Is the theory of evolution true?

This so called recapitulation theory, according to which the embryo of man is climbing up its own pedigree, is utter nonsense. An eminent doctor, who is completely familiar with embryology, has announced that a "six week old embryo resembles a beautiful little baby." And as the different stages of the embryo have become more known, many darwinists have stopped defending the folly. Some of them, who still cling to the theory, jump over most of the intermediate stages and believe that only the fish stage, tail stage and hair stage are relevant.

... The "arcs", which they so gladly speak of as "gill arcs", are simply the grooves or arcs from which the ear cavity, chin and neck are formed. (Thoralf Gulbrandsen: Puuttuva rengas [Jakten på apemennesket], p. 72,73)

However, it is not difficult to find a group of organs that appear with almost all the highly created. The brain, the nervous system, the heart and circulation, stomach and digestion system, ears, eyes, feet, head - and a whole bunch of other useful things - are mainly a kind of common property. But what kind of deductions do the supporters of evolution use to make this fact "proof" of the doctrine, according to which we all originate from a being that had none of these organs? This small unicellular animal, from which all is supposed to have got its beginning, lacked all these limbs and organs!

... According to these absurd theories the head of a cod and the head of Einstein have the same origin, one of them is only a little more "developed." But we have to reject everything termed as a head in order for us to believe such nonsense!

Please, don't demand of us to regard everything that have heads - or which have a certain amount of bones on their paws or their flippers - as our cousins. (Thoralf Gulbrandsen: Puuttuva rengas, [Jakten på apemennesket] p. 64)

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Yes, the theory of the development of an embryo mirroring evolution is probably false. The theory of evolution is not dependent upon this notion.

Animals that share the same basic organ design as we do all descended from a common ancestor. A cod and a human are both tetrapods.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Of course he has to ignore your post, it contains facts which challenge his viewpoint, and he can't let that happen.

 

Bible says that animals and man has formed from the earth and same Creator has created them all .....certain kind of similarities arise for this ......


Animals and men common "ancestor" is God ......

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

The bible is a work of fiction, and god was made in Man's image.

You are still ignoring JameR's points about the eye I notice. This is because you have been defeated, but don't have the grace to admit it.

 

He has not present anything, which can cancel the truth, which is in God and His word ........

Seeing eyes and hearing ears is impossible born without Creator ... and think about human body and its function, it is so clever creation, that it is impossible born without creator .........

 

Well, I don't know about anyone else, but I find this argument irresistibly persuasive.

PetriFB pwns you all, you Godless scum.

 

Yes, I also side with PetriFB. He has repeated his argument so many times it must be right.

PetriFB: Quantity uber alles

 

PetriFb, you are a blinkered Fundie. Go away.

 

This is called an argument from incredulity. To phrase it more simply, you are saying that because you don't understand evolutionary biology, that it must be wrong. I say that the cleverness was the result of an accumulation of small innovations, each leading to greater success on the part of the organism where it originated.

If an intelligence is required to make something clever, and God is clever, what intelligence made God?

I would like to bring up an interesting point, which is that Judeo-Christianity was the original promoter of evolution. Their view of the universe is evolutionary, beginning incrementally with the creation, leading to mankind in Eden, leading to some fits and starts involving floods and wars, leading to civilization, eventually leading to some end point when the righteous are reunited with God in the "end times". This does not describe a steady state.

Now, why do we look so much like apes?

 

Thanks about feedback. My habit is stay and discuss .. Next things will lead my leaving from here:

If you ban me or limit my rights to post as I believe .......... If those not happen I will stay here ......

 

You can have ape ancestor, lol, but I don't have .......


Fable tells about the hare, which found big cabbage. When hare started to eat it, under the cabbage heard sound of the tortoise: "Cabbage belongs to me". In order to get cabbage for itself, hare proposed competition. It, which runs faster to field end and back, win the cabbage. Nimble-footed hare surprised, when slow tortoise agreed running race. Tortoise required however, that competition must be following morning. Hare agreed to this. In the morning observant magpie gave competitors starting signal, hare scampered to run. Surprise was large when on the end of field hare saw that tortoise was already there. "Improve your speed, if your intention is win": said tortoise. And so hare ran its best possible speed back, but when hare came to goal tortoise was already there. Hare was confused and he gave up the cabbage to tortoise and left as bitter from its loss on his way. In the evening tortoise couple enjoyed cabbage meal and laughed their cunning an it, how easily can cheat those, who look only at exterior. In both end of field had been different tortoise.

Is similar likeness kinship?

Evolution teaches very same way as the fable, that similar likeness is proof from the common origin kinship of kinds. In the fable tortoise was of course similar kind, but they faked there, that there was two tortoises, although there was only one. According to this belief kinds, which remind from their external appearance each others, are in development line their close relatives in other words they have developed from the same pre- form. On the basis of this idea German, enthusiastic supporter of Darwin, Ernst Haeckel planned a pedigree to people, which root was plasm and its highest branch was the man. Was lived year 1866. Haeckel was few year previously copied fetus pictures from known researchers (made byBischoff1845 and Ecker1851-59) and faked them thus, that he got form of fetus to agree to his idea of evolution. These faked fetus designs live still in current textbooks even though Haeckel was forced to go court and was condemned from his fakes . Haeckel drew his first pedigree merely on the basis of t imagination. There apes and gorillas, which on behalf of their external appearance look like people; those apes and gorilals were in drawing with nearby branches. Haeckel developed in his imagination life plasm "Monera", which was on the root of pedigree as initiator of the life. Enthusiastic englishman and Darwinist Thomas Huxley also found by accident from base of the sea this life plasm, which for name came Bathybius haeckelii. As a matter of fact this material was only mixture of plaster and alcohol, but at that time plasm cheating support suitably progressing of Darwin's evolution theory. Because weakness of Haeckel's first evolution tree could easily indicate, he planned new Monera-plasm growing organisms pedigree in year 1874. This drawing spread with the help of different medias both to science books and to textbooks. But to people does not tell, that information of those books are based on to imagination and that all proofs about developing of the man from lower kind is missing.


Idea of pedigree was stated so good to spreading work of evolution, that all possible animals were drawn their own pedigree. Also to schoolbooks were taken picture eg. from pedigrees of horses, whales, birds and the man. To support those drawings were compiled age charts of earth’s surface layers, in which age of the life by the degrees was got about 3.5 billion year. Layers was put fossils, which support different branches and age calculations in the pedigrees. These fossils were little by little call for leading fossils, with whose help were accompanied define age of stratums for suitable to evolution theory.

In year 1927 belgian G Lamaitre idea from initial explosion got among evolution supporters enthusiastic acceptance. According to this idea all material got its beginning from the smaller energy point than pin, every by accident exploded and spread all around forming nowadays known macrocosm with its galaxies. Our own the milky way was there atom in the smaller packet. Initial explosion placed the life plasm of Monera to development tree ideas and to current textbooks. Like this tree, which described from all developing got form of fan, in which initial point describes Big-Bang-explosion and in the end are species of animals which have clarified to this day.

1950's upset science world. Inside cell living (DNA) being building program structure clarified Francis Crick and Fred Hoyle. Started examining of cells and protein kinship. Was concluded, that in accordance with evolution gradually development line can be found also from birth history of living cells structures. In very large headlines were publish research results, in which so said. cell clock and changes which affected to structures of protein, support the evolution theory lines .


Truth as accidentally to the publicity

Darwin himself believed, that from ground settling we will come to find proofs that animal and plant kinds have developed from lower form to higher forms. Default demanded absolutely, that in fossil material is abound required intermediate forms from kinds, which move from kind to another kind. Darwin informed, that if this intermediate form does not be found, is his evolution theory declare for incorrect. Even though to science institutions were been able to put strong belief to competence of evolution, during over 100 years carried out searches didn't brought wished results. Researchers was forced to reveal, that in layers, in which should appear only elementary life, can be found al nowadays known species of animals and not at all intermediate forms. New Scientist-magazine wrote in year 1985 : " ...Most fossils appear quickly to layers, remain there as unchangeable some million year and disappear after that in the same way". Known evolution biologist Stephen J. Gould bring into view "Cambrise explosion". On this he describes life from under stratum found, ready species of animals. All kinds as vigorous and current richer. Under this life abuzz layer don’t found any proofs about the life, and above of it being layers amount of the kinds has reduced. Has born tree of development, which roots stick up and diverse set of living organisms is lowest.

When known development line researcher Richard Leakey was demanded in Walter Universe-program of Cronkite information from development line of the man, he was forced to admit: "If he would make development tree of the man, he would do only question-mark. " Dr.W.R informed as result of research, that common background of the man and ape is only imagination.

Evidence of cells

Evidences of cells and protein evolution fall down. Has resolved, that as proof used comparison charts was got from computers, which were thus programmed, that they formed from given differences suitable results from the point of view of evolution. When to computer was given basic data without command: "Form development tree", connections no more found. Known researcher and medicine doctor Michael Denton expose in his book these bluffs and that we can't find evolution supporting evidences of different molecules comparison. Results prove it, that each organism group is their own entirety and those can't classify to any development order on the basis of structure molecules.


In textbook of physics "Vuorovaikutus/WSOY-1996", is said that birth of macrocosm begins from initial explosion and comes to an end to the man; and that this information is based on to scientific truth. Account of textbook from developing of all beginning exceeds in its imagination many children storybooks. How many teacher dare to tell to his students, that this account is based on only to imagination and strong belief, that all however developed.


American chemist F. Doolittle presented as result of 4 DNA-research, that on the basis of cells building materials made development tree does not remind tree, but cruller.

Progressing of research researchers have reached to destination also from internal structures of cells and their operating principle. At the end of 1990’s internationally known cell researcher Michael J. Behe proved in his book, that complicated structure of cell and that it reminds large industrial establishment and activity of energy reclaiming- and operating system and different materials transport systems, haven't been able to born haphazardly and by the degrees. Forming of different cells and their produced effect- and structure materials are clear proofs that behind of that all must be extremely high intelligence.

By the degrees also different parts to the world teaching school official of evolution and to parents of children has been exposed, that so said. scientific evidences from the competence of evolution are missing. Development trees are like fairytales from pea stem, which reached to the sky. During last years in different states of USA has held quick-tempered conversations supporters of evolution have could only argue against, that people must trust to them even though proofs from macroevolution is not exist (developing of kind for another kind). There, why for supporting of evolution is continually sought safety about half truths, covering the truth and serious deceptions, they don't wanna answer in publicity. This is still clearer, that almost of 150-year time evolution theory has proved only stories, which based to imagination. As starting-point has been powerful belief, that evolution theory is true and we can’t examine its absurdity. As task of researchers has been only inventing various background accounts about that, how development has possibly taken place. Like this was born story collections, which win in their imagination fairytales of children and which serious faces scientists invent and tell to one another.



References:
1) New Scientist, 108 / 5.12.1985,
2) The Bone Peddlers / William R. Fix,
3 Evolution, A Theory in Crisis / Michael Denton
4) Scientific 2 of American / 2000,
5) darwin Black Box / Michael J. Behe

 

The frailties of early scientists do not discredit the value of current scientific thought on evolution.

No, it doesn't. Similar likeness is a compelling reason to search for the reason. It might be that two different species evolved to resemble each other with no actual kinship involved. Proving kinship 100% from a fossil is impossible, although by studying bone structure we may deduce probabilities of kinship.

We can study the kinship between apes and man, because we can look at the DNA. We share so much DNA, that it is certain we both evolved from a common ancestor. The reason people don't want to admit ape ancestry is precisely that they resemble us so much, that they recall images of an unshaven, uncivilized, probably homeless, ignorant, and low-class human being.

The big-bang theory has little to do with biological evolution, although it is interesting that both systems seem to preserve complexity and promote novelty.

If you are really interested in evolution, Petri, I would suggest reading from less biased sources. The science is really compelling.

 

So your really don't believe that dinosaurs existed, and that people were created exactly as we are now?

 

Well, that would be a real shame, wouldn't it guys?

 

He probably believes that dinosaurs were animals wiped out in Noah's flood, although there is a progression in fossil layers which would not occur if they are simply an accumulation of debris.

The question of transitional forms has to do with how and when animals get fossilized. By the time fossils of a species become common, the species has already had many tens of thousands of years of success, maybe millions. Any animals that existed in that form for a short time would not make fossils that people could easily find. It is unlikely in general for any creature to form a fossil. The fossil record is inherently lacking.

 

I don't wanna insult anybody, but believing to evolution theory is like talk nonsense.

God has created animals and men from the dust of the earth and He has planned animals and men DNA and so on ...... in that way we have common "ancestor" with animals ........

But anybody who believe that apes are his cousins can believe so ... You can also visit zoo to visit your cousins.....

But I don't believe

Apposing opinions of evolution theory are looked have strengthened in the district of the science makers after the year 1961, when John C. Whitcomb and Henry M. Morris published their book concerning the flood "The Genesis Flood". Still more scientists and researchers have verified, that evolution theory can hold as the religious philosophical in the light of the current information, whereby is not anything to do with the science. Any scientific examination has not got to succeed, in which had even partly prove this claim about evolution theory!

 

Fossils in the ground are a powerful evidence of the Flood. The origin of these fossils is in the mud and sludge avalanches burying these animals and plants very quickly. If this hadn't taken place so quickly, the fossils couldn't have been formed, because otherwise the decomposing bacteria and scavengers would have destroyed them in a short time. It is noteworthy that nowadays there are no fossils. The well-known explorer Nordenskjöld noticed that it is easier to find old remains of gigantic lizards in Spitzbergen than those of recently buried seals, even though there are millions of seals in that area.

Therefore, it is quite a problem to explain how large animals such as mammoths, dinosaurs, rhinoceroses, hippopotamuses, horses and other large animals could have been buried under mud and the layers of the earth if one doesn't believe in the Flood. For example, five million mammoths are supposed to be buried in the ground. In current conditions, these animals would not be buried in the ground, they would decay quickly on the ground or the scavengers would eat them immediately. The next description (James Dana: “Manual of Geology, p. 141) indicates how quick burials are necessary to create fossils:

Vertebrate animals, such as fishes, reptiles etc. decompose when their soft parts are removed. They must be buried quickly after death to avoid decaying and being eaten by other animals.

 

No one could care less that you wish to bury your head in the sand and remain ignorant - but at least stop posting threads asking for answers when you aren't looking for any.

You may now return to your regular scheduled fantasy.