R4DS, R4i, R4 SDHC, Acekard 2i, CycloDS, DSTTi, M3DS, Supercard DS
•Step 1
Use the scientific method. A key part of the scientific method is the
finding of evidence that is observable and supports a hypothesis
resulting in a theory's development. Here a problem arises in the
theory of evolution. Natural selection and genetic variance are
commonly used as the observable evidence of evolution. However, this
body of evidence only proves that variance exists within a species.
From here evolutionists take a major leap of faith to presume that
over time a species will change into a different species due to
environmental conditions that favor a certain trait or traits than
others. No species has ever been observed changing into another one.
Indeed environmental conditions may favor specific traits within in a
species and a characteristic like color or size may well become
dominant over time, but this in no way suggests that it will
eventually transform into a separate species. It merely proves that
different characteristics should exist within populations that are
removed from other populations. Two members of different populations
would still be perfectly capable of reproducing with one another no
matter how long they have been separated. In fact, natural selection
could be used to explain why genetic variance exists within
populations that share dominant characteristics but in no way can it
be supposed that it results in species transformation. Just look at
the diversity within the human race. Small, tall, white, black, 1200cc
brain capacity, 1400cc brain capacity- all perfectly able to reproduce
with one another and all the same species. The oldest human
populations on Earth are scientifically accepted as West African
groups. These groups have dominant traits that all members share and
are biologically similar in appearance and physical makeup yet among
themselves the highest degree of genetic variance in the human race is
found. They are not changing into a different species. They carry a
genetic code that proves species evolution does not occur.
•Step 2
Use examples that are used to prove evolution to challenge it. A
popular example evolutionists point to as evidence of for the theory
is moths that changed color in England during the Industrial
Revolution. The environmental condition of pollution enabled darker
moths to become more dominant than lighter moths, as they attained an
advantage over predators by becoming harder to see in the polluted
environment. Well, what does that prove? Only that the majority of
moths in the area were darker than they were before. They would still
be able to reproduce with the lighter moths if the opportunity arose.
Evolutionists in fact have very little observances to base their
theory on, and this example is still one of the most commonly used-
despite the theory itself growing far more complex than such a simple
observation as this. With the introduction of genetics into the theory
of evolution, they should realize that varying characteristics do not
mandate species evolution. Instead, genetics offer evidence for
species flowing back and forth between varying traits that are at
times more well-suited than others. A trait that has lost its
favorability will, through reproduction within a species, once again
become dominant if environmental conditions cooperate. This is why a
high degree of genetic variability will exist in older and more
isolated populations of species. Not because they evolved new
characteristics but because they have been around for such a long
period of time that they are merely using a trait that was already
part of its genetic code. The older population would still be able to
reproduce with all members of a species no matter how much time or
distinctiveness of environments separates it from the other
populations.
•Step 3
Use more recent examples. Another favorite piece of evidence used to
prove evolution is mutation, which is, in most cases, contrary to the
principles of evolution, as their effects are overwhelmingly
detrimental to an organism. Commonly the AIDS virus is shown to
support this basis in their thinking. People infected with the virus
and treated with the anti-viral medications used to combat the
infection have seen the disease become resistant to their treatments.
This is due to the virus mutating-but it does not change into a new
virus altogether. In fact, when a person has developed drug resistant
AIDS, the most effective method is to stop taking medication, allowing
the virus to change back into its original form because it has been
shown that the original strain will gradually replace the mutated
strain. Once it reverts back to its original state, the anti-viral
drugs will be effective once again. This shows that the variance
brought on by the mutation is the only factor contributing to its
change, and that given the right environmental conditions, it will
once again assume its original dominant characteristics, but will not
change into a new virus completely. Bacterial diseases that are
antibiotic-resistant work in a similar way. Their resistance derives
from a variance that allows a bacterial population to be missing the
ribosome an antibiotic attaches to. If the bacteria with the missing
ribosome is introduced to a population of bacteria with the ribosome,
very quickly will the ribosome-less bacteria be overrun and replaced
by the normal bacteria. Their own evidence of mutation sometimes being
beneficial is always applied to viruses and bacteria but they fail to
recognize that these changes are only temporary variance within a
isolated populations that will not result in complete biological
change.
•Step 4
Use the fossil evidence. There are many factors within the fossil
record that are highly suspect when it comes to using it as an example
for evolution. Many of the explanations are purely hypothetical and at
times contradictory. The problems with dating fossils has recently
become so evident that old methods such as carbon dating are not
heavily relied upon by anthropologists and paleontologists anymore.
They themselves only feel sure about dates if a fossil is found in
layers of certain geological tufts. This results in dating based on
theories unrelated to evolution and opens itself to criticism. The
best way to highlight the tremendous amount of faith evolutionists put
into their ideas is relating the anthropological explanation for the
fossil record of New World monkeys. They surmise that the only reason
monkeys exist on the South American continent is that they are a
result of a small population of Old World monkeys in Africa that
sailed across the Atlantic ocean on a breakaway piece of land. They
subsequently evolved into all the moneys in South America today. What?
Evolutionists have to come up with a hypothesis like this because the
dates that they ascribe to various fossils force them to. They assume
dates are accurate enough to make further conclusions about a fossil.
Here they make a huge scientific mistake. The environmental conditions
that allow a bone to fossilize require extremely rare circumstances
that allow preservation. The process of the fossilization results in
total change from organic matter to inorganic matter that has been so
chemically transformed that extracting an accurate date is impossible.
•Step 5
Use mathematics. The theory of evolution is driven by so many chance
occurances that once they are totaled it becomes a mathematical
impossibility. Think of it this way. Our universe was just formed by
chance, on top of that chance luck stuck again with Earth's position
from the sun, the luck kept rolling with the life spark of chemical
reactions in the primordial ooze, luckier still is the chemical
reaction never repeated itself so all living things have a common
ancestor, and the best part of it all is that we are the supreme
byproduct of these biological lotteries. Or maybe our faith should be
placed in something greater than ourselves.
No comments:
Post a Comment