The Scientific Case Against Evolution

Sat Oct 06, 2012 8:41 pm » by **Nihilgeist**

Nilm33 wrote:
Extract the genes from a nucleus, and a cell still lives and does its job. How is that so if genes are responsible for life? So then where does the "life" come from if DNA is absent from a cell?

Source or point of reference?

Sat Oct 06, 2012 10:04 pm » by **The Riddler**

To be clear, the lack of evidence for macroevolution is the lack of evidence of organisms that are half invertebrate and half vertebrate, principally?

Sat Oct 06, 2012 10:27 pm » by **Nilm33**

Nihilgeist wrote:
Nilm33 wrote:
Extract the genes from a nucleus, and a cell still lives and does its job. How is that so if genes are responsible for life? So then where does the "life" come from if DNA is absent from a cell?

Source or point of reference?

Ask a professor, or any advanced biochemistry major.

Also saw a good presentation posted on here a while back. If I can find it ill post it for you. Interesting stuff. I used to be entirely sold on evolutionary theory until some things I never knew surfaced and factored heavily into what I now question.

Sat Oct 06, 2012 10:56 pm » by **Nilm33**

So you're basically saying there is some form of evolution taking place.

Yes

Who ever suggested that life came from evolution?

Evolutionists

That evolution is a replacement for God?

Thats a bit deep. I tend to leave god out of it. Anything beyond the natural material universe gets REALLY complicated lol

It would be fine if evolutionists stuck to the "adaptation to ones environment" argument. Thats pretty much spot on minus a few anomalous exceptions.

Evolution is a process, not the source, but yet evolutionists argue that life came into being because of stimuli from chemicals/elements reacting to the environment, then it "evolved" and adapted over time to make the things that live today.

Not entirely wrong, but also not entirely right.

Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:17 am » by **Nilm33**

Daemonfoe wrote:
Nilm33 wrote:Evolution is only partially correct.

So you're basically saying there is some form of evolution taking place.

Who ever suggested that life came from evolution? That evolution is a replacement for God?

Upload to Disclose.tv

None the less that video was fucking awesome. :flop:

Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:03 am » by **Daemonfoe**

Nilm33 wrote:
Who ever suggested that life came from evolution?

Evolutionists

What category would I be in if I believed that evolution happens, but I'm basically agnostic toward anything trying to explain where life first came from?

Mon Oct 08, 2012 8:52 am » by **Nilm33**

Daemonfoe wrote:
Nilm33 wrote:
Who ever suggested that life came from evolution?

Evolutionists

What category would I be in if I believed that evolution happens, but I'm basically agnostic toward anything trying to explain where life first came from?

My kind of category :flop:

But heed caution. Saying to people you believe in evolution will automatically presume that you believe evolution is responsible for the creation of life. So when people ask me I just smile

Makes you wonder why evolutionists even argue with creationists to begin with... One argues the origin, the other argues what happens after the origin.

Mon Oct 08, 2012 10:53 am » by **Iwanci**

Could 'cross breeding' be one explanation as to why some species seem to have combined attributes from 2 different (yet closely related) species? Two different types of large cats mating perhaps? or how about a dog and a cat? I have seen a dog hump a mattress and even try to hump a cat.. so why not?

or

Could the breeding by deformities spawn a new breed, albeit deformed, yet again, in some mild deformities how would we truly know if the deformity was not a deformity but a natural attribute? ie, if say many years ago a dog was born with a deformity wherby his hind legs were deformed and his head enlarged, and that dog mated with another dog and produced offsrping, and that offspring reproduced and in doing so maintained the 'new' deformity, could that not explain a new species?

or

cross polination? How do some aquatic species breed? They release eggs which are then inseminated whilst floating in the water.. what if, two species released their eggs in the same location, and one passer by inseminating one species accidently inseminates the other as well, is that possible? What if there was a slim possibility? Could this create a new species?

Just saying... maybe there are other explanations for some species...

Mon Oct 08, 2012 11:01 am » by **kiwi**

you make some valid points truthdefender and found it to be very enlightening. can i just say to everyone, are you all not acting the way the world did to Charles Darwin in 1859

Mon Oct 08, 2012 12:10 pm » by **Svaha**

In short, evolution is controlled by Big Mystery that is in and around everything.
In this humans are not separate of an atom, an animal / plant or the universe.

Looking at this from the opposite side (separation), evolution is controlled by the environment, the earth, the sun, the central sun ...

Both theories are true in a paradox way (duality)