Creationism/Evolution
See other Creationism/Evolution Articles
Title: EVOLUTION IMPOSSIBLE!
Source:
Answers In Genesis
URL Source: http://www.answersingenesis.org/get ... _campaign=evolution-impossible
Published: Sep 2, 2011
Author: unattributed
Post Date: 2011-09-02 00:30:28 by A K A Stone
Keywords: None
Views: 54746
Comments: 69
We’re sure you’ve heard this claim before, probably hundreds of times: “Science has proven evolution is fact.” It’s like a strange Darwinian chant that emanates from atheist blogs and secular universities. Too bad (for them) it’s not true. In fact, refuting evolution doesn’t require complicated equations or lab experiments—though those do the job, too. Just remember the two fundamental flaws we can use to show evolution to be, well, not even scientifically viable. Where’d You Get Your Information, Bub? Everything that makes up your body requires genetic information. You’ve got hands and feet because your genes code for it. The same is true for any creature—dogs, camels, you name it. The genetic information in humans varies from the information in animals, plants, and so on. Seems obvious, so why point it out? Because for animal kind A to somehow “presto-change-o” into animal kind B, the information’s got to change. A fish doesn’t just morph into an amphibian without something changing in the genes. It would have to gain some new information. Check This Out! Get the full DVD. Here’s the clincher: when we use operational science—the kind involving observable, repeatable, testable results—we have never observed, repeated, or been able to test animal kind A turning into animal kind B—at all. Sure, there’s some genetic “do-si-do” going on through mutations and gene drift, but there’s no way fish are going to sprout hair and opposable thumbs. Just in case you think by “no way” we mean there’s still a chance, there’s not—none, zilch, nada, not going to happen. What if we add billions of years and cool artistic renderings? Still no. Original Recipe That first point is devastating enough. But here’s how evolution gets buried even more. You’ve probably heard news accounts about how life could have started on earth “gazillions” of years ago in volcanoes, slush pools, crystals, rocks, you name it. Maybe you’ve heard something about “artificial” life or test-tube life or rotten-food-in-the-refrigerator life (okay, maybe not the last one). Those are interesting speculations, but they overlook one important rule in biology: life doesn’t, cannot, and will never come from non-life. Life comes from life. Always. That’s the law—the Law of Biogenesis, to be exact. All these failed experiments, like the Miller-Urey experiment, really show is just how much intelligence is required for life to begin in the first place. (That is, way smarter than us.) And Yet We’re Here So, if evolution can’t explain how humans came to be (or any other living thing, for that matter), what can? The Bible. Yep, God’s Word. The Bible provides an eyewitness account of how the universe and all life came to be. There’s no speculation or strange interpretation needed. You can just read how God created everything in six days a few thousand years ago. Simple. Factual. Pick it up, dust it off if you need, and read it. There’s even some good news in there for you.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-29) not displayed.
.
.
.
#30. To: A K A Stone (#29)
YOU claimed that ALL mutations are bad. SUPPORT THE STATEMENT. YOU claimed that there are no transitional fossils. SUPPORT THE STATEMENT.
America...My Kind Of Place... "I truly am not that concerned about [bin Laden]..." "THE MILITIA IS COMING!!! THE MILITIA IS COMING!!!" I lurk to see if someone other than Myst or Pookie posts anything...
I don't lie. Post number 10 skip says that this entire article is 100 percent bullshit.
SUPPORT THE STATEMENT. YOU claimed that there are no transitional fossils. SUPPORT THE STATEMENT. There are no transitional fossils. That statement is supported by the fact that you can't contradict it by posting transitional fossils. You wont post any because I you will get smacked down because there are none. There are no good mutations. If there was you would post them. You liberals can't debate for shit.
You stated that. Where is your proof? This is EXACTLY what I claimed would happen in this discussion: You make a statement and your only support for it is for you to continually refer back to it.
America...My Kind Of Place... "I truly am not that concerned about [bin Laden]..." "THE MILITIA IS COMING!!! THE MILITIA IS COMING!!!" I lurk to see if someone other than Myst or Pookie posts anything...
Post #10 comes before post #15. He couldn't have stated that your question was bullshit BEFORE you asked it. You really suck at debating...do you realize that?
America...My Kind Of Place... "I truly am not that concerned about [bin Laden]..." "THE MILITIA IS COMING!!! THE MILITIA IS COMING!!!" I lurk to see if someone other than Myst or Pookie posts anything...
Yes, there are, as ten seconds of research on the net would show you. Your repeated use of this statement shows us all what a total dumbshit you are.
You are such a pussy you are afraid to answer number 15. You can't find any transitional fossils. You lose. You can't find any mutations that are positive. You lose.
Yes, there are, as ten seconds of research on the net would show you. Your repeated use of this statement shows us all what a total dumbshit you are. You said the entire articled is 100 percent bullshit. I posted to you in number 15 if that is bullshit. You like war are afraid of the first claim in the article. The very first one stumps you. If you think there are transitional fossils post an example and I will shoot it down. You only have claims of transitional fossils. No proof whatsoever. You are the dumbshit, certainly not I.
Thanks for living up to my expectations of your ability to argue your point. For the record, I had NONE. Then again, you had nothing to work with.
America...My Kind Of Place... "I truly am not that concerned about [bin Laden]..." "THE MILITIA IS COMING!!! THE MILITIA IS COMING!!!" I lurk to see if someone other than Myst or Pookie posts anything...
You are such a pussy you are afraid to answer number 15. You can't find any transitional fossils. You lose. You can't find any mutations that are positive. You lose.
Where did god come from, Stone?
That is a hard question. He said he always was. Are you ever going to answer number 15 so we can continue the discussion? You did say that the article is 100 percent bullshit.
So is he alive?
I'll answer that after you answer 15. It isn't a one way street.
Sorry, I don't play that way. Unlike you, I have a point to my question.
I have had a point to my question too. I'll just stick to your original statement that the article is 100 percent bullshit. You don't believe this is true. Everything that makes up your body requires genetic information. You’ve got hands and feet because your genes code for it. The same is true for any creature—dogs, camels, you name it. You don't believe in genes. lol
And, of course, totally false. What else would you expect from The Sheepherders Guide to the Universe?
You don't believe in genes. lol
Yes, everything requires genetic information. I'll revise my opinion. The article is only 99% bullshit.
Well those words are more then 1 percent of the article. Without counting the words it is about 10 percent. Yes I believe God is alive in answer to your earlier question. Now onto the next paragraph The genetic information in humans varies from the information in animals, plants, and so on. Seems obvious, so why point it out? Because for animal kind A to somehow “presto-change-o” into animal kind B, the information’s got to change. A fish doesn’t just morph into an amphibian without something changing in the genes. It would have to gain some new information. That paragraph sounds pretty reasonable to me. Do you really think that a fish can morph into an amphibian without a change in its genes? According to your 100 percent or 99 percent bullshit claim this is bullshit too. How can it be bullshit?
Your 99% bullshit article says this: "Those are interesting speculations, but they overlook one important rule in biology: life doesn’t, cannot, and will never come from non-life. Life comes from life. Always." So if I take your article at face value, god must have been created by someone else, since " life doesn’t, cannot, and will never come from non-life. Life comes from life. Always." Funny how that part got left out of the bible.
How is God alive when the creator doesn't manifest itself in front of you as God in a living format or method?
You are asking unaswerable questions. We can't know everything about God. The article is talking about the natural laws set up in this world. To quote the article "but they overlook one important rule in biology: life doesn’t, cannot, and will never come from non-life. Life comes from life. Always." So you see it is talking about the laws of biology. Evolution has never happened. Can't be reproduced in the lab. Has never been observed. There aren't any positive mutations as far as I am aware of. There are also no transitional fossils.
So you are saying if God doesn't manifest himself before his creation at his creations demand he can't exist?
The genetic information in humans varies from the information in animals, plants, and so on. Seems obvious, so why point it out? Because for animal kind A to somehow “presto-change-o” into animal kind B, the information’s got to change. A fish doesn’t just morph into an amphibian without something changing in the genes. It would have to gain some new information. That paragraph sounds pretty reasonable to me. Do you really think that a fish can morph into an amphibian without a change in its genes? According to your 100 percent or 99 percent bullshit claim this is bullshit too. How can it be bullshit? You forgot to answer that question.
I did? Within my original question where did you read that, Stone? Spill the beans.
How do you know "God" or the creator of the Universe is based on your own interpretation of the Bible. Traditional Jews (whom originally wrote the Old Testament) know that the reader must properly interpret the wording as opposed to taking a literal interpretation as the truth.
I didn't read that. That is why I asked the question. I answered your question with a question because I don't have a good enough answer for you. Maybe someone else can answer that for you better then I can.
Learn some simple communication skills, Stone; reply with an answer and not more rhetorical BS questions. Lets go back to your post#49 of this thread: And my #51 posting: Answer my question.
It is just what I genuinely believe. Based on to many things to put into a post here. But lets just look at one thing. Lets start at pretty much the beginning. The flood. Lets do the short version. A worldwide flood would have have been a major historical event. It would have left traces of it. That is what created the fossil record. I'm not going to go and try to reinvent the wheel and write a bunch of stuff. Others can do it better then I can. Here is an interesting article that talks about the kind of things I am talking about. Cool! dinosaur tracks! How can today’s slow-and-gradual geologic processes over millions of years explain the preservation of delicate impressions in mud before they are washed away? Does the Flood provide a better explanation? Thousands of dinosaur footprints have been found in the geologic record, often in long trackways of successive left and right footprints. With the help of these clues, paleontologists have deciphered many details about the behavior of these fascinating creatures.1 2 3 4 Who Has a Dilemma? Dinosaur footprints create an apparent dilemma for creationists. How could they ever be made and fossilized during the Flood?5 After all, with the Flood waters covering the entire earth, the dinosaurs would have nowhere to walk. Even if they did, the churning waters would erode away any footprints left behind. Secular geologists and skeptics often raise this question and are sometimes scathing in their mockery. Biblical geologists, on the other hand, say it is the conventional geologists who, in fact, face a dilemma. If geologic change takes place slowly, surely footprints made in mud would be obliterated by wind and rain long before the prints were covered by new sediments and hardened into rock. So who has a dilemma? To find out, let’s explore a specific case of fossilized dinosaur footprints discovered in Israel. A Pertinent Example Fossilized Dinosaur Footprints Photo courtesy Dr. Snelling Figure 1 Left foot–right foot sequence of fossilized footprints. Just west of Jerusalem is the village of Beit Zeit. There on an exposed rock pavement, a left foot–right foot sequence of fossilized footprints is clearly evident (Figure 1). In a closer view the imprints of three long toes are plainly visible (Figure 2). Perhaps the most interesting clue about the formation of these footprints is the type of rock in which they are found. It is a unique type of carbonate rock similar to limestone, called dolomite. We see various types of limestone forming today, but dolomite requires unique conditions to form, as determined in the laboratory. Dolomite forms today only in small quantities and only in extreme environments where dinosaurs could not possibly have lived, such as hot springs and desert salt flats.6 All other theoretical environments where dolomite might form are likewise not places where dinosaurs could live (such as hyper-salty lakes and oceans with unusual chemistry). So conventional geologists, who believe that the present is the key to the past, would not expect to find dinosaur prints in dolomite. The best explanation they can suggest is that, for some reason, a dinosaur walked across an intertidal mudflat in an arid region (where there was nothing for him to eat!). Fossilized Dinosaur Footprints Photo courtesy Dr. Snelling Figure 2 Three long toes clearly visible. The problem is complicated by the vast scale of the rock deposits. The dinosaur prints are found in the lower section of a thick sequence of alternating layers of dolomite and limestone, half a mile thick (2,600 feet or 800 m), collectively called the Judea Group.7 Jerusalem sits on the Judea Group, which includes Mount Zion and the Temple Mount (Mount Moriah). A “group” in geology is not based on rocks in a relatively small area but a pile of rocks identifiable over a very large region. Since it is a group, we must conclude that these thick limestones and dolomites in Israel were formed over a vast region.8 The only known way to produce large quantities of limestone, such as we find in the Judea Group, is an ocean environment. The “easiest” way to form widespread dolomites, too, is an ocean, but the water must be of unusual chemistry. So the Judea Group probably formed in a vast ocean sitting over the entire region. This wasn’t an optimum place for dinosaurs to live! The Conventional Wisdom So, how did the dinosaurs make these footprints under the ocean? Everyone agrees that the dinosaurs were land-dwellers. So conventional geologists cannot explain why they were walking across an ocean floor. Furthermore, even if the dinosaurs somehow left footprints in soft dolomite mud on a shallow ocean floor, how would the water-saturated sediment harden to fossilize the footprints? This can be done in only two ways: by exposing the sediment to the air so that the water evaporates from the mud, or by burying the mud so that the overlying sediments squeeze the water out of the mud. Explaining the Dolomite Layers How do Flood geologists overcome all these challenges? How could dinosaurs leave footprints in dolomite mud on a continent that was covered by ocean waters? Answer: a global flood! First, let’s explain the unusual chemical conditions. The pre-Flood ocean floor would have been littered with the remains of mollusk shells, in the form of lime. (Mollusk shells are made out of calcium carbonate, the main ingredient in lime.) When the fountains of the great deep broke up at the start of the Flood, massive earthquakes9 would have caused the ocean waters to rise and sweep in across the pre-Flood supercontinent, like tsunamis, carrying the lime sediments landwards with them. The water temperature would have progressively increased as hot volcanic waters were added to the ocean. Also, many volcanic eruptions would have added magnesium to the lime-rich Flood waters. This combination of hot water, lime, and magnesium would produce the layers of dolomite.10 Thus, catastrophic plate tectonics can explain the increase in Flood water temperatures, the inundation of the continents, and the formation of enormous amounts of “marine” carbonate sediments on the continents. Explaining the Dinosaur Footprints As the Flood waters swept inland, dinosaurs would have been forced to swim to survive the rising Flood waters.11 Elephants today react similarly when faced with rising floodwaters.12 The water level at each location would not have risen at a constant rate. As global sea level rose, water would rise and fall locally with the surge and ebb of tsunamis and the shifting tidal pull of the moon and sun.13 At the same time, earthquakes and continental collisions would raise and lower land at different places and times. Consequently, warm surging waters of the catastrophic Flood might cover a particular lowland area with dolomite layers, only to expose that same area again for a few hours. This cycle could occur several times before the Flood finally covered the area completely. Some dinosaur prints may have been made by fully submerged dinosaurs, others in shallow water, and others on temporarily exposed surfaces. Any brief exposure would probably not provide enough time, however, for the soft dolomite layer, composed of a natural “quick set” cement, to harden sufficiently to preserve the footprints. Instead, the next surge of dolomite sediment would bury the footprints (even if still underwater), and the weight of the overlying layers would squeeze the water out of the dolomite and harden it to rock. The dinosaurs that made the footprints would again be swept away in the Flood waters. Within weeks or months, they would succumb to exhaustion and die, to be buried in Flood sediments higher up in the sequence. This explanation fits what is found in the geologic record. Dinosaur body fossils are invariably found in sediment layers higher in local strata sequences than their fossilized footprints.14 God’s Word Solves the Dilemma Flood geologists have a satisfying explanation for fossilized dinosaur footprints in dolomite layers. But conventional geologists, who insist on slow-and-gradual geologic processes, struggle to explain both the dolomite layers and the preservation of the dinosaur footprints. When we base our understanding of earth history on God’s Word, we can explain fossilized dinosaur footprints, even in supposed “marine” dolomite layers. The truth is much more exciting than man’s made-up history. Dr. Andrew Snelling holds a PhD in geology from the University of Sydney and has worked as a consultant research geologist to organizations in both Australia and America. Author of numerous scientific articles, Dr. Snelling is now director of research at Answers in Genesis–USA. www.answersingenesis.org/.../v5/n4/fossil-dino-prints Then there is the moral code in the Bible. You know the 10 commandments. Could people today write something so simple to govern themselves? It is universal throughout time for all time. Then there is the story of Jesus. You said you believe in God. I don't know if that means you believe in God as in Jesus or just a generic god. Also the prophecy in the Bible. For example the Mark of the Beast found in Revelation chapter 13 is interesting. And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live. 15 And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed. 16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: 17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. 18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six. Think about those amazing verses. No time in human history could they have been physically fulfilled. Now in our lifetime things in that chapter are possible. No human could have guessed that this could happen in the future. I mean a buying and selling system that is global in scope. That every nation and tongue will be part of this. That this beast will be kind of all knowing. I think that the internet plays a role in that. Or some future internet like thing. It says the whole world is going to worship this beast, and if they don't worship it the sentence is death. That is a global dictatorship. Again when the Bible was written that was not literally possible. Again now it is. It talks about an image of a beast. That it talks. Sounds kind of like a tv image or maybe some future decendent of whatever TV becomes. Then in another chapter of the Bible it talks about two witnesses. That these witnesses are going to preach to the whole earth for some timeframe. Think about that. It says the whole world is going to see them. How would that have been possible before things like television? Just lots of stuff buckeroo. Thanks for asking.
The genetic information in humans varies from the information in animals, plants, and so on. Seems obvious, so why point it out? Because for animal kind A to somehow “presto-change-o” into animal kind B, the information’s got to change. A fish doesn’t just morph into an amphibian without something changing in the genes. It would have to gain some new information. Check This Out! Now to get back on topic. That is where we are. What do you think about those two paragraphs?
Coming from you that is too much data to analyze within a a few moments so lets start at the top of your well-intentioned post. Why on Earth do you think the Biblical record about Noah's Ark and the flood is the beginning? What happened to Adam&Eve and Able and Cain and all the Old Testament BEGATS leading up to the same myth? How do these Jewish/Christian/Muslim myths tell me or anyone that based on your #49 comment, Yes I believe God is alive is a worthy opinion? Cite any proof or evidence to include your own conviction through any historical acknowledgments describing the same.
From Mark Chapter 13 And the gospel must first be published among all nations. There are other verses also that talk about the Bible being taken to all nations. I would expect that the first English versions which are nearly identical as far as I can tell (Bishops Bible, King James, and there was one other that escapes me right now) would be put out by God himself and not that mean old devil.
Where did I say it was the beginning? On you calling it a myth. Are you certain of that 100 percent? Or are you not sure? Or are you pretty sure? Hang in there or are you somewhat sure?
Now I haven't done this myself. But lots of people have apparently added up the years and came to, I don't know what was it? thousands of years of history before the flood? Is that the point you are getting at in saying the flood is the beginning?
Your post #59. Just a couple of posts up, don't you watch your own change t to post#59. Don't you monitor your own keyboard while napping?
Oh I remember now. I mean the beginning of the Bible the first book. Not the literal beginning which would be genesis chapter 1 v 1
Are you retracting your own statements? Since, you believe God is alive what makes you think that God doesn't modify life around the Universe in a way to adjust about ever changing conditions thus making possible the concept of evolution?
I'm retracting nothing. I'm clarifying. I don't think that God modifies life around the universe in the manner you describe because he gives a different account in the book of Genesis. Not only does he give a different account. It fits with what is observeable in the real world. The flood as I mentioned and other things like what it says about seeds and that we produce after like kind. If you really believe in Jeusus and aren't ignorant you have to believe in the flood and Genesis.
So, let us briefly examine Adam&Eve in Paradise. Do you really believe God created Eve from Adam's own rib? And what was grabbing an apple the tree of paradise all about? After them, how did all the BEGATS within the Old testament occur? Fornication and Incest? Are you saying we are all inbreds like folks from Ohio?
--GW Bush
--Sarah Palin's version of "The Midnight Ride of Paul revere"
#31. To: war (#23)
I didn't answer the question because you lied about Skip having addressed it.
#32. To: war (#30)
YOU claimed that ALL mutations are bad.
#33. To: A K A Stone, Skip Intro (#32)
There are no transitional fossils.
--GW Bush
--Sarah Palin's version of "The Midnight Ride of Paul revere"
#34. To: A K A Stone, Skip Intro (#31)
--GW Bush
--Sarah Palin's version of "The Midnight Ride of Paul revere"
#35. To: A K A Stone (#32)
There are no transitional fossils.
#36. To: war (#33)
#37. To: Skip Intro (#35)
There are no transitional fossils.
#38. To: A K A Stone (#36)
--GW Bush
--Sarah Palin's version of "The Midnight Ride of Paul revere"
#39. To: war (#38)
#40. To: A K A Stone (#37)
#41. To: Skip Intro (#40)
Where did god come from, Stone?
#42. To: A K A Stone (#41)
That is a hard question. He said he always was.
#43. To: Skip Intro (#42)
So is he alive?
#44. To: A K A Stone (#43)
I'll answer that after you answer 15. It isn't a one way street.
#45. To: Skip Intro (#44)
#46. To: A K A Stone (#0)
You can just read how God created everything in six days a few thousand years ago. Simple. Factual.
#47. To: Skip Intro (#46)
#48. To: A K A Stone (#45)
Everything that makes up your body requires genetic information.
#49. To: Skip Intro (#48)
#50. To: A K A Stone (#49)
Yes I believe God is alive in answer to your earlier question. ×0;
#51. To: A K A Stone (#49)
Yes I believe God is alive
#52. To: Skip Intro (#50)
#53. To: buckeroo (#51)
How is God alive when the creator doesn't manifest itself in front of you as God in a living format or method?
#54. To: Skip Intro (#50)
Now onto the next paragraph
#55. To: A K A Stone (#53)
buckeroo asks an answer from the channel manager (A K A Stone): How is God alive when the creator doesn't manifest itself in front of you as God in a living format or method?
AKA Stone retorts: So you are saying if God doesn't manifest himself before his creation at his creations demand he can't exist?
#56. To: A K A Stone (#54)
You forgot to answer that question.
#57. To: buckeroo (#55)
I did? Within my original question where did you read that, Stone? Spill the beans.
#58. To: A K A Stone (#57)
I answered your question with a question because I don't have a good enough answer for you. Maybe someone else can answer that for you better then I can.
Yes I believe God is alive
How is God alive when the creator doesn't manifest itself in front of you as God in a living format or method?
#59. To: buckeroo (#56)
How do you know "God" or the creator of the Universe is based on your own interpretation of the Bible. Traditional Jews (whom originally wrote the Old Testament) know that the reader must properly interpret the wording as opposed to taking a literal interpretation as the truth.
#60. To: buckeroo, skip intro (#58)
Everything that makes up your body requires genetic information. You’ve got hands and feet because your genes code for it. The same is true for any creature—dogs, camels, you name it.
#61. To: A K A Stone (#59)
Just lots of stuff buckeroo. Thanks for asking.
But lets just look at one thing. Lets start at pretty much the beginning. The flood. Lets do the short version. A worldwide flood would have have been a major historical event. It would have left traces of it. That is what created the fossil record. I'm not going to go and try to reinvent the wheel and write a bunch of stuff. Others can do it better then I can. Here is an interesting article that talks about the kind of things I am talking about.
#62. To: buckeroo (#56)
that the reader must properly interpret the wording as opposed to taking a literal interpretation as the truth.
#63. To: buckeroo (#61)
Why on Earth do you think the Biblical record about Noah's Ark and the flood is the beginning? What happened to Adam&Eve and Able and Cain and all the Old Testament BEGATS leading up to the same myth?
#64. To: buckeroo (#61)
What happened to Adam&Eve and Able and Cain and all the Old Testament BEGATS leading up to the same
#65. To: A K A Stone (#63)
Where did I say it [the flood] was the beginning?
Lets just look at one thing. Lets start at pretty much the beginning. The flood.
#66. To: buckeroo (#65)
#67. To: A K A Stone (#66)
#68. To: buckeroo (#67)
Are you retracting your own statements? Since, you believe God is alive what makes you think that God doesn't modify life around the Universe in a way to adjust about ever changing conditions thus making possible the concept of evolution?
#69. To: A K A Stone (#68)
I don't think that God modifies life around the universe in the manner you describe because he gives a different account in the book of Genesis.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]