Proof that at least one of two (evolution, ice age) key theories is false

official school material ^ | 04/05/21 | self

[Truth666]

These are three of the dogmas which we are endoctrinated nowadays in school : #1 - origins of the current forms life forms: by evolution from previous forms #2 - appearance of Homo Sapiens (from encarta): The oldest known fossils that possess skeletal features typical of modern humans date from between 130,000 and 90,000 years ago. #3 - last ice age (from encarta): the most recent ice age, the Pleistocene Epoch, lasted from about 1.6 million years to 10,000 years before present ... when temperatures were 5° to 7° C cooler than today.

#1 and #2 are part of current evolution theory; #3 is part of current ice age theory.

There can be no doubts that no other theory has so much impact on modern society as evolution theory. In view of the signs of climate change from the last years, ice age theory is impacting society more by the day.

From these dogmas we immediately can take the following conclusion : homo sapiens has already experienced an ice age.

Now hold on to your seat : relying solely on the assumptions of both theories, there's plenty of evidence that AT LEAST one of these theories is false ! In other words : these theories are incompatible.

Let's take one piece of evidence that any high school student can understand.

Lord Howe Island - living proof

This is not just another coral reef. This is Lord Howe Island, by far the southern-most coral reef in the world. Its existance is only possible due to particular climate conditions that affect an area of the world where no other land rises even remotely near sea level. In fact there's nothing but deep ocean until Port Macquarie, on the NSW coast, 550 kms away.

This wonder of the world would be immediately destroyed, if the ocean temperature would drop just one degree Celsius. If the temperature would drop 5°C both endemic unmistakable palms (including the most popular indoor palm of the world, howea forsteriana) would also perish. So, just to take these two examples, both the coral and the howea would have had to have developed from scratch during the last 10,000 years. A claim that nobody would dare to make.

[Physicist]

Here's a pair of questions for you: Do you believe that Noah's flood was a historical event? How long ago did it occur?

[Dimensio]

To give evolution credibility requires lack of order, and no given species.

1) Define "lack of order".

2) You are aware that there are a number of "species" that are very closely related to one another, such that Species A and Species B can produce viable offspring, Species B and Species C can produce viable offspring, but Species A and Species C cannot produce viable ofspring? Such occurances show that "species" is just a term we have invented to define when a group of organisms has more or less genetically isolated themselves from related organisms. It's not a predefined property of life forms.

Your statements do not expose flaws in evolution. They merely expose the flaws in your understanding of evolution.

[Just mythoughts]

"1) Define "lack of order"."

Order lack of confusion. A tree is a tree and there are numerous "species" of trees. A cow is a cow and may well come in all colors and sizes and body shapes.

"2) You are aware that there are a number of "species" that are very closely related to one another, such that Species A and Species B can produce viable offspring, Species B and Species C can produce viable offspring, but Species A and Species C cannot produce viable ofspring? Such occurances show that "species" is just a term we have invented to define when a group of organisms has more or less genetically isolated themselves from related organisms. It's not a predefined property of life forms."

Based upon what authority do you claim no predefined property of life forms? We in flesh bodies can only see in one dimension, evolution is about what has happened to the "flesh" over a vast amount of time. The status of what is found at this point in time does not change the origination of "flesh". Evolution does not explain the "spirit" body.

"Your statements do not expose flaws in evolution. They merely expose the flaws in your understanding of evolution."

Evolution keeps evolving, no way possible to understand something that ignores the whole picture. Evolution gives power to those that elevate themselves to positions of power and authority and upon that basis alone I reject that because through whatever means possible an individual becomes a dictator can claim that he/she is superior because they drew life's evolution lottery.

[Dimensio]

Order lack of confusion. A tree is a tree and there are numerous "species" of trees. A cow is a cow and may well come in all colors and sizes and body shapes.

Ah, so this just ties into your fallacy that species are anything but human definition.

Based upon what authority do you claim no predefined property of life forms?

Based upon observable evidence, such as that which I explained to you.

We in flesh bodies can only see in one dimension, evolution is about what has happened to the "flesh" over a vast amount of time.

We in the "flesh" can see in three dimensions, actually. And we can remember things fourth-dimensionally. Moreover, our perception of three-dimensional space allows us to extrapolate reliably about events that occured in the past.

Your response is an attempt to use what you think are fancy words to hide your lack of a real answer.

The status of what is found at this point in time does not change the origination of "flesh".

What does this have to do with anything?

No, observing things now does not change what happened in the past. No one has claimed this.

Evolution does not explain the "spirit" body.

No, it doesn't. It also doesn't explain gravitational attraction. That doesn't make it false either. And, unlike the "spirit body", gravitational attraction can actually be demonstrated to exist with some degree of certainty.

Evolution keeps evolving, no way possible to understand something that ignores the whole picture.

Once again, you make absolutely no sense. You're throwing out words in the hopes that you'll make me think that you're speaking too intelligently for me and I'll concede the point out of confusion. I'm not that dumb. You're not making sense, and you're not even trying to make sense and I am not falling for it.

volution gives power to those that elevate themselves to positions of power and authority and upon that basis alone I reject that because through whatever means possible an individual becomes a dictator can claim that he/she is superior because they drew life's evolution lottery.

In other words, you reject evolution because you don't like the consequences -- a logical fallacy. Moreover, the "consequences" that you don't like are utterly bogus, not actual consequences of the theory of evolution but rather your hopelessly wrong idea of what evolution is.

[Truth666]

Noah's flood I don't need it in the scope of this thread, so let's ignore that here.
BTW; here is the introductory image for this thread again :

[Truth666]

I'm collecting the open questions of the scope of this thread - here is
Qu01 : possiblity of current coral of Lord Howe having arrived in the last 10,000 years.
I'll answer later.

[Truth666]

I've answered this in #62 - just to make sure that with "View Replies" the reader can verify that no questions remain unaswered : yes, this is it. Incredibly small. It's always like this :
the more you get into details the easier you can see the wonders of creation.

[ColdSteelTalon]

Creationists know how hard it is to disprove something. They are just intellectually dishonest.

Well, people who put faith in evolution without questioning it just want to be intellectually fulfilled.

[Truth666]

"Howea forsterana palm forest on the flats behind North Bay and H. belmoreana palm forest in the narrower gullies running down towards Old Settlement Beach."
Again I aswered this on #62.
Now for the rest of the article - Thanks a lot for posting that. More to follow.

[Truth666]

This is a document from the World Heritage Sites - certainly the prime entry point for the public to get some first idea about Lord Howe Island.
Since Lord Howe Island is maybe the best living example to immediately crash the foundation of the current construct of lies, the document has to be a prime example of the process I described in the first comment of this thread : "Poor liars at work".
More to follow.

[Truth666]

"Poor (but successful) liars at work"

- spread a big lie, as part of an agenda
- at some point later in time, add another big lie to the construct, as part of the same agenda. Most of the times event the most simple construct (i.e. just two big lies) will be already incompatible - a well known fact that the more lies, the easier it is to be caught.
Now, how is the problem solved of adding new lies without letting the construct looking immediately grotesque ?
There are several key techniques for that. Let's check just the techniques that are used by the World Heritage Sites article.

[Truth666]

How to sell big lie based constructs

Technique #1 - downplay key evidence
Fact : nobody has the slightest idea what could be the "ancestors" of the Lord Howe palms (or any of the other endemics, btw).
Implementing technique #1

- #1a - suggest that there is some idea about it : many (endemics) have confusing origins, such as the three endemic palm genera Howea, Hedyscope and Lepidorrhachis and also Dietes sp., the three congeners of which are endemic to southern Africa and which has seeds with apparently only short range dispersal capacity.

Explanation for #1a :
- the word "many" suggests for at least for SOME endemics, the "ancestors" are known (so that evolution theory is not immediately questioned).
- the word "confusing" suggests that, for the endemics whose origin is not known, at least something is compatible with evolution theory (in other words : implicitly suggesting similarities with the flora of New Caledonia or Vanuatu, from where BTW the coral is also supposed to come from).
- give at least one example, no matter how grotesque : but in fact the only similarity that is referred is with South Africa ! (more on this later, explaining the dilemma faced by the poor liars when they use another technique detailed later)

[Physicist]

Noah's flood I don't need it in the scope of this thread, so let's ignore that here.

You absolutely must address it. Christian dogma insists that this island was submerged for, what, 266 days about 4000 years ago. If you accept that mythology, you are faced with exactly the same (indeed, a worse) problem than the one you just laid at the feet of evolution.

[Truth666]

I don't have to address it because I'm not proving that the Bible is 100% right.
I'm proving the title of this thread ....

[Truth666]

... and because of the intelligent objections, in the process I'm also proving that evolution is impossible - but that's just a side effect, really.
BTW, ...

[Truth666]

... is there anyone here that participated or was reading the CNN message board "Evolution" before CNN closed the message boards, in 2001 ?

[Physicist]

I don't have to address it because I'm not proving that the Bible is 100% right.

But you've put yourself in the position of either insisting that there's a naturalistic means by which the island could have been uniquely repopulated in the last few thousand years, or repudiating the Word of God. When God sits in judgment before you, He won't accept the dodge that you weren't talking about that at the time. You're really safer if you accept the naturalistic explanation.

I'm proving the title of this thread ....

There are still two things you haven't shown: A) that the island was necessarily devoid of both coral and palms during the last ice age, and B) that 10,000 years is insufficient for these to repopulate the island and diversify. (Furthermore, such diversification is not integral to the explanation, as the "distinctive" species could have arrived from elsewhere in essentially their modern form, with the parent stocks dying out in the interim.)

[GeekDejure]

The "Mississippi River Gambit"

Sounds Koooool... Can I downlodd it in MP3? ;-))

.

[Dimensio]

Well, people who put faith in evolution without questioning it just want to be intellectually fulfilled.

Well, it's a good thing that evolution can be tested. It's easy to question evolution. Thus far, however, no one has been able to come up with an answer to falsify it.

[Dimensio]

... is there anyone here that participated or was reading the CNN message board "Evolution" before CNN closed the message boards, in 2001 ?

Yes. Why?