If Evolution is true, why are human adaptations not ubiquitous?

[Aussie Pete]

I recently got a thorn stuck deep into my finger and was fascinated by the mechanism that my body used to expel it. I also pondered the evolutionary factoid that only those with this ability survived. All whose body lacked this ability perished. Curious that.

It's not evolution. Why did the mechanism exist in the first place? How does blood know to clot only in the area of the wound? If it does not clot, you bleed to death. If all the blood clots, your circulation stops and you die. That's before we get into how the body fights infections that come into an open wound.

 

[Aussie Pete]

There's been plenty of time... humans demonstrate that. It's just that they weren't in the same environment and didn't get the same mutations that helped us become what we are today.

If that is true, then we desperately need a raft of new mutations. The current crop are sending the world to disaster and the human race to extinction. Thank God, evolution is not true.

 

[pitabread]

Thank God, evolution is not true.

Oh, the things creationists need to tell themselves...

 

[loveofourlord]

It's not evolution. Why did the mechanism exist in the first place? How does blood know to clot only in the area of the wound? If it does not clot, you bleed to death. If all the blood clots, your circulation stops and you die. That's before we get into how the body fights infections that come into an open wound.

Nice of you to answer the question yourself :> Well for one thing, early on many animals probably did die from such things, but also remember early fish were bony so be harder to bleed that way, but those that got a mild wound and bleed to death didn't survive, so anything that gave a advantage to how blood slowed the flowing would be beneficial, it doesn't have to be 1-1. For humans that live 100 years not clotting is a issue, but for soemthing that lives a year or two at most it's alot easier to avoid.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

It's not evolution. Why did the mechanism exist in the first place? How does blood know to clot only in the area of the wound? If it does not clot, you bleed to death. If all the blood clots, your circulation stops and you die. That's before we get into how the body fights infections that come into an open wound.

Of course it's not evolution; it's design.

 

[Shemjaza]

The real reason that scientists back evolution:
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” Upton Sinclair wasn’t right about much. He was a socialist, after all. But he was right about that. Evolutionists control the budgets and so most scientists will not go against the status quo

False. And I'm sure you can't support it with honest evidence.

There are plenty of us here who are not scientists, but understand the concept fine. Given the comparative loyalty and fervor that Creationism has compared to science if it had any real evidence it would have annihilated evolution as a teaching.

If that is true, then we desperately need a raft of new mutations. The current crop are sending the world to disaster and the human race to extinction. Thank God, evolution is not true.

I think this is a very legitimate problem... I wish there was a manager/designer who was responsible for this state of affairs, but since there isn't we're going to have to muddle it out ourselves.

 

[Aussie Pete]

False. And I'm sure you can't support it with honest evidence.

There are plenty of us here who are not scientists, but understand the concept fine. Given the comparative loyalty and fervor that Creationism has compared to science if it had any real evidence it would have annihilated evolution as a teaching.

I think this is a very legitimate problem... I wish there was a manager/designer who was responsible for this state of affairs, but since there isn't we're going to have to muddle it out ourselves.

You should read the Designer's manual, the Bible. There is everything you need to know about why the world is such a mess and what He has done, and will do, to fix it. There are reasons that evolution is so well accepted. None of them are valid
1. The world system (as opposed to people) is Antichrist. It will engage any means to hinder the knowledge of God
2. The system controls the money. It will only fund those who conform to its godless ideology
3. Most education is controlled by 1 & 2. Hence evolution is taught and Creationism is not permitted
4. Scientists who reject evolution (and there are many) also are subject to 1 & 2 so they are often reluctant to publicly state their opposition to evolution.
5. It is a simple fact of psychology that the first presentation of an idea is readily accepted. If no other idea is presented, the first idea tends to become entrenched. The internet is full of lies and deceptions readily accepted without any basis. That's how advertising works. I was fortunate enough to be offered both evolution and creation as the basis for life on earth. Even though I was not a Christian, I chose to believe the creation account.
6. My "quote of the week": “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” Upton Sinclair wasn’t right about much. He was a socialist, after all. But he was right about that. Scientists salaries often depend on their "not understanding" Creation.

 

[pitabread]

You should read the Designer's manual, the Bible. There is everything you need to know about why the world is such a mess and what He has done, and will do, to fix it. There are reasons that evolution is so well accepted. None of them are valid
1. The world system (as opposed to people) is Antichrist. It will engage any means to hinder the knowledge of God
2. The system controls the money. It will only fund those who conform to its godless ideology
3. Most education is controlled by 1 & 2. Hence evolution is taught and Creationism is not permitted
4. Scientists who reject evolution (and there are many) also are subject to 1 & 2 so they are often reluctant to publicly state their opposition to evolution.
5. It is a simple fact of psychology that the first presentation of an idea is readily accepted. If no other idea is presented, the first idea tends to become entrenched. The internet is full of lies and deceptions readily accepted without any basis. That's how advertising works. I was fortunate enough to be offered both evolution and creation as the basis for life on earth. Even though I was not a Christian, I chose to believe the creation account.
6. My "quote of the week": “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” Upton Sinclair wasn’t right about much. He was a socialist, after all. But he was right about that. Scientists salaries often depend on their "not understanding" Creation.

I love it when creationists literally invent reasons why evolution is accepted and/or creationism is rejected and it has absolutely nothing to do with the reality of the situation. The power of denial is sure strong among you guys.

Todd Wood seems to be one of the very few creationists who is honest about the situation. Too bad most creationists don't listen to him.

The truth about evolution

 

[Aussie Pete]

Nice of you to answer the question yourself :> Well for one thing, early on many animals probably did die from such things, but also remember early fish were bony so be harder to bleed that way, but those that got a mild wound and bleed to death didn't survive, so anything that gave a advantage to how blood slowed the flowing would be beneficial, it doesn't have to be 1-1. For humans that live 100 years not clotting is a issue, but for soemthing that lives a year or two at most it's alot easier to avoid.

Just way too many things have to be right at the right time under the right conditions. Evolution is mathematically impossible.

 

[Aussie Pete]

I love it when creationists literally invent reasons why evolution is accepted and/or creationism is rejected and it has absolutely nothing to do with the reality of the situation. The power of denial is sure strong among you guys.

Todd Wood seems to be one of the very few creationists who is honest about the situation. Too bad most creationists don't listen to him.

The truth about evolution

Denial? The evolutionist Gestapo suppresses any dissent ruthlessly. Talk about pots and kettles.............

 

[pitabread]

Evolution is mathematically impossible.

No, no it's not.

 

[pitabread]

Denial? The evolutionist Gestapo suppresses any dissent ruthlessly. Talk about pots and kettles.............

Uh, no. In case you haven't noticed creationists are more than free to talk about their feelings.

This is just another fabrication on your part to avoid the reality of the situation.

 

[Aussie Pete]

Uh, no. In case you haven't noticed creationists are more than free to talk about their feelings.

This is just another fabrication on your part to avoid the reality of the situation.

Not scientists who are Creationist. Not educators. If you want to know what trolling is, get a science degree and talk about creation. Professor Tour advises his students to shut up about their anti evolution views, if they want a career in science. I know evolutionists are not big on facts, but your remark is ridiculous.

 

[pitabread]

Not scientists who are Creationist. Not educators. If you want to know what trolling is, get a science degree and talk about creation. Professor Tour advises his students to shut up about their anti evolution views, if they want a career in science. I know evolutionists are not big on facts, but your remark is ridiculous.

This isn't suppression of dissent though; it is about demonstrating competence in one's field. The theory of evolution is foundational to modern biology and an applied science in industry. You may not like it, but this is the reality of things.

Going into a job interview and spouting off a bunch of anti-evolution views is no different than interviewing for the job of a tax accountant and then revealing you're in favor of tax protestation.

It calls into question one's professional competence in that chosen field.

 

[loveofourlord]

Just way too many things have to be right at the right time under the right conditions. Evolution is mathematically impossible.

congratulations you got nothing you said right in what you said :> Just LALALA ignore what you said and reassert the previous lies nice job :>

 

[Aussie Pete]

congratulations you got nothing you said right in what you said :> Just LALALA ignore what you said and reassert the previous lies nice job :>

A brilliant and considered refutation of my argument. Not,

 

[Shemjaza]

You should read the Designer's manual, the Bible. There is everything you need to know about why the world is such a mess and what He has done, and will do, to fix it.

I've read it, it didn't clear anything up for me.

Particularly in the analogy of looking for a responsible figure. When a creation fails, typically you blame the responsible party, not the creation.

There are reasons that evolution is so well accepted. None of them are valid
1. The world system (as opposed to people) is Antichrist. It will engage any means to hinder the knowledge of God
2. The system controls the money. It will only fund those who conform to its godless ideology
3. Most education is controlled by 1 & 2. Hence evolution is taught and Creationism is not permitted
4. Scientists who reject evolution (and there are many) also are subject to 1 & 2 so they are often reluctant to publicly state their opposition to evolution.
5. It is a simple fact of psychology that the first presentation of an idea is readily accepted. If no other idea is presented, the first idea tends to become entrenched. The internet is full of lies and deceptions readily accepted without any basis. That's how advertising works. I was fortunate enough to be offered both evolution and creation as the basis for life on earth. Even though I was not a Christian, I chose to believe the creation account.
6. My "quote of the week": “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” Upton Sinclair wasn’t right about much. He was a socialist, after all. But he was right about that. Scientists salaries often depend on their "not understanding" Creation.

Unsupportable nonsense.

How on Earth can you justify depicting evolution as "first presentation of an idea"? Religious ideas are presented in simpler formats at younger ages.

I suspect you are younger then me, but when I was at school I got Adam and Eve at R.E. long before any teacher attempted to explain evolution.

Trained scientists may well doubt evolution... but even with the millions of religious dollars to support their research and marketing campaigns they can somehow never actually present compelling evidence against evolution, and also don't seem to even both to try to find evidence for creation.

Evolution is supported by consistent repeatable evidence. Please feel free to ask for clarity on any number of threads on this sub forum.

 

[Shemjaza]

A brilliant and considered refutation of my argument. Not,

Made up accusations and implied conspiracy theories isn't an argument.

 

[Aussie Pete]

I've read it, it didn't clear anything up for me.

Particularly in the analogy of looking for a responsible figure. When a creation fails, typically you blame the responsible party, not the creation.


Unsupportable nonsense.

How on Earth can you justify depicting evolution as "first presentation of an idea"? Religious ideas are presented in simpler formats at younger ages.

I suspect you are younger then me, but when I was at school I got Adam and Eve at R.E. long before any teacher attempted to explain evolution.

Trained scientists may well doubt evolution... but even with the millions of religious dollars to support their research and marketing campaigns they can somehow never actually present compelling evidence against evolution, and also don't seem to even both to try to find evidence for creation.

Evolution is supported by consistent repeatable evidence. Please feel free to ask for clarity on any number of threads on this sub forum.

Your premise is false. Evolution is impossible with current known mechanisms. You can't even produce life by evolutionary means. Don't tell me that OOL is not the same as evolution. Without life, there is nothing to evolve. "Compelling evidence" is available everywhere. Evolutionist are as blind as bats and can't see the (created) nose in front of their collective faces. Evolutionists are so intellectually dishonest that they conflate adaptation with evolution. Adaptation is everywhere. Evolution is nowhere.

 

[Shemjaza]

Your premise is false. Evolution is impossible with current known mechanisms. You can't even produce life by evolutionary means. Don't tell me that OOL is not the same as evolution. Without life, there is nothing to evolve.

"Don't tell me that OOL is not the same as evolution" Why not? It's the truth.

Evolution does not provide a mechanism for the development of life from an environment without life. Also cake making doesn't provide a method of oven construction... it's trivially true, but meaningless.

For arguments sake let's accept a premise: "The God of Abraham exists and he created simple life".
Evolution is still supported by exactly the same evidence in exactly the same way.

"Compelling evidence" is available everywhere. Evolutionist are as blind as bats and can't see the (created) nose in front of their collective faces.

Yeah, I'm blind and I can't see it. You've got time to talk about how much of it there is and time to be insulting, but somehow forgot to present any of this evidence. Again.

So what is it?

Evolutionists are so intellectually dishonest that they conflate adaptation with evolution. Adaptation is everywhere. Evolution is nowhere.

I suspect you are using words differently to other people in the conversation. Adaption is a part of evolution.

Why don't you tell us what definitions of "adaptation" and "evolution" you are actually using?