0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
bear in mind we are told by sciencehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life"Biology is the science concerned with the study of life."buthttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life"There is currently no consensus regarding the definition of life"so basicallywithout science knowing what life isthen dead and alive have no meaningbiology science dont even know what life is-how ironic they study life but dont know what life isthat is why biology is not a science
1)Darwins book is called On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection ....butthis paper shows natural selection is not the origin of new species Natural selection is not the origin of new species"Natural selection does not generate new genes/species Natural selection adds no new genetic information as it only deals with the passing on of genes/traits already present and it will be pointed out genetics cannot account for the generation of new species/genes as it is claimed the generation of new genes [via mutation] is a random process due to radiation, viruses, chemicals etc and genetic cannot account for these process happening as they are out side the scope of genetics physics, chaos theory etc may give some explanation but genetics cant"
Biologist cant tell us what a species is -without contradiction thus evolution theory ie evolving species is nonsensehttp://.yellowgum.com/wp-content/uploads/BIOLOGISTS-DON.pdfBiologists agree there is species hybridizationbut that contradicts what a species is
1)the cambrian explosion as darwin saw invalidates his theory.http://www.genesispark.com/genpark/explo/explo.htm“No real progress has been made by evolutionists since Darwin’s day and "The Cambrian evolutionary explosion is still shrouded in mystery." (Eldredge, N., The Monkey Business, 1982, p. 46.)”-at the present time nothing has changed2)NS is invalidated by the fact of speciation as NS only deals with traits already present and cant deal with the generation of new species genetics might be able to account for the generation of new species [ see below where it is shown genetics cannot account for the generation of new species] but NS cant as the generation of new species it not part of its remit 3) NS deals with the transmission of favorable traits and the eradication of unfavorable traits so the fact that unfavorable traits ie the gene for breast cancer are and can be transmitted and become common invalidates NS out right Some argue that harmful genes can be transmitted and become common when accompanied by good genes but this makes natural selection wrong ie 4”natural selection, a process that causes helpful traits (those that increase the chance of survival and reproduction) to become more common in a population and causes harmful traits to become more rare”(Ref: Futuyma, Douglas Evolution 2005” seeing bad genes can become common this thus makes natural selection wrong which says bad genes should be come rare or less common 4) genetics cannot account for the generation of new species-ie the cambrian explosion as it is claimed the generation of new genes is a random process due to radiation, viruses, chemicals etc and genetic cannot account for these process happening as they are out side the scope of genetics physics chaos theory etc may give some explanation but genetics cant
Random changes in genes, also makes no sense, in terms of the formation of new species. There are more things that can go wrong than can go right, if we use a random approach to changing the genes. The majority of cellular systems, in place, that already work, if subject to random change, will get worse and not better. The entire approach defies common sense.
Detroit does not use this approach since it is nonsense.
We target where
As usually happens with people saying "Evolution is wrong!", you have not understood evolution.
Quote from: puppypower on 18/03/2020 11:11:08Random changes in genes, also makes no sense, in terms of the formation of new species. There are more things that can go wrong than can go right, if we use a random approach to changing the genes. The majority of cellular systems, in place, that already work, if subject to random change, will get worse and not better. The entire approach defies common sense.It would only have to follow "common sense" if something with common sense designed it.That's how we know there is no designer.Quote from: puppypower on 18/03/2020 11:11:08Detroit does not use this approach since it is nonsense.Car design is a classic example of evolution.https://blog.world-mysteries.com/science/127-years-of-modern-automobile-evolution/Quote from: puppypower on 18/03/2020 11:11:08 We target where Yes, we do, because we caan think.But evolution can't so it doesn't.It's absurd to compare the intentional action of people with the evolution of nature.If you don't understand that then...Quote from: Bored chemist on 15/03/2020 10:02:34As usually happens with people saying "Evolution is wrong!", you have not understood evolution.
This statistical approach to life was disproven in the late 1950's, when it was observed that protein fold with exact folds.
This statistical approach to life was disproven in the late 1950's, when it was observed that protein fold with exact folds. This repeatable observation of each folding of protein has yet to explain with a statistical explanation, 60 years later. Talk about a long term coverup and deception.
I used the example of small children mutating a new model car by randomly rearranging, taking and giving parts.
Quote from: puppypower on 19/03/2020 11:12:38 I used the example of small children mutating a new model car by randomly rearranging, taking and giving parts.This is a simplification of evolution. If evolution was only capable of rearranging existing parts (say, swapping the trachea and the esophagus) or duplicating or deleting certain parts, then mutation would be, as you say, exceedingly unlikely to create improvements.Thankfully, evolution is not limited to such large-scale changes.In order to be more accurately analogous to mutation, you should also make allowances for very minor changes, such as changing the wheel diameter by a couple of centimeters, altering the composition of structural alloys by increasing or decreasing nickel content by 3%, changing the wall thickness of pipes by a millimeter, etc. This method would be much more likely to create slight improvements in performance that would allow for selection.
Megalosaurus is believed to be the first dinosaur ever described scientifically. British fossil hunter William Buckland found some fossils in 1819, and he eventually described them and named them in 1824.
The origin of species is when human started to catalog them, not when they appeared on earth.
In the species catalog, lions and tigers are considered two species even thought they can mate and have offspring.
This will make most of the metals less functional.
If you use your minor change, such as making alloys, a random approach would also try all the available atoms on the periodic table, hoping to win the jackpot.
Larger animals, like humans, would not benefit by this approach, since random will destroy faster than it can restock.
Quote from: puppypower on 20/03/2020 10:36:31If you use your minor change, such as making alloys, a random approach would also try all the available atoms on the periodic table, hoping to win the jackpot.Except that, in the case of biology, far from all of the available atoms on the periodic table are being used. The stock is limited to the amino acids (since an amino acid sequence is ultimately the way that DNA is expressed).Quote from: puppypower on 20/03/2020 10:36:31Larger animals, like humans, would not benefit by this approach, since random will destroy faster than it can restock. That obviously depends on the mutation rate. If it was low enough, then the population could easily recover from negative mutations. Discard the failures, keep the successes.The basic principle behind natural selection of random mutation has been found workable in computer simulations. Here's the first video in a series about one such example: //www.youtube.com/watch?v=GOFws_hhZs8