Evolution vs Int Design

Posted by mesenberg on June 16, 2006, 2:20 p.m.

Everyone has been told in schools that we evolved from monkeys. A well know theory called Evolution has been said to be true in the past twenty years by young folks, but the theory fails to be backed up by evidence. Now lets take a good look at some of its flaws.

-Evolution cannot account for matter.

Matter cannot be created or destroyed, only change in form. Thus the ammount of matter in the univers cannot grow or decrease. How then did matter come into existance? It would seem that some super-natural force must have created it.

-The forming of even the smallest bacteria is to complex to suddenly happen in some puddle somewhere. If all the molicules somehow came together is some way to make all the parts of the tiny bacteria, then how would all the parts fit together so they would work? Its like taking your car engine parts, throwing them into a swiming pool and having them all come together into your engine. There is no way it could happen on accident. Also the parts must all be intact at the same time for the machine to work, if the machines parts are only halfway there, they wont work.

-The planet earth has just the right tilt and just the perfect distance from the sun with just the right ammount of oxygen and plenty of h2o. And on top of that, we are at just the right place in the galaxy too. There are hundreds of factors that are tuned so finnely so that we could live. I cant remember the exact number but it is far over 1 out of 1000000000000000000000000, that one has 25 zeros, the real number had around 64 or something. The sorce I get that info from is a group of scientists and mathmatisions who figured that out.

-Genes in animals do undergo mutations. No one denys that. What is a mutation you ask? A mutation is when a gene is not present so the creature LACKS an ability. Mutations do not add a gene, it is a missing gene. Various creatures have variable genes, like if a whole bunch of people with red hair married, their children would have red hair and the red hair gene would take dominance. But new genes have never occured to change one creature to another. They have so many genes, they can lose genes, but not gain new ones.

-The 2nd law of thermodynamics states that dissorder tends to increase in a system. So creatures that were little cells do not mutate into frogs, for that would require more order and things fall apart over time, not get better. Old cars dont get better than new cars. New cars are better and old cars get broken over time. Its all around us!

-Saturns rings have been deteriorating rapidly, the inermost ring has shifted 200km closer to the planet. Neptunes rings are also deteriorating rapidly. If the planets took so many millions of years to form, then why are they coming into disarray so fast.

-Fossils do not give evolution any legs to stand on, the layers of sediment are full of fossils which are in no aparent order. You find large highly soffisticated animals in lower layers, and small little crawlers up near the top.

-Humans were around before dinasours became extinct, there are cave drawings and stories and writings recovered all about dinasours.

Well, thats all ill do for now. Just write your oppinion and thoughts on the matter and we'll have a swig at this controversial issue [:P]

Comments

Extravisual 18 years, 6 months ago

Marbs: You need to explain if you claim the impossible. Like somebody once told me "They lie to you, numbers can be divided by 0."

mesenberg 18 years, 6 months ago

yes marbs, plx explain. God isnt made of physical, have you ever heard that he might be a spirit? Whether God exists or not I will blog evidences tommorow.

I do know that there were tribes with no writtian language, like the North American Indians, most of them except 1 never had a written language. I do not deny the existance of tribal groups in europe without written language. But if they had dinos on their drawings then they must have been around. And where do you suppose the chinies dragon symbol came from if not dinosoars? Ancient writings include parts of the old testiment, such as Job which was written around 4000BC if I got my dates right. Then there are tales of sea serpents. You cant just pass them of as tales, they might have been exagerated by people but most myths come from something real.

HeroofTime55 18 years, 6 months ago

First, evolution dosent have to explain matter. Seriously, was that put in as a joke?

Second, true, its like a 1 in bazagillion chance that the planet is just right. But there are like a bazagillion planets. though that has nothing to do with evolution. Which, by the way, that is a very narrow minded view on life. Everyone always thinks that life has to survive in OUR environment. I dont believe all life even has to be made of DNA. anain, nthing to do with evolution. Also, to assume the molecules randomly arrange all at once is foolish. It is known that 'shells', just like cell membranes, can be formed by pouring hot water on clay.

You also misunderstand mutation. Nothing is taken away. Things change. If its a good change, it helps the species. otherwise it hurts it. To have the narrow minded view that "mutation == bad" is foolish.

Now, i am christian. I believe that God is more intelligent than any human. As humans, we create things as best we can. Because of our lmitationms, our creations break down. Disorder is created. But God is smarter than that. He made sure His creation could maintain itself. Physically, our our species as a whole needs no outside matinence. Evolution is the self-matinence of every creature.

Now, what the heck does saturn have to do with evolution?? >.<

I dont understand the point of the fossil argument

And finally, No, humans did not arise before dinousaurs died out…. (though technically, birds and alligators may be considered dinosaurs). Seriously, is this a joke?

ok i made a point on every issue there. Im tempted to write my own blog entry on my ideas.

I mean none of the above to be offensive. It just drives me crazy, people who take the bible to the word. The stories exist as lessons, much more than as a record of history.

And seriously, to try to deny evolution is foolishness. God created evolution as part of his plan. Seriously, i find your arguments to be mildly entertaining. Do some research and mabye a little thinking before you post something like this. Seriously. Think through our ideas for a bit. You can come up with some great info if you think about things.

Gah, this has inspired me to make a blog now about how everything in the universe works.

Josea 18 years, 6 months ago

Quote:
somewhere in europe there are pepperd moths, Some with white genes others with black genes. When curtian white trees started growing in the area the black moths would show up so well that they were being eatin, soon black moths were hard to find. Nothing has evolved here, the white gene is lost and the black gene is dominant. New genes have not evolved ever to make the creature more better and evolve into another, even over millions of years.
Yes, nothing has evolved there, the example you gave us is as simple as saying there people with blue eyes and people with brown eyes. Some genes are domeinant, some are recesive. Maybe both are recesive, and they tend to dissapear if the organims carrying those genes are killed in a large amount.

Your example isn't valid to prove evolutio non-existance.

melee-master 18 years, 6 months ago

I think the blog poster should have established if we were going to use "fact", or "non-fact" in our arguments, or else, like now, things go crazy. (and by "fact", I mean things that scientists and biologists, etc, deem the truth)

Josea 18 years, 6 months ago

I COMPLETELy agree with Herofotime. That's kind of what I wanted to say all this time.

marbs 18 years, 6 months ago

You asked me to explain, but I'll let wiki do it:

Quote:

An exception to the law of conservation of matter

Modern nuclear chemistry has been successful in proving that in certain situations (a nuclear reaction, for example), matter can in fact be lost in the sense that the quantity of all matter remaining in the universe (if we do not count photons as "matter") is less than what it was prior to the reaction taking place. This idea can best be summarized by the Einstein equation E = mc², meaning that the total energy gained by a loss of m, matter, is the product of m and the universal constant c, the speed of light, about or 3×108 m/s.

Even in nuclear chemistry, whenever matter is completely destroyed, it is always matter in the sense of fermionic particles encountering their antiparticles (for example, positrons may be created and destroyed when they encounter electrons). When such "matter" is converted to "energy" (gamma rays in the case of positrons and electrons) it still retains its mass, in most senses of the word "mass" (see mass in special relativity). For example, a system of two gamma rays moving in opposite direction retains all the mass of a positron and electron (even though each individual gamma ray is massless). In a similar way, the heat of a chemical reaction or a nuclear reaction has mass when measured as part of a system of masses, and the reaction system does not lose mass until the heat is removed.

In most nuclear reactions, the actual "mass" which is converted to heat and light does not represent any particular type of particle, but is only the mass of static fields associated with particles in the nucleus. Exceptions involve the production of antimatter particles, which can be anihilated completely, with associated production of electromagnetic radiation only.

Now I'm going to bed. Seriously. I'm going out tomorrow at 10am and now it is 11:30pm.

Extravisual 18 years, 6 months ago

#19: Of course protons are matter, splitting an atom does not make it any less mass, that wiki article is going under the assumtion that protons, electrons, and neutrons are not matter. If you take abpart a piece of clay, you are distributing the mass, not destroying it. Something cannot be turned into nothing.

Josea 18 years, 6 months ago

I was going to sya something but my eyes are fried of 5 hours of PC use. And that's just not healthy.

Tasm 18 years, 6 months ago

All this theoretical thinking hurts my mind… I'll drop my opinions on you later.