Posts Tagged ‘evolution’

by mb7art

Question by austany: Evolution is a theory with flaws!!! Agree?
First, there is a contradiction between “punctuated equilibrium” and “gradualism.” There are two basic possibilities for how naturalistic evolution can occur. This flaw in the theory of evolution occurs because these two ideas are mutually exclusive, and yet there is evidence suggestive of both of them. Gradualism implies that organisms experience a relatively steady rate of mutations, resulting in a somewhat “smooth” transition from early forms to later ones. This was the original assumption derived from the theory of evolution. Punctuated equilibrium, on the other hand, implies that mutation rates are heavily influenced by a unique set of coincidences. Therefore, organisms will experience long periods of stability, “punctuated” by short bursts of rapid evolution.

Gradualism seems to be contradicted by the fossil record. Organisms appear suddenly and demonstrate little change over long periods. The fossil record has been greatly expanded over the last century, and the more fossils that are found, the more gradualism seems to be disproved. It was this overt refutation of gradualism in the fossil record that prompted the theory of punctuated equilibrium.

The second flaw is the problem of extending “microevolution” into “macroevolution.” Laboratory studies have shown that organisms are capable of adaptation. That is, living things have an ability to shift their biology to better fit their environment. However, those same studies have demonstrated that such changes can only go so far, and those organisms have not fundamentally changed. These small changes are called “micro-evolution.” Microevolution can result in some drastic changes, such as those found in dogs. All dogs are the same species, and one can see how much variation there is. But even the most aggressive breeding has never turned a dog into something else. There is a limit to how large, small, smart, or hairy a dog can become through breeding. Experimentally, there is no reason to suggest that a species can change beyond its own genetic limits and become something else.

Finally, there is the flawed application of evolution. This is not a flaw in the scientific theory, of course, but an error in the way the theory has been abused for non-scientific purposes. There are still many, many fundamental questions about the development of life that evolution has not answered. There are many, many questions about biological life that it cannot answer. And yet, there are those who try to transform the theory from a biological explanation into a metaphysical one. Every time a person claims that the theory of evolution disproves religion, spirituality, or God, they are taking the theory outside of its own limits. Fairly or not, the theory of evolution has been hijacked as an anti-religious mascot by those with an axe to grind against God.

AGREE?

Best answer:

Answer by Jared
No. Evolution has no flaws. If a flaw existed, it would be recognized as a flaw and promptly peer-reviewed and corrected.

You have a really good understanding of creationist propaganda, but not so much of the actual theory. I’d suggest that you actually research your own arguments, because a lot of them prove themselves wrong.

Know better? Leave your own answer in the comments!

The evolution of 3 brave pagans Music: Týr – Hold The Heathen Hammer High
Video Rating: 5 / 5

Question by APCc: Question for ID subscribers on Evolution?
I just do not understand it at all. You either believe in evolution by means of natural selection or not. I don’t see how people can honestly say that their faith and evolution are compatible. Richard Dawkins even mentions in his book the God Delusion, that a true believer of evolution cannot possibly find a compatibility between the two. Evolution is a completely naturalistic process which does not use any divine intervention. Where then do the metaphysical aspects of spirituality fit into something that is 100% naturalistic? If we share a common ancestral lineage with a non-metaphysical nature (abiogenesis for example), then where do aspects such as the after life and the soul fit in?
I am not asking how theory or evidence shows evidence of evolution, read the whole question! I am simply asking how the spiritual nature of the afterlife or soul exist in humans if we are just another product of naturalistic processes.

Best answer:

Answer by Biochem
Well, first of all Richard Dawkins is a HACK! Even other atheist are ashamed of him. Anyhow, I will answer your question in a true scientific manner!

When discussing the Theory of Evolution that was purposed my Dawrin, you need to understand some history first. During the time period of Darwin, the fossil record only showed evidence against his theory and he knew it. He made the statement that future discoveries would show evidence for his theory. On the contrary, they have only shown evidence against it. There is no missing link, and no fossils for that matter than link any predecessor fossils to any current living species. There is just no link, and with the abundance of fossils collected worldwide, this evidence is astounding! Also there are things like the flagellum, and the Cambrian explosion that no evolutionist can reason away with any theory.

Now, the concept above is referred to as macro-evolution in the science community, because the term micro-evolution does occur. There are adaptations that we have been able to observe, mainly in bacteria with a high rate of making progeny. These adaptation however do not create a new species.

The fact is, at the current knowledge of science there is no supporting evidence of macro-evolution.

Now concerning Intelligent Design supporters believing in evolution (if in the future is scientifically evident, which I am not going to hold my breathe for!) is a completely relevant idea. Who is to say how God should or should not have created life on Earth. If God deemed it necessary to create life by means of evolution, then he could have done it. The thought that evolution disproves God is one of the biggest ignorant statements ever said.

The Theory of Evolution is not a problem to Intelligent Design and it never will be. The problem for atheistic evolutionist is the creation of the Universe. There is NO current plausible theory as to the origin of the Universe. The Big Bang is a theory of how it may have happened, but the explanation of it’s occurrence is still a mystery to unbelievers!

You said “Evolution is a completely naturalistic process which does not use any divine intervention.” which it is NOT. I answered your part on how ID believes correlate to it. Read my entire response! I will reiterate it. ID or creationist can believe in both evolution and in a Creator, they do not conflict with each other! Especially since evolution is incorrect. Your question is invalid scientifically! Therefore, it is simple and easy to believe in a after life that God has promised!

Abiogenesis, has already been shown to not be possible, because scientist have re-studied the possible atmospheric conditions. The molecules that are made from that atmosphere and lightning or any other environmental catalyst make formaldehyde, arsenic, and cyanide! Not very inviting for the beginning of life. Also the idea that RNA could have been the first genomic information has also been shown to not be possible. I got an idea for you. Go and actually find the whole scientific research behind these findings. Do not just take half evidence that people like Dawkins put into their books. Try places like PubMed, that have thousands upon thousands of research papers!

Hopefully this time you will read the entirety of my answer with an objective mind rather than a closed one. The reason why I gave you an answer to evolution as well was because your question holds no real scientific basis and is therefore invalid. Go read and do some research and try again!

Well it looks like I need to add some more to you close minded people. You need to look past atheist scientist because they use half truths to shows their ideas. The fossil record shows only evidence against Darwin’s theory… go check better sources than Wikipedia. Come on people use your damn brains! Look at actual published research articles. Evolutionist cannot explain why the big bang occurred. It is interesting to note that many respected physicist and other scientist are embracing the idea of a Creator because science shows evidence of one!!! If you wish to remain ignorant, then fine by me, but do not warp the minds of people seeking answers.

I have many atheist friends and scientist who cannot win an educated debate with myself and other beleivers whom are scientist. They all portray Dawkins as a moron and hurtful to many atheist ideas. How about you educate yourselves and read the Dawkins delusion. I have read the God Delusion and like many other atheist books it is full of half truth and augmented evidence. The face remains that macro-evolution still has no real scientific basis, yet people are holding out HOPE!

What do you think? Answer below!

by ????????Mani Yang’s lounging world

Relationships The Sacred Barometers of Desired Consecrated Evolution

MODE of Cosmic Therapy: Investing Ourselves in Specifically Chosen Self-Projected Mates

Relationships come in all shapes and sizes, just like people. No one relationship is ever the same, nor can it be compared to or competed with/for. According to some of the latest psychological scientific research, there are more than 5000 characteristics in ones personality. I dare say, there are more than 100,000 times that many unique characteristics in a relationship. I am not merely referring to romantic involvements, though they are inestimably important. I am talking about every kind of relationship known to mankind. Our intricate complex relationships define us! They mold, shift, alter, arrange, blend, extricate, cajole, and elicit the best and worst we are. If and when we concentrate our distorted perceptions on what we’re getting from the relationship instead of simply ‘showing up for the gig’, we miss a vitally important aspect of the relationship: to see ourselves more clearly.

It’s easy to get ‘hung up’ on the blinding effect of erratic dancing blurred shadows in the external forces operating in our different (multi-faceted) relationships. We can, however, {should we be so vested enough] to add sufficient interest, inclination, effort, involvement and committed attention in proportions necessary to solicit hidden motives in ourselves, reap the astounding benefits of self-disclosure. By becoming more acutely aware of the whole (perplexing spidery webbed) picture, we are rendered in a much better receptive state of mind. This sponge-like mindset preambles an initial discovery phase in which much of our inner motivations can be revealed. Just as important to realize and accept is the fact that the incurred relationship