[_ Old Earth _] The conclusion of the matter

[Heidi]

So the conclusion of the the theory of evolution is that the premise which is: "That ape genes can turn into human genes are their own" is faulty, then the rest of the theory has to be faulty as well. Faulty premises always produce faulty conclusions. :wink:

Mating and breeding is what propogates animal and human life on earth. That is elementary biology and precisely why animals mate and breed with each other and humans mate and breed with each other. Otherwise, there would be no mating and breeding and each animal would simply change into another animal on their own.

But this is obviously not the way life works. Therefore, the premise of evolution is impossible. But what evolutionists count on, is sidetracking the public with new sceintific terms made-up everyday, hoping that people will simply believe them and not take the time to see the impossibility of their premise. And this works very well, until people actually listen to them to see the absurdity of their statements. That's like Tolken becoming so immersed in his own fiction until he finally believes it and cannot separate truth from fiction.

So the conclusion of the matter is that evolution is a fictional theory that has no truth in reality, but only in the imagination. Animal genes do not turn into human genes on their own and neither can apes breed with humans. Therefore an ape or a primate cannot produce offspring that turn into human beings. There is no possible way. And lying about it won't change that fact one iota. The theory of evolution has been shown to be the biggest hoax of the 20th century and more and more people are realizing this. Once again, scientists have duped the public which they do in every generation. :wink:

 

[WillyGilligan]

The premise of evolution is not "ape genes can turn into human genes on their own". Evolution is concerned with more than just mankind. The reason you hear so many arguments on that singular part of evolutionary theory is that there are many religious people who keep the argument centered on that part. It's a natural part of humanity's egocentrism. Evolution isn't about you, it just includes you.

And why are there so many threads talking about the same thing? You even restate yourself in most of them. Why?

 

[Heidi]

The premise of evolution is not "ape genes can turn into human genes on their own". Evolution is concerned with more than just mankind. The reason you hear so many arguments on that singular part of evolutionary theory is that there are many religious people who keep the argument centered on that part. It's a natural part of humanity's egocentrism. Evolution isn't about you, it just includes you.

And why are there so many threads talking about the same thing? You even restate yourself in most of them. Why?

Another sidetrack. You still don't understand that a faulty premise can only produce faulty conclusions. Evolutionists are simply wrong about the origin of humans and I have proven it. Your contradictions are not my responsibility, my friend. They are yours.

 

[noblej6]

Heidi,

Please go to the Smithsonian Institute site and have a look at those pictures of skulls of unearthed skeletons.

I remember you writing that man hasn't changed in recorded history, so tell us why those skulls are shaped so much different than ours, yet they are our close relatives.

noble6

 

[jwu]

You still don't understand that a faulty premise can only produce faulty conclusions.

I'm quite sure that everyone here understands that. The problem is, that the premises of evolution are not faulty in first instance. You're just willfully ignorant of them and continue to attack straw men.

 

[WillyGilligan]

I agree that a faulty premise leads to faulty conclusions. I disagree that the faulty premise you state is actually what evolution rests on, or that the statement has been proven faulty.

So again, why so many threads on the same thing?

 

[Heidi]

You still don't understand that a faulty premise can only produce faulty conclusions.

I'm quite sure that everyone here understands that. The problem is, that the premises of evolution are not faulty in first instance. You're just willfully ignorant of them and continue to attack straw men.

The please state the premises clearly and succinctly without contradicting the way animals and humans produce offspring. When I asked someone to do this before, he agreed with me that evolutuionists claim that ape genes truned into human genes. So is there one evolutionist here who will not take back his statements and provide a universal premise for evolution that does not contradict reality or change with every post? The please provide proof for your statements.

 

[WillyGilligan]

Organisms change over time. That's evolution in a nutshell. Within that nutshell, there are many other features. Micro-evolution, macro-evolution, punctuated equilibrium, and so on.

So, the animals we see today are different in most cases from the animals we see in the fossil record. That information goes for man as well. You keep wanting evolution to be about man when man is just a part of the whole.

I lack the resources to prove it. After the holiday stress is over, I will attempt to tackle more research on the subject. I'm willing to admit what I don't know, but I require (not in some way that binds on you, just that it guides my actions) that participants in a discussion are actually talking about the same thing. I like to increase understanding, both mine and that of other people.

 

[jwu]

1. A species is defined as the group of individuals which can mate with each other and have fertile offspring.

2. The offpring's genes are not an exact copy of a mixture of its parent's genes. This means that the offspring is a bit further towards the limits of the species, if its parents are used to define the frame of reference. It's still part of the species, but not exactly in the "middle".


Do you agree with this so far?

 

[reznwerks]

someone

You still don't understand that a faulty premise can only produce faulty conclusions.

I'm quite sure that everyone here understands that. The problem is, that the premises of evolution are not faulty in first instance. You're just willfully ignorant of them and continue to attack straw men.

The please state the premises clearly and succinctly without contradicting the way animals and humans produce offspring. When I asked someone to do this before, he agreed with me that evolutuionists claim that ape genes truned into human genes.
Can you tell us who this SOMEONE might be, or is it a secret?

So is there one evolutionist here who will not take back his statements and provide a universal premise for evolution that does not contradict reality or change with every post? The please provide proof for your statements.
I've read just about every post here and I haven't seen any contradictions. You keep saying there are but when challenged you seem to change the subject. If anything you have failed to acknowldege the facts as they are presented. Genes don't change and animals adapt to the environment. Genes do get damaged and that causes disease but that is a different topic. That is evolution and I don't think you can find anyone who has posted or any evolutionist that exists or existed that disagrees with this fact.

 

[Heidi]

Heidi,

Please go to the Smithsonian Institute site and have a look at those pictures of skulls of unearthed skeletons.

I remember you writing that man hasn't changed in recorded history, so tell us why those skulls are shaped so much different than ours, yet they are our close relatives.

noble6

There are so many variables that scientists overlook when they identify ancient skulls and bones. For example, the bible talks about a tribe of giants much like Andre the Giant who were oversized and probably had the same disease as Andre the Giant. But scientists don't even consider anything other than what they're already decided in their imaginations that skull represents. This again is tunnel vision and exculsionary. The one thing it's not, is scientific. These are once again all theories and should be passed along as theories instead of facts.

In fact, not too long ago my husband read an article to me in the newspaper about bones that scientists found in the Mohave desert. They dated them and said they were millions of years old Then a man contacted them and told them he thought they were the bones of his uncle who had wandered away months ago. So they did DNA testing and sure enough, they were the bones of his uncle. So once again, scientists can very easily brainwash the public simply because they have degrees. But only when people have the courage to think for themselves and listen to scientists, they can discern truth from fiction. It is simply a fact that animal genes do not change into human genes on their own. The wolrd doesn't work that way and there is absolutely no proof that this is possible whatsoever except in science fiction books or movies. And many on this forum are easily deceived by scientists. You give them tremendous power over you. :wink:

 

[Frost Giant]

No. I also don't understand why it is so hard to believe that genes can change.

 

[Heidi]

No. I also don't understand why it is so hard to believe that genes can change.

Evolutionists claim that animal genes change into human genes on their own. :o So why do animals mate and breed and why do humans mate and breed? Do you even have a clue how genes are passed along to offspring? :o Do you even have a clue why humans don't have tiger genes? Or are you in the dark about that also? :o

 

[Frost Giant]

Evolutionists claim that animal genes change into human genes on their own.

Not really.

So why do animals mate and breed and why do humans mate and breed?

Because the changes from generation to generation are miniscule. You aren't going to see a human with 6 arms or a cat with wings in just 1 generation.

Do you even have a clue how genes are passed along to offspring?

Yes, via an imperfect replicator that causes copying errors that are called "mutations". These mutations can be positive, negative, or neutral. Most are neutral, however.

Do you even have a clue why humans don't have tiger genes? Or are you in the dark about that also?

We do have tiger genes. We have arms, a skull, lungs, a backbone, just like tigers! The reason we aren't tigers is because that's simply not the evolutionary path we took. Our environment didn't select for 4 legs and fur and powerful jaws.

 

[Heidi]

Evolutionists claim that animal genes change into human genes on their own.

Not really.

So why do animals mate and breed and why do humans mate and breed?

Because the changes from generation to generation are miniscule. You aren't going to see a human with 6 arms or a cat with wings in just 1 generation.
[quote:26869]Do you even have a clue how genes are passed along to offspring?

Yes, via an imperfect replicator that causes copying errors that are called "mutations". These mutations can be positive, negative, or neutral. Most are neutral, however.

Do you even have a clue why humans don't have tiger genes? Or are you in the dark about that also?

We do have tiger genes. We have arms, a skull, lungs, a backbone, just like tigers! The reason we aren't tigers is because that's simply not the evolutionary path we took. Our environment didn't select for 4 legs and fur and powerful jaws.[/quote:26869]

You just contradicted other evolutionists who say that animal genes do change into human genes. So again, it appears that no evolutionist really know what evolution is!

So you're claiming that one day, humans will have wings. is that correct? :o if so, where's your proof for this except in your imagination? :o

So you are saying that animal genes can change into humans if you say that this happens by mutation. You therefore have just contradicted your first reply to me that animal genes do not change into human genes. So which is it? :o

 

[armed2010]

Evolutionists claim that animal genes change into human genes on their own.

Not really.

So why do animals mate and breed and why do humans mate and breed?

Because the changes from generation to generation are miniscule. You aren't going to see a human with 6 arms or a cat with wings in just 1 generation.
[quote:d7a36]Do you even have a clue how genes are passed along to offspring?

Yes, via an imperfect replicator that causes copying errors that are called "mutations". These mutations can be positive, negative, or neutral. Most are neutral, however.
[quote:d7a36]Do you even have a clue why humans don't have tiger genes? Or are you in the dark about that also?

We do have tiger genes. We have arms, a skull, lungs, a backbone, just like tigers! The reason we aren't tigers is because that's simply not the evolutionary path we took. Our environment didn't select for 4 legs and fur and powerful jaws.[/quote:d7a36]

You just contradicted other evolutionists who say that animal genes do change into human genes. So again, it appears that no evolutionist really know what evolution is!

So you're claiming that one day, humans will have wings. is that correct? :o if so, where's your proof for this except in your imagination? :o

So you are saying that animal genes can change into humans if you say that this happens by mutation. You therefore have just contradicted your first reply to me that animal genes do not change into human genes. So which is it? :o[/quote:d7a36]

Heidi, we don't know if we will have wings or not. The only thing we know that WILL happen is that we will change based on what mutations occur in the human gene pool and how widespread these new genes propogate through breeding.

It is doubtful that any animal today will turn into a human. That is a specific goal. You can compare the appearance of any animal on earth to the toss of a billion dices. The chances of getting that specific result are very small, but a result had to occur, and that is the result that occured. If some things had changed in the past, certain animals may not be here today, or may have been radically different.

 

[Frost Giant]

You just contradicted other evolutionists who say that animal genes do change into human genes. So again, it appears that no evolutionist really know what evolution is!

Why don't you show some intellectual honesty for once? It doesn't matter what individual people think. It matters what the theory says.

So you're claiming that one day, humans will have wings. is that correct? :o if so, where's your proof for this except in your imagination?

I never claimed that, learn 2 read.

So you are saying that animal genes can change into humans if you say that this happens by mutation. You therefore have just contradicted your first reply to me that animal genes do not change into human genes. So which is it?

Again, not really. You said "by themselves". It's not "by themselves", they change with the help of mutation and natural selection.

 

[Heidi]

In regard to what's true or false it does. But people are accountable for their actions. And if people lie to me then claim I don't undertand then, they are attacking me for no reason and trying to get themselves off the hook.

Also, if one has to lie to defend evolution, then obviously, evolution is based on lies or one wouldn't have to lie to defend it. :wink: And the constant contradictions and open lying that evolutionists do, (without a conscience, by the way) is the kind of thing they're teaching our children at school which will affect their whole lives. The reason so many people believe evolution now is simply because they've been taught that it's a fact since elementary school. And it is extremely difficult to break away from deceptions which have been engrained from such an early age. it also teaches children that teachers and scientists aren't trustworthy.

So since you see nothing wrong with lying, then obviously, nothing you say can be trusted and people will eventually stop listening to you. They won't take you seriously, and all you would have stood for in your life is a lie, then all you have to look forward to is death. That's nothing but a wasted life whidh is paid for by eternal hell.

 

[pfilmtech]

People aren't lying to you just because you refuse to listen to them

 

[Frost Giant]

Also, if one has to lie to defend evolution, then obviously, evolution is based on lies or one wouldn't have to lie to defend it. :wink: And the constant contradictions and open lying that evolutionists do, (without a conscience, by the way) is the kind of thing they're teaching our children at school which will affect their whole lives. The reason so many people believe evolution now is simply because they've been taught that it's a fact since elementary school. And it is extremely difficult to break away from deceptions which have been engrained from such an early age. it also teaches children that teachers and scientists aren't trustworthy.

You spelled creationism wrong.