(via roomthily:braincraft) Excellent science fiction. If you look closely at the arguments for transitive life forms they have no intermediaries. There is nothing in the genetic record that demonstrates genetic change aside from mutation. But mutation is generally degenerative. We don’t find mutation creating higher life forms. In simpler terms: 1) There should be billions of “missing links” in the fosil record. (The argument is it has been so long they are all gone - if you follow that rational you have to do away with the fosil record entirely as an incomplete source for information.) 2) DNA and Microbiology now tell us a different story of origin, from when Darwin arrived at his theory. Small things are infinitively complex. But instead of investigating why, the “establishment” is instead pushing the old theories harder. 3) This concept only works with a very very very old planet. If the earth is proven young, as it is, this whole fantasy will unravel. The very first image of the asteroids speak the loudest: explosions and chaos don’t create complex life, they destroy it. Think about it; order, design, and complexity do not spring forth from cataclysmic events. Newtonian physics and thermodynamics make this clear. If evolution were true it failed when the dinosaurs died off during the ice age. They failed to evolve past that. And why were their brains smaller than ours? The hierarchy of species shows bigger is smarter, no? (via oh-noo, freshphotons) Nice image, ridiculous text The thing that gets me about this is that they treat evolution like ‘Evolution, God of Biological Processes’. Evolution never fails, nor does it succeed, it just is. It’s the process of determining which lifeform is currently best suited to the current environment. That’s all. It’s not a plan for life, it’s a winnowing process life goes through. We’re not ‘guided’ by it. And “If the earth is proven young, as it is, this whole fantasy will unravel”. What? You can’t front-load the argument like that. The ‘as-it-is’ does not belong in that sentence. By the way, if I am misinformed about the evolutionary process (how it works, not how god did it all), please correct me.

(via roomthily:braincraft)

Excellent science fiction.

If you look closely at the arguments for transitive life forms they have no intermediaries. There is nothing in the genetic record that demonstrates genetic change aside from mutation. But mutation is generally degenerative. We don’t find mutation creating higher life forms.

In simpler terms:

1) There should be billions of “missing links” in the fosil record. (The argument is it has been so long they are all gone - if you follow that rational you have to do away with the fosil record entirely as an incomplete source for information.)

2) DNA and Microbiology now tell us a different story of origin, from when Darwin arrived at his theory. Small things are infinitively complex. But instead of investigating why, the “establishment” is instead pushing the old theories harder.

3) This concept only works with a very very very old planet. If the earth is proven young, as it is, this whole fantasy will unravel.

The very first image of the asteroids speak the loudest: explosions and chaos don’t create complex life, they destroy it. Think about it; order, design, and complexity do not spring forth from cataclysmic events. Newtonian physics and thermodynamics make this clear.

If evolution were true it failed when the dinosaurs died off during the ice age. They failed to evolve past that. And why were their brains smaller than ours? The hierarchy of species shows bigger is smarter, no?

(via oh-noo, freshphotons)

Nice image, ridiculous text

The thing that gets me about this is that they treat evolution like ‘Evolution, God of Biological Processes’. Evolution never fails, nor does it succeed, it just is. It’s the process of determining which lifeform is currently best suited to the current environment. That’s all. It’s not a plan for life, it’s a winnowing process life goes through. We’re not ‘guided’ by it.

And “If the earth is proven young, as it is, this whole fantasy will unravel”. What? You can’t front-load the argument like that. The ‘as-it-is’ does not belong in that sentence.

By the way, if I am misinformed about the evolutionary process (how it works, not how god did it all), please correct me.

  1. cheap-ebook reblogged this from xoseramon
  2. takexxxx reblogged this from kotenpa
  3. kotenpa reblogged this from gelcoat
  4. gelcoat reblogged this from proto-jp
  5. qtaroqhoji reblogged this from shi3z
  6. whatthoselittlefluffies reblogged this from caewaiisar
  7. residual-blues reblogged this from caylabot
  8. caylabot reblogged this from stuphunuu and added:
    the only Creationist argument against evolution theory that seems to interact on any rational level with the scientific...
  9. stuphunuu reblogged this from beastlyart and added:
    yeah figured that big out after reblogging. But yes. Thank you all of that.
  10. beastlyart reblogged this from stuphunuu and added:
    To be fair I think most people reblogged the original chart from its source and not with Creationism’s thoughts in tow....
  11. caewaiisar reblogged this from classics
  12. writerman-js reblogged this from jacony
  13. nin3bake7 reblogged this from petapeta
  14. taiyaki0334 reblogged this from d-d-d
  15. jimihands reblogged this from classics
  16. godf reblogged this from classics
  17. d-d-d reblogged this from classics
  18. arrjcc reblogged this from petapeta
  19. satelllite reblogged this from petapeta
  20. garamoba reblogged this from petapeta
  21. fico-labo reblogged this from pinto
  22. keke30jp reblogged this from classics
  23. grindlebone reblogged this from oh-noo and added:
    The thing that gets me about this is that they treat evolution like ‘Evolution, God of Biological Processes’. Evolution...
  24. idosiris reblogged this from jacony
  25. oh-noo reblogged this from pinto and added:
    Nice image, ridiculous text
  26. moritamori reblogged this from petapeta
  27. baiubeam reblogged this from classics
  28. daizydaizy reblogged this from nashi-kyo
  29. wasuretayo reblogged this from jacony
  30. rakuyen reblogged this from pinto