Theory Of Evolution
Posted 28 January 2004 - 09:31 PM
The desperate behavior of evolutionary scientists who have, over the years and century, tried to hold fast to an immutable theory, has not been becoming, resorting to childish tactics of intellectual dishonesty that would get any highschool student an F.
From such biological frauds as gemmules, bathybius, and eozoon, to other frauds as notable as Nebraska Man, it is clear those who back evolutionary theory will go to any lengths to vindicate the already discredited theory.
And when the fossil evidence does not match Darwins assertions of gradualism, all of a sudden we have imaginitive minds like Stephen J. Gould ( who would have faired better as a screenwriter ) who tell us about 'punctuated equilibria' and that really all change from one species to another is so drastic and so fast that there is no evidence of any intermediate forms.
I'm tired of evolution being crammed down my throat as if its some absolute fact. Never will those egoists in the evolutionary department of biology ever concede that human intelligence and knowledge is limited and finite. Biology is tainted by this as some holy relic that for some reason if you go into biology, you cannot look at the world any other way other than having evolved. This is no different than telling people in France or Canada that you cannot question the veracity of the Holocaust.
Posted 28 January 2004 - 09:35 PM
Posted 28 January 2004 - 09:37 PM
Posted 28 January 2004 - 09:50 PM
Hahahaha did you talk to Domino lately?
Posted 28 January 2004 - 10:24 PM
Posted 28 January 2004 - 10:44 PM
Actually even the Universe is based on the mathematical platform. So is life and death.
Posted 28 January 2004 - 10:51 PM
Posted 28 January 2004 - 10:52 PM
Gamavor jan , not entirely though, there are always ways to get around it, Mr. Franklin and Mr. Chase work wonders. Look at me, I sound like a Russian Mobster.
Posted 28 January 2004 - 11:01 PM
If you think about it the same way mathematics is also sort of mathematically improbable.
Posted 28 January 2004 - 11:03 PM
Posted 28 January 2004 - 11:04 PM
If evolution is as it is thaught in textbooks, then i dont see what is stopping us here, now, sa the humans we are.. Why dont we keep evolving, surely this is not perfection, is it?
Why do frogs not make fire? they would be much better suited if they did no? Why do dogs not talk, i mean according to the theory of evolution prehistoric humans had to language or sense of it right.. so well, dogs dont too, but whats keeping them from evolving to it??
The list will go on and on, my faovrite is, why dont i evolv another arm outta my chest, i could surely use it..
Plus, how does pure "chance" make us as perfect sa we are, we evolve from a pile of bacteria to the intelligent human beings we are today? Its complettely ridiculous, there is no evidence as u guys stated above...
The reason for the theory of evolution was not because it wsa right, and it was not because of Darwins' work, it was because non beleivers had to come up with "some" explanation of how we came about, until then the creationist view ruled supreme.
Posted 28 January 2004 - 11:42 PM
Aaaah Gamavor jan!
Posted 28 January 2004 - 11:44 PM
Mathematics is the language of the universe. It is based on logic, hence it is provable and testable. Applying it to evolutionary theory regarding random mutations, math revealed that this is highly improbable. Of course I didn't say this, Murray Eden of MIT did, in 1966 during the Wistar Institute regarding evolution.
Posted 29 January 2004 - 11:02 AM
Posted 29 January 2004 - 12:27 PM
I believe I've said before that I don't buy the evolution theory. There are to many holes in it in order to be called science.
Posted 29 January 2004 - 01:00 PM
I am obsolete sure that 98% of primates gene pull being the same as humans is just accidental for lack of better term.
Posted 29 January 2004 - 03:30 PM
Posted 29 January 2004 - 04:32 PM
Scientists believe we involved from little rat like creatures since they were the first mammuls.
Posted 29 January 2004 - 05:36 PM
The 98% commonality of human and monkey DNA is not a proof at all. Even if it was 100% it would not be a proof. It is only a supporting argument.
A simplistic example, atoms look round, so do planets. Does that mean that there is any evolutionary link between planets and atoms? Of course not.
Well, I am not a biologist, just a fiew thoughts....
Posted 29 January 2004 - 06:44 PM
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users