Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 1,450 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 415,227
Pageviews Today: 692,805Threads Today: 286Posts Today: 6,007
12:18 PM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

Irreducible complexity, or why we can prove Darwinian evolution scientifically false

 
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 71036078
United States
12/15/2015 09:29 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Irreducible complexity, or why we can prove Darwinian evolution scientifically false
Irreducible Complexity is not just a problem for Darwinian mythology, it is the end of Darwinianism.

If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down."
--Charles Darwin, Origin of Species

[link to www.ideacenter.org]
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 69601298
United States
12/15/2015 09:30 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Irreducible complexity, or why we can prove Darwinian evolution scientifically false
clappa
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 68010917
United States
12/15/2015 09:51 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Irreducible complexity, or why we can prove Darwinian evolution scientifically false

Irreducible Complexity is not just a problem for Darwinian mythology, it is the end of Darwinianism.



I agree that this is an insurmountable problem.

I currently support Sir Francis Cricks "directed panspermia"
hypothesis.
rekinom8

User ID: 71029708
Germany
12/15/2015 10:28 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Irreducible complexity, or why we can prove Darwinian evolution scientifically false
Charles Darwin is not a prophet his words are not the absolute and irrefutable truth. So he may be wrong in some things and right in some others without the world collapsing.


More specifically the required complexity can be created by nature. Look for example here. A nature built nuclear reactor: [link to www.extremetech.com]
Mystic Gohan

User ID: 71043374
Australia
12/16/2015 09:53 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Irreducible complexity, or why we can prove Darwinian evolution scientifically false
Believing in irreducible complexity shows you have zero understanding of evolution
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 71043308
United States
12/16/2015 10:06 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Irreducible complexity, or why we can prove Darwinian evolution scientifically false
A good dismissal of this tired old creationist shit for those that are interested
[link to scienceblogs.com]
Dances With Fire

User ID: 52680061
United States
12/16/2015 10:06 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Irreducible complexity, or why we can prove Darwinian evolution scientifically false
I wish we could once and for all decide what we are debating here.

On one side we have creationists or intelligent designists (I made up that word).

On the other side we have evolutionists.

Both sides talk past each other because they are debating two different things.

The title of Darwin's book is "Origin of Species." Origin...new.

Evolutionists provide tons of scientific evidence for evolution within the species, but not one iota for a NEW species arriving through a mechanism of evolving. Then for some reason, creationists argue the undisputable evidence of evolution WITHIN the species. No need for that. Let's get back on topic with ORIGIN of species.

And there is no proof at of that. In fact it is illogical.
Free speech is never free.

Well I know it wasn't you who held me down
Heaven knows it wasn't you who set me free
So often times it happens that we live our lives in chains
And we never even know we have the key - Eagles
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 71041911
United States
12/16/2015 10:12 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Irreducible complexity, or why we can prove Darwinian evolution scientifically false
This gentleman has an excellent explanation for the origin of life:

[link to www.mdpi.com]

That's the abstract for the paper; you can get the whole thing there. It's a deep read, but mindblowing, insightful and spectacular. This explains many other things too, not merely the origin of life.
Mystic Gohan

User ID: 71043374
Australia
12/16/2015 10:16 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Irreducible complexity, or why we can prove Darwinian evolution scientifically false
I wish we could once and for all decide what we are debating here.

On one side we have creationists or intelligent designists (I made up that word).

On the other side we have evolutionists.

Both sides talk past each other because they are debating two different things.

The title of Darwin's book is "Origin of Species." Origin...new.

Evolutionists provide tons of scientific evidence for evolution within the species, but not one iota for a NEW species arriving through a mechanism of evolving. Then for some reason, creationists argue the undisputable evidence of evolution WITHIN the species. No need for that. Let's get back on topic with ORIGIN of species.

And there is no proof at of that. In fact it is illogical.
 Quoting: Dances With Fire


Cough...speciation
rekinom8

User ID: 71043898
Germany
12/16/2015 11:46 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Irreducible complexity, or why we can prove Darwinian evolution scientifically false
Believing in irreducible complexity shows you have zero understanding of evolution
 Quoting: Mystic Gohan


Actually he is right. Evolution cant create anything from zero, quite simply because it needs something (DNA) which translates information to the next generation and it cant be created by evolution, because it requires said something. You cant make a giraffe if the unevolved DNA only transfers enough info to make half a giraffe, it wont work.

However, like said, this device can and was created by nature, and then life started. Our DNA was made by nature and chemistry, not evolution.


Or God of course, such possibility cant be excluded either.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 4405567
Philippines
12/17/2015 12:06 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Irreducible complexity, or why we can prove Darwinian evolution scientifically false
yeah bro

like the eye of anomalocaridids.

It lived 500 million years ago according to the latest bs artists figures.

It had 16000 lenses in its eye.

How does natural selection, random chance and sheer luck get from nothing to 16000 lenses and the brain structures to support it and the physical support structures to platform and benefit it by chance?

It throws all of their timeline figures into a tizzy. Not enough time in the universe for it to happen accidentally.

And that is just one example.

lies lies lies
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 4405567
Philippines
12/17/2015 12:09 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Irreducible complexity, or why we can prove Darwinian evolution scientifically false
Believing in irreducible complexity shows you have zero understanding of evolution
 Quoting: Mystic Gohan


Actually he is right. Evolution cant create anything from zero, quite simply because it needs something (DNA) which translates information to the next generation and it cant be created by evolution, because it requires said something. You cant make a giraffe if the unevolved DNA only transfers enough info to make half a giraffe, it wont work.

However, like said, this device can and was created by nature, and then life started. Our DNA was made by nature and chemistry, not evolution.


Or God of course, such possibility cant be excluded either.
 Quoting: rekinom8


Scientists (and I use the term loosely) claim to create life in a lab by using state of the art equipment and pre existing structures and try to pass this off as generalizable to life's origin. Like serving diarrhea on a late and calling it filet mignon.
rekinom8

User ID: 71043898
Germany
12/17/2015 12:36 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Irreducible complexity, or why we can prove Darwinian evolution scientifically false
Believing in irreducible complexity shows you have zero understanding of evolution
 Quoting: Mystic Gohan


Actually he is right. Evolution cant create anything from zero, quite simply because it needs something (DNA) which translates information to the next generation and it cant be created by evolution, because it requires said something. You cant make a giraffe if the unevolved DNA only transfers enough info to make half a giraffe, it wont work.

However, like said, this device can and was created by nature, and then life started. Our DNA was made by nature and chemistry, not evolution.


Or God of course, such possibility cant be excluded either.
 Quoting: rekinom8


Scientists (and I use the term loosely) claim to create life in a lab by using state of the art equipment and pre existing structures and try to pass this off as generalizable to life's origin. Like serving diarrhea on a late and calling it filet mignon.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 4405567

A question of definition. Life is undefined so its anyones guess really. I googled and found some millionaire guy who put an artificial cell in a jar and made it multiply, which is ironic because he quite literally played God and shown that he couldnt create life without help from a Designer.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 4405567
Philippines
12/17/2015 12:42 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Irreducible complexity, or why we can prove Darwinian evolution scientifically false
Believing in irreducible complexity shows you have zero understanding of evolution
 Quoting: Mystic Gohan


Actually he is right. Evolution cant create anything from zero, quite simply because it needs something (DNA) which translates information to the next generation and it cant be created by evolution, because it requires said something. You cant make a giraffe if the unevolved DNA only transfers enough info to make half a giraffe, it wont work.

However, like said, this device can and was created by nature, and then life started. Our DNA was made by nature and chemistry, not evolution.


Or God of course, such possibility cant be excluded either.
 Quoting: rekinom8


Scientists (and I use the term loosely) claim to create life in a lab by using state of the art equipment and pre existing structures and try to pass this off as generalizable to life's origin. Like serving diarrhea on a late and calling it filet mignon.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 4405567

A question of definition. Life is undefined so its anyones guess really. I googled and found some millionaire guy who put an artificial cell in a jar and made it multiply, which is ironic because he quite literally played God and shown that he couldnt create life without help from a Designer.
 Quoting: rekinom8


so at some time in the distant past someone put what would become man into a jar

so at some point in iterating that you have to go from something playing god to something being god

and by the way artificial cell made of what?

it sure as hell was not made by chance and it did not get to the jar by chance
rekinom8

User ID: 71043898
Germany
12/17/2015 01:00 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Irreducible complexity, or why we can prove Darwinian evolution scientifically false
A good dismissal of this tired old creationist shit for those that are interested
[link to scienceblogs.com]
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 71043308


This article is stupid, as is anything that tries to explain biology with light bulbs. Or anything really. Yes it is possible to create a seemingly impossible structure with a series of steps. Yet he continuously creates circuits and takes parts without realizing that creating and taking are not evolutionary acts. In other words his second step is wrong where he, for no reason, assumes he has knowledge of a previous system. Which he does not and, too, plays God in explaining how God didnt participate. rolleyes
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 71024600
United States
12/17/2015 01:01 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Irreducible complexity, or why we can prove Darwinian evolution scientifically false
Irreducible Complexity is not just a problem for Darwinian mythology, it is the end of Darwinianism.

If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down."
--Charles Darwin, Origin of Species

[link to www.ideacenter.org]
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 71036078


:yessa:

You should read Michael Behe's excellent book, The Edge of Evolution. In it, he argues convincingly that there is actually a mathematical limit to Darwinian (aka Random) Evolution. Beyond that limit, non-random Evolution (aka Intelligent Design) is required. It is probably the most important book written on the subject of Evolution since The Origin of Species. Of course, Behe is predictably demonized by the materialist mafia.

He also has many excellent lectures on Youtube. Here is one of my favorite:

Mystic Gohan

User ID: 71043374
Australia
12/17/2015 02:56 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Irreducible complexity, or why we can prove Darwinian evolution scientifically false
Believing in irreducible complexity shows you have zero understanding of evolution
 Quoting: Mystic Gohan


Actually he is right. Evolution cant create anything from zero, quite simply because it needs something (DNA) which translates information to the next generation and it cant be created by evolution, because it requires said something. You cant make a giraffe if the unevolved DNA only transfers enough info to make half a giraffe, it wont work.

However, like said, this device can and was created by nature, and then life started. Our DNA was made by nature and chemistry, not evolution.


Or God of course, such possibility cant be excluded either.
 Quoting: rekinom8


Evolution does not claim to "create" anything from zero. Evolution is descent with modification. Modification. Modification. There is no such thing as half an organ or half an animal in evolution. Through out the animal world you can see the steps how organs have evolved, like advanced eyes and simple eyes. Their eyes suits their environment like our eyes suit our environment. Our eyes are not the best in the animal kingdom and they are not the worst either, just right for our environment because it adapted to our environment over a long time. It is clear our eyes evolved because every human has a blind spot in their vision. After all an omnipotent god would not create a mistake like that would he? [link to io9.com] but it is perfectly explained by evolution

A duplication mutation a long time ago gave us 3 color vision. The other apes also have this mutation. But monkeys do not.

Also, RNA came before DNA.
rekinom8

User ID: 71043898
Germany
12/17/2015 04:18 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Irreducible complexity, or why we can prove Darwinian evolution scientifically false
Evolution is descent with modification. Modification. Modification.
 Quoting: Mystic Gohan

Ok ill play, so how is a mortal living being without the ability to procreate is able to evolve? It dies and its gone. Gone. Gone.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 9094168
United Kingdom
12/17/2015 05:04 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Irreducible complexity, or why we can prove Darwinian evolution scientifically false
disproving evolution does just that: disproves evolution.

you then have to explain why evolution appears to be the case, even if evolution is wrong.

disproving evolution does not automatically prove a creater, you HAVE to prove a god of some sort, not just assert, but prove.

in your own time then.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 71024600
United States
12/17/2015 06:32 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Irreducible complexity, or why we can prove Darwinian evolution scientifically false
disproving evolution does just that: disproves evolution.

you then have to explain why evolution appears to be the case, even if evolution is wrong.

disproving evolution does not automatically prove a creater, you HAVE to prove a god of some sort, not just assert, but prove.

in your own time then.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 9094168


Darwinian (aka non-random) Evolution was never proved in the first place.

Human beings can easily recognize design when they see it. We do it all the time. Even Richard Dawkins admits in the opening chapter of The Blind Watchmaker that Biology is the study of living things that "appear to be designed." He says "appear" because his loyalty to Atheism is greater than his loyalty to Science.

Non-random Evolution can explain some things. It doesn't come close to explaining the most important questions of biology. We should follow the evidence wherever it leads, even if that data has theological implications.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 71024600
United States
12/17/2015 06:33 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Irreducible complexity, or why we can prove Darwinian evolution scientifically false
disproving evolution does just that: disproves evolution.

you then have to explain why evolution appears to be the case, even if evolution is wrong.

disproving evolution does not automatically prove a creater, you HAVE to prove a god of some sort, not just assert, but prove.

in your own time then.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 9094168


Darwinian (aka random) Evolution was never proved in the first place.

Human beings can easily recognize design when they see it. We do it all the time. Even Richard Dawkins admits in the opening chapter of The Blind Watchmaker that Biology is the study of living things that "appear to be designed." He says "appear" because his loyalty to Atheism is greater than his loyalty to Science.

Non-random Evolution can explain some things. It doesn't come close to explaining the most important questions of biology. We should follow the evidence wherever it leads, even if that data has theological implications.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 71024600
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 70084835
Belgium
12/17/2015 06:58 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Irreducible complexity, or why we can prove Darwinian evolution scientifically false
Believing in irreducible complexity shows you have zero understanding of evolution
 Quoting: Mystic Gohan


Actually he is right. Evolution cant create anything from zero, quite simply because it needs something (DNA) which translates information to the next generation and it cant be created by evolution, because it requires said something. You cant make a giraffe if the unevolved DNA only transfers enough info to make half a giraffe, it wont work.

However, like said, this device can and was created by nature, and then life started. Our DNA was made by nature and chemistry, not evolution.


Or God of course, such possibility cant be excluded either.
 Quoting: rekinom8


Evolution does not claim to "create" anything from zero. Evolution is descent with modification. Modification. Modification. There is no such thing as half an organ or half an animal in evolution. Through out the animal world you can see the steps how organs have evolved, like advanced eyes and simple eyes. Their eyes suits their environment like our eyes suit our environment. Our eyes are not the best in the animal kingdom and they are not the worst either, just right for our environment because it adapted to our environment over a long time. It is clear our eyes evolved because every human has a blind spot in their vision. After all an omnipotent god would not create a mistake like that would he? [link to io9.com] but it is perfectly explained by evolution

A duplication mutation a long time ago gave us 3 color vision. The other apes also have this mutation. But monkeys do not.

Also, RNA came before DNA.
 Quoting: Mystic Gohan


My god you are so full of it you can't help but contradict yourself in every sentence you write.

First of all, every eye, of every organism is complex.
Secondly, every organism is complex.

Evolution claims exactly to create everything from zero.
That's why its a bottom up theory, mixed with neverending gradualism due to the well known 'needs' & 'pressures' & 'changes & randomness' followed by some wicked survival of the fittest paradigm which oddly enough completely excludes altruism., which is very observable in nature.

And ofcourse, like you say, there's no god, because we can not fly and we do not have 360° vision. Another solid argument by the simplistic naturalist materialist.

Kudos nachos.
Mystic Gohan

User ID: 71043374
Australia
12/17/2015 01:37 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Irreducible complexity, or why we can prove Darwinian evolution scientifically false
Believing in irreducible complexity shows you have zero understanding of evolution
 Quoting: Mystic Gohan


Actually he is right. Evolution cant create anything from zero, quite simply because it needs something (DNA) which translates information to the next generation and it cant be created by evolution, because it requires said something. You cant make a giraffe if the unevolved DNA only transfers enough info to make half a giraffe, it wont work.

However, like said, this device can and was created by nature, and then life started. Our DNA was made by nature and chemistry, not evolution.


Or God of course, such possibility cant be excluded either.
 Quoting: rekinom8


Evolution does not claim to "create" anything from zero. Evolution is descent with modification. Modification. Modification. There is no such thing as half an organ or half an animal in evolution. Through out the animal world you can see the steps how organs have evolved, like advanced eyes and simple eyes. Their eyes suits their environment like our eyes suit our environment. Our eyes are not the best in the animal kingdom and they are not the worst either, just right for our environment because it adapted to our environment over a long time. It is clear our eyes evolved because every human has a blind spot in their vision. After all an omnipotent god would not create a mistake like that would he? [link to io9.com] but it is perfectly explained by evolution

A duplication mutation a long time ago gave us 3 color vision. The other apes also have this mutation. But monkeys do not.

Also, RNA came before DNA.
 Quoting: Mystic Gohan


My god you are so full of it you can't help but contradict yourself in every sentence you write.

First of all, every eye, of every organism is complex.
Secondly, every organism is complex.

Evolution claims exactly to create everything from zero.
That's why its a bottom up theory, mixed with neverending gradualism due to the well known 'needs' & 'pressures' & 'changes & randomness' followed by some wicked survival of the fittest paradigm which oddly enough completely excludes altruism., which is very observable in nature.

And ofcourse, like you say, there's no god, because we can not fly and we do not have 360° vision. Another solid argument by the simplistic naturalist materialist.

Kudos nachos.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 70084835


Simple eyes compared to other eyes. Because they have been evolving for billions of years. All organisms have. Even the most simplest organisms around today.

No it doesn't. Evolution is descent with modification.

Last Edited by Kakarot_ on 12/17/2015 01:39 PM
Mystic Gohan

User ID: 71043374
Australia
12/17/2015 01:41 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Irreducible complexity, or why we can prove Darwinian evolution scientifically false
Evolution is descent with modification. Modification. Modification.
 Quoting: Mystic Gohan

Ok ill play, so how is a mortal living being without the ability to procreate is able to evolve? It dies and its gone. Gone. Gone.
 Quoting: rekinom8


Individuals do not evolve, evolution is over populations over time.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 70998328
United States
12/17/2015 01:50 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Irreducible complexity, or why we can prove Darwinian evolution scientifically false
Evolution is descent with modification.

DNA is irreducibly complex from the origin of species, thus making speciation as theory of origins scientifically impossible; thus making Darwinianism a theory of origins scientifically and logically proven false.

It's over. The question of biological origins, or ontology has not been answered scientifically. But Darwinian evolution as a theory of ontology has been scientifically proven to be a scientific impossibility.
Latucher

User ID: 71007306
United Kingdom
12/17/2015 01:54 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Irreducible complexity, or why we can prove Darwinian evolution scientifically false
[link to rationalwiki.org]

'I think I have now finally understood what "irreducibly complex" really means: a statement, fact or event so simple it cannot be simplified any further, but still too complex to be grasped by a creationist.' - Bjorn Brembs
Mystic Gohan

User ID: 71043374
Australia
12/17/2015 01:59 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Irreducible complexity, or why we can prove Darwinian evolution scientifically false
Evolution is descent with modification.

DNA is irreducibly complex from the origin of species, thus making speciation as theory of origins scientifically impossible; thus making Darwinianism a theory of origins scientifically and logically proven false.

It's over. The question of biological origins, or ontology has not been answered scientifically. But Darwinian evolution as a theory of ontology has been scientifically proven to be a scientific impossibility.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 70998328


Species do not evolve into already existing species. Species change appearance over time, we see snapshots of what is basically a 4 billion year time lapse in the fossil record. As fossilization is a super rare event that usually requires disasters like floods for it to happen. If a dog evolved into a giraffe evolution would be debunked. What we would expect is a dog species "turning" into another dog-like species. Dogs have changed dramatically over the last 30 million years. Fossils really only start to appear 500 million years ago when hard-bodied animals evolved.

Last Edited by Kakarot_ on 12/17/2015 02:00 PM
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 3750923
United Kingdom
12/17/2015 02:03 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Irreducible complexity, or why we can prove Darwinian evolution scientifically false
Science proves God. The more we know, the more proportionally we know we don't know, and at an increasing rate. Taken to it's logical conclusion, science will prove God necessary.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 71034976
United States
12/17/2015 03:37 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Irreducible complexity, or why we can prove Darwinian evolution scientifically false
Evolution is descent with modification.

DNA is irreducibly complex from the origin of species, thus making speciation as theory of origins scientifically impossible; thus making Darwinianism a theory of origins scientifically and logically proven false.

It's over. The question of biological origins, or ontology has not been answered scientifically. But Darwinian evolution as a theory of ontology has been scientifically proven to be a scientific impossibility.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 70998328


Species do not evolve into already existing species. Species change appearance over time, we see snapshots of what is basically a 4 billion year time lapse in the fossil record. As fossilization is a super rare event that usually requires disasters like floods for it to happen. If a dog evolved into a giraffe evolution would be debunked. What we would expect is a dog species "turning" into another dog-like species. Dogs have changed dramatically over the last 30 million years. Fossils really only start to appear 500 million years ago when hard-bodied animals evolved.
 Quoting: Mystic Gohan


Ok. That's an interesting mythological view.

But it has nothing to do with what I wrote.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 69338163
United States
12/17/2015 03:45 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Irreducible complexity, or why we can prove Darwinian evolution scientifically false
[link to rationalwiki.org]

'I think I have now finally understood what "irreducibly complex" really means: a statement, fact or event so simple it cannot be simplified any further, but still too complex to be grasped by a creationist.' - Bjorn Brembs
 Quoting: Latucher


bsflag
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 70084835
Belgium
12/18/2015 06:24 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Irreducible complexity, or why we can prove Darwinian evolution scientifically false
...


Actually he is right. Evolution cant create anything from zero, quite simply because it needs something (DNA) which translates information to the next generation and it cant be created by evolution, because it requires said something. You cant make a giraffe if the unevolved DNA only transfers enough info to make half a giraffe, it wont work.

However, like said, this device can and was created by nature, and then life started. Our DNA was made by nature and chemistry, not evolution.


Or God of course, such possibility cant be excluded either.
 Quoting: rekinom8


Evolution does not claim to "create" anything from zero. Evolution is descent with modification. Modification. Modification. There is no such thing as half an organ or half an animal in evolution. Through out the animal world you can see the steps how organs have evolved, like advanced eyes and simple eyes. Their eyes suits their environment like our eyes suit our environment. Our eyes are not the best in the animal kingdom and they are not the worst either, just right for our environment because it adapted to our environment over a long time. It is clear our eyes evolved because every human has a blind spot in their vision. After all an omnipotent god would not create a mistake like that would he? [link to io9.com] but it is perfectly explained by evolution

A duplication mutation a long time ago gave us 3 color vision. The other apes also have this mutation. But monkeys do not.

Also, RNA came before DNA.
 Quoting: Mystic Gohan


My god you are so full of it you can't help but contradict yourself in every sentence you write.

First of all, every eye, of every organism is complex.
Secondly, every organism is complex.

Evolution claims exactly to create everything from zero.
That's why its a bottom up theory, mixed with neverending gradualism due to the well known 'needs' & 'pressures' & 'changes & randomness' followed by some wicked survival of the fittest paradigm which oddly enough completely excludes altruism., which is very observable in nature.

And ofcourse, like you say, there's no god, because we can not fly and we do not have 360° vision. Another solid argument by the simplistic naturalist materialist.

Kudos nachos.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 70084835


Simple eyes compared to other eyes. Because they have been evolving for billions of years. All organisms have. Even the most simplest organisms around today.

No it doesn't. Evolution is descent with modification.
 Quoting: Mystic Gohan


So according to you the dragonfly has simple eyes, compared to what or whom exactly?

And since when is comparing x to y by the use of human intelligence, the basis of what is better or worse?

Didn't you state a few 100 posts ago that there's no such thing as good, better or best in the evolutionary paradigm?

It seems to me that all insect eyes have not evolved compared to any fossilised insect we have found.

And of course, these insect eyes are so 'simple' we decided to copy their pattern and design (created by mothernature, time , chance, randomness and luck) and put them on our new age space technology.

Your worldview makes so much sense.

bushfing