What Darwin discovered

Forums: Science, Riddles, Religion, Philosophy, Math
Email this Topic • Print this Page

All Charles Darwin actually did, was to put in ink, that species, are evolving. Seems almost silly now, but back then it was a revolutionary concept. What Darwin did not do, was offer any rational explanation for where any existing species, that is evolving came from in the first place. However, since evolution is incomplete without a beginning, the warm pond was invented by whackaloons, who have now hijacked Darwin's name, and made the theory of evolution theirs to do with as they see fit.....

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Question • Score: 0 • Views: 10,203 • Replies: 144

@DNA Thumbs drive,

Since you haven't told us where you come from that would mean any theory you present is invalid under your argument.

So I guess we should just ignore you from now on since you clearly fail your own criteria.

1 Reply

@parados,

I have not discounted anything that Darwin discovered, just what the loons who came after him have attributed to his name.

Try again....

1 Reply

@DNA Thumbs drive,

Let me remind you of what you said.

Quote:

evolution is incomplete without a beginning

Clearly you are discounting Darwin and what he discovered. This is made evident by the fact that evolution doesn't require a beginning to occur. So, since you require a valid beginning, what is your source? Without a valid source you are incomplete and simply a whaakaloon.

1 Reply

@parados,

And without a beginning, which the theory of evolution does not have, is incomplete. This is obvious to all, which is why people made up warm ponds.

Sheesh

1 Reply

@DNA Thumbs drive,

And your opinion is meaningless since you have no beginning. Surely you must agree.

1 Reply

@parados,

No, not at all, since any computer programmer, can begin a new computer program at any time. This happens all the time, it happened on the Earth 3.5 billion years ago as well. Or do you believe that Microsoft Windows 8.1 could form itself in a warm pond? Windows is simple, when compared to DNA, even Gates knows this. Bill Gates said that “DNA is like a computer program but far, far more advanced than any software ever created.”

2 Replies

@DNA Thumbs drive,

From your inability to present a factual summary, I don't believe that you've ever read ANY of the "ORIGIN..." ( not even one page of one edition). Your arguments are gibberish..

1 Reply

@farmerman,

I accept evolution, my questions and passion revolves around the creation of life. Thus the origin of the species, that merely outlines now accepted ideas of evolution, is irrelevant. If you wanted to make a better light bulb today, would Edison's diaries be important, since you would be using not one technology of Edison's time? The future, is in the future, the fact is that DNA is now proven to be a hard drive, you can not learn this from a man who never even heard of DNA, or hard drives.

But if you want to live in the past, there you may stay.

2 Replies

@DNA Thumbs drive,

Wow. You just don't understand the difference between hardware and software, do you?

0 Replies

@DNA Thumbs drive,

DNA is not a hard drive. You read one article and you take it to heart and can't see past your own ignorance.

Go buy a new hard drive. I guarantee if you put it in your computer, it won't do anything.

1 Reply

@parados,

Actually I have studied this topic and find it interesting. DNA has a helixical frame that stores genetic code, and has now been adapted to store the binary code that this network uses as well. Thus the Harvard researchers have proven that DNA can be used as a hard drive storage media. This is difficult for evolutionist to rectify, as it proves that DNA is in fact a piece of hardware as you say, hardware built in the distant past, by engineers, that is being reverse engineered as we converse. http://news.sciencemag.org/math/2012/08/dna-ultimate-hard-drive

1 Reply

@DNA Thumbs drive,

Your analogy is faulty. Darwins theory was about HERITABILITY OF TRAITS that VARY INCREMENTALLY through TIME , and that was all about ability of the life forms to successfully adapt through evolution.
His theory was about many things we see today but his idea and work still is considered one of (or maybe THE) best ideas of the millennium.

Understanding genetics and its chemical mechanisms has not invalidated anything of Darwin's discovery. In fact, the only blunder he made in his "Origins..."was to posit that the heritable traits responsible for evolution were actually "diluted" by successive generations. (That was more a correction that was made by understanding the persistance of individual genes revealed from Mendelian genetics and not from genomics)

DNA is merely the "bookkeeping mechanism" of evolution. We see microevolutional changes occur in species for generations with
measurable morphological changes , all WITHOUT any DNA modifications.

PS, if your passion is about the creation of life, you've been in error to consider thi biochemistry as prt of evolution theory (Theres actually NO PLACE FOR IT).

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Quote:

His theory was abwnt mny thing qe ee today but his idea and work atill is considered onw 9or maybe THE

Can you please, entertain the theory, that binary code spell checkers exist?

Science has never shown any experiment where a species, can become another species. So it remains a theory.

PS. Look into a spell checker, it will make you look older.

4 Replies

@DNA Thumbs drive,

I already changed my mistakes in spelling so your reminder was a bit irrelevant. (Spell checks wont work because I just make new errors)

Get to the point.

1 Reply

@DNA Thumbs drive,

Quote:

Your analogy is faulty. Darwins theory was about HERITABILITY OF TRAITS that VARY INCREMENTALLY through TIME , and that was all about ability of the life forms to successfully adapt through evolution.
His theory was about many things we see today but his idea and work still is considered one of (or maybe THE) best ideas of the millennium.

Understanding genetics and its chemical mechanisms has not invalidated anything of Darwin's discovery. In fact, the only blunder he made in his "Origins..."was to posit that the heritable traits responsible for evolution were actually "diluted" by successive generations. (That was more a correction that was made by understanding the persistance of individual genes revealed from Mendelian genetics and not from genomics)

DNA is merely the "bookkeeping mechanism" of evolution. We see microevolutional changes occur in species for generations with
measurable morphological changes , all WITHOUT any DNA modifications.

PS, if your passion is about the creation of life, you've been in error to consider thi biochemistry as prt of evolution theory (Theres actually NO PLACE FOR IT).

Here, try again.

0 Replies

@DNA Thumbs drive,

Quote:

Science has never shown any experiment where a species, can become another species. So it remains a theory

well, you are just flat wrong .

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Yes you changed your many mistakes, after being told that they were there. So the quote stands as is. The point is gibberish is your finest product.

1 Reply

@DNA Thumbs drive,

We don't "believe" in evolution, its a fact that has been evidenced in lab nd in field. If you blind;y try to bullshit your way through the path of discovery then I pity you. Having a worldview GUIDE your science is poor science.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

There has never been even one small example, of one species changing into another discovered by anyone......

PS. It is customary to run the spell checker, before submitting the thesis, and not after.

1 Reply

What Darwin discovered

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know