Jump to content

christian forums

Worthy Christian Forums - Christian Forums

Welcome to Worthy Christian Forums
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Science Disproves Evolution


  • Please log in to reply
327 replies to this topic

#321
gray wolf

gray wolf

    Senior Member

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,154 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Indianapolis
  • Interests:Theology, science, philosophy, classical music and German folk music.
No I would say the notion comes after observation.
  • 1

#322
enoob57

enoob57

    Royal Member

  • Soapbox - Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,662 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Grove, Oklahoma
  • Interests:**Study God's Word to know God...
    **To know Christ in service to others!
    **Multi skilled in building industry for use in that service.
    **Computer skills: graphic art, cad design
    **Bible College 3.5 years

Jerry
I would say it would be very difficult, for me at least, to do science without the conviction of an Ultimate Reality. Whether that means a personal God, or some deistic creator is a matter of faith and other knowledge outside of science..

Doesn't that kind of preconceived notion defeat science?  What if someone were raised with no deity,  what would that do to their science in your opinion (and thanks for your opinion)?

It is really easy! Does your verification of things become necessary for them to be?
Doesn't life speak of causal realities and then for itself as life the cause? Love, Steven
  • 2

#323
Pahu

Pahu

    Advanced Member

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 334 posts

Ape-Men? 5

 

Another study, which examined their inner ear bones, used to maintain balance, showed a striking similarity to those of chimpanzees and gorillas, but great differences from those of humans (n). Also, their pattern of dental development corresponds to chimpanzees, not humans (o). Claims were made—based on one partially complete australopithecine fossil, Australopithecus afarensis, (a 3.5-foot-tall, long-armed, 60-pound adult called Lucy)—that all australopithecines walked upright in a human manner. However, studies of Lucy’s entire anatomy, not just a knee joint, now show that this is very unlikely. She likely swung from the trees (p) and was similar to pygmy chimpanzees (q). In 2006, a partial Australopithecus afarensis specimen—a 3-year-old baby—with clear apelike features—was announced ®. The australopithecines are probably extinct apes (s).

 

n. “Among the fossil hominids, the australopithecines show great-ape-like proportions [based on CAT scans of their inner ears] and H. erectus shows modern-human-like proportions.” Fred Spoor et al., “Implications of Early Hominid Labyrinthine Morphology for Evolution of Human Bipedal Locomotion,” Nature, Vol. 369, 23 June 1994, p. 646. [Many H. erectus bones are probably those of H. sapiens.]

 

o. “The closest parallel today to the pattern of dental development of [australopithecines] is not in people but in chimpanzees.”  Bruce Bower, “Evolution’s Youth Movement,” Science News, Vol. 159, 2 June 2001, p. 347.

 

p. William L. Jungers, “Lucy’s Limbs: Skeletal Allometry and Locomotion in Australopithecus Afarensis,” Nature, Vol. 297, 24 June 1982, pp. 676–678.

 

Jeremy Cherfas, “Trees Have Made Man Upright,” New Scientist, Vol. 93, 20 January 1983, pp. 172–178.

 

Jack T. Stern Jr. and Randall L. Susman, “The Locomotor Anatomy of Australopithecus Afarensis,” American Journal of Physical Anthropology, Vol. 60, March 1983, pp. 279–317.

 

q. Adrienne Zihlman, “Pigmy Chimps, People, and the Pundits,” New Scientist, Vol. 104, 15 November 1984, pp. 39–40.

 

r. Zeresenay Alemseged et al., “A Juvenile Early Hominin Skeleton from Dikika, Ethiopia,” Nature, Vol. 443, 21 September 2006, pp. 296–301.

 

s. “At present we have no grounds for thinking that there was anything distinctively human about australopithecine ecology and behavior. ... [T]hey were surprisingly apelike in skull form, premolar dentition, limb proportions, and morphology of some joint surfaces, and they may still have been spending a significant amount of time in the trees.”  Matt Cartmill et al., “One Hundred Years of Paleoanthropology,” American Scientist, Vol. 74, July–August 1986, p. 417.

 

“The proportions calculated for africanus turned out to be amazingly close to those of a chimpanzee, with big arms and small legs. ... ‘One might say we are kicking Lucy out of the family tree,’ says Berger.”  James Shreeve, “New Skeleton Gives Path from Trees to Ground an Odd Turn,” Science, Vol. 272, 3 May 1996, p. 654.

 

“There is indeed, no question which the Australopithecine skull resembles when placed side by side with specimens of human and living ape skulls. It is the ape—so much so that only detailed and close scrutiny can reveal any differences between them.” Solly Zuckerman, “Correlation of Change in the Evolution of Higher Primates,” Evolution as a Process, editors Julian Huxley, A. C. Hardy, and E. B. Ford (London: George Allen and Unwin Ltd., 1954), p. 307.

 

“We can safely conclude from the fossil hominoid material now available that in the history of the globe there have been many more species of great ape than just the three which exist today.”  Ibid., pp. 348–349.

 


  • 1

#324
Pahu

Pahu

    Advanced Member

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 334 posts

Ape-Men? 6

 

For about 100 years the world was led to believe that Neanderthal man was stooped and apelike. This false idea was based upon some Neanderthals with bone diseases such as arthritis and rickets (t). Recent dental and x-ray studies of Neanderthals suggest that they were humans who matured at a slower rate and lived to be much older than people today (u). Neanderthal man, Heidelberg man, and Cro-Magnon man are now considered completely human. Artists’ drawings of “ape-men,” especially their fleshy portions, are often quite imaginative and are not supported by the evidence (v).

 

Furthermore, the techniques used to date these fossils are highly questionable. [See pages 3743]

 

t. Francis Ivanhoe, “Was Virchow Right About Neanderthal?” Nature, Vol. 227, 8 August 1970, pp. 577–578.

 

William L. Straus Jr. and A. J. E. Cave, “Pathology and the Posture of Neanderthal Man,” The Quarterly Review of Biology, Vol. 32, December, 1957, pp. 348–363.

 

Bruce M. Rothschild and Pierre L. Thillaud, “Oldest Bone Disease,” Nature, Vol. 349, 24 January 1991, p. 288.

 

u. Jack Cuozzo, Buried Alive: The Startling Truth about Neanderthal Man (Green Forest, Arkansas: Master Books, 1998).

 

Jack Cuozzo, “Early Orthodontic Intervention: A View from Prehistory,” The Journal of the New Jersey Dental Association, Vol. 58, No. 4, Autumn 1987, pp. 33–40.

 

v. Boyce Rensberger, “Facing the Past,” Science 81, October 1981, p. 49.

 


  • 1

#325
jerryR34

jerryR34

    Advanced Member

  • Nonbeliever
  • PipPipPip
  • 391 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oregon, USA

 

Ape-Men? 6

 

For about 100 years the world was led to believe that Neanderthal man was stooped and apelike. This false idea was based upon some Neanderthals with bone diseases such as arthritis and rickets (t). Recent dental and x-ray studies of Neanderthals suggest that they were humans who matured at a slower rate and lived to be much older than people today (u). Neanderthal man, Heidelberg man, and Cro-Magnon man are now considered completely human. Artists’ drawings of “ape-men,” especially their fleshy portions, are often quite imaginative and are not supported by the evidence (v).

 

Furthermore, the techniques used to date these fossils are highly questionable. [See pages 3743]

 

t. Francis Ivanhoe, “Was Virchow Right About Neanderthal?” Nature, Vol. 227, 8 August 1970, pp. 577–578.

 

William L. Straus Jr. and A. J. E. Cave, “Pathology and the Posture of Neanderthal Man,” The Quarterly Review of Biology, Vol. 32, December, 1957, pp. 348–363.

 

Bruce M. Rothschild and Pierre L. Thillaud, “Oldest Bone Disease,” Nature, Vol. 349, 24 January 1991, p. 288.

 

u. Jack Cuozzo, Buried Alive: The Startling Truth about Neanderthal Man (Green Forest, Arkansas: Master Books, 1998).

 

Jack Cuozzo, “Early Orthodontic Intervention: A View from Prehistory,” The Journal of the New Jersey Dental Association, Vol. 58, No. 4, Autumn 1987, pp. 33–40.

 

v. Boyce Rensberger, “Facing the Past,” Science 81, October 1981, p. 49.

 

 

Did you happen to notice how science corrected itself...that's the beauty of it.  Evolutionary theory has been refined and reinforced over the last 150+ years - each new biology field - genetics, bio-chemistry, DNA analysis etc. - all support Darwin's brilliant theory.


  • 1

#326
Enoch2021

Enoch2021

    Senior Member

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,368 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Missouri
  • Interests:The Word of GOD!
    Microbiology/Biochemistry
    /Physics/Genetics
    Young Earth Creationist

Did you happen to notice how science corrected itself...that's the beauty of it.  Evolutionary theory has been refined and reinforced over the last 150+ years - each new biology field - genetics, bio-chemistry, DNA analysis etc. - all support Darwin's brilliant theory.

 

 

===============================================================================================

 

Did you happen to notice how science corrected itself.

 

Science did no such thing, it can't correct itself it has no Sentience or Intelligence...it's a Logical Fallacy (Reification)

 

Evolutionary theory has been refined and reinforced over the last 150+ years

 

It was Summarily Falsified in 1972 with Punctuated Equilibrium (Ad Hoc Hypothesis).

 

Your refined and reinforced are all Ad Hoc Hypothesis.....

 

Ad Hoc Hypothesis or "after-the-fact" Hypothesis: is a hypothesis added to a theory in order to save it from being falsified. They are characteristic of PSEUDO-scientific objects.

http://en.wikipedia...._hoc_hypothesis

 

 

each new biology field - genetics, bio-chemistry, DNA analysis etc. - all support Darwin's brilliant theory.

 

False and Baseless Unsupported Conjecture

 

Each of those Fields have Laughed Out Loud @ it and are continuing currently in Belly Mode Posture


  • 1

#327
jerryR34

jerryR34

    Advanced Member

  • Nonbeliever
  • PipPipPip
  • 391 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oregon, USA

 

Did you happen to notice how science corrected itself...that's the beauty of it.  Evolutionary theory has been refined and reinforced over the last 150+ years - each new biology field - genetics, bio-chemistry, DNA analysis etc. - all support Darwin's brilliant theory.

 

 

===============================================================================================

 

Did you happen to notice how science corrected itself.

 

Science did no such thing, it can't correct itself it has no Sentience or Intelligence...it's a Logical Fallacy (Reification)

 

Evolutionary theory has been refined and reinforced over the last 150+ years

 

It was Summarily Falsified in 1972 with Punctuated Equilibrium (Ad Hoc Hypothesis).

 

Your refined and reinforced are all Ad Hoc Hypothesis.....

 

Ad Hoc Hypothesis or "after-the-fact" Hypothesis: is a hypothesis added to a theory in order to save it from being falsified. They are characteristic of PSEUDO-scientific objects.

http://en.wikipedia...._hoc_hypothesis

 

 

each new biology field - genetics, bio-chemistry, DNA analysis etc. - all support Darwin's brilliant theory.

 

False and Baseless Unsupported Conjecture

 

Each of those Fields have Laughed Out Loud @ it and are continuing currently in Belly Mode Posture

You, or anyone, has yet to show punctuated equilibrium refutes evolution.  One would expect puntuated equilibrium in large populations.  Genetics, DNA, microbiology etc have mountains of data to back up evolution - making the fossil record the icing on the cake.


  • 1

#328
Enoch2021

Enoch2021

    Senior Member

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,368 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Missouri
  • Interests:The Word of GOD!
    Microbiology/Biochemistry
    /Physics/Genetics
    Young Earth Creationist

 

You, or anyone, has yet to show punctuated equilibrium refutes evolution.  One would expect puntuated equilibrium in large populations.  Genetics, DNA, microbiology etc have mountains of data to back up evolution - making the fossil record the icing on the cake.

 

 

 

===============================================================

 

 

You, or anyone, has yet to show punctuated equilibrium refutes evolution.

 

I've showed you @ least 5 Times...and it's by definition and detailed.  Go back and search, I'm not posting it again

 

 

One would expect puntuated equilibrium in large populations.

 

Darwin or his theory didn't and stated the exact opposite.  And again.......

 

"Darwin's prediction of rampant, albeit gradual, change affecting all lineages through time is refuted. The record is there, and the record speaks for tremendous anatomical conservatism. Change in the manner Darwin expected is just not found in the fossil record."
(Dr. Niles Eldridge, Curator of Invertebrate Paleontology at the American Museum of natural History) The Myths of Human Evolution  (1982)  p.45-46

 

I have about 20 more that You've seen before.
 

 

Genetics, DNA, microbiology etc have mountains of data to back up evolution

 

As I said False Generalized Unsupported Conjecture

 

 

mountains of data to back up evolution

 

Oh it's mountains alright

 

 

making the fossil record the icing on the cake.

 

Pray Tell?  How do dead things prove evolution?? I thought it just proved Dead Things that happened ----all of a Sudden Like.

 

Go ahead a provide your Scientific Evidence that "Evolution did it" with Fossils.


  • 1




0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Worthy Christian Forums - Christian Message Boards - 1999-2014 part of the Worthy Network