Posted on 06/09/2017 11:01:38 AM PDT by fishtank
June 8, 2017 | David F. Coppedge
Stop the Presses! Human Evolution Falsified!
Human bones found in Morocco undermine almost everything that has been taught about human evolution since Darwin. But is that news? Happens every year, doesn’t it?
This news is so hot, we have to get the word out now and wait for a fuller analysis later. Evolutionary paleoanthropology is in big trouble, if a new find in Morocco is as important as the news are making it out to be. Announced in Nature this week, the discoverers are dating bones from five individuals at over 300,000 Darwin Years old – over 100,000 years older than when they thought modern humans first began to emerge. And it was found in northern Africa – not at Olduvai Gorge or in some South African cave where most of the attention has been focused. Added to that, the discoverers found stone tools and chemical evidence of cooking, and are saying these people probably lived all over Africa at the same time!
(Excerpt) Read more at crev.info ...
We saw Trump turn into a Republican.
Maybe it was the Republicans who "evolved?"
Impossible? Have you considered the radiohalo evidence (click here) found in granitic minerals?
You might want to look for the videos made by Robert Gentry some years ago.
From nothing?
My thing has always been, Okay, you grant the evolutionists “life” as in abiogenesis, and they claim you can get all this wild and wondrous stuff because of all the variability inherent in ANY living system.
Fair enough.
The problem comes in when you figure out they’re using the residents of our old friend the periodic table to accomplish all this wizardry, and real chemicals just don’t act the way they say they’d have to unless “someone” is being VERY particular about how they’re allowed to interact.
Next thing you know, every Tom, Dick, and Harry think they’re the new Renaissance Man because they can not conceive how anyone could question the existence of extraterrestrial life with their ONE big data point to go on.
It’s been a long time, but ..... ping
Here’s an interesting take on the age of the universe that does not violate any scriptural integrity.
The Age of the Universe
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3051495/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1576941/posts
Jim is correct.
There's simply too much entropy for evolution to continue on as long as it has and create are much order as it has, especially to the level of complexity that we see at the genetic level, nor does it address where information comes from and the ability to process that information.
To create that kind of order, to violate the 2nd Law to the degree that genetics does, work has to be done to the system.
The question then remains where the work comes from.
Time- not a scientist, allblues and jonno, but it seems ‘time’ is measured through movement of the sun, moon, stars.
If that is what science uses, it is interesting that the bible has those(sun, moon, stars) being created on the ‘4th Day’.
Time is considered a 4th dimension, correct?
Maybe it’s a clue that those tools to measure ‘time’ were created on the 4th Day.
And the 4th Commandment is the only Commandment that deals with ‘time’- Remember the Sabbath Day..
Who knows, maybe there are 10 dimensions out there that speak to greater understanding of His Creation and plan, hidden within His Word as riddles/clues for believers to find- clues/riddles found from His 10 Commandments.
When Hawking talks about physics or cosmology, I pretty much assume he’s right. He’s probably well read on biology but I doubt he knows more then most amateurs. No evolutionary biologist has ever claimed dna came out of some primordial ooze, there are much simpler compounds that are capable of copying themselves. Add to that the shear scale of time, a billion years, that it had to occur then yes, life could have come from nothing.
Now short of building a time machine I grant we will never know that for sure but again, I have to use the best evidence
“Design in Nature proves a Designer” that’s funny!
Christianity was very important to the Creation of our civilization and this country, there is no denying that and I give it much of the credit. But so was the house drawn carriage, doesn’t mean we still need it.
I’m an objectivist, I think that fits your ethical system requirements. And we don’t use other people...its explicit in the creed, “I swear by my life...”
And most objectivists I know are Republican voting, small l libertarians.
You ask a lot of questions but won’t answer one straightforward one. I’m not playing.
He seems to have lost a lot of bets with other physicists and his best days are well behind him.
Add to that the shear scale of time, a billion years, that it had to occur then yes, life could have come from nothing.
One amazing thing about that is there is only one tree of life. In other words, abiogenesis only occurred once. There are other such "singularities" observed in biology that make me wonder at the odds of us being here.
And how long has it been continuing, in your view?
There's nothing the the 2nd law that says there is increasing disorder everywhere.
You can take a pile of logs and build a house - you are increasing order.
The house will fall down in ten years or a hundred years, order decreases.
And since when do creationists care about physical "laws" anyway? Everything is apparently subject to the whims of a magical immortal being.
Yes, and you proved my point. The order of a structure was the result of work being done on the system. Work done by an intelligent outside source.
Simply pouring energy into a system does not by default increase order by itself.
Also in those ordered structures, as you pointed out, entropy still enters and decay begins. Once the work is done, if it is not maintained, entropy kicks in, and even then the maintenance merely slows down the rate of entropy.
Entropy is a LAW of thermodynamics.
It HAS to happen and will happen even after work is done to the system to create pockets of order.
And since when do creationists care about physical "laws" anyway? Everything is apparently subject to the whims of a magical immortal being.
Because God also created the laws by which the universe runs.
Isaac Newton held to that view and I would suggest that he was a more brilliant scientist than most alive today.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_views_of_Isaac_Newton
Newton saw God as the masterful creator whose existence could not be denied in the face of the grandeur of all creation.[26] Nevertheless, he rejected Leibniz' thesis that God would necessarily make a perfect world which requires no intervention from the creator. In Query 31 of the Opticks, Newton simultaneously made an argument from design and for the necessity of intervention:
For while comets move in very eccentric orbs in all manner of positions, blind fate could never make all the planets move one and the same way in orbs concentric, some inconsiderable irregularities excepted which may have arisen from the mutual actions of comets and planets on one another, and which will be apt to increase, till this system wants a reformation.[27]
BTW, Christians do not believe in magic.
If you consider the extra natural, things that exist outside the purview of the natural as can be observed and described by science, as *magic* it shows a mind closed to anything outside it's narrow, rigid belief system.
Thank you for the BEEP!
I have but one question;
If Evolution is a fact, why is it called a theory?
My problem with evolution as theory is the inductive nature of its reasoning, along with the alomst universal acceptance of it by people who have no more real knowledge of it than I do.
It's one of those things that seems far too pat an explanation for something we likely are incapable of understanding, the kind of explanation that would appeal to a child.
Hey! Good to see you again.
You are correct.
If it’s a fact, then it SHOULD (theoretically speaking) be called *The LAW of Evolution*.
Just like *The Law of Thermodynamics*.
If God just created the world today with everyone and everything exactly as they are right now, there would seem to be a past that actually hadn’t happened. When He actually created the universe, including Adam and Eve, they all would have appeared, according to the physical laws of this universe, to have pasts they didn’t have.
I am recovering from two broken hips and am very slow in responding. That’s why I’ve spent a lot of time being out of the action. I’m still mostly out of it.
>If it’s a fact, then it SHOULD (theoretically speaking) be called *The LAW of Evolution*.<
Evolution is a THEORY, not a fact, based on some facts we THINK we know.
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.