Killing The Theory Of Evolution: Part 1 (Extended)
Evolution can be a hard topic to debate at times. The phrase “you clearly don’t know anything about evolution” comes out a lot in my debates with atheists. And no surprise because even the most highly regarded scientists of our day greatly differ on very fundamental facts about how the process of evolution “really” works. What those evolutionists often neglect is the fact that they themselves don’t even know everything there is to know about evolution. No matter how compelling anevolutionist may sound in his argument, or how loud he screams it, evolution is
NOT a settled science. This is mostly because a large number of fundamental
questions still exist when we consider the theory of evolution. The fundament questions that evolutionists differ upon or offer up very slip-short lunchbox answers to include:
- How matter originated
- Why matter originated
- When matter originated
- How the universe began
- Why the universe began
- When the universe began
- How the solar system formed
- Why the solar system formed
- When the solar system formed
- How the first living cell came into being
- Why the first living cell came into being
- When the first living cell came into being
- How nonlife became life
- Why nonlife became life
- When nonlife became life
- How the first single cell became a multicell
- Why the first single cell became a multicell
-When the first single cell became a multicell
- How DNA/RNA originated
- Why DNA/RNA originated
- When DNA/RNA originated
- How DNA/RNA can exhibit such a complex language with no original and apparent reason to do so
- Where water came from
- Why 70 percent coverage of liquid water on a planet is only located on our planet
- Why the fossil records do not scientifically demonstrate an evolutionary chain.
- Where the common ancestor for man and chimp is located on the evolutionary chain
- Why humans alone rule over all the other species of the Earth
Many evolutionists will say things like
“the world around us is evidence of evolution.” Ignorantly, they ignore the
fact that there is far more compelling evidence against evolution, than there is for it. For instance, consider the human body and it’s various systems such as…
- Endocrine (hormonal regulation)
- Integumentary (skin, hair, nails, etc.)
Each of these astounding and intricate
systems is made up of copious smaller parts. Each part serves a unique
function. These parts are constructed of countless microscopic cells. Many of
these cells are unique from all the other cells of the body. Each cell ensures
that the small parts of the systems, and the systems as a whole, function
properly. With the exception of the reproductive system, if even one of these
systems shuts down, you will die. These systems must be in place and fully
functioning in order for your body to live. In reality, then, the human body is
made up of systems within systems. The intricacy is astounding and
If all living organisms, including
humans, arrived here in their present form by chance, then how do we explain
the presence of such complex, interwoven and multiple systems that are so
necessary to each other’s survival? How did it come about that each system is
made of copious parts and unique cells with unique functions working in concert
with one another? If there is an obvious necessity for all the systems to be in
one accord for us to live, would this not mean, in a logical sense, that they
had to first appear together, at the same time, and working in perfect accord?
Is it probable that the systems would have appeared at the same time, working
in perfect unity, through the un-purposed evolutionary process? If not, is it
probably that each one formed in a mysterious evolutionary sequence that was
separated by millions of years? If this is the case, then why, how and when did
these systems begin to know that each of them needed another in order to
function properly? Again, why would they make such a determination?
Evolutionists say that living things
look for efficiency as they randomly seek their own survival, purpose and
function. If this is factual, then why would the human body seek to make itself
more complicated, only to ensure the increase of the odds of its ultimate
demise by losing a vital system to disease or accident? Moreover, how would it
accomplish this? What are the odds that one intricate system, filled with it’s
own mysteries and complex wonders of unique and interworking cells and
subsystems, would have evolved through a random process? Why would the singular
system have evolved only to somehow determine that it needed to add yet another
system, and then another, and another, and another and another?
When did this evolving organism decide
that enough was enough? Why did it decide that enough was enough? How did it
decide? Are systems still evolving within our bodies? If this is true, where is
the evidence? If this statement is not true, why not? Has the evolution process
stopped? If evolution of our body systems has stopped, then does that not belie
the meaning of the word evolution?
When one considers these following
additional facts, the idea of random natural selection, origins theory, and
evolution grow more absurd…
- Every square inch of the human body has
about 19 million skin cells.
- Every hour about 1 billion cells in the
human body must be replaced.
- The circulatory system of arteries,
veins, and capillaries in your body is about 60,000 miles long.
- The heart has to beat more than 2.5
billion times in an average lifetime in order to sustain the human body.
- Humans have about 9,000 taste buds on
the surface of the tongue, in the throat, and on the roof of the mouth.
- The proper function of the eye requires
that you blink more than 10,000,000 times a year.
DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) molecules in
plants, humans, and all living things are all the same shape. The shape is
comparable to a twisted ladder or a double helix. The backbone of the ladder is
made up of sugar and phosphate molecules. The DNA molecules, together with
their unique function transfer system of RNA (ribonucleic acid), are the
fundamental building blocks of life-all of life.
Each rung on the ladder of DNA is a made
up of two bases that stick out from the backbone and then pair in the middle.
This pairing is called a base pair. The letters A, T, G, and C represent the
chemical names of these bases. The twisted ladder forms the unique DNA molecule
shape of which we are so familiar. DNA is folded, stored, copied, and used as a
blueprint to make proteins. This process is accomplished in the same way in all
RNA is equally vital to DNA, even if it
is lesser known. RNA is significant because it plays a critical role in helping
DNA copy and express genes and to transport genetic material within the cell.
RNA also serves a number of other independent functions that are central to the
sustaining of life within a cell.
DNA plays a crucial role in the
production of RNA. In essence, DNA contains the blueprint for making RNA.
Therefore, when the cell requires more RNA, it pulls us the necessary
information in the DNA and gets to work making more RNA. This process is known
as transcription, alluding to the fact that the information is copied from one
molecule to another.
It is a scientific fact that the
instructions for almost all living things come from DNA. Functions that are
unique to a plant or animal have unique proteins, but proteins that do the same
things in numerous organisms have parallel instructions or DNA sequences.
Thus, if all living things hold in
common the same basic structures or building blocks for live, why are all
living things so different? A number of the differences come from the order of
the As, Ts, Cs, and Gs and the proteins they code. The differences can also be
a result of the time and place these proteins are made. Furthermore, the
variations in living things are the result of the number of chromosomes and
genes contained within the genome.
Plant and animal cells perform several
of the same function. The genes involved in these functions have comparable
sequences. One of these functions is called cellular respiration; that is, the
process that converts sugar and oxygen to water and carbon dioxide-to make
energy for the cell. In order for this process to take place, we have to eat.
When we ingest other living things, the
DNA of those living things (fruits, vegetables, nuts, meats, etc.) just happens
to be compatible with our DNA so that cellular respiration can take place. If
it were not for the fact that our DNA is so akin to all other living things, we
could not eat. If we could not eat, we would die.
Is the process of eating and cellular
respiration the result of a mere fluke of evolution? Alternatively, could it be
that a common designer made certain that the process of eating and cellular
respiration would function in such a precise and perfect manner? Which answer
appears to be the most probable to you?
If the supposed cosmic and random
happenstance of evolution was the real reason that all living things exist,
why, when and how did this happenstance mechanism decide that living things
needed to eat anything in the first place? Would it not be odd that evolution
should come up with the idea of food and energy creation through cellular
respiration? Cellular respiration is an astoundingly complex, energy-expending
system. Yet in order for life to be sustained,
living things must have other living things to ingest. What an odd things for a
mere cosmic happenstance to develop, by random generation. Is it not a strange
convince for evolution that all living things have such unimaginable DNA
similarity that cellular respiration is possible? Evolution supposition leaves
us, then, with several puzzling conundrums:
- When did the need to eat other living
- Why did the need to eat other living
- How did the need to eat other living
- Why would natural selection not have
chosen or produced a much simpler and more energy-efficient solution for the
energy needs of a living organism?
- Why would natural selection not have
chosen a much more ecology-friendly solution for the sustenance of life for
it’s several million species?
The origin of gender is also an incredibly puzzling question for evolution. How did all of humankind originate at
the same time, but with separate sexual systems fully operating, ready to work
as functioning males and females? Why, when and how did these two sexes
originate? The fact is that evolution has yet to agree on an answer as to how
this remarkable thing called sex could have happened. Why sex? Sex takes so
much longer and requires more energy than simple cell division. Why did a process
so blatantly unprofitable to its earliest practitioners become so widespread?
No matter the numerous theories invented
to explain sex, they still must cross the inescapable obstacle concerining the
origin and the purpose of the first fully functional male and female. While various
evolutionary theories attempt to explain why sex exists now, they do not and
cannot explain the origin of sex.
Biology textbooks on the topic of
origins, consistently illustrate amoebas evolving into various intermediate
organisms, which then evolve into amphibians, reptiles, mammals, and eventually
humans. Yet, we are not told at exactly which point the independent male and
female sexes originated. How could nature have randomly evolved a female member
of a species that produces eggs and is internally equipped to nourish a growing
embryo? At the same time how did nature randomness evolve a male member of the
species that produced sperm cells able to mobilize themselves within the
reproductive organs of the female until they unite with the egg? How did these
cells, egg and sperm, conveniently evolve to ensure that each contained half
the normal chromosome number necessary to produce the cells of the completed
Evolutionists need to realize that there is a huge difference between adaption and evolution as they often mistake the two for one other. We witness adaption all the time. When we stay in the sun for long periods of time our skin get darker, when we stay in the cold for long periods of time our skin get’s lighter. That’s an example of adaption.
When a small change takes place within a species-the species always remains a certain kind. This truth reveals an embedded, intelligent coding systems within that particular living things genetic makeup. In other words, dog’s are always dog’s, regardless of how many various species of the dog exist. Dogs never become another kind of living thing. There are several variations of horses and cats, as well. Yet horses and cats are always horses and cats. The latest DNA evidence powerfully suggests that humans have always been humans and chimps have always been chimps-in spite of evolutions insistence that the two somehow relate through a common ancestor. Unfortunately for the evolutionist that elusive common ancestor has never been confirmed or discovered, although this does not stop the insistence that one exists-somewhere. Rather than proving that an Intelligent Designer does not exist, the scientific that of speciation serves as strong evidence of an intricate and intelligent coding process-predetermined by an Intelligent Designer.
Evolution also denies to improbable uniqueness of man. Out of the myriads of species of life on planet Earth, humans stand uniquely beyond all the others. Man is indescribable in his difference from anything else in all of creation. God declared that nothing in all creation was analogous to humankind. Undoubtedly, animals such as the great apes, chimps, and monkeys resemble out appearance and can even mimic human mannerisms. Even so, the smartest of apes does not come close in comparison with a human toddler in overall intelligence and in the toddler’s world-changing capabilities. The majority of evolutionists agree that the chimpanzee is the most intelligent life on the planet, next to humans. Evolutionists are giddy in presenting the numerous similarities between chimps and humans. They will, in short order, point out the chimp’s ability to perform basic communication techniques and their antiquated use of elementary weapons (throwing rocks). The real difference between a human and a chimp is comparable to the difference that exists between a chimp and a lone rock lying in the bottom of a secluded valley. Evolutionists conveniently ignore the fact that chimps and humans are a universe apart in a myriad of undeniable ways. Neither a yeast cell not a chimp comes close to a human in scores of incontrovertible and obvious ways. In fact, nothing out of the many millions of species on the Earth comes within several universes of proximity to the complexity of the human being. For instance, human beings are the only species…
- to display a complex consciousness (making us capable of abstract reasoning, introspection, extremely advanced and complex problem solving, and generating and sharing thoughts, ideas, words, and literature)
- to advance almost limitless technology (what the human mind can conceive, it can, in all probability, invent, produce, and use)
- to build complex societies with laws, courts, rules, and written codes of multifaceted regulations
- to build prisons in order to separate certain members of our society from the rest
- to build complex buildings for shelter, which we then arrange into communities and sprawling cities with intro-connecting, complex, technological infrastructures
- to transport and mobilize through artificial means of technologically produced transportation vehicles
- to invent technologies that travel underwater, through the air, and into space
- to display morals and moral judgements to hold other society members accountable
- to use complex language forms-spoken, written, and signed with our hands and body motions
- to invent artificial technological language forms, such as the various types of computer language
- to invent more than six thousand unique language types within our own singular species
- to produce written, generational knowledge fashioned in a specific manner for generational transference
- to build libraries, write books, and invent computers that store our generational knowledge
- to produce and wear clothing
- to discover and use various mathematical principles and apply them to the invention of numerous technologies
- to invent the art of tool crafting, manufacturing, and use
- to seek control and manipulate the environment in which we life (we are the only species that is remotely capable of manipulating our environment)
- to build temples and altars and to worship, both as individuals and as a corporate community
- to build fires and construct artificial fire-making devices
- to farm and grow food for our own species and to provide it for numerous other species
- to cook food
- to produce medicines and provide medical assistance for each other as well as the animal life around us
- to perform surgery
- to care for all the other species of the world in a concerted effort
- to build weapons of war and assemble in military units to wage war against entire societies
- to build zoos where we contain and study examples of the other life around us
The list goes on and on, but certainly you understand the point. We are difference from all other species in a myriad of indescribable ways.
Mass excerpt from Magic Man In The Sky by Carl Gallups
Of the many creatures on the Galápagos Islands, one of the most impressive is the huge Galápagos tortoise. Once so plentiful that ships loaded up on as many as 700 live animals, one tortoise could provide 200 pounds of meat.
It is now possible for scientists to identify the exact Galápagos Island from which zoo and Museum specimens, such as the tortoise featured above, were originally collected using DNA. This technology is helping captive breeding programs.
The outer arrows are going counter-clock wise. This could represent going back in time. They are going back to a darker concept, like MAMA, which could be connected to their EXO PLANET origin, and their DNA sequences.
There are three unmarked lines (non-arrows). The 3 could represent a missing link. In our human DNA contains A, C, T, and G. There is no G in the graph above, so 3 could represent missing DNA, or alien DNA.
3 members have also left since MAMA, but I doubt this could be it. (But it is a possibly.
Episode 6 is a dangerous one in the Orphan Black universe. It was in last season’s sixth episode that Paul met his maker after a selfless sacrifice. Season 4’s sixth entry proved just as bloody as another character’s life was extinguished.
Kendall Malone – mother to Siobhan, and possessor of the original DNA from which all the clones are derived – was kidnapped, shot, killed, and then had her DNA blown to bits as part of a power play by newly unmasked villain Evie Cho. So why kill of this key character now?
“Whenever we do something like this, it’s never an easy decision to make,” says Orphan Black co-creator John Fawcett. “Obviously this was a big emotional decision, but also it’s a decision that puts everybody in a very difficult place. Where we thought we had a sure fire answer, now suddenly we don’t. In fact, we’ve got nothing. In fact, we’ve got less than what we began with. Not only is Kendall dead and her biology incinerated, but we’ve lost all of our research as well. And we are really now at the mercy of a very big new villain, which is Evie Cho, who has now presented herself.”
I read that the writers of The Big Bang Theory want to keep the show’s “original DNA”…
“For now, for me, Leonard-Sheldon-Penny floating around in those two apartments is a pretty important basic building block of what ‘The Big Bang Theory’ is. At this point in time, we’re not rushing to people moving out,” Steve Molaro said.
Come on, writers!!!!! The shows DNA has already changed. Embrace the chaos!
It’s a typical morning at the Dupont Veterinary Clinic in Lafayette, La. Dr. Phillip Dupont is caring for cats and dogs in the examining room while his wife, Paula, answers the phone and pet owners’ questions. Their two dogs are sleeping on the floor behind her desk.
“That’s Ken and Henry,” Paula says, pointing to the slim, midsize dogs with floppy ears and long snouts. Both dogs are tan, gray and white, with similar markings. “I put a red collar on Ken and a black collar on Henry so I can tell who’s who.”
Ken and Henry are genetically identical, though not exact replicas. They’re clones of the Duponts’ last dog, Melvin — created when scientists injected one of Melvin’s skin cells, which contained all of his DNA, into a donor egg that has been emptied of its original DNA.
Ken And Henry are two of only about 600 dogs that have been cloned since scientists at Sooam Biotech, a suburban company near Seoul, South Korea, developed the technology to create cloned canines.