.
.
S i t e  S e a r c h

A_B_C_D_E_F_G_H_I_J_K_L_M_N_O_P_Q_R_S_T_U_V_W_XYZ

List of Topics__Ask Suby__Free Stuff__Questions Lists
Terms of Use__________________Privacy Policy

C r e a t i o n  I n d e x

C r e a t i o n  P a g e  1 0

Behavorial scientists.(evolutionary 'scientists').often do it; that is, they move from true science that may threaten their postulations, to conjecture and philosophical randomness, settling upon what they feel is an axiomatic.(self evident).exclusion of design as the only possibility.(necessary of course, in order to replace foundational creation precepts with evolutionary concepts), thus placing themselves into the preposterous.realm of circular reasoning.

Neo-Darwinism is based on the accrual of mutations. Evolutionary theory is driven by natural selection due to environmental pressures, the process eliminating the least stable structures, those less adapted to a given environment.

Darwin:."Natural selection will never produce in a being any structure more injurious than beneficial to that being, for natural selection acts solely by and for the good of each.(*). As natural selection works solely for the good of each being, all corporeal and mental endowments will tend to progress toward perfection." Surprisingly in this, he was correct.if.he meant genes, but he.probably.knew nothing of them back then, as the science of genetics didn't come on stream till 1900, thanks to the work of the Austrian monk Gregor Mendel in 1866, whose work was widely ignored until 1900. And he was 'out to lunch' regarding his phrase 'progress toward perfection', because the supposed natural selection tenet of his theory had favor to mutations. Why this was no good.

However, because of the basic.tenets of the evolutionary theory, an increasing number of scientists.(what some of them had to say).believe, in reality, it fails to qualify as a theory. If all the violence, hate, sickness and disease are what billions of years of evolution have brought us, it must then be the world's biggest failure. Those who espouse it in continued hope, in the light of evidence to the contrary, show evidence of serious psychological.maladjustment. Evolution can now be seen to be nothing more than a fantasy filled fabrication of illogical.fallacy. Once thoroughly examined it can be seen evolution has reached an epistemological barrier.

Evolution is silent on what it is that formats.an organism's blueprint. Evolution fails to account for how the living material of a developing life form knows both how and what to unfold. Evolution fails to account for how organisms regulate and control their growth systems. Evolution fails to account for the harmony that is in various organisms and fails to explain why should there be any harmony at all. Evolution also miserably fails to account for the mathematical precision organisms exhibit. It also fails to account for the spirit in man without which evolutionists couldn't even reason with the error prone information they possess. 

Evolution also fails to account for the complex biological processes spurred by the cell. Evolution fails to account for the ability of a cell to communicate what goes where. Where does the heart go in a developing embryo, the brain, the ears, the eyes, the hands, the legs, etc.? How much and what type of nutrition is necessary for each component as growth progresses? How is it apportioned? Evolution fails to account for properties of matter that do what they do where it is that they are doing it. Though evolution talks of phenotypes, it here fails too, in an accounting for them. Modern day evolution fails to account for how genes.are turned off and on. Evolution fails to account for the dynamics of an ecosystem. Evolution even fails criteria.to be accounted worth being classified as a theory.

Though natural selection is an essential part of Darwinian theory, this mysterious, allegedly in action natural selection energy, is believed by evolutionists to be the ultimate source of genetic variation.(talk about their faith, eh!)

One problem with the adaption by modification.(asserted by evolutionists to be due to natural selection acting upon random mutation).part of the theory, is that the majority of mutations.(999 out of every 1000).are harmful; for example, Down's Syndrome, etc. Yet are we expected to accept de facto, that the myriad.mutations necessary to produce the complex healthy, well adapted structures we see everywhere evident in life, were mostly helpful towards this end? Fact is, mutations aren't heritable beyond one generation. Somehow they missed this, however the smarter ones simply adapted this to be, new mutations occurring in future generations and assumed this would be an important mechanism for improving a species adaption to environments.prevalent at future times. But again they missed something.

A non complex life form is an impossibility as one of the requirements of life is that it needs to have the ability to reproduce. A simple self-reproducing organism, Mycoplasma genitalium.(a parasitic bacterium).is comprised of 482 genes with 580,000 'letters' or base pairs. But even this little creature is not sustainable on its own. It parasitizes complex organisms to survive. 

Did Darwin ascribe to some other science of logic than we today are aware of? The adaption concept is recognized as a fallacy

Evolutionists today know a lot, except why a hen's egg doesn't turn into a crocodile! Darwin knew little regarding mutations. What good is it to have a lot of knowledge about that which is useless and erroneous? It's just a waste of energy.

"Despite the phrase 'Origin of Species', Darwin said nothing about why members of different species are usually mutually infertile.(can't reproduce between species), like the mule."....Scientific American, December, 1999, page 66.

Evolutionists know little of complexity in nature as they focus upon such simple fables as natural selection. Let's give some complexity for minds too long assuming the random occurrence of order.(repetitive, low information).in nature, such as crystals and snowflakes, provides insight into the generation of complexity.(non repetitive, high information)

One objection to evolution is that it's too slow for this age, or, to put it another way; The Infinite One's cooperative design is just too fast, too integrated, too adaptable, too efficient and too complex for the hackneyed.banality evolution nauseatingly cranks out in meagre attempts to compensate questions regarding origins with conjecture.

Either evolution happened slowly, with each tiny change building on the last over 'jillions' of years or the changes came as quick leaps.(and even faster with the new crackpot adaptations to the theory), something like a mouse coming out of a snake's egg.
   


.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
*