Some Reasons I Don't Believe in Evolution

[AV1611VET]

1. The Bible does not teach evolution; but in fact, teaches its antithesis: creationism.

2. Variation (microevolution) can only go so far, then it stops. If you push a species to the limit by selective breeding, it becomes sterile and dies out.

1. Bacteria produce a new variation every twenty minutes to twenty-four hours and are found in every environment on earth, yet despite being at the limits of variation, no bacterium changes into something else.
2. Fruit flies grow from egg to adult in nine days, and are one of scientists favorite insects to study; yet studies of fruit flies all over the world show no change into something higher.

3. Variation involves a loss of information, not a gain. This means that even though a species may adapt to a new environment, it does so by losing a big part of its genetic information. If the new environment is a temporary one, such as a minor ice age, the adapted species will die out as soon as the environment changes back; it will not evolve back to where it came from.

4. The fossil record is a joke. All it is is bones in the ground, and not one set of fossils would stand up in a court of law as preponderance of evolution. In addition, one cannot show that the creature in question even had any offspring.

Commence confutation please.

 

[Davian]

If you live in a 6000 year old box (#1), I can see how you cannot make sense of the other points.

 

[AV1611VET]

If you live in a 6000 year old box (#1), I can see how you cannot make sense of the other points.

Indeed, I remember someone starting a thread asking for just one item of refutation of evolution, and I answered: "time".

 

[Davian]

Indeed, I remember someone starting a thread asking for just one item of refutation of evolution, and I answered: "time".

And were you able to substantiate this refutation?

 

[Loudmouth]

1. The Bible does not teach evolution; but in fact, teaches its antithesis: creationism.

Reality is not forced to conform to what humans have written in a book.

2. Variation (microevolution) can only go so far, then it stops.

Evidence please. I have never seen any experiment where they observed a base in a genome that was incapable of being mutated.

If you push a species to the limit by selective breeding, it becomes sterile and dies out.

Selective breeding is not the creation of variation. It is the removal of variation, sometimes to the detriment of the population.

Bacteria produce a new variation every twenty minutes to twenty-four hours and are found in every environment on earth, yet despite being at the limits of variation, no bacterium changes into something else.

Humans and chimps share a common ancestor, and they are still apes. Humans and bears share a common ancestor, and they are still mammals. Humans and fish share a common ancestor, and they are still vertebrates. Evolution does not produce species that are "something else". They produce species that are what their ancestors were plus modifications.

Fruit flies grow from egg to adult in nine days, and are one of scientists favorite insects to study; yet studies of fruit flies all over the world show no change into something higher.

"Something higher" has no meaning in evolution. Evolution does not have a direction or a goal.

Variation involves a loss of information, not a gain.

Then macroevolution can occur through losses of information. All macroevolution needs is new variation.

This means that even though a species may adapt to a new environment, it does so by losing a big part of its genetic information. If the new environment is a temporary one, such as a minor ice age, the adapted species will die out as soon as the environment changes back; it will not evolve back to where it came from.

Why is that a problem? The fossil record is full of extinct species.

If adaptation to a new environment is considered a loss of information then evolution can move along just fine with a loss of information. You have argued yourself into irrelevancy.

4. The fossil record is a joke. All it is is bones in the ground, and not one set of fossils would stand up in a court of law as preponderance of evolution. In addition, one cannot show that the creature in question even had any offspring.

None of this is required to show that the transitional features that the theory of evolution predicted are in fact real. That is why the fossils are considered evidence of evolution.

 

[AV1611VET]

And were you able to substantiate this refutation?

Biblically, yes.

 

[Ryal Kane]

If I discuss one of your points, and try to correct your misunderstanding of the science, will you actually engage AV or dismiss it off hand? Because otherwise it would be a waste of both our time.

 

[AV1611VET]

If I discuss one of your points, and try to correct your misunderstanding of the science, will you actually engage AV or dismiss it off hand? Because otherwise it would be a waste of both our time.

I'm leaving for awhile right now, but yes, I will engage you to a point; and try not to disappoint you -- even if I have to lose the engagement --

One word of warning though: As Loudmouth has shown in his post, my word choices were poor, this stems from an almost zero amount of knowledge of what I'm even talking about; so if I think you're going to try to bury me in anything other than elementary school talk, the conversation's over.

Fair enough?

 

[Davian]

And were you able to substantiate this refutation?

Biblically, yes.

If that had *actually* substantiated your 'time' refutation, why waste your time on those other points? Those points that you - as you told Ryal - know so little about?

 

[Ryal Kane]

I'm leaving for awhile right now, but yes, I will engage you to a point; and try not to disappoint you -- even if I have to lose the engagement --

One word of warning though: As Loudmouth has shown in his post, my word choices were poor, this stems from an almost zero amount of knowledge of what I'm even talking about; so if I think you're going to try to bury me in anything other than elementary school talk, the conversation's over.

Fair enough?

Deal. I'm not a scientist myself so I'll try and keep it simple.

I want to address point 3, the idea that variation contains no information.

Mutations come in many forms. Some multiply elements, some remove elements and some simply change the shape.

For Example
If I take the word STOP and copy the letters incorrectly it can become different things.

Deletion (removal of code) STOP - > TOP

Insertion (addition of code) STOP - > STOOP

Transposition (alteration of code) STOP - > TOPS

DNA isn't letters exactly, it's chemicals but this is an example of how mutations can occur. Don't worry about biological effects for now, just consider how the code can change. Do you get the idea of these three types of mutation?

 

[No Time]

1. The Bible does not teach evolution; but in fact, teaches its antithesis: creationism.

That means less than nothing.

As they say AV1611VET you are entitled to your own opinions but you are not entitled to your own facts.
Evolution is working every second of the day no matter what you me or anyone else wants thinks or wishes.
If all human life disappeared tomorrow evolution would not even notice.

While all this is true you and yours are still damaging the minds of children with your lies and distortions of facts.

 

[Delphiki]

4. The fossil record is a joke. All it is is bones in the ground, and not one set of fossils would stand up in a court of law as preponderance of evolution. In addition, one cannot show that the creature in question even had any offspring.

Wait... Doesn't this argument contradict your embedded age argument?

 

[AV1611VET]

If that had *actually* substantiated your 'time' refutation, why waste your time on those other points? Those points that you - as you told Ryal - know so little about?

Good question.

I'm trying to broaden my horizon; wade out into the deep a little and see if I drown.

 

[AV1611VET]

I want to address point 3, the idea that variation contains no information.

I didn't say that, my friend -- here's what I said:

3. Variation involves a loss of information, not a gain.

There's a difference between a 'loss of information' and 'no information'.

Mutations come in many forms. Some multiply elements, some remove elements and some simply change the shape.

The only thing that throws up a red flag with this, is you saying some 'multiply'.

That tells me that information is added, and I don't agree with that.

For Example

If I take the word STOP and copy the letters incorrectly it can become different things.

Good example! Let's make this into a STOP sign, eh?

Deletion (removal of code) STOP - > TOP

Okay, but then you can't use it anymore as a STOP sign. Agreed?

And in fact, and this is my point, it cannot go back to being a STOP sign.

(Or am I wrong here?)

Insertion (addition of code) STOP - > STOOP

I'm not prepared to deal with where the extra O came from. This to me, smacks of an addition of information.

Transposition (alteration of code) STOP - > TOPS

Again though, it cannot go back to being a STOP sign; but here again, you're setting up a scenario where nothing is lost.

I'm under the impression that, should variation occur, it occurred because information was lost.

DNA isn't letters exactly, it's chemicals but this is an example of how mutations can occur. Don't worry about biological effects for now, just consider how the code can change. Do you get the idea of these three types of mutation?

I think so.

 

[AV1611VET]

That means less than nothing.

To whom? you?

As they say AV1611VET you are entitled to your own opinions but you are not entitled to your own facts.

Then I'll work with what I'm entitled to work with, and the rest can take a hike.

Evolution is working every second of the day no matter what you me or anyone else wants thinks or wishes.

Did I say it wasn't?

If all human life disappeared tomorrow evolution would not even notice.

Okay.

While all this is true you and yours are still damaging the minds of children with your lies and distortions of facts.

As I pointed out before, thinking the moon is made of green cheese can just be a display of ignorance; but saying the moon is made of green cheese because NASA secretly sent astronauts to the moon in 1973, and they came back with green cheese is supporting an untruth with a lie.

 

[AV1611VET]

Wait... Doesn't this argument contradict your embedded age argument?

No -- since I believe these fossils (of Neanderthals) are of those who at one time were healthy human beings.

 

[SpiceDMind21]

I'm not prepared to deal with where the extra O came from. This to me, smacks of an addition of information.

Hello, AV1611VET. I have been following you for many years, and I hope I can finally engage in conversation with you.

Now, it might help if you think of how DNA is replicated. DNA is an acid made up of little building blocks that act like the code for how to build a living thing. You need a whole set for every cell in your body (and there are quite a few cells-- many trillions in fact!)

I'm sure you know that cells split-- Creationists and Evolutionists can agree on that

Every time our cells split, they need to make a new set of DNA. The process itself is tricky, but the code is broken up into chunks and reformed in each cell. This process is not perfect.

Going from STOP -> STOOP is a mistake. It is not a willful addition of information. Somewhere in that tangling and untangling, breaking apart and reforming that goes on when DNA is replicated, a mistake was made and a chunk was added. Sometimes, people even have whole extra chromosomes as well. These are all errors in the duplication process.

This is almost always bad, as we can see from people born with extra chromosomes. Often, these extra chromosomes make it impossible for a fetus to develop as the genetic code makes no sense. This happens with cells as well; if a cell has a changed set of DNA, it may not be able to survive, or it may even develop into cancer.

Very rarely, the mistake might be beneficial. Now, we don't need to get into the nitty-gritty. We don't have to argue about whether or not a duck can grow extra arms or a cat can sprout wings. Understanding the basics would help you understand why these things do not happen.

So let us just focus on one teeny-tiny bit of the whole puzzle: mistakes made when replicating DNA. We can agree that they happen, no? Again, let us not worry about the larger implications. I would simply like to explain, as fully as you would like, that bits of DNA can be lost, changed, or added.

Do you have any questions?

 

[Nostromo]

Hello, AV1611VET. I have been following you for many years, and I hope I can finally engage in conversation with you.

That's a scary first post.

 

[plindboe]

2. Variation (microevolution) can only go so far, then it stops. If you push a species to the limit by selective breeding, it becomes sterile and dies out.

1. Bacteria produce a new variation every twenty minutes to twenty-four hours and are found in every environment on earth, yet despite being at the limits of variation, no bacterium changes into something else.
2. Fruit flies grow from egg to adult in nine days, and are one of scientists favorite insects to study; yet studies of fruit flies all over the world show no change into something higher.

3. Variation involves a loss of information, not a gain. This means that even though a species may adapt to a new environment, it does so by losing a big part of its genetic information. If the new environment is a temporary one, such as a minor ice age, the adapted species will die out as soon as the environment changes back; it will not evolve back to where it came from.

4. The fossil record is a joke. All it is is bones in the ground, and not one set of fossils would stand up in a court of law as preponderance of evolution. In addition, one cannot show that the creature in question even had any offspring.

Commence confutation please.

http://www.christianforums.com/t7593157-8/#post58619458

Never = a couple of weeks apparently.

Peter

 

[AV1611VET]

Hello, AV1611VET. I have been following you for many years, and I hope I can finally engage in conversation with you.

Oh, my! You could have at least said, "Hello!"

Nice to meet you!

Do you have any questions?

Okay, I'm pretty sure I understand what you're saying.

I do realize that copy-errors are what makes us all unique.

If not for copy-errors, then we would all look the same.

So, let's assume then, for the sake of arguing, that indeed information does get added in once in awhile.

It's a LONG way from molecule-to-man; or cyanobacterium-to-man -- don't you think?

In fact, it appears the whole macroevolution industry depends on these additions, eh?