Prove Evolution Is False - Even Without the Bible

originally posted by: madenusa
a reply to: vethumanbeing...............agree 100% we are not setting at the controls
Evolutionists just throw up their hands at the question of the origin of matter because they know something cannot evolve from nothing

They suspect "something" but cannot describe it as a whole system diametric (opposite extremes). As you say something cannot evolve from nothing; there was plan/intent prior to the actionable (who was in charge of this action PLAY TIME exactly).

a reply to: NaughtyLibrarian

True. I maintain that as long as the probability for something isn't 0, it is BOUND to happen given a long enough time and enough space; and as you expand into infinity, it will happen infinite times. So it is technically possible that such a thing could happen. I just find it unlikely.

To be honest, if we were to find another intelligent species in the universe, we likely wouldn't even be able to communicate with it, let alone understand each other. I mean think about it like this, our senses evolved out of the evolutionary path on THIS planet, do you think that evolutionary paths would be similar across planets?

originally posted by: madenusa
Giant dinosaurs literally exploded onto the scene during the Triassic period.

Are you at all familiar with the concept of population and genetic bottlenecks? Are you aware that the delineation between the Triassic and the earlier Permian is marked by the Permian Extinction, also called the great dying because ~96% of all marine life and ~70% of terrestrial vertebrates became extinct. Basically, nearly 60% of all families and over 80% of all genera became extinct in one fell swoop. This is also the only extinction event in Earths history known to have affected insects as well. This sudden loss of such a huge percentage of the planets biodiversity left almost all ecological niches empty and the Earth took up to 10 MA to recover sufficiently. Ina very similar process to what allowed mammals to fill every available niche after the extinction of the dinosaurs and other large reptiles, the P-Tr event allowed dinosaurs to arise from earlier Archosaurs.

The fossil record shows no intermediate or transitional species. Where are the millions of years of fossils showing the transitional forms for dinosaurs?

They do not not exist, because the dinosaurs did not evolve.

You couldn't be more wrong here. There is plenty of evidence and transitional fossils demonstrating the progression fromTherapsids to Pelycosaurs to archosaurs to Dinosaurs. Mothers is Lysterosaurus whose remains have been found all across the planet. There are Therapsids like Cynogathus and Thrinaxodon who had fur and warm blood(therapsids were the ancestors of both mammals and reptiles). There is also evidence that Cynogathus may have given birth to live young as opposed to laying eggs like other reptiles.

So,e of the earliest Archosaurs like Euparkeria were on of the first bipedal creatures we know of. Towards the end of the Triassic, the archosaurs began to split off into the first primitive dinosaurs, fast small and bipedal carnivores like Eoraptor, Herrerasaurus amd Staurikosaurus. The Archosaurs evolved into the first Theropods as well as Crocodilkiams and reptiles such as Pterosaurs. The information and literature is there for anyone who wants to be bothered to educate themselves.

originally posted by: madenusa
There is no scientific evidence that a species can change the number of chromosomes within the DNA.
The chromosome count within each species is fixed.

Fusion of chromosome 2 is an unavoidable fact. The centromere in human chromosome 2 is in the exact same place as chromosome 2P in Chimpanzees as determined by sequence similarity. More importantly, on the 2q arm of human chromosome 2 lies the unmistakeable remains of the original centromere of the LCA between humans and chimps 2q chromosome in the exact same position as the chimp 2q centromere.

Now let's talk telomeres. A telomeres function is to protect the ends of the chromosomal DNA strand during replication because the ends of the strands are extremely vulnerable to mutation and deletion. Over time, these telomere strands have a tendency to shorten and are from time to time replenished by an enzyme called telomerase which lengthens the sequence. Again... Telomeric and pretelomeric sequences are normally found only at the ends of chromosomes. Except in human chromosome 2. Here, we find a pretelomeric sequence, a telomeres sequence, an inverted telomeres sequence and an inverted pretelomeric sequence, in that specific order, in the MIDDLE of the chromosome. Not at the ends. This is extremely strong evidence of chromosomal fusion all by itself. Add in the centromere data and it's a rather conclusive case.

[/uote]This is the reason a male from one species cannot mate successfully with a female of another species.
Man could not evolve from a monkey.

What on earth are you going on about? There is nobody on earth except for the scientific illiterates of the world who make statements such as "man from monkey". It's not what happened, not what any anthropologist will tell you and it's nowhere in MES or anywhere else in science for that matter. Huge difference between sharing common ancestry with the other great apes and claiming we evolved from monkeys. If you can't get the basics correct, what makes you think that you can be so authoritative regarding chromosomal fusion?

Each species is locked into its chromosome count that cannot be changed. If an animal developed an extra chromosome or lost a chromosome because of some deformity, it could not successfully mate. The defect could not be passed along to the next generation.

Really? How then do people with Downs Syndrome have babies with each other? How are they able to do so with people who have no chromosomal abnormalities? Because they do so despite your claim of the impossibility of such a thing occurring.

Evolving a new species is scientifically impossible.

Care to provide a citation supporting this supposition? Even if you want to discount the fossil record, genetics seals the deal here. Evolution is a fact. Whether you want to accept it or not or care enough to try to understand the science behind it, evolution is the most well supported and evidenced theory in the history of science.

originally posted by: madenusa
a reply to: vethumanbeing...............agree 100% we are not setting at the controls
Evolutionists just throw up their hands at the question of the origin of matter because they know something cannot evolve from nothing

incorrect. the investigation is still ongoing, and it has not yet concluded because those investigating the matter understand that the subject deserves all the diligence, thoroughness, and professional acuity that they can muster. if that means the investigation doesnt conclude quite as soon as you would like...too bad. even they have to wait for the answer, and they are actually working to find it. better to do it right than to do it quickly.

a reply to: TzarChasm
I just watched the movie "Kingsmen" (I could swear upon a totally made up oath Monty Python style) movies are now being made to educate the human.
"The Truman Show"
"Prometheus"
"Close Encounters of the Third Kind"
"Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy"
"Brazil"
"The Fifth Element"
"AI"
"The Abyss"
"Interstellar"
"Elysiem"
"District 9"
"Gattica"
"The LEGO Movie"
"Wall-E"
Too many to mention and I promise never to bring this up again (fingers crossed behind my back).

a reply to: Krazysh0t

For once, I agree with someone on here! Ty
Sars

a reply to: Krazysh0t
Heave ho go to the tundra and species survived; accidental happenstance.

originally posted by: vethumanbeing
a reply to: Krazysh0t
Heave ho go to the tundra and species survived; accidental happenstance.

Is this supposed to be a sentence? I'm not sure what you are saying here. Please elaborate.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: vethumanbeing
a reply to: Krazysh0t
Heave ho go to the tundra and species survived; accidental happenstance.

Is this supposed to be a sentence? I'm not sure what you are saying here. Please elaborate.

Sneaky evolution reference is all.

a reply to: vethumanbeing

Sounds great. What's it mean?

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: vethumanbeing

Sounds great. What's it mean?

"Sneaky Evolution"? (you exist) and have no purpose for being in this ecosystem at all; as if dropped out the sky; thin air.

originally posted by: vethumanbeing

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: vethumanbeing

Sounds great. What's it mean?

"Sneaky Evolution"? (you exist) and have no purpose for being in this ecosystem at all; as if dropped out the sky; thin air.

It is liberating. To have your future up in the air, nothing set in stone. See my signature.

originally posted by: TzarChasm
originally posted by: vethumanbeing

Krazyshot: Sounds great. What's it mean?

vhb: "Sneaky Evolution"? (you exist) and have no purpose for being in this ecosystem at all; as if dropped out the sky; thin air.

TzarChasm: It is liberating. To have your future up in the air, nothing set in stone. See my signature.

Who ever said WE were in charge of anything other than the human operatives driving the division/polarizing factions between nations. I sort of like not being in any control of anything (someone else is at fault if all goes haywire no finger pointing my way). I like your signature; it not only goes well in comment to this thread but could as an 'abstract' be applied to all subject/formats.

originally posted by: vethumanbeing

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: vethumanbeing

Sounds great. What's it mean?

"Sneaky Evolution"? (you exist) and have no purpose for being in this ecosystem at all; as if dropped out the sky; thin air.

is that a problem? Does there HAVE to be a point to everything? Can't things just be?

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: vethumanbeing

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: vethumanbeing

Sounds great. What's it mean?

"Sneaky Evolution"? (you exist) and have no purpose for being in this ecosystem at all; as if dropped out the sky; thin air.

is that a problem? Does there HAVE to be a point to everything? Can't things just be?

I think the point is to be a catalyst for change (good or bad) to cause the system to then react (earth does it all of the time).

a reply to: vethumanbeing

There is no point because evolution is not a conscious agency. There is no intent.

a reply to: TzarChasm
It entirely depends upon what side of the line of "fault" finger pointing you fall on; (intentionally created by Smarty Pants Manipulators or accidental happenstances affecting all specie driven only by environmental factors).