Darwin Was Wrong About Geology

CEH ^ | December 2, 2009

[GodGunsGuts]

Dec 2, 2009 — Field geologists have revisited a site Darwin visited on the voyage of the Beagle, and found that he incorrectly interpreted what he found.  A large field of erratic boulders in Tierra del Fuego that have become known as “Darwin’s Boulders” were deposited by a completely different process than he thought.  The modern team, publishing in the Geological Society of America’s December issue of the GSA Today,¹ noted that “Darwin’s thinking was profoundly influenced by Lyell’s obsession with large-scale, slow, vertical movements of the crust, especially as manifested in his theory of submergence and ice rafting to explain drift.”  Lyell, in turn, felt vindicated: “Lyell celebrated these observations because they supported his idea of uniformitarianism—that continued small changes, as witnessed in the field, could account for dramatic changes of Earth’s surface over geologic time.”  In this case, though, a more rapid phenomenon provides a better explanation for the observations...

[Blood of Tyrants]

You just assume that the combinations of genetic material are random.

[Moonman62]

You just assume that the combinations of genetic material are random.

Are you saying they aren't random?

[Blood of Tyrants]

YES! You start with the assumption that everything is just accidental and random and cannot get to the point that there is a designer who can and does control even the smallest details.

[Moonman62]

You start with the assumption that everything is just accidental and random

No I didn't. That's your strawman.

And if randomness isn't really random then why do you object to it being part of genetics or evolution?

[Blood of Tyrants]

“And if randomness isn’t really random then why do you object to it being part of genetics or evolution?”

What? If it isn’t random, then it isn’t random. I do not put limits on a God that can create the entire universe. The entire universe exists only because He wills it.

Do you REALLY look at the incredible complexity of just a single cell, the function of which is still only partially understood yet fills volumes of books, and think that it all just accidental and a result of millions of molecules of amino acids and proteins just sort of jumbled together in the right order?

Do you realize that it is more likely for a tornado to go through a junkyard and produce a space shuttle than for a cell to form and suddenly come to life?

[Just mythoughts]

The "Earth Ages" theology was then as it is now, a fringe element of Christianity. But had Darwin had such a faculty he would never have gotten on the Beagle nor would any scientist ever have gone to a science class or lab because because his "knowledgeable instructors" would have already have deciphered all of the answers to science from Scripture. (Please let me know where in Scripture I can find some answers to semiconductor technology I am working on. I would really appreciate it.)

I sure hope I get to have a seat in the room, when you have opportunity to tell Peter what he penned was a fringe element of Christianity.

Your semiconductor tech question is too vague for me to respond.

[ColdWater]

Do you realize that it is more likely for a tornado to go through a junkyard and produce a space shuttle than for a cell to form and suddenly come to life?

Why do you doubt the power of God?

[ColdWater]

Do you realize that it is more likely for a tornado to go through a junkyard and produce a space shuttle than for a cell to form and suddenly come to life?

Which is more likely? A cell to form and come to life or a fully developed man to suddenly come to life?

[Blood of Tyrants]

Let me complete that for the deliberately dense.

Do you realize that it is more likely for a tornado to go through a junkyard and produce a space shuttle than for a cell to form and suddenly come to life by itself?

[Blood of Tyrants]

When the hand of God is involved, what is the difference?

[ColdWater]

Let me complete that for the deliberately dense.

Translated (I really didn't mean to write what I wrote).

[ColdWater]

When the hand of God is involved, what is the difference?

Then we must go with the most probable and the most obvious. It is more probably that a cell first formed than for a fully formed human to have first formed.

[Blood of Tyrants]

Translated for the deliberately dense: Yes, I meant to write what I wrote, I just assumed that the dense would not be deliberately so.

[Blood of Tyrants]

You are being stupid. Goodbye.

[ColdWater]

Yes, I meant to write what I wrote, I just assumed that the dense would not be deliberately so.

Oh. We are supposed to read your mind and add to your posts what you didn't write. Uh huh. That is pretty dense of you.

[Natural Law]

"I sure hope I get to have a seat in the room, when you have opportunity to tell Peter what he penned was a fringe element of Christianity."

Those who preach that Scripture requires a secret key to decipher the locks on the gates of Heaven that only their interpretation of Scripture can provide will have a lot of 'splainin" to do, assuming they even get an audience.

[Just mythoughts]

Those who preach that Scripture requires a secret key to decipher the locks on the gates of Heaven that only their interpretation of Scripture can provide will have a lot of 'splainin" to do, assuming they even get an audience.

LOL I do not follow a religion of passed off keys. Peter's words are the key, and require NO decipher. There is only One who has the key that opens or closes, and it is called the Key to David.

[OldNavyVet]

Evolution states that living things change slowly over a long period of time

Evolutionists have noted that the appearance of new viruses demonstates that some living things evolve rapidly -- over short periods of time.

Other evolutionary changes take time ... One for instance -- going beyond living species -- is the evolutionary history of the moon. Science has pretty well documented that the moon is an ancient splash-off from earth.

[Moonman62]

Do you REALLY look at the incredible complexity of just a single cell, the function of which is still only partially understood yet fills volumes of books, and think that it all just accidental and a result of millions of molecules of amino acids and proteins just sort of jumbled together in the right order?

No. Like I said many times before it isn't a random accident. You're leaving out something very important. Randomness is a very important part of nature, and something which is central to Mendelian genetics, which you don't seem to deny, though you do seem confused.

Do you realize that it is more likely for a tornado to go through a junkyard and produce a space shuttle than for a cell to form and suddenly come to life?

Really? Where's the math and what model are you using?

[aruanan]

1) There is no such thing as neo-evolutionism. Theories (pardon the pun) continuously evolve.
2)Science does not have "doctrines".
3P Punctuated equilibrium is not a new concept. It has a long history in the fields of behavioral science and computer modeling in which an iterative orthogonal array process can be greatly accelerated.
4) You obviously don;t know what you are talking about.

1) Neo-Darwinism is indeed neo-evolutionary theory.
2) Of course, it does. A study of the history of science shows a field littered with discarded theories and teachings (aka doctrines) based on them.
3) Punctuated equilibrium (aka PunkEek) is one of the more neo of the neo-Darwinian theories of evolution. Maybe if you're twenty, it would seem to have been around a long time; otherwise, it's pretty new, arriving on the scene in 1972 only 10 years before the first commercially produced CD player (1982). PE came first. It was adopted and adapted since then by other fields.
4) Ha ha ha ha ha. Typical.