Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 92
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    18,758
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    139 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475233

    Default Dissenting Darwin

    Good to see honest scientists and professionals standing up for common sense and Data and Facts.




    https://dissentfromdarwin.org/

    • Genetics—Mutations Cause Harm and Do Not Build Complexity: Darwinian evolution relies on random mutations that are selected by a blind, unguided process of natural selection. This undirected process has no goals. Being random, it tends to harm organisms and does not improve them or build complexity. As biologist Lynn Margulis, a member of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences until her death in 2011, said: “New mutations don’t create new species; they create offspring that are impaired.”1 Similarly, the past president of the French Academy of Sciences, Pierre-Paul Grasse, contended that “[m]utations have a very limited ‘constructive capacity’” because “[n]o matter how numerous they may be, mutations do not produce any kind of evolution.”2
    • Biochemistry—Unguided and Random Processes Cannot Produce Cellular Complexity: Our cells are like miniature factories using machine technology but dwarfing the complexity and efficiency of anything produced by humans. Cells use miniature circuits, motors, feedback loops, encoded language, and even error-checking machinery to decode and repair our DNA. As Bruce Alberts, former president of the U.S. National Academy of Science, observed: “[t]he entire cell can be viewed as a factory that contains an elaborate network of interlocking assembly lines, each of which is composed of a set of large protein machines.”3 Darwinian evolution struggles to explain the origin of this type of integrated complexity. Biochemist Franklin Harold admits in a book published by Oxford University Press: “There are presently no detailed Darwinian accounts of the evolution of any biochemical or cellular system, only a variety of wishful speculations.”4
    • Paleontology—The Fossil Record Lacks Intermediate Fossils: The fossil record’s overall pattern is one of abrupt explosions of new biological forms, and generally lacks plausible candidates for transitional fossils, contradicting the pattern of gradual evolution predicted by Darwinian theory. This non-Darwinian pattern has been recognized by many paleontologists. University of Pittsburgh anthropologist Jeffrey Schwartz states: “We are still in the dark about the origin of most major groups of organisms. They appear in the fossil record as Athena did from the head of Zeus — full-blown and raring to go, in contradiction to Darwin’s depiction of evolution as resulting from the gradual accumulation of countless infinitesimally minute variations.”5 Likewise the great evolutionary biologist Ernst Mayr explained that “[n]ew species usually appear in the fossil record suddenly, not connected with their ancestors by a series of intermediates.”6 Similarly, a zoology textbook observes: “Many species remain virtually unchanged for millions of years, then suddenly disappear to be replaced by a quite different, but related, form. Moreover, most major groups of animals appear abruptly in the fossil record, fully formed, and with no fossils yet discovered that form a transition from their parent group.”7
    • [B]Neo-Darwinian Evolution Has Been and Continues to Be Critiqued by Mainstream Scientists: Everyone agrees that microevolution occurs. But mainstream scientific and academic literature is saturated with skepticism about the neo-Darwinian claim that microevolution offers an adequate basis for justifying macroevolutionary claims. Günter Theißen of the Department of Genetics at Friedrich Schiller University in Germany wrote in the journal Theory in Biosciences that “while we already have a quite good understanding of how organisms adapt to the environment, much less is known about the mechanisms behind the origin of evolutionary novelties, a process that is arguably different from adaptation. Despite Darwin’s undeniable merits, explaining how the enormous complexity and diversity of living beings on our planet originated remains one of the greatest challenges of biology.”8 A 2011 paper in Biological Theory stated, “Darwinism in its current scientific incarnation has pretty much reached the end of its rope,”9 and in 2012, the noted atheist philosopher Thomas Nagel argued in an Oxford University Press book that “the materialist neo-Darwinian conception of nature is almost certainly false.”10Evolutionary biologist Stanley Salthe likewise describes himself as “a critic of Darwinian evolutionary theory,”11 which he insists “cannot explain origins, or the actual presence of forms and behaviors”12 in organisms. Biologist Scott Gilbert has stated in a report in Nature that “[t]he modern synthesis is remarkably good at modeling the survival of the fittest, but not good at modeling the arrival of the fittest,” and evolutionary paleobiologist Graham Budd admits: “When the public thinks about evolution, they think about the origin of wings and the invasion of the land, . . . ut these are things that evolutionary theory has told us little about.”13 Eugene Koonin writes in Trends in Genetics about the increasingly undeniable reasons to doubt core neo-Darwinian tenets, such as view that “natural selection is the main driving force of evolution,” indicating that “the modern synthesis has crumbled, apparently, beyond repair” and “all major tenets of the modern synthesis have been, if not outright overturned, replaced by a new and incomparably more complex vision of the key aspects of evolution.” He concludes: “Not to mince words, the modern synthesis is gone.”14 Because of such criticisms, Cornell evolutionary biologist William Provine believes the Darwinian claim that “Macroevolution was a simple extension of microevolution” is “false.”15

    There are many scientific objections to Darwinian evolution, and again, this is not to say that any particular signer of the Dissent from Darwinism list makes any one of these specific arguments. Instead, this article simply indicates some of the common scientific objections to Darwinian evolution.
    “… the greatest detractor from high performance is fear: fear that you are not prepared, fear that you are in over your head, fear that you are not worthy, and ultimately, fear of failure. If you can eliminate that fear—not through arrogance or just wishing difficulties away, but through hard work and preparation—you will put yourself in an incredibly powerful position to take on the challenges you face" - Pete Carroll.

  2. Likes revelarts liked this post
  3. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    6,314
    Thanks (Given)
    5
    Thanks (Received)
    354
    Likes (Given)
    36
    Likes (Received)
    131
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    63
    Mentioned
    145 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Darwin is definitely outdated, modern evolution theory has moved on like Einstein from Newton.

  4. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    Mouth of the Rogue River, Oregon USA
    Posts
    9,585
    Thanks (Given)
    8103
    Thanks (Received)
    7926
    Likes (Given)
    1479
    Likes (Received)
    1560
    Piss Off (Given)
    3
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    42 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    19808673

    Default

    None the less, it is still amusing to see the 'Darwin Award' annually for
    the biggest idiots who chose to make stunts or accidents that can kill them.

    "Natural Section" indeed!
    Last edited by Elessar; 02-21-2019 at 10:23 PM.
    I have lost my mind. If found, please give it a snack and return it?

    "I won't be wronged. I won't be insulted. I won't be laid a hand on. I don't do these things to other people, and I require the same of others"...John Wayne in "The Shootist"

    A Deplorable!

  5. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    6,314
    Thanks (Given)
    5
    Thanks (Received)
    354
    Likes (Given)
    36
    Likes (Received)
    131
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    63
    Mentioned
    145 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Elessar View Post
    None the less, it is still amusing to see the 'Darwin Award' annually for
    the biggest idiots who chose to make stunts or accidents that can kill the.

    "Natural Section" indeed!
    This we agree on

  6. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    In my knickers
    Posts
    31,029
    Thanks (Given)
    13927
    Thanks (Received)
    15358
    Likes (Given)
    4384
    Likes (Received)
    5487
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    181 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475356

    Default

    @Russ
    After the game, the king and the pawn go into the same box - Author unknown

    “Unfortunately, the truth is now whatever the media say it is”
    -Abbey

  7. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    18,758
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    139 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pete311 View Post
    Darwin is definitely outdated, modern evolution theory has moved on like Einstein from Newton.
    Except modern evolution theory is as-flawed and silly as strict darwinism. Just no evidence to support the outlandish conclusions and its heavy reliance upon magic and mysticism.
    “… the greatest detractor from high performance is fear: fear that you are not prepared, fear that you are in over your head, fear that you are not worthy, and ultimately, fear of failure. If you can eliminate that fear—not through arrogance or just wishing difficulties away, but through hard work and preparation—you will put yourself in an incredibly powerful position to take on the challenges you face" - Pete Carroll.

  8. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    4,853
    Thanks (Given)
    960
    Thanks (Received)
    3749
    Likes (Given)
    535
    Likes (Received)
    854
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    50 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    17759692

    Default

    pffftt.... we have evolved to the point that (as humans) we can select our gender despite the biological evidence to the contrary....
    I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.
    Thomas Jefferson


  9. Likes Abbey Marie, FakeNewsSux liked this post
  10. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    6,314
    Thanks (Given)
    5
    Thanks (Received)
    354
    Likes (Given)
    36
    Likes (Received)
    131
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    63
    Mentioned
    145 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by darin View Post
    Except modern evolution theory is as-flawed and silly as strict darwinism. Just no evidence to support the outlandish conclusions and its heavy reliance upon magic and mysticism.
    I'm not going to get into another debate because it will go no where like the old ones. But I would encourage you to visit a local university and meet with a biologist. Much of modern medicine is due to our evolution theory knowledge. I know you argue microevolution is fine but macro is not, but that is simply a lack of perception than a lack of science. You can also find many holes, but there are many holes in our theory of gravity. Yet, you take that for granted. Again, if you want to get to the meat of anything, visit with a local university expert actually doing the research rather than relying on youtube videos and suspect websites. This is all I will say.

  11. #9
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Podunk, WI
    Posts
    9,836
    Thanks (Given)
    4248
    Thanks (Received)
    4521
    Likes (Given)
    4519
    Likes (Received)
    2812
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    38 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Microevolution is nothing more than rebranding adaptation.

    Evolution, whether macro or micro, is a nonsensical farce based on magic and whimsical thought.

    There's less proof of evolution than there is of GOD and creation.
    Last edited by High_Plains_Drifter; 02-22-2019 at 08:46 AM.

  12. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    6,314
    Thanks (Given)
    5
    Thanks (Received)
    354
    Likes (Given)
    36
    Likes (Received)
    131
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    63
    Mentioned
    145 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by High_Plains_Drifter View Post
    Microevolution is nothing more than rebranding adaptation.

    Evolution, whether macro or micro, is a nonsensical farce based on magic and whimsical thought.
    And creationism is not? We have vaccines every year for the flu because we understand evolution.
    Last edited by pete311; 02-22-2019 at 08:44 AM.

  13. #11
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Podunk, WI
    Posts
    9,836
    Thanks (Given)
    4248
    Thanks (Received)
    4521
    Likes (Given)
    4519
    Likes (Received)
    2812
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    38 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Post

    No... worthless flu vaccines have nothing to do with farcical evolution... https://www.cdc.gov/flu/protect/vacc...ccine-made.htm

    And call it creation, call it SEEDING, call it what you want, but the most logic and intelligent answer as to how life got on this planet, especially man, is that we were PUT HERE. We surely didn't start out as some amoeba in a swamp that no one could explain how it got there, and then magically arrange into highly complex cell structures into a human being. The chances of that happening are statistically ZERO.
    Last edited by High_Plains_Drifter; 02-22-2019 at 08:56 AM.

  14. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    18,758
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    139 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pete311 View Post
    And creationism is not? We have vaccines every year for the flu because we understand evolution.
    intelligent design as "how did we get here?" relies upon no mysticism; it is based on observation and rational thought. The flu example is bait and switch. nobody denies micro-evolotion or change within species. A flu virus will never become a liver. Nor a spider.
    “… the greatest detractor from high performance is fear: fear that you are not prepared, fear that you are in over your head, fear that you are not worthy, and ultimately, fear of failure. If you can eliminate that fear—not through arrogance or just wishing difficulties away, but through hard work and preparation—you will put yourself in an incredibly powerful position to take on the challenges you face" - Pete Carroll.

  15. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    18,758
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    139 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pete311 View Post
    I'm not going to get into another debate because it will go no where like the old ones. But I would encourage you to visit a local university and meet with a biologist. Much of modern medicine is due to our evolution theory knowledge. I know you argue microevolution is fine but macro is not, but that is simply a lack of perception than a lack of science. You can also find many holes, but there are many holes in our theory of gravity. Yet, you take that for granted. Again, if you want to get to the meat of anything, visit with a local university expert actually doing the research rather than relying on youtube videos and suspect websites. This is all I will say.

    That's fine. And I do that a lot. And the more I see people make shit up and use their assumptions to create theory, then teach that made-upshit as fact to vulnerable kids, the more sickening I get.
    “… the greatest detractor from high performance is fear: fear that you are not prepared, fear that you are in over your head, fear that you are not worthy, and ultimately, fear of failure. If you can eliminate that fear—not through arrogance or just wishing difficulties away, but through hard work and preparation—you will put yourself in an incredibly powerful position to take on the challenges you face" - Pete Carroll.

  16. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    In my knickers
    Posts
    31,029
    Thanks (Given)
    13927
    Thanks (Received)
    15358
    Likes (Given)
    4384
    Likes (Received)
    5487
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    181 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475356

    Default

    Pete, have you opened your mind to Intelligent Design, and consulted with any experts at a local Bible college?
    After the game, the king and the pawn go into the same box - Author unknown

    “Unfortunately, the truth is now whatever the media say it is”
    -Abbey

  17. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    18,758
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    139 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Abbey View Post
    Pete, have you opened your mind to Intelligent Design, and consulted with any experts at a local Bible college?
    ...or any of the hundreds and hundreds of scientists who disagree with him?
    “… the greatest detractor from high performance is fear: fear that you are not prepared, fear that you are in over your head, fear that you are not worthy, and ultimately, fear of failure. If you can eliminate that fear—not through arrogance or just wishing difficulties away, but through hard work and preparation—you will put yourself in an incredibly powerful position to take on the challenges you face" - Pete Carroll.

  18. Likes Abbey Marie liked this post

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Debate Policy - Political Forums