Time to Evolve from Evolution (Saturbray)

Be careful, however, that the exercise of your Freedom does not become a stumbling block to the weak. 1 Cor 8:9

What if everything about evolution is a lie? This would mean everything built on the theory of evolution is a fraud too. One of the primary gaps evolutionists never want to discuss is where life began? They have two primary theories, it either randomly developed from the primordial soup of came from another universe on an asteroid. Neither of these theories is believable yet the entire theory of evolution is built on them even though the odds are around one in infinity.

There is a huge void in scientific explanation how life and evolution started so most scientists dismiss it as not important or in any need of explanation or proof. They say there was a Big Bang when nothing became something and then exploded into an explosion creating the universe according to all of their infallible models. After billions and billions of years, life magically, oops, scientifically appeared to begin the evolutionary chain. The only explanation the Darwinists have for life beginning is time rather than God. For evolutionists God is to be mocked while billions and billions of years is a serious explanation.

If you ask an evolutionist how life began they will immediately tell you that how life began is not a part of evolution. If you continue to ax the question they will either call you all types of names the worst of which is Christian or explain how only scientists understand how life began. It usually comes down to their ability to intimidate and bully people and even fellow scientists into backing down from the obvious black hole of life’s beginning. They will usually begin their virtual firing squad for anyone daring to question the beginning of life as subhuman and not part of academia’s Holy of Holies.

Their primary explanation is the primordial soup explanation. After the Big Bang and the earth formed with millions of years of volcanoes and flowing lava when the hydrogen and oxygen combined to form water and the cooling began. Randomly the earth just happened to circle the sun at exactly the right orbit and rotation to make the water the perfect temperature for life. Then a few million years ago the chemicals randomly formed amino acids turning into some type of primitive bacteria and billions of years later that bacteria is making laptops.

The problem with this theory is how complex that random event had to be. As scientists become more and more familiar with amino acids and DNA they are finding it is far more complex than they ever knew it was. The genetic codes are still ninety eight percent unexplained as they find more and more unexplainable pieces of the complexity it points less and less to a random act. They were dismissing the unexplained parts as Junk DNA pieces since they have only been able to identify less than 2% of DNA code and invented the term junk for the rest. This should be insulting to their intelligence and certainly to ours. As they get deeper and deeper into the DNA code they are finding that there is no junk in the code and more complexity making the randomness even less possible. Simply Google junk DNA and find out the lies are being exposed by those brave enough to question science. It would take trillions and trillions of years for a DNA helix to form randomly not simply billions. http://www.psrast.org/junkdna.htm

Their second explanation which is not as universally accepted but basically a fallback theory is the amino acids and life source came from space. This was developed when they realized their primordial soup explanation really didn’t hold water. So they developed the asteroid explanation that a life seed came from a distant solar system billions of light years away and fell to the earth at just the right time and apparently into the ocean after it survived the billion year trip in a vacuum and thousand degree temps during entry into our atmosphere. The obvious questions are where did it come from and is the solar system it came from more or less superior than ours. It is ok to believe there are life forms on other planets but it is not ok to believe there is a God.

Simply because a scientist says over billions of years and billions of chances can make something happen does not make it so. This is only a theory but one that really does not withstand the smell test when you think about it. Fortunately for evolution, scientists generally refuse to question any of their theories and rely on consensus to verify and vilify their earth sized holes in their theories. They have had to fight for this theory so completely and ignore so many craters it has become more of a magic show than science. They use smoke and mirrors to keep people from asking the important questions or demanding an explanation of why those odds are looking more like infinity to one than the truth.

Imagine if scientists spent as much time, energy and money trying to find out if God is real than trying to disprove God. Science has become a religion based on an atheistic belief that we began as nothing and when we die we go back to nothing. It is a religion that places all of its faith in evolution with no explanation of how life arrived but when it came, random chance and mutations has got us to the point man can think, read and write. They have replaced God with billions and billions of years so time is the miracle of our creation. What is the difference between their faith in billions of years and faith in God?

Evolution became the first agenda driven junk science of the modern world. Science is basically following a 19th century idea which if they were true scientists would have been disproved millions of times over but the politics won’t allow it. They need to have people turn from God to force their hope and trust in the gummit. They need the people to believe gummit is their god where all of their hope exists.

If people would put their faith and hope in God they would not need the gummit and most of its controls. If people were saved by Jesus Christ and believed he is where all hope exists there would be a heaven beyond this earth, something the Darwinists can’t offer. If there is a heaven and hell and Jesus saves us sinners from that torture we deserve then we wouldn’t need gummit to regulate our lives as we would simply follow the rules set in the Bible. This is the communists’ greatest fear that people would be free to live their lives as they wish without their absolute control.

Imagine if science were to investigate the marvel of God’s creation and how it so miraculously relates together rather than attempting to use his design as proof there is no God? Science could actually be a positive to most lives rather than its need to be god and repeatedly use its power to control our lives with all of their junk science decrees. You can see all the failures of science everywhere you look so why do we continue to believe evolution with all of its massive gaps? It is time to evolve from evolution.

Earth has a number of lifeforms that are so remarkably different from all the others at the molecular level that a different origin somewhere else ~ or at a different time ~ is certainly suggested.

I don't think evolutionists can prove common origin anymore ~ they could back before we knew about DNA and began building a genome library and anayzing it.

Actually, thinking about it, the evolutionists pretty much stuck to the higher animals and plants ~ before they knew about DNA ~ and they came up with some pretty fanciful ideas. This business of humans being apes is one of them ~ because, as it turns out, we have some chemistry in us that dates to when EVERYBODY like us was still a monkey ~ but today's apes, and the more apelike advanced monkeys do not have that chemistry.

Raises a real good question about how we could have ape ancestry when only monkeys have that part of our ancestry, and the apes don't, and vice versa.

We cannot have a common ancestry with apes while at the same time missing some of the more serious ingredients in ape makeup ~ and here we're not talking about gross physical attributes ~ but things that make the kidneys and livers work, or help us hold our meat together! I think that last one ~ the adhesives is the most important ~ we got monkey glue~!

As far as genders are concerned, their development is being studied, and there are several approaches that have merit (I'm not an evolutionary biologist, so I my understanding is rudimentary). However, right in your own backyard there are a number of species that are capable of self fertilization - a lot of plants (most conifers) are diaceous, i.e. have male and female reproductive organs. Many animals are simultaneous hermaphrodites (worms, snails, clams), and some fish are sequentially hermaphroditic, and change gender during their lives.

In order to further the discussion based on the intent of your original post.

I suggest the issue breaks down between two positions.

1. There is a God/Creator and we acquired objective morality, as well as the cognitive ability to explore his nature and our own.

2. We exist as a matter of random chance over time and therefore morality is relative, a social construct for the benefit of the whole. It also requires determination, “you are your genes” and have no choice or “Free Will”.

In the first position, there is humility and consciousness.

In the second, there is the fatalism and selfishness that you have no choice over.

So, how did we get this far ?

Evolution, regardless of all its claims of creating more complexity or higher levels of understanding, is all about death.

They try to make it about “survival”, but that is a false flag.

So, we have a modern culture that has been conditioned to set aside their own nature in order to “get along”.

This is the issue.

There are, of course, many paths to satori ~ in the microminiature world of pre-assembly i've noticed that when the researchers get up to using nanoparticles they can get them to assemble into tiny machinery. When they use the much smaller molecules of life they get different sorts of assembly options.

This is well within the parameters of multi-level coding implicit in DNA.

Give you an example of how important this is ~ when you go looking for gold ~ and who hasn't ~ if you go for the flakes you can see, you need substantial capital investment and machinery of different sorts. if, on the other hand, you go for nanoparticles, which has been done, it's totally different. They call the finest particles, which you cannot see by themselves, 'gold flour' ~ which means you have to have an awful lot of them to see them to know you've collected some gold.

Termites can mine gold nanoparticles and poop them out in their nests BTW which is a recent discovery discussed earlier on FR.

The big difference between the particles and the nano particles is that the particles don't float, and the nano particles do float.

When using water in your process of extracting gold from the background matrix the technological solutions are different depending on the size of that gold particle.

The difference takes place at a level of smallness that the vanderwaals forces are relevant.

Self assembly into molecular machines like DNA, or little tiny motors that work on heat differentials seems to be built into the demiurge of the atoms themselves. Eventually I think they'll find that life can be caused to self assemble ~ possibly through the mediation and cogitation of supercomputer segments actually found within DNA.

no doubt someone will come up with the math behind it someday but when you start with DNA you need an error edit correction process ~ which, in fact, DNA has ~ it works at the time of meiosis in the higher organisms. That's what drives gender differentiation ~ Tab A vs. Slot B

It's gotta' be one whale of an error correction mechanism since, in general, DNA based life has been around for about 4 billion years on this planet ~ and it didn't turn into some other kind of life in all that time.

Really ?

You seem to be where I was a number of years ago.

Trying desperately to convince myself that I was free to do what I pleased.

I suggest you look at the math or probabilities necessary for random mutations, conserved and selected in any given environment that would result in an increase of information. Evolution is all about death.

The easy way to do that is to accept the fact that DNA is heavily invested in self assembly technology ~ and that it's the DNA itself that's life, not the critters it churns out.

Whether DNA churns up a Brown Fish or a White Bear has no bearing whatsoever on the mechanism of self-assembly. Sexual reproduction has mechanisms, themselves, self assembled in some fashion, that correct errors in coding at the time of reproduction and thereby FIGHT BACK against the process mistakenly called 'evolution' ~ presumably the self assembled protective mechanisms change through time ~ and can fix errors differently thereby leading to entirely diferent critters.

You have to get beyond Darwin's mistake of accepting the gradualist premise of the geologists of his time. if you dope a chip base a tad different you get an entirely different chip with different capacitances ~ the premise should apply to DNA rebuilds in mieosis as well.

However, right in your own backyard there are a number of species that are capable of self fertilization - a lot of plants (most conifers) are diaceous, i.e. have male and female reproductive organs.

Right, but why? The energy-cost of making these sexual organs themselves, WITH NO REASONABLE GUARANTEE OF WORKING (and even likelihood of failing), is the question. Asexual reproduction is "the safe bet" and, since evolution is a process, there's not any reason to implement it: that is, evolution cannot 'see' that added effort/complexity* now yields some benefit in the future. (*Something that is 'optional' won't be used in the first rounds of evolution and should fall victim to degenerating ["vestigalization"?], and an entire system [sexual reproduction] is of no use if it doesn't fully work.)

Many animals are simultaneous hermaphrodites (worms, snails, clams), and some fish are sequentially hermaphroditic, and change gender during their lives.

Except self-fertilizers it's irrelevant to the discussion: in order for sexual reproduction to work it has to be multiple members having sex. -- Thus energy is wasted on sexual-organs, from a evolutionary-standpoint, if there are not other sexed organisms of that species to mate with: at that point it actually becomes true that sexual organs should be the ones selected against.

Watch all you can from David Berlinski.

Berlinski received his Ph.D. in philosophy from Princeton University and was later a postdoctoral fellow in mathematics and molecular biology at Columbia University. He has authored works on systems analysis, differential topology, theoretical biology, analytic philosophy, and the philosophy of mathematics, as well as three novels. He has also taught philosophy, mathematics and English at Stanford, Rutgers, the City University of New York and the Université de Paris. In addition, he has held research fellowships at the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis in Austria and the Institut des Hautes Études Scientifiques. He lives in Paris.

You can start here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHeSaUq-Hl8

There is so much more.

It’s up to you.

Everything we know about self-assembly has been developed within the last 10 years. We live in a universe where the teeny tiny stuff self-assembles. The only question is where does the direction come from ~ the old guys two centuries ago imagined macro forces impinge on the life force, whatever that was, and cause it in some manner to improve through competition ~ that's evolution.

The reality of self-assembly is that in some manner the information necessary to provide for the details is implicit in the being of matter itself ~ or, accessible by matter from different dimensional levels (the half dozen 'rolled up' dimensions perhaps, and who knows what's going on over there eh).

The MIND OF GOD would be expressed in this universe in such a manner. it's not a clock.

I suspect an error in translation ~ God would be saying something more like 'all things are possible' ~ and then giving the meditating prophet an example of how a small seed ~ maybe the mustard seed ~ has all the genes it will ever need to grow up to meet whatever the conditions are. Just at the time humans did not comprehend the message beyond knowing it was important and passing it on to us to decipher.

I believe the mustard plant has more genes than any other plant, and more than any of the chordate animals, and more than just about anyting except the largest virus ~ which is just about the size of the smallest bacteria.

Interesting choice that mustard seed ~ a veritable factory of self-assembly ~ can grow anywhere and everywhere!

more recent studies on how paint really mixes are leading to a lot of reconsideration of just all sorts of things ~ which we need not get into of course, but it's interesting that we did not really know how paint mixed and it may involve quantum interactions of a most profound nature.

DNA is far more complex than paint ~ with a vast array of exceedingly complex chemistry. If paint can do it, so can DNA!

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.