Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Evolution, where's the Link? (Saturbray)
www.brayincandy.com ^ | 1/26/12 | bray

Posted on 01/26/2013 8:46:52 AM PST by bray

Were you a slave when you were called? Don’t let it trouble you—although if you can gain your Freedom, do so. 1 Cor 7:21

Why do we assume scientists are always right? It seems we are being scammed by some of the shiftiest salesmen on the planet beginning with their most questionable foundation of evolution. While they are intimidating and ridiculing Christians for their belief in an all powerful God, they are promoting a theory that has not made any progress in over a hundred and fifty years. This failure happened in spite of every scientist on the planet attempting to discover the holy grail of science, that elusive missing link between monkey and man.

Darwin invented this theory by the logical observations that every animal and plant seems to have a similarity and connection making an obvious chain from one animal to the next. His theory as everyone knows has life beginning randomly in a primordial soup forming the first life forms billions of years ago. Never mind this huge hole in the theory of how life could be formed in a soup that was previously sterilized at over a thousand degrees, you just accept it without explanation or even the slightest bit of logic. This crater is so big that the Darwinists eliminated it from their discussion and saying how it occurred is no longer part of evolution which is like saying starting the car has nothing to do with your destination?

In 1859 Darwin questioned his own theory in his book Origin of Species when he wrote, ” ...as this process of extermination [survival of the fittest] has acted on an enormous scale, so must the number of intermediate varieties, which have formerly existed on the earth, be truly enormous. Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory. The explanation lies, as I believe, in the extreme imperfection of the geological record.”

If he asked that question in today’s scientific community he would be called a denier and would be tossed out of the scientific community. After a century and a half it should be time for the scientific community to answer that basic question. Shouldn’t these archeologists be swimming in transitory species’ fossils yet they have not found any which can be confirmed.

Now if you simply ask the question of where life began you will soon be vilified and called a Bible thumping Neanderthal or as they would call it, the missing link. From the magic of life appearing forward evolutionists are very comfortable, since life forms have a continuity they can observe and theorize. First there were bacteria which formed into amoeba’s which evolved into plankton and then fish since they all occur in the ocean and live as well as adapt similarly to each other. There are no explanations of how or why they simply changed from single cells into fish other than you simply need to have faith in random defects turning into superior species rather than inferior or that it can be repeated, you just accept it.

The next step of evolution is moving from the ocean and onto the land which of course was the evolution of whales and whale type creatures which eventually became reptiles. The reptiles ruled the earth as dinosaurs for millions and millions of years until a random ice age happened which wiped them out instantly. This is where it becomes dicey since they are not sure the mammals developed while the dinosaurs were eating them and vice versa since the evolution from reptile to mammal is such a giant leap. Once again we have no transitory species or fossils of those species which makes you have to wonder why no examples of these defective reptiles becoming pure land creatures. You simply take another scientific leap of faith.

The other problem the Darwinists have is where is the missing link? During the early 20th century there was something the scientists called the evolutionary ladder that led to modern man. It began with Nebraska man (fraud) to Peking man (fraud) to Piltdown man (fraud) to Neanderthal (fraud) and then man began walking fully upright. Once that happened then they used their scientific brilliance and made the Black man into one of the lower man evolutions followed by Asian through Slavic, Gypsy, Jew, and then Aryan being the highest form of man which they then attempted to make a super race leading to gas chambers and ovens to purify the race. Good thing science has given up on that evolutionary idea.

Once again science was wrong as it moved away from simple curiosity and investigation and into an agenda driven science and has not moved from there since that time. For any scientist there would have to be millions and millions of transitory species moving from Ape to man, yet not one scientist has found a credible fossil. The evolutions from the ape to man has to have as many separate species as from reptile to ape, yet nothing. Every scientist knows if she finds this fossil she will have instant immortality as they have finally proved God a fake…er…evolution is true. Even the most basic logic has to tell you if they know where modern man first began in Iran on the Euphrates in the simplest of digging areas there should be a sea of those transitional ape/man species and yet they have not found any. Why? There is only one logical answer and that is that man did not evolve from the Great Apes but came from somewhere else. If there were millions of evolutions between Ape and Man which would take more evolutions than moving from amoeba to ape, it is statistically impossible for scientists to not find at least one! The odds have to be billions and billions to one not to find one of these missing links, yet that is exactly what has happened in over a hundred and fifty years of searching.

It really makes you wonder when science began losing its curiosity of the unknown. There had to be a time when science was as eager to disprove their theories as they are now to perpetuate their frauds? If they have not come up with a credible missing link by this time then what stops them from discarding the entire theory. Sure it is easy to say an amoeba looks like a fish and a lizard walking out of the water looks like a mammal. Then of course the Disney movie continues as a dog looks like a horse and when they go up on two legs the can go from monkey to ape to man, but did that actually happen? There is no proof that is what happened which is the giant hole in the theory they have to fill with consensus, intimidation and purging rather than evidence.

The giant question that is not allowed to be asked is, was life formed by a chain of events making them look similar and have continuity or did that similarity occur at creation? Did science actually invent a theory of our creation or are they simply observing the miraculous continuity of a perfect creator? These are questions science does not want to ask and are beginning to fear the answers. Why won’t today’s scientists ask the same logical question Darwin asked, "why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links?"

Pray for America


TOPICS: Culture/Society; FReeper Editorial; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: belongsinreligion; evolution; fake; fraud; notanewstopic
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-90 next last
To: bray
Ah the old, Christians should be seen but not heard. Have you ever considered the possibility that evolution has holes in it you can drive a train through? Have you ever considered Darwin may have been wrong? No of course not."

Why does the teaching of Christ become any less valid when the creation story changes? "By your fruits you shall know them"! Does that ring a bell? Where have I said Christians must be ignored? The "holes" you claim is just your pride refusing to see. You do a disservice to Christians by making them live a lie about how we got here. God is much bigger than any book Man has written about him, and now that Mankind has actually stepped upon another world in the heavens it's about time his religion caught up!

21 posted on 01/26/2013 9:45:20 AM PST by Nateman (If liberals are not screaming you are doing it wrong!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: bray
LOL! Sorry to have bruised your apparently fragile ego. I’m afraid you’ll have to explain the validity of your pot/kettle analogy and how direct criticism is a “thug tactic”.
22 posted on 01/26/2013 9:48:55 AM PST by stormer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: yldstrk

And I’m repeating by saying this, bud, you don’t have to. Look at the citations. Wiki has nothing to do with them.


23 posted on 01/26/2013 9:50:03 AM PST by James C. Bennett (An Australian.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Nateman

Where is the missing link from ape to man you speak of?

Pray for America


24 posted on 01/26/2013 9:52:31 AM PST by bray (Welcome to Obamaville)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: James C. Bennett

They posted it and then it turns out to be a fraud. Should I do more of them or is one fraud enough? Now where is the missing link?

Pray for America


25 posted on 01/26/2013 9:55:01 AM PST by bray (Welcome to Obamaville)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: bray
Why would Wikipedia want to take the conodont (not conodate) off their list? The hoax you've so cleverly used as evidence disputing the Theory of Evolution has nothing to do with the validity of the cladistics of conodonts, but only that someone was lying about the provenance of some fossils. And how was this fraud detected? Why through science, of course. By demonstrating that the geological setting claimed could not have produced those remains, evolutionary theory is strengthened, not weakened. Care to play again?
26 posted on 01/26/2013 10:03:47 AM PST by stormer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: James C. Bennett

Looks like another fake and it is the first example cited:
http://www.tccsa.tc/articles/hoax.html

Perhaps there is an actual transitional fossil that wasn’t doctored.


27 posted on 01/26/2013 10:06:36 AM PST by bray (Welcome to Obamaville)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: stormer

Let’s get this straight, the more frauds and fakes found in evolution the stronger evolution becomes. By the looks of it evolution is really really strong by your definition.

Yes, let’s play although your mind has long been made up so no amount of fraud or fakes will shake your faith in atheism.

Pray for America


28 posted on 01/26/2013 10:11:03 AM PST by bray (Welcome to Obamaville)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Natufian
I hate to nit pick but I think it’s reasonable to assert that every fossil ever found and every living thing on this planet is transitional to some degree or other.

Overwhelmingly, species disappear from the fossil record in the same form that they appear in the fossil record. Even archaeopteryx is not exempt. All examples of it look the same.

The fossil record demonstrates stasis in species; the exact opposite of what Darwin predicted.

This is what lead Gould to postulate macroevolution.

29 posted on 01/26/2013 10:13:00 AM PST by St_Thomas_Aquinas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: bray
Why do we assume scientists are always right?

I don't and I'm a very science oriented person. Science as represented in the mass media is particularly suspect.

30 posted on 01/26/2013 10:14:13 AM PST by Moonman62 (The US has become a government with a country, rather than a country with a government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stormer

LOL! You may want to look in the mirror.
I have been on the net for years and yours is the cheapest of thug tactics. Try again.


31 posted on 01/26/2013 10:15:58 AM PST by bray (Welcome to Obamaville)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: stormer

LOL! You may want to look in the mirror.
I have been on the net for years and yours is the cheapest of thug tactics. Try again.


32 posted on 01/26/2013 10:16:26 AM PST by bray (Welcome to Obamaville)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Alter Kaker

Wiki !?

So if wiki says it, it must be true even if they omit all the facts.

Take the Evos best case,Archaeopteryx .DNA may improve a creatures ability to survive but will not transform it from a cold blooded species into a warm blooded one . There may be variation within a species but a snake will never become an elephant.

Your random chance dictates only 3 outcomes, something, nothing or a nutated freakish disaster. So there must be just as many mutated freak fossils as there are formed ones in the fossil record. Where are they? There are none.

Then there is the 2nd law of thermodynamics and how miraculously darwinism violates it with impunity.

No transitional state between scales and feathers exists in the fossil record and there is no solid science that excludes other theories:

“There is still no overall consensus amongst biologists on either the original function of feathers or the origin of flight. The earlier, more obvious, explanations focused on the two major current functions of feathers: as aerofoils . . . and as insulation. More recently, dissatisfaction with these ideas led to hypotheses based on more specialized functions, such as display and fighting. “

Department of Zoology at Oxford University

Darwin,Marx,Nietzsche,Heidegger,Eliot,Satre,Camus.All these ragamuffins chose the godless universe as their starting point,their Master Premise.Their theology.Freud the atheist blathered on about the two revolutions and Russell yet a third..The anthropic principle and ID has reversed these now antiquated ancient beliefs.


33 posted on 01/26/2013 10:16:38 AM PST by Para-Ord.45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: bray

There is no link for flowers. They just showed up all at once. I think God created flowers after He created Eve. :) Just a pleasant thought.


34 posted on 01/26/2013 10:20:50 AM PST by huldah1776
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bray

LOL! I’m not sure where I place the Twin Cities Creation Science Association in the pantheon of discovery, but I would be remiss if I did not point out that their “research” ignores the findings of Creation Ministries’ John Safarti who claims that archeopteryx is in fact a bird, and not a transitional. Oh noes! Creationists disagree?! A number of archeopteryx fossils have been discovered - have they all been modified as fakes? What of other feathered dinosaurs that have been discovered that predate archeopteryx? Are they fakes, too?


35 posted on 01/26/2013 10:22:39 AM PST by stormer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: James C. Bennett

yeah well nobody fact checks the citations either


36 posted on 01/26/2013 10:24:32 AM PST by yldstrk (My heroes have always been cowboys)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: bray
You aren't even making sense. Can you be bothered to address the issues?
37 posted on 01/26/2013 10:25:05 AM PST by stormer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Para-Ord.45

My point is that even Darwin asked where all of these mutated disasters were in the fossil record. The odds of not finding them are too astronomical to not have thousands of these mutants.

The only statistical explanation is there are none and all mutations killed the individuals leaving no transitory species or evolution.

Time for you Darwinists to prove your theory!

Pray for America


38 posted on 01/26/2013 10:27:04 AM PST by bray (Welcome to Obamaville)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: stormer

“The museum granted Spetner two very small samples of the fossil surface; one from the “wing” area and the other as a control remote from the “wing” area. A scanning electron microscope analysis carried out at the Weizman Institute showed that the control sample was clean crystalline limestone as one would expect but that from the “wing” area was amorphous; X-ray luminescence analysis revealed that it had a strange composition. Suspicions that it was indeed the glue and limestone mixture which had been suggested, were close to being confirmed. Yet another sample was necessary to be sure the first sample was truly representative and not an artifact. The museum refused all further testing”

How many fakes and frauds are ok with you? It was done to try to make a reptile into a bird/reptile or vice/versa. Now where is your proof? Name one transitory species or fossil? I am sure that question will bring more thug tactics.


39 posted on 01/26/2013 10:33:47 AM PST by bray (Welcome to Obamaville)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: St_Thomas_Aquinas

What percentage of any given species is successfully fossilized, found and studied?


40 posted on 01/26/2013 10:35:00 AM PST by Natufian (t)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-90 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson