WR - Creation or Evolution? Or perhaps something else?

05-03-2005, 11:25 PM

schutzenkonig

This is my rifle...

Join Date: Aug 2004

Location: in the US

Posts: 1,589/1.05

Threads: 10

Friends Network

Creation or Evolution? Or perhaps something else?

click on one of our sponsors! OR REMOVE ADS

Personally I hold that evolution makes no sense what-so-ever. The ideas of one species gradually changing into something completely different I see as illogical, impossible, and contradictory to genetics.

Here are some reasons articles that explain why I believe this over evolution (I believed evolution as fact until I came to college, where I realized the impossibility of it due to the following articles, and the complexity of organic chemistry. I had been believing it as it was taught as dogma in the biology class I had in highschool).

LINK

Quote:

Many evolutionists believe that either DNA or RNA were the first things to have evolved. Not only is that impossible but that DNA actually supports a Creator. DNA is the most complex molecule in the universe with nothing even close to compare. The average human has over 50 trillion cells. All the DNA in these cells would only fill about two tablespoons. If all the chromosomes from just one person were stretched out and laid next to each other side by side it would go to the moon and back 5 million times. The information in just one person's chromosomes would fill enough books to fill the Grand Canyon 40 times. Each of the 15,000 cells in an infant is more complex than the Space Shuttle. One can only resound with the Psalmist, "I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made" (Psalm 139:14). DNA (Deoxyribonucleic Acid) is two strands coiled together into a double helix that carry information for any living organism to make all the molecules needed for life. It even stores all the information for cells to divide. RNA (Ribonucleic Acid) is a single strand that puts the genetic information found in the DNA to use by building proteins. These proteins can not arrange themselves without the help of the DNA or RNA. Proteins are like the machines in a wood shop and the RNA/DNA would be the blueprints or instructions to construct the machines. RNA is also very unstable and will only last from about 30 minutes to a few hours, whereas DNA is very stable. This stability is why information is stored in DNA. In short, DNA stores information and then passes it on to RNA, which reads and decodes the information to make proteins.

The challenge to any evolutionist is to answer the question of where life came from. With DNA, one must answer the question of where did all the information, stored within itself, come from? In other words, how could the process of natural selection or microevolution gain and pass on information to increase complexity? Today, very few scientists believe DNA could have been the first molecule to evolve because of its extreme complexity.

The genome of a mammal has about 2-4 billion symbols of information, that if put in a book, would be about 1000 volumes of 1000 pages each. Now imagine copying all that information symbol for symbol without any mistakes. This is exactly what DNA does as it duplicates and checks itself for errors in 20-80 minutes leaving a cat a cat, and a dog a dog. How could evolution use multiple chance mutations (mistakes) to add information to DNA when all cells have a built in code to prevent change in the DNA?

The catch-22 comes in when we see that in order for DNA to replicate it must use a protein (DNA polmerase) of only left handed amino acids. Remember proteins can not be made without DNA and now DNA can not reproduce without proteins. This means God had to have created DNA and proteins simultaneously. (And RNA makes the proteins so, it too, has to be there at the beginning).

Evolutionists have suggested that it must have been the RNA that evolved first because it is only a single strand and DNA is far too complex. Let us examine this logically. RNA must be able to reproduce itself, but how can it do this without the instructions from the DNA which hasn't evolved yet? RNA is unstable with a half life of only 44 years (much too short for evolution). Also, if temperatures get above 100 degrees Celsius the half life goes down to 70 minutes. This sure throws logic out the window for those evolutionists claiming life evolved in the hot hydrothermal environments. All this and we still haven't even answered the question of how RNA came to be. How could lifeless, unordered chemicals without any information come together to form a complex molecule with huge amounts of information and order? TIME is the answer for evolutionists. Given enough time anything is logical. Right? WRONG! In our past newsletter on the 2nd law of thermodynamics we saw that the greater the time the more the decay. But again, this is only what a known LAW of science states. I guess we could ignore it if it doesn't fit our faith. (Sorry, I couldn't resist the sarcasm).

LINK

Quote:

There are two requirements in science for something to be scientifically feasible. First, we must be able to scientifically describe the process and, second, we must be able to give it a scientifically descriptive name.

Before we describe the process, there are some things you must first understand. All living organisms are composed of atoms which are organized into molecules which are organized into cells. Every part of every living organism is composed of atoms and molecules and every function and structure of every living organism is based entirely on molecular activity. There is no mystical magic causing the existence or function of any living organism.

Every atom in every organism comes either directly or indirectly from the soil, water, and air of this planet. What one could call the clay of the earth. Better than 90% of the human body is composed of just four elements; hydrogen, oxygen, carbon, and nitrogen. The building blocks to create any and all living organisms are available in the soil, water, and air of our planet.

If we were to take the atoms we need for an organism from the soil, water, and air of the planet, organize them into the molecules we need, organize the molecules into the desired structure, and set the appropriate molecules in motion, we would create a living organism. A proper name for this process would be Molecular Construction of a Living Organism.

It is very easy to define the process and scientifically name it and is, therefore, scientifically feasible. But, is it scientifically possible to perform the process?

In the spring of 1998, IBM made a very significant step towards being able to perform the process of molecular construction of a living organism. IBM boasted on television about the ability to move and position atoms long enough to spell IBM with the atoms. It is only scientific common sense that, if we can move and position something as small as atoms, we can also move and position much larger molecules which are all composed of two or more atoms.

Is it possible to move and position the trillions of molecules necessary to construct a single living cell, much less a multicellular organism?

It depends on how advanced our technology is. I believe that it is only a matter of time until we have that technology and, with our knowledge doubling in less than two years, time is on our side. I predict that we will create a relatively simple protist (single cell organism) from nothing but atoms within the next 20 to 30 years (by 2020 to 2030.) If technology research giants like IBM, medical researchers, and biological researchers combine their efforts, it could happen in as little as five to 10 years. This achievement would be the single most significant achievement in the history of man, would dwarf traveling to the moon or Mars, and would change medicine forever (see the page on molecular regeneration.)

My question for you to think about is, "If it is inevitable that we will some day create life with molecular construction, why isn't it possible that someone else already has?"

Oh, if you are just going to come in and say that somone is stupid for believing in creation or evolution, a preemptive:

So come in, post your reasons for believing what you do, and lets keep this civil.

| quote |

Sponsored Links
REMOVE ADS

05-04-2005, 12:16 AM	#2
CD Psychic MOD Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Everywhere Posts: 7,002/4.55 Threads: 268 Friends Network Gold Member	Re: Creation or Evolution? Or perhaps something else? One thing that is being forgotten is the utterly staggering amount of time that is talked about in evolution. Think of how far man has come since the early 1900s... now go back to the Medieval times... now go back to the time of Christ. 0 A.D. ... was that a long time ago? Well, if the planet is indeed as old as some say it is, then 2005 years is a blink of the eye. All I'm saying is that time is relative and people who dismiss evolution may possibly be forgetting that. A lot can happen in tens/hundreds of thousands of years. I don't know the answers but I'm also not arrogant enough to assume I do. Since humans have been on this Earth (for how long is just another arguement) there have been countless theories as to why and how... what are the chances we suddenly got it right? Or ever will...
	___________________________________________
	\| quote \|

05-04-2005, 12:24 AM	#3
skept The Original Aussie. Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Aussie Posts: 4,479/3.40 Threads: 49 Friends Network Gold Member	Re: Creation or Evolution? Or perhaps something else? I believe that God created the Heavens and the Earth and every living thing in existance. The fundamental truth is that someone had to create the first few elements upon which all of the blocks are based upon. I believe that that being is God. How did God come about? I dont know - its a mystery of life that will hopefully answered after death along with many other questions. That is me speaking from a Catholic perspective. Now the engineering side of me kicks in. Many of the phenonema of this earth can be simply proven by mathematics in one form or another. Do i believe in evolution yes - I believe that man 1000 years from now will be very different from man today. We just have to look at the differnt races to see the different paths that evolution has taken in each one of them. Hell even if you break down each country and look at its inhabitants you will see the different body features between each of the countries as evolution marched on during the thousands of years we were here. I believe that one day we will solve a 'big bang' theory and people will try to use it to disprove the existance of God and religion, but to that I have but one reply - What made the very first building blocks that caused that big bang? To say a lepton or a quark hit each other and causing the universe thus disproving the position of God is wrong. You cannot claim that something is magically appeared out of the middle of nowhere. Yet in saying that there is the faith that God is there and its being contradictory what I'm saying. I'm saying particles cannot just appear but how did God appear? That is where faith comes in and my believe is that God is eternal - he was there from the very beginning - how he got there I do not know, how he was created I do not know but I have faith that he does exist - and that is the basis of every religion the faith to believe in something that you cannot see or touch. Yet you can feel God exist - when you in a shit you pray and life becomes bearable. To some they say this is just the cycle of life - shit happens shit gets better, lather, rinse repeat. I believe that shit happens for a reason - it adds perspective to my life, when shit gets really bad as it tends to God is there with a guiding hand to make sure I come out on top. So I believe in both creation and evolution - they go hand in had with each other. I believe that God created the first man and the human nature drove the evolution of man to what we are today.

	\| quote \|

05-04-2005, 12:39 AM	#4
Jimi Banned by pornerators Champion! Champion! Champion! Champion! Champion! Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 10,064/4.80 Threads: 316 Friends Network	Re: Creation or Evolution? Or perhaps something else? Evolution is not impossible, nor improbable. Evolution happens every day, before our very eyes. However, the word evolution itself has been raped from it's original meaning. Evolution is when a species changes physiologically, and to deny species change is to deny the obvious. You can take any given species, from any given location, and they will be similar, but the further you get from that particular location, the more and more differences you see inside the same species. This is why there are obvious locality variations between even humans, with blacks, asians, whites, aborigines, native Americans, etc. Even inside of localized areas, you have difference.... darker hair, eyes, and skin in the more moderate Southern Europe, as opposed to the lighter skinned, lighter hair and eyed people of Northern Europe. I know most people can't see it, because they're too busy generalizing people, but even in Asians, there are obvious differences between Chinese people, Japanese people, Fillipinos, Malaysians, Borneans..... With Africans, you have obvious difference depending on even which tribe you come from. This is all due to evolution. I don't, however, believe that we, as humans, evolved from lesser primates. We have 46 chromosomes, all other primates, be it gorillas, chimpanzees, orangutans, marmosetts, any of them have 48. Evolution has never shown to decrease chromosomal composition to make itself better. Ever. DNA is a specific program, if you will. There are patterns in ALL of DNA that make us who we are. EVERY LIVING ORGANISM has the SAME DNA. However, different DNA is coded differently to make us what we are. This is much the same as computers. Computers use complex coding of 0s and 1s to make it all work. We have the same basic concept, just in A, G, T, and D. Programming doesn't just happen. Computers didn't just start to exist one day. These things take time, and effort, and artistic concept. Our very being proves the existence of creation, be it God, or Aliens, or pink elves from Pluto. Then we come to the whole time thing. Sure, 2500 years isn't a long time in the entire scheme of things, but neither is 3 billion years. Supposedly, we evolved from lesser primates within the last few million years. Now, if it took us THAT long to evolve.... then how the hell did we come from single-celled organisms in such a short period of time? It's simply not possible, nor is it plausible. This has been debated in a previous argument, so rather than wasting my time writing it all out, I will find the previous argument and quote it in my next post. Then we come to environment. This is an "M-class" planet. This planet has everything needed to allow us to live. One would say that we "evolved" to suit the planet, but if that was the case, why didn't plants evolve to live on Mars, where the C02 levels are in huge quantity? We have trees, we have rivers, we have mountains, we have life flourishing in all aspects of this planet. We have bacteria growing in the deepest depths of the oceans, in fissures in which any other life-form would die instantly from the toxic gasses. Tell me that these same organisms can't live on Venus. We have water bears (if you've never seen water bears, check 'em out.... such cute little microscopic buggers). These little guys live pretty much anywhere you can go, save for the fissures with the toxic gasses, I think. I could go on all night, but I have to get to watching House. So, I will find my previous argument, and post it.

	\| quote \|

05-04-2005, 12:42 AM	#5
Bigeme bitch Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: UNC Posts: 1,033/0.79 Threads: 118 Friends Network	Re: Creation or Evolution? Or perhaps something else? One quick note that you might get pissed at me for - Man has not evolved in the past 100,000 years. You take an infant from 80,000 years ago and raise it in society today, it would have no distinguishable characteristics. Not to say that evolution doesnt occur, it just doesnt occur that fast. Now all that chemistry mumbo jumbo...you assume that there is only 1 planet and that time is not involved in this? Ahem. There are literall billions and billions of GALAXIES. each galaxy most likely have hunders of billions of stars with multiple planets. Now given that and the estimated age of the known universe (something between 9 and 16 billion years), you have how many chances for these chemicals to come together in the right way? I mean sure its an extremely, extremely, extremely small chance, but how many chances have you had? And once life comes about the processes that drive evolution (especially when sexual reproduction comes about) allow the process to occur relatively rapidly. My biology teacher was a creationist. I was raised catholic. My experience and independent research indicates logically that life has evolved and continues to evolve. Cell reproduction does have errors. Most of them not noticeable because the codons code for the same amino acid with just one variation or for another amino acid that replaces it nicely or cause the protein to become unstable. Anyway I need to get back to studying. (Origin of the universe is a whole nother thing)

	\| quote \|