Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 19
  1. #1

    Default Theory of CREATIONISM


    Mendel’s laws of genetics and their modern-day refinements explain almost all physical variations occurring within species. Mendel discovered that genes (units of heredity) are merely reshuffled from one generation to another. Different combinations are formed, not different genes. The different combinations produce many variations within each kind of life, as in the dog family.
    A logical consequence of Mendel’s laws is that there are limits to such variation. Breeding experiments and common observationsc also confirm these boundaries

    Mutations are the only known means by which new genetic material becomes available for evolution. Rarely, if ever, is a mutation beneficial to an organism in its natural environment. Almost all observable mutations are harmful; some are meaningless; many are lethal. No known mutation has ever produced a form of life having greater complexity and viability than its ancestors

    “Most mutants which arise in any organism are more or less disadvantageous to their possessors. The classical mutants obtained in Drosophila [the fruit fly] usually show deterioration, breakdown, or disappearance of some organs. Mutants are known which diminish the quantity or destroy the pigment in the eyes, and in the body reduce the wings, eyes, bristles, legs. Many mutants are, in fact, lethal to their possessors. Mutants which equal the normal fly in vigor are a minority, and mutants that would make a major improvement of the normal organization in the normal environments are unknown.” Theodosius Dobzhansky, Evolution, Genetics, and Man (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1955), p. 105.

    It is a striking, but not much mentioned fact that, though geneticists have been breeding fruit-flies for sixty years or more in labs all round the world—flies which produce a new generation every eleven days—they have never yet seen the emergence of a new species or even a new enzyme.” Gordon Rattray Taylor (former Chief Science Advisor, BBC Television), The Great Evolution Mystery (New York: Harper & Row, 1983), p. 48

    “Molecular evolution is not based on scientific authority. There is no publication in the scientific literature—in prestigious journals, specialty journals, or book—that describes how molecular evolution of any real, complex, biochemical system either did occur or even might have occurred. There are assertions that such evolution occurred, but absolutely none are supported by pertinent experiments or calculations. Since no one knows molecular evolution by direct experience, and since there is no authority on which to base claims of knowledge, it can truly be said that—like the contention that the Eagles will win the Super Bowl this year—the assertion of Darwinian molecular evolution is merely bluster.” Behe, pp. 186–187.

    “There has never been a meeting, or a book, or a paper on details of the evolution of complex biochemical systems.” Michael J. Behe, Darwin’s Black Box (New York: The Free Press, 1996), p. 179.

    From a Darwinian standpoint, going childless by choice is hard enough to explain, but adoption, as the arch-Darwinist Richard Dawkins notes, is a double whammy. Not only do you reduce, or at least fail to increase, your own reproductive success, but you improve someone else’s. Since the birth parent is your rival in the great genetic steeplechase, a gene that encourages adoption should be knocked out of the running in fairly short order. Cleo Sullivan, “The Adoption Paradox,” Discover, January 2001, p. 80.

    daghan pa unta... post lang nako by category!

  2. #2
    pastilana gyud nimo bosing oi

    hehehehehehehehehehehehehe

    up ta ani.

  3. #3
    The return of the g-die

  4. #4
    bro kebot, please post this sa creationism thread. use the forum's search function. the mods must have muted you kay you've been opening threads here and there...kapila na na nagbalik-balik imong mga threads gi open. for your sake, follow the forum rules.

  5. #5
    hoy kebot paminaw badlongona gyud ni oi..... he

  6. #6
    Bro kebs...just to guide you naa nay thread ani and were heavily discussed before...https://www.istorya.net/forums/spirit...eving-123.html ...

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by kebotDiNaMute View Post
    Mendel’s laws of genetics and their modern-day refinements explain almost all physical variations occurring within species. Mendel discovered that genes (units of heredity) are merely reshuffled from one generation to another. Different combinations are formed, not different genes. The different combinations produce many variations within each kind of life, as in the dog family.
    A logical consequence of Mendel’s laws is that there are limits to such variation. Breeding experiments and common observationsc also confirm these boundaries

    Mutations are the only known means by which new genetic material becomes available for evolution. Rarely, if ever, is a mutation beneficial to an organism in its natural environment. Almost all observable mutations are harmful; some are meaningless; many are lethal. No known mutation has ever produced a form of life having greater complexity and viability than its ancestors

    “Most mutants which arise in any organism are more or less disadvantageous to their possessors. The classical mutants obtained in Drosophila [the fruit fly] usually show deterioration, breakdown, or disappearance of some organs. Mutants are known which diminish the quantity or destroy the pigment in the eyes, and in the body reduce the wings, eyes, bristles, legs. Many mutants are, in fact, lethal to their possessors. Mutants which equal the normal fly in vigor are a minority, and mutants that would make a major improvement of the normal organization in the normal environments are unknown.” Theodosius Dobzhansky, Evolution, Genetics, and Man (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1955), p. 105.

    It is a striking, but not much mentioned fact that, though geneticists have been breeding fruit-flies for sixty years or more in labs all round the world—flies which produce a new generation every eleven days—they have never yet seen the emergence of a new species or even a new enzyme.” Gordon Rattray Taylor (former Chief Science Advisor, BBC Television), The Great Evolution Mystery (New York: Harper & Row, 1983), p. 48

    “Molecular evolution is not based on scientific authority. There is no publication in the scientific literature—in prestigious journals, specialty journals, or book—that describes how molecular evolution of any real, complex, biochemical system either did occur or even might have occurred. There are assertions that such evolution occurred, but absolutely none are supported by pertinent experiments or calculations. Since no one knows molecular evolution by direct experience, and since there is no authority on which to base claims of knowledge, it can truly be said that—like the contention that the Eagles will win the Super Bowl this year—the assertion of Darwinian molecular evolution is merely bluster.” Behe, pp. 186–187.

    “There has never been a meeting, or a book, or a paper on details of the evolution of complex biochemical systems.” Michael J. Behe, Darwin’s Black Box (New York: The Free Press, 1996), p. 179.

    From a Darwinian standpoint, going childless by choice is hard enough to explain, but adoption, as the arch-Darwinist Richard Dawkins notes, is a double whammy. Not only do you reduce, or at least fail to increase, your own reproductive success, but you improve someone else’s. Since the birth parent is your rival in the great genetic steeplechase, a gene that encourages adoption should be knocked out of the running in fairly short order. Cleo Sullivan, “The Adoption Paradox,” Discover, January 2001, p. 80.

    daghan pa unta... post lang nako by category!

    okay.

    Mister I have questions.

    1. From two pairs(Noah's flood story in the bible) how did we arrived the numbers of species we have today that goes by millions?

    2. Lions take Zebras and buffaloes as food, how many buffaloes and Zebras were there in the Ark? according to the bible- Noah took pairs. Are Lions vegetarians?

  8. #8
    pagka toy toy jud.

    ang mopatol ani kay patolon sad/



    dont make ur life harder ma man.

  9. #9
    naa nay existing thread pareho ani.

  10. #10
    ^^ agree ko syo...mods, please close lang.

  11.    Advertisement

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

 
  1. Story of Creation VS Theory of Evolution.
    By rcruman in forum General Discussions
    Replies: 527
    Last Post: 06-15-2010, 09:41 PM
  2. Sumerian Tales of Creation
    By hizuka007 in forum Spirituality & Occult - OLDER
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 01-11-2010, 12:52 AM
  3. The New Theory of the Universe
    By tripwire in forum Science
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 11-12-2009, 05:37 PM
  4. Theory of life and love by Albert Einstein
    By floppy in forum Arts & Literature
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-26-2009, 11:39 AM
  5. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-06-2009, 09:14 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
about us
We are the first Cebu Online Media.

iSTORYA.NET is Cebu's Biggest, Southern Philippines' Most Active, and the Philippines' Strongest Online Community!
follow us
#top