header pic

Area51 Board (non-moderated) at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' Scout-Tennessee a51 Crowd- Enjoy ROWDY discussion covering politics, religion, current events, and all things under the sun

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.


Author

Topic: THE ORDER IN THE SKIES

 (Read 1388 times)

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 18295
  • Liked:
THE ORDER IN THE SKIES
« on: January 08, 2018, 11:56:29 AM »
… Something else has to be behind things, somehow guiding them. And that, one might say, is a kind of mathematical proof of divinity.
Guy Marchie, American Science Writer (1)
During the night of July 4th in 1054, Chinese astronomers witnessed an extraordinary event: a very bright star that suddenly appeared near the constellation Taurus. It was so bright that it could easily be seen even in daytime. At night it was brighter than the moon.
The gigantic explosions known as supernova cause matter to move throughout the universe. The enormous distances between the universe's stars and galaxies moderate the risk that such an explosion will affect other bodies.
What Chinese astronomers observed was one of the most interesting and catastrophic astronomic
phenomena in our universe. It was a supernova.
A supernova is a star that is shattered by an explosion. A huge star destroys itself in an immense blast and the material of its core is scattered in every direction. The light produced during this event is a thousand times brighter than normal.
Scientists today think that supernovas play a key role in the formation of the universe. These explosions are what cause different elements to be carried to different parts of the universe. It is supposed that the material ejected by these explosions subsequently combines to form a new galaxy or a star somewhere else in the universe. According to this hypothesis, our solar system, the sun and its planets including Earth, are the products of some incredibly ancient supernova.
Although supernovas may seem to be ordinary explosions, they in fact are minutely structured in their details. In Nature's Destiny Michael Denton writes:
The distance between supernovae and indeed between all stars is critical for other reasons. If the distance between stars in our galaxy was much less, planetary orbits would be destabilized. If it was much more, then the debris thrown out by a supernova would be so diffusely distributed that planetary systems like our own would in all probability never form. If the cosmos is to be a home for life, then the flickering of the supernovae must occur at a very precise rate and the average distance between them, and indeed between all stars, must be very close to the actual observed figure. (2)
The ratio of supernovas and stars' distances are just two more of the fine-tuned details of this miraculous universe. Examining deeper the universe the arrangement we see is beautiful both in the organization and design.
 
Why is There So Much Space?
The universe following the Big Bang was a nebula of just hydrogen and helium. Heavier elements were produced later by means of intentionally-designed nuclear reactions. Yet the existence of heavier elements is not a sufficient reason for the universe to become a suitable place for life. A much more important issue is how the universe was formed and ordered.
We shall start by asking how big the universe is.
The planet Earth is a part of the solar system. In this system there are nine major planets with fifty-four satellites, and an uncounted number of asteroids all revolving around a single star called "Sun", a middle-sized star compared with others in the universe. Earth is the third planet from the sun.
Let us first try to understand the size of this system. The diameter of the sun is 103 times that of the earth. To visualize this, the planet Earth has diameter of 12,200 kms. If we scaled that down to the dimensions of a glass bead, the sun would be about the size of soccer ball. But the interesting thing is the distance between the two. Keeping to the same scale, the two balls should be 280 meters apart. Some of the objects representing the outer planets would have to be set several kilometers away.
Big though this might seem, the solar system is a quite miniscule in size compared with the Milky Way, the galaxy in which it is located. There are over 250 billion stars in the Milky Way-some similar to the sun, others bigger, others smaller. The star nearest to the sun is Alpha Centauri. If we wanted to add Alpha Centauri in our model system, it would have to be located 78,000 kilometers away.
That's too big for almost anyone to grasp, so let's reduce the scale. We'll assume the earth to be as big as a dust-particle. That would make the sun as big as a walnut about three meters from the earth. On this scale, Alpha Centauri would have to be located 640 kilometers from the sun.
The Milky Way consists of about 250 billion stars with similarly mind-boggling distances between them. The sun is located closer to the edge of this spiral-shaped galaxy than it is to the center.
Even the Milky Way is dwarfed by the vast size of the whole universe. It is just one of many galaxies-nearly 300 billion of them according to recent calculations. And the distances between galaxies are millions of times greater than that between the sun and Alpha Centauri.
George Greenstein, in The Symbiotic Universe, comments on this unimaginable vastness:
Had the stars been somewhat closer, astrophysics would not have been so very different. The fundamental physical processes occurring within stars, nebulas, and the like would have proceeded unchanged. The appearance of our galaxy as seen from some far-distant vantage point would have been the same. About the only difference would have been the view of the night time sky from the grass on which I lie, which would have been yet richer with stars. And oh, yes-one more small change: There would have been no me to do the viewing…All that waster space! On the other hand, in this very waste lies our safety. (3)  
Greenstein also explains the reason for this. In his view, the huge distances in space makes it possible for certain physical variables to be arranged so as to be exactly suitable for human life. He also notes the importance of this huge space in allowing Earth to exist while minimizing the risk of collision with other stars.
In short, the distribution of celestial bodies in space is exactly what it must be for human life to exist on our planet. These huge spaces are the outcome of an intentional design for a purpose and not a result of coincidence.
 
Entropy and Order
In order to understand the concept of order in the universe, we need first to talk about the Second Law of Thermodynamics, one of the fundamental universal physical laws.
This law states that, left to themselves, organized systems will become unstable and less organized as time advances. This law is also called the Law of Entropy. In physics, entropy is the amount of disorder in a system. The transition of a system from a stable condition into an unstable condition is the same as an increase in its entropy. The instability is directly related to the entropy of that system.
This is commonplace knowledge, many examples of which we may observe in our daily lives. If you abandon a car in some exposed place for a year or even a couple of months, you certainly wouldn't expect it be in just as good condition as you left it when you return. You'll probably notice flat tires, broken windows, corroded parts in the engine and body, etc. Similarly if you neglect to straighten up your house for a few days and you'll immediately see it getting dustier and more disorganized as time goes by. This is a kind of entropy; however you can undo it by cleaning and picking things up and by taking out the trash.
An abandoned car deteriorates and falls apart. Everything in the universe is subject to entropy: the law says that, left to itself, everything becomes less stable and less organized with the passage of time.
The Second Law of Thermodynamics is widely accepted as valid and binding. Einstein, the most important scientist of our century, said that this law was the "first law of all sciences". The American scientist Jeremy Rifkin comments in Entropy: A New World View:
The Entropy Law will preside as the ruling paradigm over the next period of history. Albert Einstein said that it is the premier law of all science: Sir Arthur Eddington referred to it as the supreme metaphysical law of the entire universe. (4)
It is important to note that the Law of Entropy by itself renders many of the claims of materialism invalid right from the start. For if there is a definite design and order in the universe, the law holds that, in the course of time, this situation will be undone by the universe itself. There are two conclusions to be reached from this observation:
1) Left to itself, the universe cannot exist for eternity. The second law says that without external intervention of some sort, entropy will eventually be maximized throughout the universe causing it to assume a completely homogenous state.
2) The claim that the order we observe is not the result of external intervention is also invalid. Immediately after the Big Bang, the universe was in precisely such a completely disorganized state as would exist if entropy had been maximized. But that has changed as we can plainly see by looking around. That change took place in violation of one of nature's fundamental laws-the Law of Entropy. There is simply no way to account for this change except to posit some sort of supernatural creation.
Every galaxy in the universe is proof of the organized structure that everywhere exists. These magnificent systems, with an average of 300 billion stars each, display an evident balance and harmony.
An example will perhaps make the second point clearer. Imagine the universe to be a huge cave full of a jumble of water, rocks, and dirt. We leave the cave alone for several billion years and then come back and take a look at it. Upon our return we notice that some of the rocks have gotten smaller, some have disappeared, the level of dirt is higher, there's more mud, and so on. Things are more disordered, which is normal-just as we might expect. If, billions of years later, you find rocks delicately carved into statues, you would definitely decide that this order cannot be explained away by laws of nature. The only rational explanation is that "a conscious mind" caused these things to be.
So the order of this universe is the most overwhelming proof of the existence of a superior consciousness. The Nobel prize winner German physicist Max Planck explains the order in the universe:
At all events, we should say, in summing up, that, according to everything taught by the exact sciences about the immense realm of nature in which our tiny planet plays an insignificant role, a certain order prevails - one independent of the human mind. Yet, in so far as we are able to ascertain through our senses, this order can be formulated in terms of purposeful activity. There is evidence of an intelligent order of the universe. (5)
Paul Davies explains the triumph of this marvelous equilibrium and harmony over materialism thus:
NOBEL PRIZE WINNER PHYSICIST MAX PLANCK:
 "A certain order prevails in our universe. This order can be formulated in terms of purposeful activity"
Everywhere we look in the Universe, from the far flung galaxies to the deepest recesses of the atom, we encounter order... Central to the idea of a very special, orderly Universe is the concept of information. A highly structured system, displaying a great deal of organised activity, needs a lot of information to describe it. Alternatively, we may say that it contains much information.
We are therefore presented with a curious question. If information and order always has a natural tendency to disappear, where did all the information that makes the world such a special place come from originally? The Universe is like a clock slowly running down. How did it get wound up in the first place? (6)
Einstein refers to this order as an unexpected event, and also says that it should be regarded as a miracle:
Well, a priori [reasoning from cause to effect] one should expect that the world would be rendered lawful [obedient to law and order] only to the extent that we [human beings] intervene with our ordering intelligence... [But instead we find] in the objective world a high degree of order that we were a priori in no way authorized to expect. This is the 'miracle' that is strengthened more and more with the development of our knowledge. (7)
In short, the order in the universe demands deep and extensive understanding and knowledge. It is designed, organized, and preserved by God.
 
The Solar System
ALBERT EINSTEIN:
 "We find in the objective world a high degree of order."
The solar system is one of the most wonderful examples of this beautiful harmony to be witnessed. There are nine planets with fifty-four known satellites and an unknown number of smaller bodies. The major planets counting outward from the sun are Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto. Earth is the only one on which life is known to exist. It is surely the only one on which human beings can live and survive unaided thanks to abundant land and water and to a breathable atmosphere.
Isaac Newton, one of the pioneers and founders of modern physics and astronomy, saw in the structure of the universe magnificent evidence of divine creation.
In the structure of the solar system, we encounter another beautiful example of equilibrium: the balance between a planet's centrifugal force countered by the gravitational attraction of its primary. (In astronomy, a primary is something that another body revolves about. Earth's primary is the sun; the moon's primary is Earth.) Without this balance, everything in the solar system would fly off into the chilling depths of outer space. The balance between these two forces results in paths (orbits) that the planets and other bodies follow around their primaries. If a body moved at too slow a speed, it would plunge into the primary; if it moved at too fast a speed, the primary would be unable to hold onto it, and it would fly off into space. Instead, every body moves at just the right speed to keep it in orbit. Moreover, this equilibrium has to be different for each body because the distance of planets to the sun differs. So do their masses. Therefore, they have to have different orbital speeds not to plunge into the sun or not to fly off into space.
Materialist astronomy holds that the origin and survival of the solar system can be explained by coincidence.
Over the last three centuries, many of its adherents have speculated on how this marvelous order should have come to pass and they have failed to get anywhere. To a materialist, the equilibrium and order of the solar system are inexplicable mysteries.
Astronomers like Kepler and Galileo, among the first to discover this superlative equilibrium, acknowledged it as a deliberate design and a sign of divine intervention in the whole universe. Isaac Newton, recognized as one of the greatest scientific minds of all times, once wrote:
This most elegant system of suns, planets, and comets could arise from the purpose and sovereignty of an intelligent and mighty being…He rules them all, not as a soul but as a sovereign lord of all things, and because of His sovereignty He is commonly called "Lord God Almighty." (8)
 
The Place of the Earth
Besides this wonderful equilibrium, the place of earth in the solar system and in the universe is also another piece of evidence of a perfect act of creation on God's part.
The latest astronomical findings have shown the importance of the other planets' existence for Earth. Jupiter's size and position turn for example out to be critical. Astrophysical calculations show that, as the biggest planet in the system, Jupiter supplies stability to the orbits of Earth and all the other planets. Jupiter's protective role over the earth is explained in an article "How special Jupiter is" by George Wetherill:
Without a large planet positioned precisely where Jupiter is, the earth would have been struck a thousand times more frequently in the past by comets and meteors and other interplanetary debris. If it were not for Jupiter, we wouldn't be around to study the origin of the solar system. (9)
To put it briefly, the structure of the solar system was specially designed for mankind to live.
Let us also consider the place of solar system in the universe. Our solar system is located in one of the huge spiral arms of the Milky Way, closer to the edge than to the center. What advantage could there be in that? In Nature's Destiny, Michael Denton explains:
What is so striking is that the cosmos appears to be not just supremely fit for our own being and for our biological adaptations, but also for our understanding... Because of the position of our solar system on the edge of the galactic rim, we can gaze farther into the night to distant galaxies and gain knowledge of the overall structure of the cosmos. Were we positioned in the center of a galaxy, we would never look on the beauty of a spiral galaxy nor would we have any idea of the structure of our universe. (10)
In other words, even Earth's location in the galaxy is evidence that it was intended for mankind to live on, no less than are all the other physics laws of the universe.
It is the plain truth that the universe is created and arranged by God.
References:
1. Guy Murchie, The Seven Mysteries of Life, Boston : The Houghton Mifflin Company, 1978, p. 598 
 2. Michael Denton, Nature's Destiny, p. 11 
 3. George Greenstein, The Symbiotic Universe, p. 21 
 4. Jeremy Rifkin, Entropy: A New World View, New York , Viking Press, 1980, p. 6 
 5. Max Planck, May 1937 address, quoted in A. Barth, The Creation (1968), p. 144. 
 6. Paul Davies, The Accidental Universe, (1982) Cambridge : Cambridge University Press. Preface  
 7. Albert Einstein, Letters to Maurice Solovine, 1956, p. 114-115 
 8. Michael A. Corey, God and the New Cosmology: The Anthropic Design Argument, Maryland : Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 1993, p. 259 
 9. G. W. Wetherill, "How Special is Jupiter?", Nature, vol. 373, 1995, p. 470 
 10. Michael Denton, Nature's Destiny, p. 262 
 
 

President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 18295
  • Liked:
President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 18295
  • Liked:
Large human brains pose energy problem for evolutionists
« Reply #2 on: January 08, 2018, 12:02:41 PM »
Modern humans have brain sizes larger than any other placental mammal relative to body size. The human brain uses a tremendous amount of energy - up to 60% of total energy consumed in newborns. A recent study suggests that the large increase in brain size was balanced by a similar reduction in the size of the gastrointestinal tract. However, other mammals, such as pigs, with small intestines don't have brains as large as ours. In addition, the theory doesn't hold for birds or bats. The presence of large brains in humans presents a problem to evolutionists, since it presents a large energy drain upon the species, especially before the advent of agriculture and reliable food supplies. (Ann Gibbons. 1998. Solving the brain's energy crisis. Science 280: 1345.)
President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 18295
  • Liked:
No transitional brain sizes between Homo and Australopithecines
« Reply #3 on: January 10, 2018, 04:36:25 PM »
One of the problems in the theories of human evolution has been the huge difference between the brain capacity of our genus (Homo) and the genus of our supposed ancestors (Australopithecus). A recent discovery of a large Australopithecine skull was anticipated to lessen the gap between the two genera. However, a recent study, using computerized tomography technology has determined that the new skull (Stw 505) has a brain capacity no larger than the size of the largest published value. However, in doing the measurements and checking their validity, the group determined that nearly all of the brain capacities of Australopithecine skulls is inflated. In reality, many Australopithecine skulls have brain capacities no larger than those of chimpanzees. Thus, there exists a huge difference between the brain capacity of the oldest Homo specimen and the largest Australopithecine skull. (Dean Falk. 1998. Hominid brain evolution: looks can be deceiving. Science 280: 1714 and Conroy, G.C., G.W. Weber, H. Seidler, P.V. Tobias, A. Kane, and B. Brunsden. 1998. Endocranial capacity in an early hominid cranium from Sterkfontein, South Africa. Science 280: 1730-1731.) 
President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 18295
  • Liked:
Archaeopteryx has been described as a link between birds and dinosaurs, although it is remarkably similar to modern birds. Attempts to find more primitive intermediates have been unsuccessful - until now - so say a group of paleontologists (see the July, 1998 issue of National Geographic). The group has found two turkey-sized dinosaurs that have both downy and modern flight feathers on their arms and tail. Their skeletal structure is similar to theropod dinosaurs (short arms - too short to be useful in flight, serrated teeth, theropod-like pelvis, etc.). The conclusions are obvious. Right? However, other researchers dispute the claims. They point to shortened tail and fused sternum, arguing that they are more advanced than Archaeopteryx. These researchers believe that the intermediates are actually flightless birds. Oh, did I mention that the new fossils are dated to have appeared at least 20 million years after the appearance of the first Archaeopteryx? Those little details do get in the way of evolutionary theory, don't they! For more information on some of the controversies, see Demise of the "Birds are Dinosaurs" Theory, located on this site. (Ann Gibbons. 1998. Dinosaur fossils, in fine feather, show link to birds. Science 280: 2051.)
President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 18295
  • Liked:
Sudden appearance of mammals
« Reply #5 on: January 17, 2018, 06:20:28 PM »
At the recent meeting of the International Symposium on the Origin of Mammalian Orders, scientists presented evidence testifying of the rapid appearance of mammals in the fossil record during the beginning of the Tertiary period. During the first 16 million years of the Tertiary period, 18 orders of mammals appeared. Many scientist had claimed that gaps in the fossil record could account for the apparent sudden appearance of mammals. However, Dr. David Archibald (San Diego State University), looked at the numbers of fossil site spanning the period of 5 million years before and after the Cretaceous-Tertiary boundary. Dr. Archibald found that sampling was equal for periods before and after the boundary, although only 11 genera were found in the 5 million years before the beginning of the Tertiary compared to 139 genera in the 5 million years following. As he stated, "Something happened to cause this explosion of speciation." The results of the fossil record are not confirmed by molecular clocks reported earlier this year. Dr. John Allroy, a paleontologist at the National Museum of Natural History (Washington D.C.) stated, "If molecular analysts can't find evidence of this explosion in speciation, then they don't know anything about the evolutionary process."

Dennis Normile. 1998. MAMMALIAN EVOLUTION MEETING: New views of the origins of mammals. Science 281: 775.
President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 18295
  • Liked:
Whales lose ancestors?
« Reply #6 on: January 19, 2018, 03:42:42 PM »
The discovery of two 50-million-year-old whales from the family Pakicetidae suggest that the previously thought link between the mesonychians and whales seems unlikely, according to Dr. Hans Thewissen (Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine). The fact that these fossils have more primitive teeth than the mesonychians from which they were supposed to have evolved led Dr. Thewissen to conclude that there was "considerable doubt" that cretaceans (whales) are closely related to mesonychians. Paleontologists now are attempting to link whales with the hippopotamus (artiodactyls). However, Dr. Maureen O'Leary (State University of New York) stated, "it's difficult to connect hippos with whales in the fossil record."
Dennis Normile. 1998. MAMMALIAN EVOLUTION MEETING: New views of the origins of mammals. Science 281: 775.
More information can be found at the Scientific American website:
 
CETACEAN CREATION New fossils leave researchers wondering where whales come from
President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 18295
  • Liked:
No link between ecology and evolution?
« Reply #7 on: February 09, 2018, 07:25:49 PM »
Evolutionary theory predicts that ecology should profoundly effect evolution within groups of related species. A recent study examined the ecological dominance of two bryozoan clades (Cyclostomata and Cheilostomata) and how that related to evolutionary success over the last 140 million years. The results indicated that "evolutionary success and ecological dominance can be decoupled and profoundly different, even over tens of millions of years." Previous studies had shown that the Permium and Triassic mass extinctions had removed other byrozoan clades that had much higher ecological diversities than Cyclostomata and Cheilostomata (Taylor, P.D., and G.P. Larwood, in Extinction and Survival in the Fossil Record, G.P. Larwood, Ed. (Clarendon, Oxford, 1988), pp. 99-119.

McKinney, F.K., S. Lidgard, J.J. Sepkoski, Jr., and P.D. Taylor. August 7, 1998. Decoupled temporal patterns of evolution and ecology in two post Paleozoic Clades. Science 281: 807-809.
President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 18295
  • Liked:
"very long leap"
« Reply #8 on: February 11, 2018, 07:30:58 PM »
"It's a very long leap from [mineral] surface chemistry to a living cell." (Norman Pace, evolutionary biologist, University of California, Berkeley, from Vogel, G. 1998. A sulfurous start for An organic compound made of amino acids arranged in a linear chain, joined together by peptide bonds between the carboxyl and amino groups of the adjacent amino acid residues.protein synthesis? Science 281: 627-628.)
President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 18295
  • Liked:
Ancient animals regain their youth
« Reply #9 on: February 19, 2018, 05:20:17 PM »
Three weeks ago in the pages of Science, paleontologists claimed to have pushed back the origins of multicellular life by 400 million years to a startling 1.1 billion years ago, based on ancient fossilized tracks found in central India (Adolf Seilacher, Pradip K. Bose, and Friedrich Pfl�ger. 1998. Triploblastic Animals More Than 1 Billion Years Ago: Trace Fossil Evidence from India. Science 282: 80-83). But a paper published about the same time in the Journal of the Geological Society of India indicates that these same rocks date to about 540 million years ago, roughly the time of the Cambrian explosion. (Kerr, R.A. 1998. PALEONTOLOGY: Fossils Challenge Age of Billion-Year-Old Animals. Science 282: 601.)
President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 18295
  • Liked:
EVOLUTION and THERMODYNAMICS
« Reply #10 on: March 04, 2018, 03:40:36 PM »
The Second Law of Thermodynamics, which is accepted as one of the basic laws of physics, holds that under normal conditions all systems left on their own tend to become disordered, dispersed, and corrupted in direct relation to the amount of time that passes. Everything, whether living or not, wears out, deteriorates, decays, disintegrates, and is destroyed. This is the absolute end that all beings will face one way or another, and according to the law, the process cannot be avoided.
If you leave a car out in
 natural conditions, it
 will rust and decay. In
 the same way, without
 an intelligent
 organization all the
 systems in the universe
 would decay. This is an
 incontrovertible law.

This is something that all of us have observed. For example if you take a car to a desert and leave it there, you would hardly expect to find it in a better condition when you came back years later. On the contrary, you would see that its tires had gone flat, its windows had been broken, its chassis had rusted, and its engine had stopped working. The same inevitable process holds true for living things.
 The second law of thermodynamics is the means by which this natural process is defined, with physical equations and calculations.
 
 This famous law of physics is also known as the "law of entropy." In physics, entropy is the measure of the disorder of a system. A system's entropy increases as it moves from an ordered, organized, and planned state towards a more disordered, dispersed, and unplanned one. The more disorder there is in a system, the higher its entropy is. The law of entropy holds that the entire universe is unavoidably proceeding towards a more disordered, unplanned, and disorganized state.
 
 The truth of the second law of thermodynamics, or the law of entropy, has been experimentally and theoretically established. All foremost scientists agree that the law of entropy will remain the principle paradigm for the foreseeable future. Albert Einstein, the greatest scientist of our age, described it as the "premier law of all of science." Sir Arthur Eddington also referred to it as the "supreme metaphysical law of the entire universe."1
 
 Evolutionary theory ignores this fundamental law of physics. The mechanism offered by evolution totally contradicts the second law. The theory of evolution says that disordered, dispersed, and lifeless atoms and molecules spontaneously came together over time, in a particular order, to form extremely complex molecules such as proteins, DNA, and RNA, whereupon millions of different living species with even more complex structures gradually emerged. According to the theory of evolution, this supposed process-which yields a more planned, more ordered, more complex and more organized structure at each stage-was formed all by itself under natural conditions. The law of entropy makes it clear that this so-called natural process utterly contradicts the laws of physics.
 Evolutionist scientists are also aware of this fact. J. H. Rush states:

Quote
In the complex course of its evolution, life exhibits a remarkable contrast to the tendency expressed in the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Where the Second Law expresses an irreversible progression toward increased entropy and disorder, life evolves continually higher levels of order.2
The evolutionist author Roger Lewin expresses the thermodynamic impasse of evolution in an article in Science:
Quote
One problem biologists have faced is the apparent contradiction by evolution of the  second law of thermodynamics. Systems should decay through time, giving less, not more, order.3
Another defender of the theory of evolution, George Stravropoulos, states the thermodynamic impossibility of the spontaneous formation of life and the impossibility of explaining the existence of complex living mechanisms by natural laws in the well-known evolutionist journal American Scientist:
Quote
Yet, under ordinary conditions, no complex organic molecule can ever form spontaneously, but will rather disintegrate, in agreement with the second law. Indeed, the more complex it is, the more unstable it will be, and the more assured, sooner or later, its disintegration. Photosynthesis and all life processes, and even life itself, cannot yet be understood in terms of thermodynamics or any other exact science, despite the use of confused or deliberately confusing language.4
As we have seen, the evolution claim is completely at odds with the laws of physics. The second law of thermodynamics constitutes an insurmountable obstacle for the scenario of evolution, in terms of both science and logic. Unable to offer any scientific and consistent explanation to overcome this obstacle, evolutionists can only do so in their imagination. For instance, science writer Jeremy Rifkin notes that evolution is belived to overwhelm this law of physics with a "magical power":
Quote
The Entropy Law says that evolution dissipates the overall available energy for life on this planet. Our concept of evolution is the exact opposite. We believe that evolution somehow magically creates greater overall value and order on earth.5
These words well indicate that evolution is a dogmatic belief rather than a scientific thesis.

 The Misconception About Open Systems
 
 Some proponents of evolution have recourse to an argument that the second law of thermodynamics holds true only for "closed systems," and that "open systems" are beyond the scope of this law. This claim goes no further than being an attempt by some evolutionists to distort scientific facts that invalidate their theory. In fact, a large number of scientists openly state that this claim is invalid, and violates thermodynamics. One of these is the Harvard scientist John Ross, who also holds evolutionist views. He explains that these unrealistic claims contain an important scientific error in the following remarks in Chemical and Engineering News:

Quote
...there are no known violations of the second law of thermodynamics. Ordinarily the second law is stated for isolated systems, but the second law applies equally well to open systems. ...there is somehow associated with the field of far-from-equilibrium phenomena the notion that the second law of thermodynamics fails for such systems. It is important to make sure that this error does not perpetuate itself.6
An "open system" is a thermodynamic system in which energy and matter flow in and out. Evolutionists hold that the world is an open system: that it is constantly exposed to an energy flow from the sun, that the law of entropy does not apply to the world as a whole, and that ordered, complex living beings can be generated from disordered, simple, and inanimate structures.
 
 However, there is an obvious distortion here. The fact that a system has an energy inflow is not enough to make that system ordered. Specific mechanisms are needed to make the energy functional. For instance, a car needs an engine, a transmission system, and related control mechanisms to convert the energy in petrol to work. Without such an energy conversion system, the car will not be able to use the energy stored in petrol.
 
 The same thing applies in the case of life as well. It is true that life derives its energy from the sun. However, solar energy can only be converted into chemical energy by the incredibly complex energy conversion systems in living things (such as photosynthesis in plants and the digestive systems of humans and animals). No living thing can live without such energy conversion systems. Without an energy conversion system, the sun is nothing but a source of destructive energy that burns, parches, or melts.
 
 As can be seen, a thermodynamic system without an energy conversion mechanism of some sort is not advantageous for evolution, be it open or closed. No one asserts that such complex and conscious mechanisms could have existed in nature under the conditions of the primeval earth. Indeed, the real problem confronting evolutionists is the question of how complex energy-converting mechanisms such as photosynthesis in plants, which cannot be duplicated even with modern technology, could have come into being on their own.
 
 The influx of solar energy into the world would be unable to bring about order on its own. Moreover, no matter how high the temperature may become, amino acids resist forming bonds in ordered sequences. Energy by itself is incapable of making amino acids form the much more complex molecules of proteins, or of making proteins form the much more complex and organized structures of cell organelles.
 
 
 Ilya Prigogine and the Myth of the "Self-Organization of  Matter"

Ilya Prigogine
Quite aware that the second law of thermodynamics renders evolution impossible, some evolutionist scientists have made speculative attempts to square the circle between the two, in order to be able to claim that evolution is possible.
 
 One person distinguished by his efforts to marry thermodynamics and evolution is the Belgian scientist Ilya Prigogine.
 
 Starting out from chaos theory, Prigogine proposed a number of hypotheses in which order develops from chaos (disorder). However, despite all his best efforts, he was unable to reconcile thermodynamics and evolution.
 
 In his studies, he tried to link irreversible physical processes to the evolutionist scenario on the origin of life, but he was unsuccessful. His books, which are completely theoretical and include a large number of mathematical propositions which cannot be implemented in real life and which there is no possibility of observing, have been criticized by scientists, recognized as experts in the fields of physics, chemistry and thermodynamics, as having no practical and concrete value.
 For instance, P. Hohenberg, a physicist regarded as an expert in the fields of statistical mechanics and pattern formation, and one of the authors of the book Review of Modern Physics, sets out his comments on Prigogine's studies in the May 1995 edition of Scientific American:

Quote
I don't know of a single phenomenon his theory has explained.7
And Cosma Shalizi, a theoretical physicist from Wisconsin University, has this to say about the fact that Prigogine's studies have reached no firm conclusion or explanation:
Quote
…in the just under five hundred pages of his Self-Organization in Nonequilibrium Systems, there are just four graphs of real-world data, and no comparison of any of his models with experimental results. Nor are his ideas about irreversibility at all connected to self-organization, except for their both being topics in statistical physics.8
The studies in the physical field by the determinedly materialist Prigogine also had the intention of providing support for the theory of evolution, because, as we have seen in the preceding pages, the theory of evolution is in clear conflict with the entropy principle, i.e., the second law of thermodynamics. The law of entropy, as we know, definitively states that when any organized, and complex structure is left to natural conditions, then loss of organization, complexity and information will result. In opposition to this, the theory of evolution claims that unordered, scattered, and unconscious atoms and molecules came together and gave rise to living things with their organized systems.
 Prigogine determined to try to invent formulae that would make processes of this kind feasible.
 However, all these efforts resulted in nothing but a series of theoretical experiments.
 The two most important theories that emerged as a result of that aim were the theory of "self-organization" and the theory of "dissipative structures." The first of these maintains that simple molecules can organize together to form complex living systems; the second claims that ordered, complex systems can emerge in unordered, high-entropy systems. But these have no other practical and scientific value than creating new, imaginary worlds for evolutionists.

The fact that these theories explain nothing, and have produced no results, is admitted by many scientists. The well-known physicist Joel Keizer writes: "His supposed criteria for predicting the stability of far-from-equilibrium dissipative structures fails-except for states very near equilibrium." 9
 
 The theoretical physicist Cosma Shalizi has this to say on the subject: "Second, he tried to push forward a rigorous and well-grounded study of pattern formation and self-organization almost before anyone else. He failed, but the attempt was inspiring."10
 
 F. Eugene Yates, editor of Self-Organizing Systems: The Emergence of Order, sums up the criticisms directed at Prigogine by Daniel L. Stein and the Nobel Prize-winning scientist Phillip W. Anderson, in an essay in that same journal:

Quote
The authors [Anderson and Stein] compare symmetry-breaking in thermodynamic equilibrium systems (leading to phase change) and in systems far from equilibrium (leading to dissipative structures). Thus, the authors do not believe that speculation about dissipative structures and their broken symmetries can, at present, be relevant to questions of the origin and persistence of life.11
In short, Prigogine's theoretical studies are of no value in explaining the origin of life. The same authors make this comment about his theories:
Quote
Contrary to statements in a number of books and articles in this field, we believe that there is no such theory, and it even may be that there are no such structures as they are implied to exist by Prigogine, Haken, and their collaborators.12
In essence, experts in the subject state that none of the theses Prigogine put forward possess any truth or validity, and that structures of the kind he discusses (dissipative structures) may not even really exist.
 
 Prigogine's claims are considered in great detail in Jean Bricmont's article "Science of Chaos or Chaos in Science?" which makes their invalidity clear.


 Despite the fact that Prigogine did not manage to find a way to support evolution, the mere fact that he took initiatives of this sort was enough for the evolutionists to accord him the very greatest respect. A large number of evolutionists have welcomed Prigogine's concept of "self-organization" with great hope and a superficial bias. Prigogine's imaginary theories and concepts have nevertheless convinced many people who do not know much about the subject that evolution has resolved the dilemma of thermodynamics, whereas even Prigogine himself has accepted that the theories he has produced for the molecular level do not apply to living systems-for instance, a living cell:

Quote
The problem of biological order involves the transition from the molecular activity to the supermolecular order of the cell. This problem is far from being solved. 13
These are the speculations that evolutionists have indulged in, encouraged by Prigogine's theories, which were meant to resolve the conflict between evolution and other physical laws.

 The Difference Between Organized and Ordered Systems

 
 If we look carefully at Prigogine and other evolutionists' claims, we can see that they have fallen into a very important trap. In order to make evolution fit in with thermodynamics, evolutionists are constantly trying to prove that a given order can emerge from open systems.
 
 And here it is important to bring out two key concepts to reveal the deceptive methods the evolutionists use. The deception lies in the deliberate confusing of two distinct concepts: "ordered" and "organized."
 We can make this clear with an example. Imagine a completely flat beach on the seashore. When a strong wave hits the beach, mounds of sand, large and small, form bumps on the surface of the sand.
 This is a process of "ordering." The seashore is an open system, and the energy flow (the wave) that enters it can form simple patterns in the sand, which look completely regular. From the thermodynamic point of view, it can set up order here where before there was none. But we must make it clear that those same waves cannot build a castle on the beach. If we see a castle there, we are in no doubt that someone has constructed it, because the castle is an "organized" system. In other words, it possesses a clear design and information. Every part of it has been made by an intelligent entity in a planned manner.
 
 The difference between the sand and the castle is that the former is an organized complexity, whereas the latter possesses only order, brought about by simple repetitions. The order formed from repetitions is as if an object (in other words the flow of energy entering the system) had fallen on the letter "a" on a typewriter keyboard, writing "aaaaaaaa" hundreds of times. But the string of "a"s in an order repeated in this manner contains no information, and no complexity. In order to write a complex chain of letters actually containing information (in other words a meaningful sentence, paragraph or book), the presence of intelligence is essential.
 
 The same thing applies when a gust of wind blows into a dusty room. When the wind blows in, the dust which had been lying in an even layer may gather in one corner of the room. This is also a
 more ordered situation than that which existed before, in the thermodynamic sense, but the individual specks of dust cannot form a portrait of someone on the floor in an organized manner.
 This means that complex, organized systems can never come about as the result of natural processes. Although simple examples of order can happen from time to time, these cannot go beyond certain limits.
 
 But evolutionists point to this self-ordering which emerges through natural processes as a most important proof of evolution, portray such cases as examples of "self-organization." As a result of this confusion of concepts, they propose that living systems could develop of their own accord from occurrences in nature and chemical reactions. The methods and studies employed by Prigogine and his followers, which we considered above, are based on this deceptive logic.
 
 However, as we made clear at the outset, organized systems are completely different structures from ordered ones. While ordered systems contain structures formed of simple repetitions, organized systems contain highly complex structures and processes, one often embedded inside the other. In order for such structures to come into existence, there is a need for intelligence, knowledge, and planning. Jeffrey Wicken, an evolutionist scientist, describes the important difference between these two concepts in this way:

Quote
'Organized' systems are to be carefully distinguished from 'ordered' systems. Neither kind of system is 'random,' but whereas ordered systems are generated according to simple algorithms and therefore lack complexity, organized systems must be assembled element by element according to an external 'wiring diagram' with a high information content ... Organization, then, is functional complexity and carries information.14
Ilya Prigogine-maybe as a result of evolutionist wishful thinking- resorted to a confusion of these two concepts, and advertised examples of molecules which ordered themselves under the influence of energy inflows as "self-organization."
 
 The American scientists Charles B. Thaxton, Walter L. Bradley and Roger L. Olsen, in their book titled The Mystery of Life's Origin, explain this fact as follows:

Quote
... In each case random movements of molecules in a fluid are spontaneously replaced by a highly ordered behaviour. Prigogine, Eigen, and others have suggested that a similar sort of self-organization may be intrinsic in organic chemistry and can potentially account for the highly complex macromolecules essential for living systems. But such analogies have scant relevance to the origin-of-life question. A major reason is that they fail to distinguish between order and complexity...15
And this is how the same scientists explain the logical shallowness and distortion of claiming that water turning into ice is an example of how biological order can spontaneously emerge:
Quote
It has often been argued by analogy to water crystallizing to ice that simple monomers may polymerize into complex molecules such as protein and DNA. The analogy is clearly inappropriate, however… The atomic bonding forces draw water molecules into an orderly crystalline array when the thermal agitation (or entropy driving force) is made sufficiently small by lowering the temperature. Organic monomers such as amino acids resist combining at all at any temperature however, much less some orderly arrangement.16
Prigogine devoted his whole career to reconciling evolution and thermodynamics, but even he admitted that there was no resemblance between the crystallization of water and the emergence of complex biological structures:
Quote
The point is that in a non-isolated system there exists a possibility for formation of ordered, low-entropy structures at sufficiently low temperatures. This ordering principle is responsible for the appearance of ordered structures such as crystals as well as for the phenomena of phase transitions. Unfortunately this principle cannot explain the formation of biological structures.17
In short, no chemical or physical effect can explain the origin of life, and the concept of "the self-organization of matter" will remain a fantasy.

 Self-Organization: A Materialist Dogma

The claim that evolutionists maintain with the concept of "self-organization" is the belief that inanimate matter can organize itself and generate a complex living thing. This is an utterly
 unscientific conviction: Observation and experiment have incontrovertibly proven that matter has no such property. The famous English astronomer and mathematician Sir Fred Hoyle notes that matter cannot generate life by itself, without deliberate interference:

Quote
If there were a basic principle of matter which somehow drove organic systems toward life, its existence should easily be demonstrable in the laboratory. One could, for instance, take a swimming bath to represent the primordial soup. Fill it with any chemicals of a non-biological nature you please. Pump any gases over it, or through it, you please, and shine any kind of radiation on it that takes your fancy. Let the experiment proceed for a year and see how many of those 2,000 enzymes [proteins produced by living cells] have appeared in the bath. I will give the answer, and so save the time and trouble and expense of actually doing the experiment. You will find nothing at all, except possibly for a tarry sludge composed of amino acids and other simple organic chemicals.18
Evolutionary biologist Andrew Scott admits the same fact:
Quote
Take some matter, heat while stirring and wait. That is the modern version of Genesis. The 'fundamental' forces of gravity, electromagnetism and the strong and weak nuclear forces are presumed to have done the rest... But how much of this neat tale is firmly established, and how much remains hopeful speculation? In truth, the mechanism of almost every major step, from chemical precursors up to the first recognizable cells, is the subject of either controversy or complete bewilderment. 19
So why do evolutionists continue to believe in scenarios such as the "self-organization of matter," which have no scientific foundation? Why are they so determined to reject the intelligence and planning that can so clearly be seen in living systems?
The answer to these questions lies hidden in the materialist philosophy that the theory of evolution is fundamentally constructed on. Materialist philosophy believes that only matter exists, for which reason living things need to be accounted for in a manner based on matter. It was this difficulty which gave birth to the theory of evolution, and no matter how much it conflicts with the scientific evidence, it is defended for just that reason. A professor of chemistry from New York University and DNA expert, Robert Shapiro, explains this belief of evolutionists about the "self-organization of matter" and the materialist dogma lying at its heart as follows:
Quote
Another evolutionary principle is therefore needed to take us across the gap from mixtures of simple natural chemicals to the first effective replicator. This principle has not yet been described in detail or demonstrated, but it is anticipated, and given names such as chemical evolution and self-organization of matter. The existence of the principle is taken for granted in the philosophy of dialectical materialism, as applied to the origin of life by Alexander Oparin.20
The truths that we have been examining in this section clearly demonstrate the impossibility of evolution in the face of the second law of thermodynamics. The concept of "self-organization" is another dogma that evolutionist scientists are trying to keep alive despite all the scientific evidence.
                     

 References

 
 1 Jeremy Rifkin, Entropy: A New World View, Viking Press, New York, 1980, p. 6.
 2 J. H. Rush, The Dawn of Life, New York, Signet, 1962, p. 35.
 3 Roger Lewin, "A Downward Slope to Greater Diversity," Science, vol. 217, 24 September, 1982, p. 1239.
 4 George P. Stravropoulos, "The Frontiers and Limits of Science," American Scientist, vol. 65, November-December 1977, p. 674.
 5 Jeremy Rifkin, Entropy: A New World View, Viking Press, New York, 1980, p. 55.
 6 John Ross, Chemical and Engineering News, 27 July, 1980, p. 40. (emphasis added)
 7 "From Complexity to Perplexity," Scientific American, May 1995.
 8 Cosma Shalizi, "Ilya Prigogine," October 10, 2001, www.santafe.edu/~shalizi/notebooks/prigogine.html. (emphasis added)
 9 Joel Keizer, "Statistical Thermodynamics of Nonequilibrium Processes," Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1987, p. 360-1. (emphasis added)
 10 Cosma Shalizi, "Ilya Prigogine," October 10, 2001, www.santafe.edu/~shalizi/notebooks/prigogine.html. (emphasis added)
 11 F. Eugene Yates, Self-Organizing Systems: The Emergence of Order, "Broken Symmetry, Emergent Properties, Dissipative Structures, Life: Are They Related," Plenum Press, New York, 1987, pp. 445-457. (emphasis added)
 12 F. Eugene Yates, Self-Organizing Systems: The Emergence of Order, "Broken Symmetry, Emergent Properties, Dissipative Structures, Life: Are They Related" (NY: Plenum Press, 1987), p. 447.
 13 Ilya Prigogine, Isabelle Stengers, Order Out of Chaos, Bantam Books, New York, 1984, p. 175.
 14 Jeffrey S. Wicken, "The Generation of Complexity in Evolution: A Thermodynamic and Information-Theoretical Discussion," Journal of Theoretical Biology, vol. 77, April 1979, p. 349.
 15 Charles B. Thaxton, Walter L. Bradley & Roger L. Olsen, The Mystery of Life's Origin: Reassessing Current Theories, 4th edition, Dallas, 1992, p. 151.
 16 C. B. Thaxton, W. L. Bradley, and R. L. Olsen, The Mystery of Life's Origin: Reassessing Current Theories, Lewis and Stanley, Texas, 1992, p. 120. (emphasis added)
 17 I. Prigogine, G. Nicolis ve A. Babloyants, "Thermodynamics of Evolution," Physics Today, November 1972, vol. 25, p. 23. (emphasis added)
 18 Fred Hoyle, The Intelligent Universe, Michael Joseph, London, 1983, p. 20-21. (emphasis added)
 19 Andrew Scott, "Update on Genesis," New Scientist, vol. 106, May 2nd, 1985, p. 30. (emphasis added)
 20 Robert Shapiro, Origins: A Sceptics Guide to the Creation of Life on Earth, Summit Books, New York, 1986, p. 207. (emphasis added)                        
President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 18295
  • Liked:
Recent human origins from Y chromosome study
« Reply #11 on: March 07, 2018, 02:51:51 PM »
A worldwide survey of 67 men from five continents representing 19 distinct populations showed that most males have both DAZ variants of a One of the two sex chromosomes that determines maleness in mammals, carried and passed down from males to males.Y chromosomegene. The authors concluded that the human race originated 55,000-200, 000 years ago. (Agulnik AI, Zharkikh A, Boettger-Tong H, Bourgeron T, McElreavey K, Bishop CE. 1998. Evolution of the DAZ gene family suggests that Y-linked DAZ plays little, or a limited, role in spermatogenesis but underlines a recent African origin for human populations. Hum. Mol. Genet. 7: 1371-1377.)
President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 18295
  • Liked:
Species sorting = species extinction
« Reply #12 on: March 12, 2018, 07:30:21 PM »
Punctuated equilibrium is dependent upon the accumulation of Permanent structural alterations in DNA, consisting of either substitutions, insertions or deletions of nucleotide bases.mutations within a large population that gets "sorted" into an isolated small population that interbreeds the new Permanent structural alterations in DNA, consisting of either substitutions, insertions or deletions of nucleotide bases.mutations. A new study destroys this idea. Instead of becoming a new species, populations that suffer drastic reductions in numbers are characterized by decreased genetic variability and an accumulation of detrimental genes. This happens because normally Possessing two different forms of a particular gene, one inherited from each parent.heterozygous (containing 2 different Variant forms of a gene at a particular locus, or location, on a chromosome.alleles of each gene) individuals become Possessing two identical forms of a particular gene, one inherited from each parent.homozygous, due to inbreeding. As a result, detrimental, non-expressed, A genetic disorder that appears only in patients who have received two copies of a mutant gene, one from each parent.recessive genes become Possessing two identical forms of a particular gene, one inherited from each parent.homozygous and, therefore, are expressed, resulting in a less fit population. The study examined the effect of a 35-year population decline of greater prairie chickens on their fitness and fertility. The results showed that population decline and isolation of the prairie chicken led to decreased genetic variability, reduced egg viability (from near 100% to less than 80%), and a decline of fertility rates (from 93% to 74%). Only after human intervention (which brought in genetically diverse individuals from other areas) did the population begin to recover. This study calls into serious question the punctuated equilibrium concept of species sorting. (Soul�, M.E. and L.S. Mills. 1998. No need to isolate genetics. Science 282: 1658 and Wetermeirer, R.L., J.D. Brawn, S.A. Simpson, T.L. Esker, R.W. Jansen, J.W. Walk, E.L. Kershner, J.L. Bouzat, and K.N. Paige. 1998. Tracking the long-term decline and recovery of an isolated population. Science 282: 1695.)
President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 18295
  • Liked:
Molecular Biology Fails to Confirm Darwinism
« Reply #13 on: March 17, 2018, 06:16:22 PM »
Although molecular biology has been used to hasten research in many fields of biology, it has failed to confirm the evolutionary mechanisms proposed by Darwinian theory. According to Dr. Paul Sharp, "Attempt to detect adaptive evolution at the molecular level have met with little success."  Although the study described one of the few molecular successes of evolutionary theory, the trend has been that molecular biology contradicts much of evolutionary theory. (Sharp, P.M.. 1997. In search of molecular Darwinism. Nature 385: 111-112).
President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

 

Associate Links/Search