• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Darwin Confesses evolution not being conceivable!

blixation

Well-Known Member
Sep 19, 2003
454
16
42
West Palm Beach, Florida
Visit site
✟670.00
Faith
Christian
Helen Fryman

THE QUOTE: From the Origin of Species, CHAPTER VI - DIFFICULTIES OF THE THEORY

"Organs of extreme Perfection and Complication. To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree. When it was first said that the sun stood still and the world turned round, the common sense of mankind declared the doctrine false; but the old saying of Vox populi, vox Dei, as every philosopher knows, cannot be trusted in science. Reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a simple and imperfect eye to one complex and perfect can be shown to exist, each grade being useful to its possessor, as is certainly the case; if further, the eye ever varies and the variations be inherited, as is likewise certainly the case and if such variations should be useful to any animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, should not be considered as subversive of the theory. How a nerve comes to be sensitive to light, hardly concerns us more than how life itself originated; but I may remark that, as some of the lowest organisms, in which nerves cannot be detected, are capable of perceiving light, it does not seem impossible that certain sensitive elements in their sarcode should become aggregated and developed into nerves, endowed with this special sensibility." --C.D.
 
Your point?

The Theory of Evolution doesn't stand or fall on whether Darwin believed it or not. It is a scientific theory, supported by masses of evidence, not the preachings of just one man.

Of course since Darwin's time, we have invented computers and we can use them to model how the eye might have formed. Nilsson and Pelger did just this, using a model that allowed a simple "eye spot" (a flat group of photo-sensitive cells), to evolve under selective pressure. It took just 400,000 generations to achieve a fish type eye.

Personal Incredulity has to be the most pathetic and egocentric reason for refusing to accept a scientific theory.

G.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Astrophile
Upvote 0

Aceldama

You may enter up to 25 ch
Dec 17, 2002
89
0
39
Visit site
✟15,299.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Labour
You have read that whole passage right?....

Reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a simple and imperfect eye to one complex and perfect can be shown to exist, each grade being useful to its possessor, as is certainly the case; if further, the eye ever varies and the variations be inherited, as is likewise certainly the case and if such variations should be useful to any animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, should not be considered as subversive of the theory.
:)
 
Upvote 0

Karl - Liberal Backslider

Senior Veteran
Jul 16, 2003
4,157
297
57
Chesterfield
Visit site
✟28,447.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Labour
And with a slight alteration of the emphasis:

blixation said:
Helen Fryman

THE QUOTE: From the Origin of Species, CHAPTER VI - DIFFICULTIES OF THE THEORY

"Organs of extreme Perfection and Complication. To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree. When it was first said that the sun stood still and the world turned round, the common sense of mankind declared the doctrine false; but the old saying of Vox populi, vox Dei, as every philosopher knows, cannot be trusted in science. Reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a simple and imperfect eye to one complex and perfect can be shown to exist, each grade being useful to its possessor, as is certainly the case; if further, the eye ever varies and the variations be inherited, as is likewise certainly the case and if such variations should be useful to any animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, should not be considered as subversive of the theory. How a nerve comes to be sensitive to light, hardly concerns us more than how life itself originated; but I may remark that, as some of the lowest organisms, in which nerves cannot be detected, are capable of perceiving light, it does not seem impossible that certain sensitive elements in their sarcode should become aggregated and developed into nerves, endowed with this special sensibility." --C.D.
We understand what Darwin was actually saying in this passage.
 
Upvote 0
Meatros said:
...Possibly a "more and more scientists are disagreeing with evolution everyday"?
Is this really a PRATT? The number of scientists that exist, or have existed, grows every day. So even if just one out of the hundreds of new ones each day disagrees with evolution, then the above statement is true. Of course the creationists' lie comes in when this is interpreted to mean that the proportion is increasing too...

G.
 
Upvote 0

blixation

Well-Known Member
Sep 19, 2003
454
16
42
West Palm Beach, Florida
Visit site
✟670.00
Faith
Christian
IT'S BEEN PROVEN!!!!!
There is no proof to the theory of evolution but just wonderful imaginations being portrayed. Now there is proof of men and dinosours living together. There is proof of the massive flood that accord in the time of Noah. Show me some good valid evidence.
 
Upvote 0

blixation

Well-Known Member
Sep 19, 2003
454
16
42
West Palm Beach, Florida
Visit site
✟670.00
Faith
Christian
The 'missing link,' is still missing.

Imaginations certainly took flight over Archaeoraptor Liaoningensis, a birdlike fossil with a meat-eater’s tail that was spirited out of northeastern China, ‘discovered’ at a Tucson, Arizona, gem and mineral show last year, and displayed at the National Geographic Society in Washington, D.C. Some 110,000 visitors saw the exhibit, which closed January 17; millions more read about the find in November’s National Geographic. Now, paleontologists are eating crow. Instead of ‘a true missing link’ connecting dinosaurs to birds, the specimen appears to be a composite, its unusual appendage likely tacked on by a Chinese farmer, not evolution.
"Archaeoraptor is hardly the first ‘missing link’ to snap under scrutiny. In 1912, fossil remains of an ancient hominid were found in England’s Piltdown quarries and quickly dubbed man’s apelike ancestor. It took decades to reveal the hoax." U.S. News & World Report, February 14, 2000

"Darwin admitted that millions of ‘missing links,’ transitional life forms, would have to be discovered in the fossil record to prove the accuracy of his theory that all species had gradually evolved by chance mutation into new species. Unfortunately for his theory, despite hundreds of millions spent on searching for fossils worldwide for more than a century, the scientists have failed to locate a single missing link out of the millions that must exist if their theory of evolution is to be vindicated." Grant R. Jeffery, The Signature of God

"There are gaps in the fossil graveyard, places where there should be intermediate forms, but where there is nothing whatsoever instead. No paleontologist . . . denies that this is so. It is simply a fact. Darwin’s theory and the fossil record are in conflict." David Berlinsky

"Scientists concede that their most cherished theories are based on embarrassingly few fossil fragments and that
 
Upvote 0

Meatros

The Meat is in the Middle!
Jun 25, 2003
942
3
47
Virginia
Visit site
✟23,613.00
Faith
Atheist
Gormless said:
Is this really a PRATT? The number of scientists that exist, or have existed, grows every day. So even if just one out of the hundreds of new ones each day disagrees with evolution, then the above statement is true. Of course the creationists' lie comes in when this is interpreted to mean that the proportion is increasing too...

G.
I see what you are saying, but the implication of it is that there are massive numbers of scientists who disagree with evolution. So yes, I agree that it's not technically untrue, but it is a point that's constantly refuted.
 
Upvote 0

Meatros

The Meat is in the Middle!
Jun 25, 2003
942
3
47
Virginia
Visit site
✟23,613.00
Faith
Atheist
blixation said:
There is no proof to the theory of evolution but just wonderful imaginations being portrayed. Now there is proof of men and dinosours living together. There is proof of the massive flood that accord in the time of Noah. Show me some good valid evidence.
Actually all of your assertions are not true.
 
Upvote 0

Karl - Liberal Backslider

Senior Veteran
Jul 16, 2003
4,157
297
57
Chesterfield
Visit site
✟28,447.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Labour
blixation said:
There is no proof to the theory of evolution but just wonderful imaginations being portrayed. Now there is proof of men and dinosours living together. There is proof of the massive flood that accord in the time of Noah. Show me some good valid evidence.
How about you show some evidence of the assertions you've just made?
 
Upvote 0

Meatros

The Meat is in the Middle!
Jun 25, 2003
942
3
47
Virginia
Visit site
✟23,613.00
Faith
Atheist
Upvote 0

Karl - Liberal Backslider

Senior Veteran
Jul 16, 2003
4,157
297
57
Chesterfield
Visit site
✟28,447.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Labour
blixation said:
The 'missing link,' is still missing.

Imaginations certainly took flight over Archaeoraptor Liaoningensis, a birdlike fossil with a meat-eater’s tail that was spirited out of northeastern China, ‘discovered’ at a Tucson, Arizona, gem and mineral show last year, and displayed at the National Geographic Society in Washington, D.C. Some 110,000 visitors saw the exhibit, which closed January 17; millions more read about the find in November’s National Geographic. Now, paleontologists are eating crow. Instead of ‘a true missing link’ connecting dinosaurs to birds, the specimen appears to be a composite, its unusual appendage likely tacked on by a Chinese farmer, not evolution.
"Archaeoraptor is hardly the first ‘missing link’ to snap under scrutiny. In 1912, fossil remains of an ancient hominid were found in England’s Piltdown quarries and quickly dubbed man’s apelike ancestor. It took decades to reveal the hoax." U.S. News & World Report, February 14, 2000
Two hoaxes eighty years apart. Pretty good record really, isn't it. Since it's palaeontologists who discovered Archaeoraptor was a fake, they're hardly "eating crow". I suggest you get your information from real scientific sources, rather than the internet equivalent of The Sun

"Darwin admitted that millions of ‘missing links,’ transitional life forms, would have to be discovered in the fossil record to prove the accuracy of his theory that all species had gradually evolved by chance mutation into new species. Unfortunately for his theory, despite hundreds of millions spent on searching for fossils worldwide for more than a century, the scientists have failed to locate a single missing link out of the millions that must exist if their theory of evolution is to be vindicated." Grant R. Jeffery, The Signature of God
Ah. Two points here - one, he didn't say "millions" of forms. Secondly, if we've found none, then Panderichthys, Ambulocetus, Acanthostega, Australopithecus, Hyracotherium, Rhodocetus, Miacis & how many others don't exist?

"There are gaps in the fossil graveyard, places where there should be intermediate forms, but where there is nothing whatsoever instead. No paleontologist . . . denies that this is so. It is simply a fact. Darwin’s theory and the fossil record are in conflict." David Berlinsky
Not so. Evolution frequently predicts the forms that should exist before they are found - I refer you back to Ambulocetus and Acanthostega.

"Scientists concede that their most cherished theories are based on embarrassingly few fossil fragments
They admit no such thing.

OK. Admit it. Who put up the "unload your list of well-rehearsed and well debunked nonsense here" sign?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Astrophile
Upvote 0

Pete Harcoff

PeteAce - In memory of WinAce
Jun 30, 2002
8,304
72
✟9,884.00
Faith
Other Religion
blixation said:
There is proof of the massive flood that accord in the time of Noah.
Which, according to most YEC timelines, is smack dab in the middle of Egypt's 6th Dynasty. Funny, someone forget to tell the Egyptians that their civilization was wiped out about 4500 years ago...
 
Upvote 0

TransformedByGrace

Well-Known Member
Sep 22, 2003
4,224
41
39
Pensacola, FL
Visit site
✟4,587.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Charles Darwin, 1809-1882, English Naturalist, doveloped the modern theory of evolution.
The following is a conversation with Lady Hope of Northfield England in the closing days of Darwin's life:
(Darwin) "I want you very much to speak here. I know you read the Bible in villages."
(Lady Hope) "What shall I speak about?"
(Darwin) "Christ Jesus and His salvation. Is that not the best theme?"
(Darwin) "I was a young man with unformed ideas. I threw out queries, suggestions, wondering all the time about everything. To my astonishment the ideas took like wildfire. People made a religion of them."
Darwin confessed Jesus Christ as Lord before he died. I think we'll be suprised at some of the people we find in heaven when we get there!
 
Upvote 0

Karl - Liberal Backslider

Senior Veteran
Jul 16, 2003
4,157
297
57
Chesterfield
Visit site
✟28,447.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Labour
TransformedByGrace said:
Charles Darwin, 1809-1882, English Naturalist, doveloped the modern theory of evolution.
The following is a conversation with Lady Hope of Northfield England in the closing days of Darwin's life:

Darwin confessed Jesus Christ as Lord before he died. I think we'll be suprised at some of the people we find in heaven when we get there!
Transformed - check this thread http://www.christianforums.com/t58350 - It's an urban myth.
 
Upvote 0

Meatros

The Meat is in the Middle!
Jun 25, 2003
942
3
47
Virginia
Visit site
✟23,613.00
Faith
Atheist
TransformedByGrace said:
Charles Darwin, 1809-1882, English Naturalist, doveloped the modern theory of evolution.
The following is a conversation with Lady Hope of Northfield England in the closing days of Darwin's life:

Darwin confessed Jesus Christ as Lord before he died. I think we'll be suprised at some of the people we find in heaven when we get there!
Don't really check the other posts in the forum before you post, do you?
 
Upvote 0