Was Darwin Wrong

[The One]

The work of the 19th-century English naturalist shocked society and revolutionized science. How well has it withstood the test of time?

Evolution by natural selection, the central concept of the life’s work of Charles Darwin, is a theory. It’s a theory about the origin of adaptation, complexity, and diversity among Earth’s living creatures. If you are skeptical by nature, unfamiliar with the terminology of science, and unaware of the overwhelming evidence, you might even be tempted to say that it’s just a theory.

In the same sense, relativity as described by Albert Einstein is just a theory. The notion that Earth orbits around the sun rather than vice versa, offered by Copernicus in 1543, is a theory. Continental drift is a theory. The existence, structure, and dynamics of atoms? Atomic theory. Even electricity is a theoretical construct, involving electrons, which are tiny units of charged mass that no one has ever seen.

Each of these theories is an explanation that has been confirmed to such a degree, by observation and experiment, that knowledgeable experts accept it as fact. That’s what scientists mean when they talk about a theory: not a dreamy and unreliable speculation, but an explanatory statement that fits the evidence. They embrace such an explanation confidently but provisionally – taking it as their best available view of reality, at least until some severely conflicting data or some better explanation might come along.

The rest of us generally agree. We plug our televisions into little wall sockets, measure a year by the length of Earth’s orbit, and in many other ways live our lives based on the trusted reality of those theories.

Evolutionary theory, though, is a bit different. It’s such a dangerously wonderful and far-reaching view of life that some people find it unacceptable, despite the vast body of supporting evidence. As applied to our own species, Homo sapiens, it can seem more threatening still.

Many fundamentalist Christians and ultra-orthodox Jews take alarm at the thought that human descent from earlier primates contradicts a strict reading of the Book of Genesis. Their discomfort is paralleled by Islamic creationists such as Harun Yahya, author of a recent volume titled The Evolution Deceit, who points to the six-day creation story in the Koran as literal truth and calls the theory of evolution nothing but a deception imposed on us by the dominators of the world system.

The late Srila Prabhupada, of the Hare Krishna movement, explained that God created “the 8,400,000 species of life from the very beginning,” in order to establish multiple tiers of reincarnation for rising souls. Although souls ascend, the species themselves don’t change, he insisted, dismissing Darwin’s nonsensical theory

8xOfy__BVuc

[Krullenjongen]

Evolution by natural selection

Evolution by natural selection is impossible. Natural selection ....SELECTS.
So natural selection selects a trait from a pool of traits, it does not create anything and therefore only shrinks the pool. For evolution to work something new must be created every once in a while and that cannot be done by natural selection.

[Mark]

The late Srila Prabhupada, of the Hare Krishna movement, explained that God created “the 8,400,000 species of life from the very beginning,” in order to establish multiple tiers of reincarnation for rising souls. Although souls ascend, the species themselves don’t change, he insisted, dismissing Darwin’s nonsensical theory.

Nice. It is rather cool though that chimps have type A blood with some instances of O and gorillas have type B blood with some instances of O and neither have AB blood-types. All kinds of strange "anomalies" out there.

[Alan]

"Evolution" is such an ambiguous term in these discussions.

Have species evolved over time? Yes, this is a fact. (Ford Mustangs have also evolved over time...)

Do offspring within a species evolve over time, becoming faster, stronger, smarter, etc, in response to their environment? Yes, this is an easily observable fact. (I like to call this "micro-evolution", not sure what the real name is...)

Did new species come into existence as a result of random mutations which occurred in their ancestors? I know of no evidence to support this, outside of micro-organisms. The idea seems far fetched to me, that an offspring of an individual could be a different species than it's parent, with new/different functionality (eg. wings, a backbone, lungs).

I think the pro-Darwinists see micro-evolution and make the leap in logic that macro-evolution (creation of new species) is therefore possible. I think not.

I believe in Intelligent Design (NOT the same as Creationism!).

[Unified Serenity]

I love how those who support one side or the other present information from a "This is an accepted fact" sort of like Al Gore and global warming, only to find there are a lot of experts who do not accept the information as facts. I appreciate the OP's suggestions. I just have a hard time with the "evolution is fact based on evidence". If it were a fact it would be called the Law of Evolution and not the Theory of Evolution. Historical evidence that does not support the theory is hidden and suppressed. There are humanoid footprints equal to modern man's footprint that are millions of years old. One site is actually guarded by an indian tribe because some people have tried to cut it out of the rock for whatever reason, and the indians hold the area as sacred.

Darwin came from a time that Eugenics was openly preached as if a religion, just like some environmentalists today treat their pet topics. Under Darwin's thinking those who were not evolved as to the level of what he believed was the most evolved humanoid were just polluting the gene pool, and it is in our best interest as a species to sterilize them. Should they come under a plague don't do too much to help them as it's natures way of selecting them out of the pool. Amazingly, Eugenisists included his race as the most evolved, and blacks, hispanics, indigenous peoples were not as evolved. Just watch the incredible documentary Maafa 21 to get a better understanding of their thinking. I do not believe in Evolution and it's not because the bible tells me so. It's because you can't have a modern homo sapien footprint millions of years old, then de-evolve into some lesser humanoid, then re-evolve into homo sapien.

[shadowstalker]

Darwin freely admitted his theories where flawed

[<8>]

This is a realy good movie about question Darwin..


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Wr-lXLGCxQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Wr-lXLGCxQ


The movie you posted are not are not accurate in the timeline findings, this movie paint a diffrent picture. That wibs with me anyway..:)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6oGqPc6poS4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6oGqPc6poS4

[Cidersomerset]

Thanks <8> interresting film .....I've always thought Darwinism was floored because why haven't monkeys and chimps evolved if we have ? To which Darwin gives no satisfactory answer for me.

I could go for a ancient ancestor theory say Homo Erectus, Homo Habilis or Neaderthal may have been tampered with genetically altered ala the Annunaki as per Sitchins theory.

There is also Billy Meiers theory that humans are the template thru out the galaxy and we are descendents from Lyra, which is cool,but does not explain where they came from...LOL


Finaly I like Ions explanation that we are all gods, and one day eons ago for a change of contrast we decided to put our powers aside and forget our origins, then leave ourselves clues
to reassend and come back into our power 'God' Which he reckons is happening!!!! with the triggering of chromozone 14 in our body to make us physically immortel as well as the eternal entities we already are??

The touble is with all these theories there are more questions than answers . The one I think we can deffinately discount is the almighty one god sat on his throne in heaven dishing out justice
surrounded by Popes ,priests, Rabbis ,mullers , nunns , buddists and 'uncle Tom cobley and All'

Cheers Steve....i'm going to watch Theones vid now...

Thats sneeky <8> you've put up another one since I was writing this post..LOL

[<8>]

Thanks <8> interresting film .....I've always thought Darwinism was floored because why haven't monkeys and chimps evolved if we have ? To which Darwin gives no satisfactory answer for me.

I could go for a ancient ancestor theory say Homo Erectus, Homo Habilis or Neaderthal may have been tampered with gynetically altered ala the Annunaki as per Sitchins theory.

There is also Billy Meiers theory that humans are the template thru out the galaxy and we are descendents from Lyra, which is cool,but does not explain where they came from...LOL


Finaly I like Ions explanation that we are all gods, and one day eons ago for a change of contrast we decided to put our powers aside and forget our origins, then leave ourselves clues
to reassend and come back into our power 'God' Which he reckons is happening!!!! with the triggering of chromozone 14 in our body to make us physically immortel as well as the eternal entities we already are??

The touble is with all these theories there are more questions than answers . The one I think we can deffinately discount is the almighty one god sat on his throne in heaven dishing out justice
surrounded by Popes ,priests, Rabbis ,mullers , nunns , buddists and 'uncle Tom cobley and All'

Cheers Steve....i'm going to watch Theones vid now...

Thats sneeky <8> you've put up another one since I was writing this post..LOL



Thanks Steve....:)

There even are a word in science there they explain themselfs why evolution dont work,.."genetic homeostasis" there's a limit to evolution..

It's just mind blowing how this silly sharade can go on...

P.s...I remember as young i was told in school, crocodiles were just perfect so they never needed to evolve.

[Cidersomerset]

Thanks Theone.....The Survival of the fittest theory does not make sence as they explained it. If a Gazzelle for example each generation gets faster/ more alert after all these generations why are they still getting eaten? For by now the selective breeding of the fittest would mean not only Gazzelles but all pray species should be immune from predetors. Unless the predetor has evolved to go faster.So where will this be in a million years. I don't think this makes sence.There is something fundamentally flawed with the evolution theory imho.

Now that DNA has been found on meteors in space this must open a whole new light on the seeding of the universe....Panspermia theory..

m41aWgJX8jI

[Godiam]

My arguement against evolution is the Starfish!

Surely the ability to regrow a limb, would be a good thing to pass on to new species as we evolved, (one would think) but Humans, as the end line in evolution cannot (as yet) regrow much more than a bit of skin!!

I too believe in an intelligence behind the creation of all life, But not a humanised God!!

HUGS Godiam

[Cidersomerset]

Hi Godiam ...Funny you should say that, part of Ions explanation of how we are going to evolve/assend has to do with this chromozone 14 being activated. there is a detailed explanation which I won't go into here as i have written down in several threads.The theory basically says as we are already eternal beings. When the chemical change happens we will be able to regrow limbs and become immortal !!! You really have to listen to his explain of it, as it always looks 'naff' to me when I write it down.

The First ten mins are about Cern The rest is one of his explanations about chromosone 14 where he talks about we,ll have bone doners .Its a bit complex the first time you hear it
but basically its a body triggering event that will transform us into physical accension. Its more complecated than that but its a interresting concept. The change of the radiation
levels in the atmosphere also has something to do with it. Cheers steve

http://halkinnaman.com/ed/audio_rr/ion_cern_chromosome14.mp3

[winston smith1971]

Jeffrey Grupp on Coast to Coast AM, Sept. 7, 2011: Dark Ecstasy, Telementation, Beings, Evolution
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9NxWsdj8UM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9NxWsdj8UM
If you listen about 15.38 he discusses why evolution is a wrong theory. At around 37.30 he discusses evolution and the extinction of the dinosaurs excellent thought provoking...

[The One]

Hi Godiam ...Funny you should say that, part of Ions explanation of how we are going to evolve/assend has to do with this chromozone 14 being activated. there is a detailed explanation which I won't go into here as i have written down in several threads.The theory basically says as we are already eternal beings. When the chemical change happens we will be able to regrow limbs and become immortal !!! You really have to listen to his explain of it, as it always looks 'naff' to me when I write it down.

The First ten mins are about Cern The rest is one of his explanations about chromosone 14 where he talks about we,ll have bone doners .Its a bit complex the first time you hear it
but basically its a body triggering event that will transform us into physical accension. Its more complecated than that but its a interresting concept. The change of the radiation
levels in the atmosphere also has something to do with it. Cheers steve

http://halkinnaman.com/ed/audio_rr/ion_cern_chromosome14.mp3

wow amazing and thanks

[Mark]

Darwin came from a time that Eugenics was openly preached as if a religion, just like some environmentalists today treat their pet topics. Under Darwin's thinking those who were not evolved as to the level of what he believed was the most evolved humanoid were just polluting the gene pool, and it is in our best interest as a species to sterilize them. Should they come under a plague don't do too much to help them as it's natures way of selecting them out of the pool. Amazingly, Eugenisists included his race as the most evolved, and blacks, hispanics, indigenous peoples were not as evolved. Just watch the incredible documentary Maafa 21 to get a better understanding of their thinking. I do not believe in Evolution and it's not because the bible tells me so. It's because you can't have a modern homo sapien footprint millions of years old, then de-evolve into some lesser humanoid, then re-evolve into homo sapien.

The work that Cremo did with "Forbidden Archaeology" continues to amaze. That TOME cause it's not a book lol it is gigantic, consists of archaeological research that is practically flawless in following the scientific method, using all of the technologies of the day and even to the point of attempting to make the least dramatic claims so as not to rock the scientific paradigm to its core. But, for the most part, the scientists whose work Cremo includes were all ostracized by their findings. Nobody has yet come out with a convincing counter-argument. All that can be done is to hide the original evidence in the basements of museums, storage units, or destroy it. Scientifically, Darwinism as the sole explanation for the evolution of Homo Sapiens cannot stand. The only weapon the mainstream scientific establishment can employ to combat the truth of that is silence and banishment.

It's like getting kicked out of church for standing up in the middle of the sermon to scream that Jesus didn't die on the cross.

[Camilo]

If somebody wants to believe that he/she evolved from something different than GOD, then believe Darwing was right.

I personally believe I was created by GOD, so I believe Darwing was totally wrong!

[58andfixed]

Natural selection was not an explanation for the creation of life.

To accept that, one would have to 'assume' that there was a 'natural selection' of minerals from rock that evolved into four proteins. [ie: we evolved from rocks.]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis

"In any theory of abiogenesis, two aspects of life have to be accounted for: replication and metabolism."

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c0/Stromatolites.jpg/250px-Stromatolites.jpg

"Pre-Cambrian stromatolites in the Siyeh Formation, Glacier National Park."

"In 2002, William Schopf of UCLA published a paper in the scientific journal Nature arguing that geological formations such as this possess 3.5 Ga (billion years old) fossilized cyanobacteria microbes."

"If true, they would be evidence of the earliest known life on earth."

****

And then there are the 223 genes that had no predecessors on the genomic evolutionary tree, according to the genome project.

http://rhnegativeregistry.com/rh-negative-factor-origin-adams-alien-genes.html

****

Questions & deep curiosity is good.

Seek & discover. Knock and the door shall be opened.

Don't expect answers to show up on CNN or the dinner plate due to some mild curiosity.

- 58