Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 1,323 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 289,419
Pageviews Today: 423,853Threads Today: 78Posts Today: 2,357
05:06 AM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

A couple of questions for evolutionists

 
Berean
Offer Upgrade

User ID: 251315
United States
06/13/2007 03:41 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
A couple of questions for evolutionists
Here is a couple back atcha".


1)How Long Would It Take the Moon to Recede from Earth to Its Present Position?

Evolutionists believe (1) the Earth and Moon are 4.5 billion years old, and (2) with enough time bacteria will change into people. We have all heard some evolutionists say, “Given enough time, anything can happen.” This simplistic attitude overlooks two things. First, most conceivable events will not happen, because they would violate well-established laws of science.1 Second, if 4.5 billion years have elapsed, many things should have occurred that obviously have not. Rather than “time being the hero of the plot,” as one prominent evolutionist stated,2 immense amounts of time cause problems for evolution, as you will now see.

Most dating techniques, including the majority that indicate young ages, make the three basic assumptions given on page 31. The following dating technique has few, if any, major assumptions. It relies basically on only the law of gravity and one undisputed and frequently repeated measurement. We will look at the forces causing the Moon to spiral farther and farther away from Earth. Then we will see that this spiraling action could not have been happening for the length of time evolutionists say the Earth and Moon have been around.

It will be shown that if the Moon began orbiting very near the Earth, it would move to its present position in only 1.2 billion years. Stated another way, if we could run the clock backwards, in 1.2 billion years the Moon would be so close to Earth that ocean tides would sweep over all mountains. Astronomers who are aware of this problem call it “the lunar crisis.”3 Notice that this conclusion does not say that the Earth-Moon system is 1.2 billion years old; it only says that the Earth-Moon system must be less than 1.2 billion years old. Had the Moon begun orbiting Earth slightly inside the Moon’s present orbit, its age would be much less. Obviously, something is wrong with either the law of gravity or evolutionists’ belief that the Earth-Moon system is 4.5 billion years old. Most astute people would place their confidence in the law of gravity, which has been verified by tens of thousands of experiments.

2. Acquired Characteristics are not inherited

Acquired characteristics cannot be inherited.a For example, large muscles acquired by a man in a weight-lifting program cannot be inherited by his child. Nor did giraffes get long necks because their ancestors stretched to reach high leaves. While almost all evolutionists agree that acquired characteristics cannot be inherited, many unconsciously slip into this false belief. On occasion, Darwin did.b

However, stressful environments for some animals and plants cause their offspring to express various defenses. New genetic traits are not created; instead, the environment can switch on genetic machinery already present. The marvel is that optimalc genetic machinery already exists to handle some contingencies, not that time, the environment, or “a need” can produce the machinery.d

Also, rates of variation within a kind (microevolution, not macroevolution) increase enormously when organisms are under stress, such as starvation.e Such situations would have been widespread in the centuries after a global flood.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1373
United States
06/13/2007 03:54 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: A couple of questions for evolutionists
Here is a couple back atcha".


1)How Long Would It Take the Moon to Recede from Earth to Its Present Position?

Evolutionists believe (1) the Earth and Moon are 4.5 billion years old, and (2) with enough time bacteria will change into people. We have all heard some evolutionists say, “Given enough time, anything can happen.” This simplistic attitude overlooks two things. First, most conceivable events will not happen, because they would violate well-established laws of science.1 Second, if 4.5 billion years have elapsed, many things should have occurred that obviously have not. Rather than “time being the hero of the plot,” as one prominent evolutionist stated,2 immense amounts of time cause problems for evolution, as you will now see.

Most dating techniques, including the majority that indicate young ages, make the three basic assumptions given on page 31. The following dating technique has few, if any, major assumptions. It relies basically on only the law of gravity and one undisputed and frequently repeated measurement. We will look at the forces causing the Moon to spiral farther and farther away from Earth. Then we will see that this spiraling action could not have been happening for the length of time evolutionists say the Earth and Moon have been around.

It will be shown that if the Moon began orbiting very near the Earth, it would move to its present position in only 1.2 billion years. Stated another way, if we could run the clock backwards, in 1.2 billion years the Moon would be so close to Earth that ocean tides would sweep over all mountains. Astronomers who are aware of this problem call it “the lunar crisis.”3 Notice that this conclusion does not say that the Earth-Moon system is 1.2 billion years old; it only says that the Earth-Moon system must be less than 1.2 billion years old. Had the Moon begun orbiting Earth slightly inside the Moon’s present orbit, its age would be much less. Obviously, something is wrong with either the law of gravity or evolutionists’ belief that the Earth-Moon system is 4.5 billion years old. Most astute people would place their confidence in the law of gravity, which has been verified by tens of thousands of experiments.

2. Acquired Characteristics are not inherited

Acquired characteristics cannot be inherited.a For example, large muscles acquired by a man in a weight-lifting program cannot be inherited by his child. Nor did giraffes get long necks because their ancestors stretched to reach high leaves. While almost all evolutionists agree that acquired characteristics cannot be inherited, many unconsciously slip into this false belief. On occasion, Darwin did.b

However, stressful environments for some animals and plants cause their offspring to express various defenses. New genetic traits are not created; instead, the environment can switch on genetic machinery already present. The marvel is that optimalc genetic machinery already exists to handle some contingencies, not that time, the environment, or “a need” can produce the machinery.d

Also, rates of variation within a kind (microevolution, not macroevolution) increase enormously when organisms are under stress, such as starvation.e Such situations would have been widespread in the centuries after a global flood.
 Quoting: Berean


1) The moon's rate of recession from the earth is not constant.

2) Inheritance of acquired characteristics is not part of the theory of evolution.

Got any more?
OPnli
User ID: 251330
United States
06/13/2007 04:29 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: A couple of questions for evolutionists
Here is a couple back atcha".




1) The moon's rate of recession from the earth is not constant.

2) Inheritance of acquired characteristics is not part of the theory of evolution.

Got any more?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1373




Wow. What a retort! Proof and all!
Basicly I wanted to show with this thread it's not the evidence that shapes your beliefs, but your worldview.
To say that the "moons receding is not constant", but must cling to the "fact" that the earths carbon content must be constant to get your outlandish dates using this as a factual standard is rather ironic if not two-faced.

And your second statement is so ignorant of the tenants of the evolutionary theory that we will only discuss this if you wish.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1373
United States
06/13/2007 04:43 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: A couple of questions for evolutionists
Here is a couple back atcha".




1) The moon's rate of recession from the earth is not constant.

2) Inheritance of acquired characteristics is not part of the theory of evolution.

Got any more?




Wow. What a retort! Proof and all!
Basicly I wanted to show with this thread it's not the evidence that shapes your beliefs, but your worldview.
To say that the "moons receding is not constant", but must cling to the "fact" that the earths carbon content must be constant to get your outlandish dates using this as a factual standard is rather ironic if not two-faced.

And your second statement is so ignorant of the tenants of the evolutionary theory that we will only discuss this if you wish.
 Quoting: OPnli 251330


1) The claim was made that the recession of the moon away from the earth puts an upper bound on the age of the earth/moon system. How can you do this calculation without knowing the rate of recession in the past?

2) Show me where the theory of evolution relies on inheritance of acquired characteristics. You're the one saying it does - it's up to you to prove that your claim is correct.

Just in case you don't understand burden of proof, it works like this: If you are making a claim, you must provide evidence for that claim.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 88145
United States
06/13/2007 05:11 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: A couple of questions for evolutionists
Here is a couple back atcha".


1)How Long Would It Take the Moon to Recede from Earth to Its Present Position?


 Quoting: Berean


Here's your answer with mathematics.

[link to www.talkorigins.org]
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 154126
United States
06/13/2007 05:21 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: A couple of questions for evolutionists
2) Show me where the theory of evolution relies on inheritance of acquired characteristics. You're the one saying it does - it's up to you to prove that your claim is correct.


 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1373



lmao... that is exactly what evolution is... the handing down of mutations to your offspring that differentiates it from the rest of the species
Skeptical Texan

User ID: 9482
United States
06/13/2007 05:24 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: A couple of questions for evolutionists
lmao... that is exactly what evolution is... the handing down of mutations to your offspring that differentiates it from the rest of the species
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 154126


Incorrect yet again. Evolution does not remotely state that if my father worked out everyday of his life until he had me that I would inherit his muscles. This is what you are trying to say. What evolution says is that if my father had a genetic mutation that would allow his muscles to grow at a faster rate, there would be a chance this mutation would be passed on to me.

Its like sickle-cell anemia, which exists mostly in the black population, especially in Africa. Why is this important? Well sickle shaped blood cells are less affected by malaria giving them a slight genetic advantage in areas where malaria runs rampant without medicine.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 154126
United States
06/13/2007 05:27 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: A couple of questions for evolutionists
lmao... that is exactly what evolution is... the handing down of mutations to your offspring that differentiates it from the rest of the species


Incorrect yet again. Evolution does not remotely state that if my father worked out everyday of his life until he had me that I would inherit his muscles. This is what you are trying to say. What evolution says is that if my father had a genetic mutation that would allow his muscles to grow at a faster rate, there would be a chance this mutation would be passed on to me.

Its like sickle-cell anemia, which exists mostly in the black population, especially in Africa. Why is this important? Well sickle shaped blood cells are less affected by malaria giving them a slight genetic advantage in areas where malaria runs rampant without medicine.
 Quoting: Skeptical Texan



read my post again then read what you wrote..

tard
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 154126
United States
06/13/2007 05:29 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: A couple of questions for evolutionists
lmao... that is exactly what evolution is... the handing down of mutations to your offspring that differentiates it from the rest of the species


Incorrect yet again. Evolution does not remotely state that if my father worked out everyday of his life until he had me that I would inherit his muscles. This is what you are trying to say. What evolution says is that if my father had a genetic mutation that would allow his muscles to grow at a faster rate, there would be a chance this mutation would be passed on to me.

Its like sickle-cell anemia, which exists mostly in the black population, especially in Africa. Why is this important? Well sickle shaped blood cells are less affected by malaria giving them a slight genetic advantage in areas where malaria runs rampant without medicine.
 Quoting: Skeptical Texan



what i wrote: the handing down of mutations to your offspring that differentiates it from the rest of the species

what you wrote: What evolution says is that if my father had a genetic mutation that would allow his muscles to grow at a faster rate, there would be a chance this mutation would be passed on to me.


read... then post
Skeptical Texan

User ID: 9482
United States
06/13/2007 05:30 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: A couple of questions for evolutionists
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1373
United States
06/13/2007 05:31 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: A couple of questions for evolutionists
2) Show me where the theory of evolution relies on inheritance of acquired characteristics. You're the one saying it does - it's up to you to prove that your claim is correct.





lmao... that is exactly what evolution is... the handing down of mutations to your offspring that differentiates it from the rest of the species
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 154126



Sorry, "inheritance of acquired characteristics" has a specific meaning in biology, and it isn't mutation.

Are you now saying that mutations can't be inherited?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1373
United States
06/13/2007 05:35 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: A couple of questions for evolutionists
2) Show me where the theory of evolution relies on inheritance of acquired characteristics. You're the one saying it does - it's up to you to prove that your claim is correct.





lmao... that is exactly what evolution is... the handing down of mutations to your offspring that differentiates it from the rest of the species
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 154126


Just in case you are claiming that mutations can't be inherited, here is an example:

[link to www.freerepublic.com]
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 154126
United States
06/13/2007 05:36 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: A couple of questions for evolutionists
2) Show me where the theory of evolution relies on inheritance of acquired characteristics. You're the one saying it does - it's up to you to prove that your claim is correct.





lmao... that is exactly what evolution is... the handing down of mutations to your offspring that differentiates it from the rest of the species



Sorry, "inheritance of acquired characteristics" has a specific meaning in biology, and it isn't mutation.

Are you now saying that mutations can't be inherited?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1373

no, i know mutations can be inherited...
selective breeding, mutation.. both would evolve a species into either whatever you are breeding for or in nature the stronger animal wins, if the mutation is advantageous it wins and has sex and offspring with the advantageous mutation
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 154126
United States
06/13/2007 05:38 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: A couple of questions for evolutionists
Sorry, "inheritance of acquired characteristics" has a specific meaning in biology, and it isn't mutation.


 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1373


apparently i am ignorant to the meaning of this phrase..
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1373
United States
06/13/2007 05:47 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: A couple of questions for evolutionists
Lamarckism

[link to en.wikipedia.org]





Sorry, "inheritance of acquired characteristics" has a specific meaning in biology, and it isn't mutation.




apparently i am ignorant to the meaning of this phrase..
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 154126
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 231239
United States
06/13/2007 05:49 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: A couple of questions for evolutionists
This thread shows you that people that don't believe in Evolution simply just don't understand it or have been given incorrect information. You can ask all the questions you want the answers are available.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 231239
United States
06/13/2007 05:54 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: A couple of questions for evolutionists
Speaking of worldviews, what the hell are creationists and
especially Young Earthers going to do when we make contact
with alien civilizations, or at least find proof of them?
 Quoting: DrPostman


They will come up with more BS that will make sense to those whose brains still haven't evolved from 2000 year old beliefs.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1373
United States
06/13/2007 05:56 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: A couple of questions for evolutionists



Sorry, "inheritance of acquired characteristics" has a specific meaning in biology, and it isn't mutation.




apparently i am ignorant to the meaning of this phrase..

 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1373


Lamarckism

[link to en.wikipedia.org]

News