Posted on 02/26/2006 9:12:24 PM PST by ibme
The Official Death of the Theory of Evolution – 2/25/2006
Theorem Name: The Illusion of Evolution DOA Theorem 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) AoU = 10 billion = 10,000,000,000 years 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 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.
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.
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.
AvRpdCyc - average reproductive life cycle generation (2)(3)
TotalRpdCyc – total reproductive cycles in the age of the Universe.
AvRpdCyc = 100 per year (2)(3)
TotalRpdCyc = AoU * AvRpdCyc = 1,000,000,000,000 = 1 Trillion
MM = 175,711,536
TotalRpdCyc / MM = 1,000,000,000,000/175,711,536 = 5,691
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)
WOW!! A massive data dump. I didn't read it, I don't have the time. But massive data dumps are normally reserved for those that are afraid they're losing the argument.
If we lived 1000 years ago, that the earth was flat would have been "reality."
Darwin's own words - calling the docrine of "Hell" a damnable doctrine - support my point.
It's not surprising that Dr. Francis Crick (the "father" of DNA theory), not exactly your garden-variety Creationist, rejected spontaneous generation in favor of alien seeding. He saw the inherent absurdity of what the evos expect us to believe. He, like me, didn't have that much faith.
Consider this: If evolution IS reality, we should be able to copulate openly, steal, lie, cheat, everything to advance myself. I suspect the dominance of this theory and the nihilism it breeds is precisely WHY we have seen such a terrible change in our culture over the last 50 years - from civilized to animalistic.
You should be.
There's no reason I can't take the most absurd theory - that the earth is made of cheese - and interpret all incoming evidence to support that postulate.
LOL. Yet another example of creationist postmodernism.
But yes, there are about 1000 reasons why you could not interpret all incoming evidence to support the hypothesis that the earth is made of cheese. Just do a simple chemical analysis of the soil, compare it to cheese, and presto, your hypothesis is falsified.
This one - biological macroevolution - just happens to fill, if true, a common desire among many: to obviate final accountability to a supreme and righteous Diety.
Nonsense. Many evolutionists believe in God. Evolution has aboslutely nothing to say about the existence of God, pro or Con.
It is -- massively so.
give me one instance where it has ever been proved that any species was created from any other other than by definition by "Scientists" who are trying to cover obvious flaws in their theory.
See the links in my previous post.
When was it ever observed and tested that something can spring from nothing in a big bang.
ROFL! When was it ever claimed that the Big Bang *did* involve "something springing from nothing"? Your (mis)understanding of the Big Bang is as poor as your "understanding" of evolutionary biology. Here, read these to cure your lack of knowledge:
Evidence for the Big Bang (also covers many of the misunderstandings about the Big Bang)Give me an instance where it has hever been observed and tested to prove that matter can evolve from less complex to more complex organismsMisconceptions about the Big Bang: Baffled by the expansion of the universe? You're not alone.
See the links in my previous post. Also see:
Genetic AlgorithmsThe Origins of Order: Self Organization and Selection in Evolution. By Stuart Kauffman, S. A. (1993) Oxford University Press, NY, ISBN: 0195079515.
Compositional genomes: Prebiotic information transfer in mutually catalytic noncovalent assemblies
Eigen M, and Schuster P, The hypercycle. A principle of natural self-organization. Springer-Verlag, isbn 3-540-09293, 1979
The origin of genetic information: viruses as models
Compositional genomes: prebiotic information transfer in mutually catalytic noncovalent assemblies
Stadler PF, Dynamics of autocatalytic reaction networks. IV: Inhomogeneous replicator networks. Biosystems, 26: 1-19, 1991
Lee DH, Severin K, and Ghadri MR. Autocatalytic networks: the transition from molecular self-replication to molecular ecosystems. Curr Opinion Chem Biol, 1, 491-496, 1997
Lee DH, Severin K, Yokobayashi Y, and Ghadiri MR, Emergence of symbiosis in peptide self-replication through a hypercyclic network. Nature, 390: 591-4, 1997
Apolipoprotein AI Mutations and Information
Creationist Claim CB102: Mutations are random noise; they do not add information.
Evolution of biological information
Evolution of biological complexity
Evolution and Information: The Nylon Bug
Examples of Beneficial Mutations and Natural Selection
Gene duplications in evolution of archaeal family B DNA polymerases
Koch, AL: Evolution of antibiotic resistance gene function. Microbiol Rev 1981, 45:355378.
Selection in the evolution of gene duplications
Velkov, VV: Gene amplification in prokaryotic and eukaryotic systems. Genetika 1982, 18:529543.
Romero, D & Palacios, R: Gene amplification and genomic plasticity in prokaryotes. Annu Rev Genet 1997, 31:91111.
Stark, GR & Wahl, GM: Gene amplification. Annu Rev Biochem 1984, 53:447491.
Reinbothe, S, Ortel, B, & Parthier, B: Overproduction by gene amplification of the multifunctional arom protein confers glyphosate tolerance to a plastid-free mutant of Euglena gracilis. Mol Gen Genet 1993, 239:416424.
Gottesman, MM, Hrycyna, CA, Schoenlein, PV, Germann, UA, & Pastan, I: Genetic analysis of the multidrug transporter. Annu Rev Genet 1995, 29:607649.
Schwab, M: Oncogene amplification in solid tumors. Semin Cancer Biol 1999, 9:319325.
Widholm, JM, Chinnala, AR, Ryu, JH, Song, HS, Eggett, T, & Brotherton, JE: Glyphosate selection of gene amplification in suspension cultures of three plant species. Physiol Plant 2001, 112:540545.
Otto, E, Young, JE, & Maroni, G: Structure and expression of a tandem duplication of the Drosophila metallothionein gene. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1986, 83:60256029.
Maroni, G, Wise, J, Young, JE, & Otto, E: Metallothionein gene duplications and metal tolerance in natural populations of Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 1987, 117:739744.
Kondratyeva, TF, Muntyan, LN, & Karvaiko, GI: Zinc-resistant and arsenic-resistant strains of Thiobacillus ferrooxidans have increased copy numbers of chromosomal resistance genes. Microbiology 1995, 141:11571162.
Tohoyama, H, Shiraishi, E, Amano, S, Inouhe, M, Joho, M, & Murayama, T: Amplification of a gene for metallothionein by tandem repeat in a strain of cadmium-resistant yeast cells. FEMS Microbiol Lett 1996, 136:269273.
Sonti, RV & Roth, JR: Role of gene duplications in the adaptation of Salmonella typhimurium to growth on limiting carbon sources. Genetics 1989, 123:1928.
Brown, CJ, Todd, KM, & Rosenzweig, RF: Multiple duplications of yeast hexose transport genes in response to selection in a glucose-limited environment. Mol Biol Evol 1998, 15:931942.
Hastings, PJ, Bull, HJ, Klump, JR, & Rosenberg, SM: Adaptive amplification: an inducible chromosomal instability mechanism. Cell 2000, 103:723731.
Tabashnik, BE: Implications of gene amplification for evolution and management of insecticide resistance. J Econ Entomol 1990, 83:11701176.
Lenormand, T, Guillemaud, T, Bourguet, D, & Raymond, M: Appearance and sweep of a gene duplication: adaptive response and potential for new functions in the mosquito Culex pipiens. Evolution 1998, 52:17051712.
Guillemaud, T, Raymond, M, Tsagkarakou, A, Bernard, C, Rochard, P, & Pasteur, N: Quantitative variation and selection of esterase gene amplification in Culex pipiens. Heredity 1999, 83:8799.
in direct contravention of the second law of thermo dynamics?
ROFL!!! Now I *know* you've made the mistake of reading creationist pamphlets -- and believing them. No, sorry, the Second Law of Thermodynamics says no such thing. Read: Learn:
- Five Major Misconceptions about Evolution: Evolution violates the 2nd law of thermodynamics
A short and to-the-point answer to this creationist claim.
- An Index to Creationist Claims: 2nd Law of Thermodynamics and Information Theory
Brief replies to various thermodynamics claims by antievolutionists.
- The Second Law of Thermodynamics, Evolution, and Probability
Does evolution violate the second law of thermodynamics? Creationists say yes. This article describes in detail why the creationists are wrong.
- Attributing False Attributes to Thermodynamics
Creationists have created a 'voodoo' thermodynamics based solely on metaphors in order to convince those not familiar with real thermodynamics that their sectarian religious views have scientific validity.
- Entropy, Disorder and Life
Can the mathematically quantifiable concept of entropy be equated to the common-sense notion of "disorder" in any meaningful way? John Pieper answers this question, incorporating Boltzmann's entropy equation and the field of science called statistical mechanics, concluding that the only way "disorder" is defined in a thermodynamic sense is no help to creationists' arguments against evolution.
- Entropy and the Second Law of Thermodynamics!
- Chemist Frank L. Lambert gives an accessible introduction to the second law of thermodynamics. It includes a section on evolution and the second law. The same author also has written a much longer treatment of the second law and Entropy is Simple... which deals with some road blocks to understanding the second law.
- The Second Law of Thermodynamics in the Context of the Christian Faith
- A chemical engineer with strong background in thermodynamics who is also an evangelical Christian debunks creationist thermodynamics claims.
- Entropy, God and Evolution
- A physicist and Christian shows that argument that evolution violates the second law is wrong.
- Creationism Versus Physical Science
- Physicist Stephen G. Brush writing for The American Physical Society shows that creationism is as much a threat to physics as it is a threat to biology. He deals with thermodynamics and other physical claims that evolution deniers make.
- Thermodynamics for Two, Please
- R.J. Riggins gives us a light-hearted look at thermodynamics for the technically challenged.
The theory of evolution is always evolving therefore it must be true....Give me a break!
No, we *won't* give you a break, because you're behaving as if the person you're responding to had made such a goofy claim, and he has not. Take your straw man elsewhere.
BTW Save your insults for a time when you can prove that you can truly know it all
All we need to do is demonstrate that we know a lot more on this subject than you do, which isn't hard at all.
This is a lie. I don't care whether it's your own lie or just someone else's lie you have made the mistake of repeating in misguided good faith, but it's still a lie.
" Come back when you have something resembling reality to add to the conversation.
Try the first paragraph or two. That should fit within your time frame.
[And your description of "data dump" is correct. Data. Facts. Evidence. Its all there.]
Would you mind explaining why? I don't see how it follows at all.
Evolutionary theory in its purest form begins with the [faith] assumption that there is no God. Theism and evolution are incompatible - theistic evolution is full of contradiction and should be discarded outright.
Its better to copulate than never.Robert A. Heinlein, Time Enough for Love, 1973
Actually, the most liberating thing going seems to be the knowledge that one is on the Lord's side and opposition is heathen, evil, and dumb if inexplicably standing astride the world. That liberation from, say, Ten Commandments morality shines through the posts of avid creationists.
See the chart in post #214.
"Everybody believes it so it must be true" is the mark of one who lacks the ability to think independently.
That doesn't make a lick of sense. Care to try again?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.