Why do people associate evolution with where life came from

Forums: Riddles, Relativity, Physics, Math, Abiogenesis
Email this Topic • Print this Page

I mean seriously, Darwin's book, The Evolution of the Species, does not even begin to deal with the evolution of any species, yet people are convinced that it proves evolution. Get with it people, evolution while very real, can only change a species, into a very similar species. Such as the polar bear is descended from the brown bear. This does not account for how, tree branches on the tree of life could exist, where one species, is the parent of another, or more easily put, how a rat could change into a human. Yet people believe this and that DNA the most powerful thing in the known universe, and a media for storing codes of at least two types, could form in a warm pond from lifelessness. Spock would say that evolution, is illogical, what do you say.

Codes are not random, they need a coder of high intelligence.

http://iaincarstairs.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/dna-sequence-protease-comparisons.jpg

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Question • Score: 0 • Views: 5,390 • Replies: 80

No top replies

And, just out of curiosity, why don't you have the guts to state clearly where you think that life came from?

1 Reply

@DNA Thumbs drive,

Clearly DNA it's a purely natural process requiring no "supernatural" intervention since this seems to be a synonym for "impossible". Yet it's intuitionally apparent at the same time that there's some sort of "plan" since the Universe without the humanoid to appreciate it seems pointless. So I propose something beyond the usual arguments concerning Her "existence" in favor of a more generalized account acknowledging something presently beyond our understanding but which eventually proves to be compatible with either viewpoint

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

Reread the post, I merely ask the question, "Why do people associate evolution with where life came from" Then, in your mind, the question changed to a clear statement. This is just not a logical answer, and it implies both frustration and possible deception.

The assumption that DNA, which is required for all replication of life, to form spontaneously, when DNA itself has many parts is not demonstrated by any other scientific principle. DNA has many parts, from hundreds of thousands to billions of genes, and these genes are stored on a hard drive matrix, that has been proven to be a hard drive, as manmade binary code can now be stored on DNA. To say that something as complex as DNA, and DNA has far more lines of code than your computer uses to operate, formed in a warm pond, is nothing more that a leap of faith and is taken by all members of the religion of evolution, which hails Darwin as being God.

Darwin thought that the human eye was complex, yet he had no idea that every cell in the eye, had 3 billion base pairs of code, as does every cell in your body. What would he do with this knowledge?

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-oXCuPKKid0c/UqePBdSrzZI/AAAAAAAAI3Y/wKcbaB7I1FQ/s640/Charles+Darwin+was+wrong+eye+quote.jpg

1 Reply

@dalehileman,

Actually the creation of DNA is no more supernatural, then using DNA to store the binary code that your computer runs on and this post is made of, as DNA is now known to be a chemical hard drive. It then follows, that the hard drive was built to store code, which we already knew, and since both hard drives and code need a creator, the supposition that DNA spawned randomly becomes supernatural. Saying that DNA is supernatural, because you never saw the writer of the DNA is like saying that this post is supernatural, because you have no proof that I wrote it. Now think about that, have you seen me? NO. Yet you instantly know that I am real, because I can both ask and answer your questions. In that you may not like my answers, is not important to am I real. The fact is that this post of which you attribute the evidence that I am real, is at least 3 billion times simpler to a single cell in your body, yet you claim that such complexity in that cell does not imply the reality of a creator. This idea is completely contradictory and illogical in the first degree.

http://christhehumanist.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/funny-evolution10.jpg

1 Reply

@DNA Thumbs drive,

DNA Thumbs drive wrote:

Why do people associate evolution with where life came from

Typically the only people who make that mistake are religious people who are inclined to which doesn't support (or offers alternative explanations) to their personal deity of choice.

Even though the fundamental mechanisms of biological evolution cannot be the same as those of abiogenesis, the phenomenal success of evolution in explaining biology carries with it an inescapable implication: That extremely complex chemical and biological structures can and do arise purely through natural processes. And if it's true for biology, which it clearly is, then it's probably true for Abiogenesis as well. It is this realization which is emotionally frightening to anyone clinging to a deity as their only explanation of life on earth.

In my opinion it isn't evolution which many religious people object to (because they don't understand it well enough to even form a coherent objection), but it's the fundamental implication which they object to: That all of what we see in nature arises through purely natural processes and that no Creator is required.

1 Reply

@DNA Thumbs drive,

DNA Thumbs drive wrote:

Reread the post, I merely ask the question, "Why do people associate evolution with where life came from" Then, in your mind, the question changed to a clear statement. This is just not a logical answer, and it implies both frustration and possible deception.

The assumption that DNA, which is required for all replication of life, to form spontaneously, when DNA itself has many parts is not demonstrated by any other scientific principle. DNA has many parts, from hundreds of thousands to billions of genes, and these genes are stored on a hard drive matrix, that has been proven to be a hard drive, as manmade binary code can now be stored on DNA. To say that something as complex as DNA, and DNA has far more lines of code than your computer uses to operate, formed in a warm pond, is nothing more that a leap of faith and is taken by all members of the religion of evolution, which hails Darwin as being God.

Darwin thought that the human eye was complex, yet he had no idea that every cell in the eye, had 3 billion base pairs of code, as does every cell in your body. What would he do with this knowledge?

Why do you repeatedly decline to answer the question of how you think that life got started? Are you ashamed of your opinion? It's a simple question. Answer it.

0 Replies

@rosborne979,

My viewpoint however is not religious, unless you have ever heard a religion speak about DNA hard drives. Clearly my thoughts are scientific. Science will also grant humanities wish to leave this planet and look for other places, if and when we do this, and say for argument engineer creates or finds in nature a photosynthetic organism to bring to another planet or moon, then if you want to include religion, we as a race have become God, as we have introduced life to a new place that never had it. This is born of science not religion, now that we see that DNA can store the binary code that was invented by humanity, the DNA code that DNA always stored looks a little clearer, as DNA is now a hard drive.

Hard drives do not form in ponds, code does not form in ponds, if code is needed to grow a hard drive, which is what DNA does, intelligence is implied, and in fact scientifically it is required, as there is no science that supports random formation of either codes or code storage units needed to allow the code to be used. So yes I believe in a creator, but my creator is created by scientific rules, and not by any religious beliefs.

2 Replies

@DNA Thumbs drive,

go into the future on the ribbon of time for a moment, and see that humanity will leave the Earth, and this can not be possible unless it brings with it food and the entire ecosystem for food to form. Thus when we introduce even a simple photosynthetic algae to another place, say Mars or a moon of some other planet, then we have brought life to that place, and created the opportunity for evolution on another new World. Why do you not see that this is what we will do one day, soon or distant it does not matter, this will happen, and when it does, we have brought life and evolution to a new place. The day that you can say that this did not happen here, in the past will never come, because the future determines it's scientific logic.

Thus, while we do not know where life came from, we do know that we can not stay here and continue to exist as our planet and Sun are finite, and we do know that life will thus be leaving, to evolve in another place. Now this is interesting, because it makes the Earth not important, as it is just another place in an infinite universe, and because it gives humanity the power to populate a new World with life.

So get your ass out of the past, and start designing a new motor to get us all out of here, because the universe beckons with wonder.

0 Replies

@DNA Thumbs drive,

DNA Thumbs drive wrote:

So yes I believe in a creator, but my creator is created by scientific rules, and not by any religious beliefs.

Please specify. How did your creator come about?

1 Reply

@rosborne979,

If you go into the future where we take life elsewhere, then we are the creator. So your question should then read, where did we come from.

I can throw the question right back, asking you to explain how a hard drive forms from nothing, assuming that you understand that the hard drive contains the code, that is needed to assemble the hard drive in the first place. This is what DNA is and does.

So can you explain this? No you can not, the theory that you will bring forth, is a creation of the human mind, and is not backed by science, it is called spontaneous abiogenesis, which Louis Pasteur scientifically disproved long ago.

So please stick to science, and do not quote the religion of evolution.

2 Replies

@DNA Thumbs drive,

Please state clearly how you think that life got started.

1 Reply

@DNA Thumbs drive,

DNA Thumbs drive wrote:

I can throw the question right back, asking you to explain how a hard drive forms from nothing, assuming that you understand that the hard drive contains the code, that is needed to assemble the hard drive in the first place. This is what DNA is and does.

That is not what DNA is or does. This has been explained to you before. You are not listening.

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

Unlike you, who clearly has that answer, as it is defined by the religion of evolution, where the God is Darwin. I can scientifically state that I do not have that answer, but laugh hysterically at the nerds who claim that they do, and who pray to Darwin, and have his book on their desk as it is their bible.

What I have put forth is the argument, that science and rational logic, forbids the abiogenesis of hard drives, that contain code, that is needed to form the hard drive in the first place.

So I throw your question back at you, and can you please state clearly how you think that life got started. Noting that I would never ask such a question on my own, as I know that your answer can only contain speculative gibberish, as you were not there, and do not know anyone who was.

1 Reply

@rosborne979,

DNA is both a hard drive (Harvard engineers have proved this) and holds the code of life on this hard drive, both the drive and it's code are needed for the replication and or growth of life. Any info to the contrary is not supported by science.

2 Replies

@DNA Thumbs drive,

I am now taking my dog for a bike and run, as this is good for the pump, that powers our biological machines. I encourage you to do the same.

0 Replies

@DNA Thumbs drive,

DNA Thumbs drive wrote:

Unlike you, who clearly has that answer, as it is defined by the religion of evolution, where the God is Darwin. I can scientifically state that I do not have that answer, but laugh hysterically at the nerds who claim that they do, and who pray to Darwin, and have his book on their desk as it is their bible.

What I have put forth is the argument, that science and rational logic, forbids the abiogenesis of hard drives, that contain code, that is needed to form the hard drive in the first place.

So I throw your question back at you, and can you please state clearly how you think that life got started. Noting that I would never ask such a question on my own, as I know that your answer can only contain speculative gibberish, as you were not there, and do not know anyone who was.

I've stated my belief about this to you repeatedly and in detail in another thread. Just go read it. I think that you're being disingenuous and that you do have an opinion, but simply decline to state it. You keep mentioning a creator. What do you mean by that? What kind of creator?

1 Reply

@DNA Thumbs drive,

DNA Thumbs drive wrote:

DNA is both a hard drive (Harvard engineers have proved this) and holds the code of life on this hard drive, both the drive and it's code are needed for the replication and or growth of life. Any info to the contrary is not supported by science.

You don't know what you are talking about.

1 Reply

@DNA Thumbs drive,

Quote:

...yet you claim that such complexity in that cell does not imply the reality of a creator. This idea is completely contradictory and illogical in the first degree.

Yes, no, DNA, thanks, I hear you. The point that such incredible complexity seems tailored specifically to permit evolution of the humanoid is very compelling

But I'm merely speculating while She (It) is something we don't quite yet understand, that She's a perfectly natural phenom; perhaps the Universe is Her body while all the frantic activity therein is Her thinking. Whether or not She is or was in the process of creation depends upon how one defines the term

….and whether or not to attach to Her, It, the moniker "God" is purely up to the individual

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

The person who states, where life came from on our planet, is irrational, as no human knows. Thus the people claiming that they know are irrational, however, since our science forbids hard drives, and chemical computer code form spontaneously generating, these things having been created is a far more likely, and also far more scientific explanation.

1 Reply

Why do people associate evolution with where life came from

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know