about that article from new geology: "Evolution" mixes two things together, one real, one imaginary. Variation is the real part. The types of bird beaks, the colors of moths, leg sizes, etc. are variation. article
This is called microevolution. Microevolution is change which can be observed DIRECTLY.
Each type and length of beak a finch can have is already in the gene pool for finches. Creationists have always agreed that there is variation within species. But what evolutionists do not want you to know is that there are strict limits to variation that are never crossed, something every breeder of animals or plants is aware of.article
Never in the history of genetics was a barrier to change ever observed. If such a mechanism were discovered, evolution would be falsified, and the discoverer would be VERY rich and VERY EXTREMELY famous for he/she has overturned a scientific paradigm that has reigned for over 150 years
Evolutionists want you to think that changes continue, merging gradually into new kinds of creatures. article
First, what is a "kind" care to define it? Second, mutations DO accumulate.
This is where the imaginary part of the theory of evolution comes in. It says that new information is added to the gene pool by mutation and natural selection to create frogs from fish, reptiles from frogs, and mammals from reptiles, to name a few.article
It is rather easy to add new information into the genome through gene and chromosome duplication. Oh, you will probably ask for some sort of feature that wasn't there before. Well, nylon metabolizing bacteria is a fine example. How can this be possible, if nylon didn't exist before the 20th century? The answer: EVOLUTION.
Do these big changes really happen? article
Not in historical times, but over millions and billions of years, "big" changes will certainly happen
Evolutionists tell us we cannot see evolution taking place because it happens too slowly.article
You cannot observe millions of years worth of time go by in historical times. Evolution has only been around for 150 years. To observe large changes over millions of years, we use fossil evidence. To establish phylogenetic relationships among animals, we use DNA, fossils, and cladistics, which is the science of cl@ssifying things based on derived characters (placenta, eucaryotic, hair present)
A human generation takes about 20 years from birth to parenthood. They say it took tens of thousands of generations to form man from a common ancestor with the ape, from populations of only hundreds or thousands. We do not have these problems with bacteria. A generation of bacteria grows in a matter of hours. There are more bacteria in the world than there are grains of sand on all of the beaches of the world (and many grains of sand are covered with bacteria). They exist in just about any environment: heat, cold, dry, wet, high pressure, low pressure, small groups, large colonies, isolated, much food, little food, much oxygen, no oxygen, in toxic chemicals, etc. There is much variation in bacteria. There are many mutations (in fact, evolutionists say that smaller organisms have a faster mutation rate than larger ones4). But they never turn into anything new. They always remain bacteria. article
You cannot possibly be asking for bacteria to change into Eucaryotes within historical times can you?
Fruit flies are much more complex than already complex single-cell bacteria. Scientists like to study them because a generation (from egg to adult) takes only 9 days. In the lab, fruit flies are studied under every conceivable condition. There is much variation in fruit flies. There are many mutations. But they never turn into anything new. They always remain fruit flies. article
"fruit flies" is a very subjective term. You cannot expect for a species to become a new genus within only a few years can you? Well not really. This takes far too long for people to observe. Science does not need direct observation to establish a theory.
Many years of study of countless generations of bacteria and fruit flies all over the world shows that evolution is not happening today.article
What? A new species of drosphila was produced in a laboratory! Speciation IS evolution.
This is how the imaginary part is supposed to happen: On rare occasions a mutation in DNA improves a creature's ability to survive, so it is more likely to reproduce (natural selection). That is evolution's only tool for making new creatures. article
That's how evolution works. Through mutation and natural selection.
It might even work if it took just one gene to make and control one part. But parts of living creatures are constructed of intricate components with connections that all need to be in place for the thing to work, controlled by many genes that have to act in the proper sequence.article
Irredcuible complexity is nothing more than an argument from personal incredulity. Once a structure or system is declared "irreducibly complex" then scientific investigation is stopped. Thats not how science works
Natural selection would not choose parts that did not have all their components existing, in place, connected, and regulated because the parts would not work. article
The system ancestral to the extant system need not have the same function
Thus all the right mutations (and none of the destructive ones) must happen at the same time by pure chance. article
Ehh, sorry, but that is not true. Natural selection selects the beneficial traits and discards the deleterious ones. Mutations are actually fairly common. Each human zygote actually has over 100 mutations.
That is physically impossible. To illustrate just how impossible it is, imagine this: on the ground are all the materials needed to build a house (nails, boards, shingles, windows, etc.). We tie a hammer to the wagging tail of a dog and let him wander about the work site for as long as you please, even millions of years. The swinging hammer on the dog is as likely to build a house as mutation-natural selection is to make a single new working part in an animal, let alone a new creature.
article
wow. The makers of this article sure are stupid. They have just lost every ounce of credibility they ever had. They have just demonstrated that they lack even the most basic understanding of evolution. But lets just continue with the pwnage and slaughter by debunking the rest of the bull**** presented in this article. But anyway, about the hose, if you threw in natural selection, reproduction, and mutation, you know, if the house was alive, then you might end up with something.
Only mutations in the reproductive (germ) cells of an animal or plant would be passed on. Mutations in the eye or skin of an animal would not matter. Mutations in DNA happen fairly often, but most are repaired or destroyed by mechanisms in animals and plants. All known mutations in animal and plant germ cells are neutral, harmful, or fatal. article
That was a complete lie. Beneficial mutations (lactase anyone? Lactase is a chemical made by your digestive system to break down lactose, or milk sugars. 2/3 of the world is lactose intolerant) have been observed in mammals
But evolutionists are eternally optimistic. They believe that many beneficial mutations were passed on to every species that ever existed, since that is the only way evolutionists think different species are made.article
Well, speciation has been observed many times. I for one cannot forgive the makers of this article for their complete lack of even basic principles of evolution. If you deny evolution in the age of the Internet, ignorance is no longer an excuse
There are two versions of evolution. The first (neo-Darwinism) proposed that many tiny changes made new creatures. They could not find these tiny changes between one type of creature and another in the fossil record, so a few evolutionists proposed instead that change occurred by occasional leaps (punctuated equilibrium).article
This is supported by evidence. And transitional fossils (archaeoptryx anyone?) do exist
Each hypothetical beneficial mutation could only make a slight change. Any more than that would be so disruptive as to cause death. So punctuated equilibrium is not really one leap at a time. It envisions a lot of slight changes over thousands of years, then nothing happens for millions of years. article
This is due to a force called "natural selection". Natural selection stabilizes the population.
Evolutionists say with a straight face that no fossils have been found from a leap because thousands of years is too fast in the billions of years of "geologic time" to leave any. article
Fossilization is an EXTREMELY rare event, and not every square inch of the earth has been dug up.
On the other hand, without fossils there is no evidence that any leaps ever happened, and of course there is no evidence that leaps or gradual changes are happening today in any of the millions of species that still exist.article
Speciation has been observed.
Evolution is all about constant change, whether gradual or in leaps. Consider a cloud in the sky: it is constantly changing shape due to natural forces. It might look like, say, a rabbit now, and a few minutes later appear to be, say, a horse. In between, the whole mass is shifting about. In a few more minutes it may look like a bird. The problem for evolution is that we never see the shifting between shapes in the fossil record. All fossils are of complete animals and plants, not works in progress "under construction". article
Evolution is not some sort of retirement plan. Natural selection is blind, and thus does not predict "works in progress".
Log in to comment