• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Science Disproves Evolution

Continuing to thumb through In The Beginning...

Walt Brown said:
Humans and many animals will endanger or even sacrifice their lives to save another—sometimes the life of another species. Natural selection, which evolutionists say selects individual characteristics, should rapidly eliminate altruistic (self-sacrificing) “individuals.” How could such risky, costly behavior ever be inherited? Its possession tends to prevent the altruistic “individual” from passing on its genes for altruism? If evolution were correct, selfish behavior should have completely eliminated unselfish behavior.c Furthermore, cheating and aggression should have “weeded out” cooperation. Altruism contradicts evolution.
Click to expand...
This is a load of crap. It is well understood that social cooperation and altruism have benefits when it comes to passing on the genome of a population. Brown's quote mining of publications won't make his claims any more viable.
 
Last edited:
well it looks like Pahu has done a runner without even attempting to answer any of the difficult (for a creotard) questions which were put to him, that really adds to his credibility doesn't it
:D
 
Foster Zygote said:
Continuing to thumb through In The Beginning...


This is a load of crap. It is well understood that social cooperation and altruism have benefits when it comes to passing on the genome of a population. Brown's quote mining of publications won't make his claims any more viable.
Click to expand...

It's hilarious. One only needs to search "evolution and altruism" on pubmed.com to find hundreds of articles which identify the evolutionary advantages of altruism.
 
This one is pathetically ignorant.

Walt Brown said:
No verified form of life which originated outside of earth has ever been observed. If life evolved on earth, one would expect that the elaborate experiments sent to the Moon and Mars might have detected at least simple forms of life (such as microbes) that differ in some respects from life on earth.
Click to expand...
First of all, even if the rest of the solar system turns out to be sterile, this will not invalidate the theory of evolution by natural selection.

Secondly, it is ludicrous for Brown to suggest that a complete survey of the solar system has been accomplished or even that the simple experiments conducted on Mars are conclusive. There are many more promising places within the solar system to conduct searches for extraterrestrial life. We've barely even begun to look and Brown is declaring that there is nothing to find. If extraterrestrial biology is found I'm sure that Brown will edit his book so as to make the discovery fit with biblical literalism and somehow invalidate the theory of evolution.
 
Last edited:
Off to fetch the wee beastie from school... I'll peruse more of Brown's book later. I invite others to look through it as well.
 
Foster Zygote said:
This one is pathetically ignorant.


First of all, even if the rest of the solar system turns out to be sterile, this will not invalidate the theory of evolution by natural selection.
Click to expand...
That statement reminds me of the pre-wright brother claims that heavier than air flight is impossible.
 
Foster Zygote said:
Walt Brown said:
No known mutation has ever produced a form of life having greater complexity and viability than its ancestors.
Click to expand...

This is false. Nylonase is but one example. Brown's statement is invalidated by the entire field of epidemiology as well.
Click to expand...


Yep; Lenski's experiments are an even clearer and better documented example of that.
 
Last edited:
Now this is just dumb.

Walt Brown said:
Fossils all over the world show evidence of rapid burial. Many fossils, such as fossilized jellyfish, show by the details of their soft, fleshy portions that they were buried rapidly, before they could decay. (Normally, dead animals and plants quickly decompose.) The presence of fossilized remains of many other animals, buried in mass graves and lying in twisted and contorted positions, suggests violent and rapid burials over large areas. These observations, together with the occurrence of compressed fossils and fossils that cut across two or more layers of sedimentary rock, are strong evidence that the sediments encasing these fossils were deposited rapidly—not over hundreds of millions of years. Furthermore, almost all sediments that formed today’s rocks were sorted by water. The worldwide fossil record is, therefore, evidence of rapid death and burial of animal and plant life by a worldwide, catastrophic flood. The fossil record is not evidence of slow change.
Click to expand...

Either Brown is dreadfully poorly versed in geology or he is taking deliberate advantage of his reader's ignorance of the subject. Geologists have known for centuries that the deposits of strata that they study are frequently laid down very rapidly over days, hours or even minutes. "Polystrate" fossils such as tree trunks are formed when layers of sediment are deposited, one at a time, such as subsequent layers of mud deposited over several flood seasons on the floodplain of a river. This is just embarrassingly wrong.
 
If you don't know what you're talking about then just pretend that you do.

Walt Brown said:
Many undisputed observations contradict current theories on how the solar system evolved. One theory says that planets formed when a star, passing near our Sun, tore matter from the Sun.
Click to expand...
Come on Walt, Buffon's theory was proposed in 1745 and is long, long dead. What has this got to do with modern cosmology? And why no citation for this particular tidbit?

More popular theories hold that the solar system formed from a cloud of swirling gas, dust, or larger particles. If the planets and their known moons evolved from the same material, they should have many similarities. After several decades of planetary exploration, this expectation is now recognized as false.
Click to expand...
This statement is false, and it once again represents either Brown's ignorance of the subject he discusses, or his practice of exploiting the ignorance of his readers regarding said subject. There is no expectation inherent in the nebular hypothesis that the solar system should be uniform in orbital and rotational characteristics of all bodies. From the beginning astronomers modeled the interaction of proto-planets and other bodies in the early solar system, showing that various bodies would be flung into all sorts of orbits. Some would be flung from the solar system, some consumed by the sun. This chaos would reign for quite some time before settling down into the relatively stable system that we see today. The result is that we see bodies with various orbital and rotational characteristics. The expectations of the nebular model are exactly what we see today.
 
This thread needs to be retitled.

I vote for "Solitary Engineer Unsuccessfully Rebuts Evolution via Appeals to Ignorance and Misstatements of Fact".

What do you say, Mods? ;)
 
So, where are they?

Walt Brown said:
At various times and places, man-made objects have been found encased in coal. Examples include a thimble, an iron pot, an iron instrument, an 8-karat gold chain, three throwing-spears, and a metallic vessel inlaid with silver. Other “out-of-place artifacts” have been found inside deeply buried rocks: nails, a screw, a strange coin, a tiny ceramic doll, and other objects of obvious human manufacture. By evolutionary dating techniques, these objects would be hundreds of millions of years older than man. Again, something is wrong.
Click to expand...
So where are these artifacts? Following the citation for the first, the thimble, leads to an obscure letter published in the Jan. to Oct 1883 edition of the American Antiquarian and Oriental Journal. By the way, that's not the former president J.Q. Adams. As you can see, this is a second hand account with little detail.

There are actual human artifacts to be found in mineral deposits that can be examined first hand. But there are simple explanations for such things. For example, artifacts left in steam boilers during their construction or maintenance will become encased in deposits of minerals that were dissolved in the water used in the boiler tanks,
 
joobz said:
What do you think a refrigerator does? If evolution violates the second law, so does your icebox.
Click to expand...

In what way? People have long known that it is hard to keep hot and cold separated. Hot things cool down and cold things naturally warm up. That’s why the ice melts in your refrigerator if the power goes out. Entropy is a measure of how evenly distributed heat is. As the ice melts in your refrigerator, the entropy of the refrigerator, and the air in your kitchen surrounding it, increases. The same thing is true of information.

http://www.scienceagainstevolution.org/v10i11f.htm
 
Pahu said:
Glenn R. Morton has a long history of making and repeating fallacious arguments against creationist scientists.

http://www.trueorigin.org/ca_jw_02.asp
Click to expand...

Now there's an oxymoron if I ever saw one... Pray tell, Pahu, what is scientific about creationism? What predictions does it make? Is it falsifiable?

*crickets* ... *crickets*

Oh, no predictions? Can't test any of it? It's just about rehashing fallacious arguments that have been debunked long ago? In that case, kindly refrain from referring to champions of ignorance and dishonesty as scientists. Thanks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom