Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 2,544 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 699,215
Pageviews Today: 1,015,705Threads Today: 244Posts Today: 5,337
10:09 AM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

Scientist's who are skeptical of Evolution

 
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 23223519
United States
09/24/2012 02:32 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Scientist's who are skeptical of Evolution


[link to www.youtube.com]


Life does not self-assemble.

Naturalistic Origins of Life is a complete irrational joke.



Atheists are confined to worshiping Aliens to escape the truth of God.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1554617
United States
09/24/2012 02:34 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Scientist's who are skeptical of Evolution
God creates the period of environmental duress which necessitates an evolution. Both creationism and evolution are one in the same.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 23223519
United States
09/24/2012 02:40 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Scientist's who are skeptical of Evolution
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 23223519
United States
09/24/2012 02:44 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Scientist's who are skeptical of Evolution
Accredited scientist Dr. Jeffrey Thomkins Phd openly speaks out against evolution



[link to www.youtube.com]


His Website: Designed-Dna

[link to designed-dna.org]
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 23223519
United States
09/24/2012 02:49 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Scientist's who are skeptical of Evolution
"The erroneous idea that complex genetic information in the form of genes and regulatory DNA can randomly evolve, has become more untenable with every new discovery in the field of genomics. Just this past week, a discovery published in the prestigious British journal 'Nature' has once again spectacularly confirmed that evolution is nothing but a complete myth.


[link to english.pravda.ru]

"

- Dr. Jeffrey Thomkins Phd
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 23223519
United States
09/24/2012 02:55 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Scientist's who are skeptical of Evolution
[link to english.pravda.ru]

......The emerging concept that homologous recombination is a highly regulated and controlled feature of the genome limited to specific hotspots contradicts the idea of random evolutionary processes being able to produce new genes.

We also know that the key regulatory parts of the genome that are critical for gene function are protected from recombination processes. This scientific discovery is a virtual death blow to any idea that recombination can serve as a random tinkering tool to create new genes and gene functions.


- Dr. Jeffrey Thomkins Phd
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 23223519
United States
09/24/2012 02:59 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Scientist's who are skeptical of Evolution


[link to www.youtube.com]
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 5631338
Netherlands
09/24/2012 03:00 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Scientist's who are skeptical of Evolution
Retrovirusses are the real force behind evolution!
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 24115171
United Kingdom
09/24/2012 03:02 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Scientist's who are skeptical of Evolution
Bacterial plasmid transfer, allowing one species of bacteria to have resistance to antibiotics when previous generations didnt.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 24115171
United Kingdom
09/24/2012 03:04 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Scientist's who are skeptical of Evolution
Bacterial plasmid transfer, allowing one species of bacteria to have resistance to antibiotics when previous generations didnt.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 24115171


When coupled with an environment that contains funghi that secrete anti bacterial compounds this is essentially natural selection in action. The bacteria evolve or die.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 23223519
United States
09/24/2012 03:11 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Scientist's who are skeptical of Evolution
Bacterial plasmid transfer, allowing one species of bacteria to have resistance to antibiotics when previous generations didnt.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 24115171


When coupled with an environment that contains funghi that secrete anti bacterial compounds this is essentially natural selection in action. The bacteria evolve or die.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 24115171


Yes, they adapt to their environments and continue to exist as bacteria.

They will never "evolve" into a fundamentally different organism.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 23223519
United States
09/24/2012 03:25 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Scientist's who are skeptical of Evolution


[link to www.youtube.com]
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 23223519
United States
09/24/2012 03:34 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Scientist's who are skeptical of Evolution
bump
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 23223519
United States
09/24/2012 03:51 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Scientist's who are skeptical of Evolution
bump
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 24115171
United Kingdom
09/24/2012 04:03 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Scientist's who are skeptical of Evolution
Yes, they adapt to their environments and continue to exist as bacteria.

They will never "evolve" into a fundamentally different organism.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 23223519


So how would you define a species?

Explain why a gene taken from one animal can often be implanted into the genome of another animal to make it express that particular gene.

For instance you can take a gene for luminescence from a jellyfish and implant that gene into a rat, and the rats glow in UV light.

If anything that shows that the one thing all life shares, DNA! is indeed related in all organisms.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 24115171
United Kingdom
09/24/2012 04:05 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Scientist's who are skeptical of Evolution
They will never "evolve" into a fundamentally different organism.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 23223519


Define fundamentally different organism.

Bacteria have been shown to evolve in a laboratory to utilize different food sources without any outside genetic interference.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 8640456
United States
09/24/2012 04:09 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Scientist's who are skeptical of Evolution
In The Origin of Species, Darwin experienced a serious difficulty in the face of the eye's complex design. The only solution he found was in pointing to the simpler eye structure found in some creatures as the origin of the more complex eyes found in others. He hypothesized that more complex eyes evolved from simpler ones. However, this claim does not reflect the truth. Paleontology shows that living things emerged in the world with their exceedingly complex structures already intact. The oldest known system of sight is the trilobite eye. This 530-million-year-old compound eye structure, which we touched on in an earlier chapter, is an "optical marvel" which worked with a double lens system. This fact totally invalidates Darwin's assumption that complex eyes evolved from "primitive" eyes.

[link to darwinismrefuted.com]
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 24115171
United Kingdom
09/24/2012 04:15 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Scientist's who are skeptical of Evolution
In The Origin of Species, Darwin experienced a serious difficulty in the face of the eye's complex design. The only solution he found was in pointing to the simpler eye structure found in some creatures as the origin of the more complex eyes found in others. He hypothesized that more complex eyes evolved from simpler ones. However, this claim does not reflect the truth. Paleontology shows that living things emerged in the world with their exceedingly complex structures already intact. The oldest known system of sight is the trilobite eye. This 530-million-year-old compound eye structure, which we touched on in an earlier chapter, is an "optical marvel" which worked with a double lens system. This fact totally invalidates Darwin's assumption that complex eyes evolved from "primitive" eyes.

[link to darwinismrefuted.com]
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 8640456


Why are you talking about a 150 year old book, and implying that because darwin didnt know something evolution is wrong.

Darwin didnt know about genetics, he didnt know about DNA, he didnt know about genes.

Its convenient for you to miss out 150 years of biology, you should look up gregor mendel, he was an austrian monk who discovered genes.

Its funny you should mention eyes though, the PAX 6 gene for eye development in mice has the same amino acid sequence as humans...whats crazy is if you transplant this gene into fruitflies it also regulates eye formation in those too.... this kind of thing shows how close all life is.

The fact PAX6 in mice and humans has the same amino acid sequence implies quite strongly we have a shared mammalian ancestor.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 24115171
United Kingdom
09/24/2012 04:17 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Scientist's who are skeptical of Evolution
In The Origin of Species, Darwin experienced a serious difficulty in the face of the eye's complex design. The only solution he found was in pointing to the simpler eye structure found in some creatures as the origin of the more complex eyes found in others. He hypothesized that more complex eyes evolved from simpler ones. However, this claim does not reflect the truth. Paleontology shows that living things emerged in the world with their exceedingly complex structures already intact. The oldest known system of sight is the trilobite eye. This 530-million-year-old compound eye structure, which we touched on in an earlier chapter, is an "optical marvel" which worked with a double lens system. This fact totally invalidates Darwin's assumption that complex eyes evolved from "primitive" eyes.

[link to darwinismrefuted.com]
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 8640456


Also the strawman argument of irreducible complexity is old as fuck, this has been answered on the internet so many times.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 24115171
United Kingdom
09/24/2012 04:23 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Scientist's who are skeptical of Evolution
The fact PAX6 in mice and humans has the same amino acid sequence implies quite strongly we have a shared mammalian ancestor.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 24115171


.....and talking about ancestors.

All the great apes have more chromosomes than US... we have less chromosomes than they do.

So??

Heres the funny thing, we have telomeres, which are the end sections of DNA in the middle of some of our specific chromosomes, and what do you know, those telemeres are the exact same as the ones found on the ends of APE chromosomes.

Implying in our APE ancestor there was fusion of chromosomes...THATS WHY WE HAVE SLIGHTY FEWER CHROMOSOMES than chimps, gorillas etc.

In our divergent ancestral evolution our ancestors show genetic changes, but leave evidence behind within the DNA.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 23223519
United States
09/24/2012 05:01 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Scientist's who are skeptical of Evolution
The fact PAX6 in mice and humans has the same amino acid sequence implies quite strongly we have a shared mammalian ancestor.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 24115171


.....and talking about ancestors.

All the great apes have more chromosomes than US... we have less chromosomes than they do.

So??

Heres the funny thing, we have telomeres, which are the end sections of DNA in the middle of some of our specific chromosomes, and what do you know, those telemeres are the exact same as the ones found on the ends of APE chromosomes.

Implying in our APE ancestor there was fusion of chromosomes...THATS WHY WE HAVE SLIGHTY FEWER CHROMOSOMES than chimps, gorillas etc.

In our divergent ancestral evolution our ancestors show genetic changes, but leave evidence behind within the DNA.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 24115171


Lol, talk about jumping to conclusions. You started with science and ended with complete Faith.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 23223519
United States
09/24/2012 05:05 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Scientist's who are skeptical of Evolution
Yes, they adapt to their environments and continue to exist as bacteria.

They will never "evolve" into a fundamentally different organism.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 23223519


So how would you define a species?

Explain why a gene taken from one animal can often be implanted into the genome of another animal to make it express that particular gene.

For instance you can take a gene for luminescence from a jellyfish and implant that gene into a rat, and the rats glow in UV light.

If anything that shows that the one thing all life shares, DNA! is indeed related in all organisms.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 24115171


Why are you asking me to define a species? Nobody has a perfect definition. Part of species classification is based around presumptions that Evolution is true.

Thank you for describing instances of intelligent design. Very interesting.

Yes everything is made of the same material. What did you expect?

Did you have an actual argument to produce?
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 23223519
United States
09/24/2012 05:10 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Scientist's who are skeptical of Evolution
They will never "evolve" into a fundamentally different organism.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 23223519


Define fundamentally different organism.

Bacteria have been shown to evolve in a laboratory to utilize different food sources without any outside genetic interference.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 24115171


Bacteria evolved into bacteria? What a shock.

Fundamentally different organisms would be those possessing different anatomy, physiology, and genetic traits.

For example, A Human and a Banana are fundamentally different organisms, believe it or not.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 23223519
United States
09/24/2012 05:13 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Scientist's who are skeptical of Evolution
Why are you talking about a 150 year old book, and implying that because darwin didnt know something evolution is wrong.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 24115171


Why are you defending the idea that bacteria can turn into a dog over time? Do you have any actual evidence of this? No. You have faith in Naturalism.

Macro-Evolution is an absurd joke.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 21007095
United Kingdom
09/24/2012 05:22 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Scientist's who are skeptical of Evolution
In The Origin of Species, Darwin experienced a serious difficulty in the face of the eye's complex design. The only solution he found was in pointing to the simpler eye structure found in some creatures as the origin of the more complex eyes found in others. He hypothesized that more complex eyes evolved from simpler ones. However, this claim does not reflect the truth. Paleontology shows that living things emerged in the world with their exceedingly complex structures already intact. The oldest known system of sight is the trilobite eye. This 530-million-year-old compound eye structure, which we touched on in an earlier chapter, is an "optical marvel" which worked with a double lens system. This fact totally invalidates Darwin's assumption that complex eyes evolved from "primitive" eyes.

[link to darwinismrefuted.com]
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 8640456


Why are you talking about a 150 year old book, and implying that because darwin didnt know something evolution is wrong.

Darwin didnt know about genetics, he didnt know about DNA, he didnt know about genes.

Its convenient for you to miss out 150 years of biology, you should look up gregor mendel, he was an austrian monk who discovered genes.

Its funny you should mention eyes though, the PAX 6 gene for eye development in mice has the same amino acid sequence as humans...whats crazy is if you transplant this gene into fruitflies it also regulates eye formation in those too.... this kind of thing shows how close all life is.

The fact PAX6 in mice and humans has the same amino acid sequence implies quite strongly we have a shared mammalian ancestor.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 24115171


That's no argument for Darwinian evolution. If life were created by a God or whatever then does'nt it make sense to use a common building block for different species of creatures?
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 23223519
United States
09/24/2012 05:56 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Scientist's who are skeptical of Evolution
The fact PAX6 in mice and humans has the same amino acid sequence implies quite strongly we have a shared mammalian ancestor.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 24115171


LOL, no it doesn't.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 23223519
United States
09/24/2012 06:11 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Scientist's who are skeptical of Evolution
bump
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 24036647
Netherlands
09/24/2012 06:12 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Scientist's who are skeptical of Evolution
Why are you talking about a 150 year old book, and implying that because darwin didnt know something evolution is wrong.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 24115171


Why are you defending the idea that bacteria can turn into a dog over time? Do you have any actual evidence of this? No. You have faith in Naturalism.

Macro-Evolution is an absurd joke.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 23223519


It makes no sense to go from single-celled organism to dog at once.

Try going from single cells to multi-celled clusters, to something simple like sponges. Take it slowly.

It took us 10,000 years of active selecting to turn wolves into chihuahuas. And natural selection works much slower.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 20517650
United States
09/24/2012 06:14 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Scientist's who are skeptical of Evolution
"Scientist's"...Your ignorance of evolution is matched only by your ignorance of grammar and spelling.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 24304217
Spain
09/24/2012 06:19 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Scientist's who are skeptical of Evolution
"Scientist's"...Your ignorance of evolution is matched only by your ignorance of grammar and spelling.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 20517650

Scientists are just like some pickled dicks,
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 23223519
United States
09/24/2012 06:29 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Scientist's who are skeptical of Evolution
Why are you talking about a 150 year old book, and implying that because darwin didnt know something evolution is wrong.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 24115171


Why are you defending the idea that bacteria can turn into a dog over time? Do you have any actual evidence of this? No. You have faith in Naturalism.

Macro-Evolution is an absurd joke.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 23223519


It makes no sense to go from single-celled organism to dog at once.

 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 24036647


What are you talking about? Nobody said "at once"

O-V-E-R T-I-M-E

News