The Official Death of the Theory of Evolution – 2/25/2006

PowerBASIC Forums ^ | 2/25/2006 | SDurham

[ibme]

The Official Death of the Theory of Evolution – 2/25/2006

Theorem Name: The Illusion of Evolution DOA Theorem
Theorem: There are not enough reproductive life cycle generations available in the projected age of the Universe to allow even the most basic form of evolution.

Note: This Theorem looks at the Theory of Evolution from a completely abstract point of view. The formulas and discussion are presented from an Evolutionist point of view. This doesn’t necessarily represent the view of the author.

AoU – age of the Universe. (1)
AvRpdCyc - average reproductive life cycle generation (2)(3)
TotalRpdCyc – total reproductive cycles in the age of the Universe.

AoU = 10 billion = 10,000,000,000 years
AvRpdCyc = 100 per year (2)(3)
TotalRpdCyc = AoU * AvRpdCyc = 1,000,000,000,000 = 1 Trillion

In the whole age of the Universe, there are only about 1 Trillion opportunities for something to evolve to a different state – eventually Man. (this is very generous)(3)

MM - Mega Millions Jackpot Odds
MM = 175,711,536
TotalRpdCyc / MM = 1,000,000,000,000/175,711,536 = 5,691

In order to believe the Theory of Evolution, you have to believe the odds of going from Rock to Man are only 5,691 times greater than winning the Mega Millions Jackpot.

• This doesn’t take into consideration; no one has ever seen a rock do it.
• This doesn’t take into account; the Human Body consists of 10 Trillion individual cells.
• We haven’t considered the complexity of the Human Body.
• We haven’t considered the complexity of reproduction.
• We haven’t considered a distribution curve.
• We haven’t considered any deviation. (On odds of 1/Trillion there would have to be a massive deviation.) (4)
• We haven’t considered other forms of life.
• We haven’t taken into consideration that it’s a lot easier to pick lottery balls than produce a live entity able to reproduce itself.

1. Some say 20 billion years – based on scientific estimation.
2. I’m using 100 average reproductive cycles per year.
   I’m taking into consideration that the Theory of Evolution is based on things moving from simple states to more complex. Some cells reproduce quickly. Mankind would be around 12 years at the best. (3)
3. This is overly fair. Evolution has been intently studied for over 100 years and there is no evidence of anything evolving in the last 100 years.
4. Check the Mega Millions statistics for reference.

Note: If something is wrong with the math, please show me. The numbers are not presumed to be absolutely correct. You can play with the numbers. Throw in a few million here and there. No matter what numbers you consider, there aren’t enough reproductive life cycles in the projected age of the Universe to produce the simplest form of life.

[Havoc]

hmm, thought you were going to laugh and skip over.. :)
Apparently, you can't just do that.

Seperate and distinct.
Seperate and distinct.
Seperate and distinct.

And evolution has lost. There, now you have two things to cry, er, laugh about.

[Phil Connors]

(clicking little red box in upper left hand corner)

[Havoc]

http://www.bereanbeacon.org/audio-video.htm

Something I thought you might find useful.

[muir_redwoods]

It must be true. He used lots of capital letters and bold fonts

[muir_redwoods]

"There is a huge group of equally credible scientists who oppose TTOE."

No there isn't

[Ken H]

And evolution has lost.

Dover CARES swept the race for school board Tuesday defeating board members who supported the curriculum change being challenged in federal court.

Pro-ID school board members in Dover, PA swept from office

______________________________

Presidential politics: Dover is in York County, which supported George W. Bush in the last two presidential elections. According to unofficial vote totals for 2004, Bush received 114,621 votes and John Kerry received 63,628 votes. [my note: that's about 64% for Bush]

--http://www.epodunk.com/cgi-bin/politicalInfo.php?locIndex=275620

________________________________

Here are three GOP office holders who are distancing themselves from ID:

Santorum: Don't put intelligent design in classroom

Jeb Bush on science standards and teaching ID:

He wants those standards to become more rigorous -- and raising the standards should take priority over discussing whether intelligent design has a place in the public schools' curriculum, he said.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1547174/posts

And here is Governor Taft backing away from ID:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1572692/posts

__________________________________

Utah House kills evolution bill

[snip] "But the bill failed in the House on a 28-46 vote Monday."

-- http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1586899/posts

[Havoc]

Id isn't an issue, lest you confuse it. Evolution has consistently lost ground and continues to do so. A majority in America do not accept the conclusions it rests upon. And the best numbers indicate only 13-15 percent of Americans believe in evolution undiluted. You're fighting a two front war and want to pretend that winning on one gives you gains on the other or both. The opposite is true. And it is so true that your own ranks say you are not getting your message out - else people would side with you. This is said whilest the populace is deafened with your message and pukes it back out for being distasteful. Evolution is dead.

[Ken H]

Id isn't an issue, lest you confuse it.

That is nonsense. ID is enough of an issue that high ranking GOP office holders in three key states issued public statements about it. You simply don't do that with non-issues. And I just showed you an example where ID was THE issue in a school board election in the national spotlight.

Evolution has consistently lost ground and continues to do so. A majority in America do not accept the conclusions it rests upon. And the best numbers indicate only 13-15 percent of Americans believe in evolution undiluted. You're fighting a two front war and want to pretend that winning on one gives you gains on the other or both. The opposite is true. And it is so true that your own ranks say you are not getting your message out - else people would side with you. This is said whilest the populace is deafened with your message and pukes it back out for being distasteful.

Then explain the shellacking the pro-evolution Dover school board candidates administered to the incumbents in a heavily GOP area. With only 13%-15% belief in evolution, I would have thought they wouldn't have had a prayer.

Evolution is dead.

I hope you're not a coroner.

[mountn man]

And your accreditation is????? HMMMMMM??????

Dr Paul Ackerman, Psychologist
Dr E. Theo Agard, Medical Physics
Dr James Allan, Geneticist
Dr Steve Austin, Geologist
Dr S.E. Aw, Biochemist
Dr Thomas Barnes, Physicist
Dr Geoff Barnard, Immunologist
Dr Don Batten, Plant physiologist, tropical fruit expert
Dr John Baumgardner, Electrical Engineering, Space Physicist, Geophysicist, expert in supercomputer modeling of plate tectonics
Dr Jerry Bergman, Psychologist
Dr Kimberly Berrine, Microbiology & Immunology
Prof. Vladimir Betina, Microbiology, Biochemistry & Biology
Dr Raymond G. Bohlin, Biologist
Dr Andrew Bosanquet, Biology, Microbiology
Edward A. Boudreaux, Theoretical Chemistry
Dr David R. Boylan, Chemical Engineer
Prof. Linn E. Carothers, Associate Professor of Statistics
Dr David Catchpoole, Plant Physiologist (read his testimony)
Prof. Sung-Do Cha, Physics
Dr Eugene F. Chaffin, Professor of Physics
Dr Choong-Kuk Chang, Genetic Engineering
Prof. Jeun-Sik Chang, Aeronautical Engineering
Dr Donald Chittick, Physical Chemist
Prof. Chung-Il Cho, Biology Education
Dr John M. Cimbala, Mechanical Engineering
Dr Harold Coffin, Palaeontologist
Dr Bob Compton, DVM
Dr Ken Cumming, Biologist
Dr Jack W. Cuozzo, Dentist
Dr William M. Curtis III, Th.D., Th.M., M.S., Aeronautics & Nuclear Physics
Dr Malcolm Cutchins, Aerospace Engineering
Dr Lionel Dahmer, Analytical Chemist
Dr Raymond V. Damadian, M.D., Pioneer of magnetic resonance imaging
Dr Chris Darnbrough, Biochemist
Dr Nancy M. Darrall, Botany
Dr Bryan Dawson, Mathematics
Dr Douglas Dean, Biological Chemistry
Prof. Stephen W. Deckard, Assistant Professor of Education
Dr David A. DeWitt, Biology, Biochemistry, Neuroscience
Dr Don DeYoung, Astronomy, atmospheric physics, M.Div
Dr Geoff Downes, Creationist Plant Physiologist
Dr Ted Driggers, Operations research
Robert H. Eckel, Medical Research
Dr André Eggen, Geneticist
Prof. Dennis L. Englin, Professor of Geophysics
Prof. Danny Faulkner, Astronomy
Prof. Carl B. Fliermans, Professor of Biology
Prof. Dwain L. Ford, Organic Chemistry
Prof. Robert H. Franks, Associate Professor of Biology
Dr Alan Galbraith, Watershed Science
Dr Paul Giem, Medical Research
Dr Maciej Giertych, Geneticist
Dr Duane Gish, Biochemist
Dr Werner Gitt, Information Scientist
Dr D.B. Gower, Biochemistry
Dr Dianne Grocott, Psychiatrist
Dr Stephen Grocott, Industrial Chemist
Dr Donald Hamann, Food Scientist
Dr Barry Harker, Philosopher
Dr Charles W. Harrison, Applied Physicist, Electromagnetics
Dr John Hartnett, Physicist and Cosmologist
Dr Mark Harwood, Satellite Communications
Dr George Hawke, Environmental Scientist
Dr Margaret Helder, Science Editor, Botanist
Dr Harold R. Henry, Engineer
Dr Jonathan Henry, Astronomy
Dr Joseph Henson, Entomologist
Dr Robert A. Herrmann, Professor of Mathematics, US Naval Academy
Dr Andrew Hodge, Head of the Cardiothoracic Surgical Service
Dr Kelly Hollowell, Molecular and Cellular Pharmacologist
Dr Ed Holroyd, III, Atmospheric Science
Dr Bob Hosken, Biochemistry
Dr George F. Howe, Botany
Dr Neil Huber, Physical Anthropologist
Dr Russell Humphreys, Physicist
Dr James A. Huggins, Professor and Chair, Department of Biology
Evan Jamieson, Hydrometallurgy
George T. Javor, Biochemistry
Dr Pierre Jerlström, Creationist Molecular Biologist
Dr Arthur Jones, Biology
Dr Jonathan W. Jones, Plastic Surgeon
Dr Raymond Jones, Agricultural Scientist
Prof. Leonid Korochkin, Molecular Biology
Dr Valery Karpounin, Mathematical Sciences, Logics, Formal Logics
Dr Dean Kenyon, Biologist
Prof. Gi-Tai Kim, Biology
Prof. Harriet Kim, Biochemistry
Prof. Jong-Bai Kim, Biochemistry
Prof. Jung-Han Kim, Biochemistry
Prof. Jung-Wook Kim, Environmental Science
Prof. Kyoung-Rai Kim, Analytical Chemistry
Prof. Kyoung-Tai Kim, Genetic Engineering
Prof. Young-Gil Kim, Materials Science
Prof. Young In Kim, Engineering
Dr John W. Klotz, Biologist
Dr Vladimir F. Kondalenko, Cytology/Cell Pathology
Dr Leonid Korochkin, M.D., Genetics, Molecular Biology, Neurobiology
Dr John K.G. Kramer, Biochemistry
Prof. Jin-Hyouk Kwon, Physics
Prof. Myung-Sang Kwon, Immunology
Dr John Leslie, Biochemist
Prof. Lane P. Lester, Biologist, Genetics
Dr Jason Lisle, Astrophysicist
Dr Alan Love, Chemist
Dr Ian Macreadie, molecular biologist and microbiologist:
Dr John Marcus, Molecular Biologist
Dr George Marshall, Eye Disease Researcher
Dr Ralph Matthews, Radiation Chemist
Dr John McEwan, Chemist
Prof. Andy McIntosh, Combustion theory, aerodynamics
Dr David Menton, Anatomist
Dr Angela Meyer, Creationist Plant Physiologist
Dr John Meyer, Physiologist
Colin W. Mitchell, Geography
Dr John N. Moore, Science Educator
Dr John W. Moreland, Mechanical engineer and Dentist
Dr Henry M. Morris, Hydrologist
Dr John D. Morris, Geologist
Dr Len Morris, Physiologist
Dr Graeme Mortimer, Geologist
Stanley A. Mumma, Architectural Engineering
Prof. Hee-Choon No, Nuclear Engineering
Dr Eric Norman, Biomedical researcher
Dr David Oderberg, Philosopher
Prof. John Oller, Linguistics
Prof. Chris D. Osborne, Assistant Professor of Biology
Dr John Osgood, Medical Practitioner
Dr Charles Pallaghy, Botanist
Dr Gary E. Parker, Biologist, Cognate in Geology (Paleontology)
Dr David Pennington, Plastic Surgeon
Prof. Richard Porter
Dr Georgia Purdom, Molecular Genetics
Dr John Rankin, Cosmologist
Dr A.S. Reece, M.D.
Prof. J. Rendle-Short, Pediatrics
Dr Jung-Goo Roe, Biology
Dr David Rosevear, Chemist
Dr Ariel A. Roth, Biology
Dr Jonathan D. Sarfati, Physical chemist / spectroscopist
Dr Joachim Scheven Palaeontologist:
Dr Ian Scott, Educator
Dr Saami Shaibani, Forensic physicist
Dr Young-Gi Shim, Chemistry
Prof. Hyun-Kil Shin, Food Science
Dr Mikhail Shulgin, Physics
Dr Emil Silvestru, Geologist/karstologist
Dr Roger Simpson, Engineer
Dr Harold Slusher, Geophysicist
Dr E. Norbert Smith, Zoologist
Dr Andrew Snelling, Geologist
Prof. Man-Suk Song, Computer Science
Dr Timothy G. Standish, Biology
Prof. James Stark, Assistant Professor of Science Education
Prof. Brian Stone, Engineer
Dr Esther Su, Biochemistry
Dr Charles Taylor, Linguistics
Dr Stephen Taylor, Electrical Engineering
Dr Ker C. Thomson, Geophysics
Dr Michael Todhunter, Forest Genetics
Dr Lyudmila Tonkonog, Chemistry/Biochemistry
Dr Royal Truman, Organic Chemist:
Dr Larry Vardiman, Atmospheric Science
Prof. Walter Veith, Zoologist
Dr Joachim Vetter, Biologist
Dr Tas Walker, Mechanical Engineer and Geologist
Dr Jeremy Walter, Mechanical Engineer
Dr Keith Wanser, Physicist
Dr Noel Weeks, Ancient Historian (also has B.Sc. in Zoology)
Dr A.J. Monty White, Chemistry/Gas Kinetics
Dr John Whitmore, Geologist/Paleontologist
Dr Carl Wieland, Medical doctor
Dr Lara Wieland, Medical doctor
Dr Clifford Wilson, Psycholinguist and archaeologist
Dr Kurt Wise, Palaeontologist
Dr Bryant Wood, Creationist Archaeologist
Prof. Seoung-Hoon Yang, Physics
Dr Thomas (Tong Y.) Yi, Ph.D., Creationist Aerospace & Mechanical Engineering
Dr Ick-Dong Yoo, Genetics
Dr Sung-Hee Yoon, Biology
Dr Patrick Young, Chemist and Materials Scientist
Prof. Keun Bae Yu, Geography
Dr Henry Zuill, Biology

[curiosity]

Jesus used the Jonah story as a "sign" of his resurrection. If you call that an "allegory"

I'm inclined to take that story as literal history. What does it have to do with whether or not evolution occurred.

Jesus taught that Noah was a real person. He was not being allegorical about the story of Noah, he was being literal and using that judgment as a warning about a future judgment.

Sure. Noah was a real person, and there was a flood. It just wasn't global.

What does any of this have to do with the theory of evolution?

[P-Marlowe]

What does any of this have to do with the theory of evolution?

It is ancillary and it comes up every time someone asserts the literal truth of the Bible. I was simply pointing out the witness of Christ to the existence of Adam and Eve, Jonah and Noah (which most "christian evolutionists" insist are ALL allegorical).

[Senator Bedfellow]

He used lots of capital letters and bold fonts

LOL. The sad thing is, "evolution is false because I use lots of capital letters and bold fonts" is actually a slightly more cogent argument than this particular heap ;)

[Havoc]

ID is not the issue. ID is a competing theory that has nothing to do with whether creationism is gaining ground or not. You are attempting to tilt at a windmill and hope people mistake that for a viable win against your real opponent. Sorry, I'm just not letting you get away with it. Evolution has historically and continually lost ground because of it's obvious and blatent failings. Whether ID takes over as the new paradigm or not has no bearing on whether evolution is dead or not. The reaction evolutionists have had to it, on the other hand, is indicative of their own feelings as to their imminant demise.

As for the 13-15 percent, they are numbers from the MSM - hardly an institution with an axe to grind against the evo crowd. If anything, I'd suggest those numbers are likely inflated. The issue at hand is that the paradigm is institutionalized and the institution has worked to protect
it's pet through any and all means possible. That is the front on which the battle is being fought now. It is the battle of the buldge for us and we've broken through the lines and driven onward with no real resistance for miles.
We're headed for Berlin full steam ahead and taking no prisoners. That's why the numbers look as they do and it's why the evos are in such an uproar. V-day is coming for us.
And we can't wait to celebrate it. But, we also know there is still work to do. There is still some remnant of the public that has yet to be reached and informed - all in good time. But you keep pretending that ID is some indicator for you. Please. At the least, you'll delude yourself making it easier for us..

[curiosity]

I was simply pointing out the witness of Christ to the existence of Adam and Eve, Jonah and Noah (which most "christian evolutionists" insist are ALL allegorical).

Well, most Catholics, who accept evolution, accept that these were all real people. Well, at least Adam, Eve and Noah. There's some question about Jonah, as some say that its literary style indicates it's a parable.

As far as Jesus referring to Jonah by name, I don't see how that indicates his taking it to be literal history. It's possible he was just referring to it as a parable that everyone already knew. He didn't use proper names in HIS parables, but why should he not refer to OT biblical parables if they were on point?

[Havoc]

If it wasn't a global flood, why didn't God just tell Noah to move? Apparently God likes telling whoppers and enslaving men for no good reason? Unreal.

[P-Marlowe]

Who was Adam? Who was Eve? Were there any humans before them? Did they evolve from lower evolved forms of life or were they specially and psecifically created in the image of God?

What do Catholics who accept evolution and believe that Adam and Eve and Noah were real believe about them?

[curiosity]

Who was Adam?

The first true human with a soul.

Who was Eve?

His wife.

Were there any humans before them?

Those who came before them were almost human.

Did they evolve from lower evolved forms of life

Their bodies evolved from lower beings, yes.

or were they specially and psecifically created in the image of God?

Their souls were specially and directly created. Their being as a whole was made in the image of God.

[curiosity]

If it wasn't a global flood, why didn't God just tell Noah to move?

Because he wanted the ark to serve as a sign.

Apparently God likes telling whoppers and enslaving men for no good reason? Unreal.

What are you talking about?

[P-Marlowe]

Their bodies evolved from lower beings, yes.

Is that Catholic Dogma?

Their souls were specially and directly created. Their being as a whole was made in the image of God.

How very gnostic of you. Then what is all this "dust of the ground and rib nonsense? nonsense? If that is nonsense, then why do you believe the rest of the story? If you believe that is a fairy tale then why would you believe the rest?

What was Jesus' Body made of? Was Jesus descended from an Ape? When you take communion are you eating the flesh of an evolved being?