ophiolite]

I considered the article. The description is a breathlessly overexcited report about a deeply flawed -- I would go so far as to say hopelessly flawed -- study. I'm not surprised that the original study appeared in a lower tier journal.

You posted while I was writing my contribution. What, specifically is flawed in thre study? I see that the authors have been plugging microchondrial barcodes for a few years and suspected they were out on a limb (hence my reference to an "interesting contribution to evolutionary theory", but wherein do you think the problem lies?

 

[akaDaScribe]

Massive Genetic Study Reveals 90 Percent Of Earth’s Animals Appeared At The Same Time

This version of the information seems a little less ad crazy.

this looks like a link to the actual publication
https://phe.rockefeller.edu/news/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Stoeckle-Thaler-Final-reduced.pdf

 

[Kevin Snow]

I have not yet had time to thoroughly study the research paper, but a speed-read was sufficient to reveal that the misrepresentation/misunderstanding of the research findings expressed in the direct link Collective Evolution) are deep and extensive. Detailing the errors, selective quoting and the like would not be worth the effort, since those who doubt evolution will ignore it and those who understand evolution can likely recognise the manipulations for themselves. However, f anyone is genuinely unsure about evolution and finds the Collective Evolution article somewhat convincing I would be willing to put in the effort. Let me know by PM.

Sounds like the same sort of reasonableness and care you ask for evolutionary theories should also be given to the scriptures. I wonder if you honestly give the same sort of genuine concern for the word of God.

As it is, this article is the perfect example of why evolution is wrong but you guys continue to make up more arguments and reasons as to why it is right. It's still a theory so that means it hasn't been proven at all but everything is speculative. You will just continue to mold the framework until there is too much information. You realize the very premise of evolution has been debunked here but you want it to keep going so you will find a new premise. Charles Darwin wouldn't even believe his own theory after this.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

It's still a theory so that means it hasn't been proven at all but everything is speculative.

This single line right here... instantly disqualifies you from any discussion on evolution.

 

[Kevin Snow]

This single line right here... instantly disqualifies you from any discussion on evolution.

No it doesn't at all. You are just the blind who believe in every little piece of misinformation out there that goes in the direction of evolution. But none of it proves evolution. You want to know that God made things according to his semblance? That the fundamental nature of life is built up in Christ? The rainbow is the sign for the manifold wisdom of God in all its creation. The fact that life is similar to itself is NO premise for evolution but is rather the fingerprints of God and we are the top of the complexity order in the seamless transition of life that God has made. The seamlessness of the rainbow testifies to the immutable nature of creation that all of it works together and this is spiritually discerned but you will have none of it because you will not ask God for help when you know you need it. God is able to show you. Just tell me why it was that Christ wore a seamless tunic? What is the reason that he wore something without seams? This very thing points to the immutable seamless creation and you want to say that because life has no seams then it must have happened all by itself! When that very reason you make for evolution is the very pointing of the glory of God!

God made life seamless.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

No it doesn't at all. You are just the blind who believe in every little piece of misinformation out there that goes in the direction of evolution. But none of it proves evolution. You want to know that God made things according to his semblance? That the fundamental nature of life is built up in Christ? The rainbow is the sign for the manifold wisdom of God in all its creation. The fact that life is similar to itself is NO premise for evolution but is rather the fingerprints of God and we are the top of the complexity order in the seamless transition of life that God has made. The seamlessness of the rainbow testifies to the immutable nature of creation that all of it works together and this is spiritually discerned but you will have none of it because you will not ask God for help when you know you need it. God is able to show you. Just tell me why it was that Christ wore a seamless tunic? What is the reason that he wore something without seams? This very thing points to the immutable seamless creation and you want to say that because life has no seams then it must have happened all by itself! When that very reason you make for evolution is the very pointing of the glory of God!

God made life seamless.

You don't know what a theory means in science, do you?

 

[Anguspure]

New Genetic Study Seriously Challenges Darwin’s ‘Theory Of Evolution’

They scramble for a new theory of evolution to explain their findings that every single creature appears to have appeared all at once. The blind leading the blind will both fall into a pit but thanks be to God in Jesus Christ our Lord who has shown us the truth forever that we might walk in it.

Ideas of panspermia have been advanced before in recognition of the problems surounding ND, however they only really push the issue away onto another planet, and in terms of the time available for advance life to evolve (on the other planet) make the problem worse.

 

[sfs]

You posted while I was writing my contribution. What, specifically is flawed in thre study? I see that the authors have been plugging microchondrial barcodes for a few years and suspected they were out on a limb (hence my reference to an "interesting contribution to evolutionary theory", but wherein do you think the problem lies?

Joshua Swamidass does a good job of running down the problems here.

 

[Strathos]

2 Timothy 3:7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

You know that in context that passage refers to promiscuous women, right?

 

[AV1611VET]

You know that in context that passage refers to promiscuous women, right?

You've heard of the harlot of Babylon?

Meet the harlot of London (evolution).

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

You've heard of the harlot of Babylon?

Meet the harlot of London (evolution).

Yeah, really showing you LOVE science here, aren't you?

 

[AV1611VET]

Yeah, really showing you LOVE science here, aren't you?

Actually I do.

Just not your kind.