I am in touch with some of the top entomology evolutionists in the world and none can even tell what insect any insect evolved directly from?? Total ignorance describes ALL evolutionists! No other way to put it. As the huge Chicago evolutionist conference showed: When asked: "Is there anyone here that KNOWS anything about evolution: the answer was total silence AS ALWAYS! But finally a hand went up: “It should not be taught in High School!”
Im an evolutionist and I can find that funny.
Hello @Vivi_O2 and welcome. I hope you have gotten some answers already for the questions you have asked but I wish to throw my hat in the ring and give my spin on how I see things.
For Adam and Eve, I see them as real and historical people but they aren’t the first humans to be made but the first humans to come into contact with God. The story of Gen. 2-3 is based off real people and a real event but told in the lens of how an ancient ANE-Hebrew audience would have understood the world. For the Flood. I see it a local but deadly flood that impacted early humanity within the Fertile Crescent and that Noah was a real historical person who built an ark for him, his family and those animals that God brought onto the ark to be saved.
As long as it is understood to be a joke. I have checked out the claim for this so called conference and found it to be without substance. This is pretty much a made up story that has been passed around as fact. The only conference at the supposed time and place may have had top people invited, but it was so much of a failure (so few attending) that nothing was published about its content. Maybe the scientists didn’t want to attend something set up by creationists.
The 1980 Chicago evolutionary conference had “160 of the world’s leading evolutionary scientists.” Newsweek (November 3, 1980), said that conference showed: “Neither the origin nor diversity of living creatures could be explained by evolutionary theory.” Now 40 years later, it has been clearly proven that life cannot start by any evolutionary process. Francis Crick knew the math showed life was impossible to start on Earth in its brief @ 4 billion years. Sir Fred Hoyle did the math and found it was impossible (a statistical zero), for life to have started anywhere in the known Universe during its @ 14 billion years. He pointed out that a “statistical zero” meant that if the entire Universe were filled with blind men working Rubik’s Cubes, it’s a “statistical zero” that they’d all solve the cube at the same moment! It’s also now well-known that one type of animal cannot “evolve” into another, no matter how much time elapses. It is also known the Darwin never even saw a Galapagos finch! The entire evolutionary story is a complete farce. And I’ve only scratched the surface, but if you want more, I will provide! Top former evolutionists are writing books about how they were tricked into believing this fantasy. I know of no former Creationists that are writing books–although there probably a comparatively few. The FACTS are making evolutionary scientists jump ship!
You do realize that in the intervening 40 years, scientists have sequenced multiple genomes, unearthed piles of transitional fossils, and refined their understanding in multiple areas. This is a laughable statement. Plus, as has already been pointed out to you multiple times, common descent does not attempt to explain the origin of life.
3 Likes
This is a dramatic misunderstanding of what the conference concluded. The conference examined the idea that the theory of evolution as it had been popularly represented up to that point (uniformly slow rates of change based on point mutations + natural selection) was missing some key pieces. I’m sure you said what you said in good faith, Mike, but I am pretty sure you have either misunderstood the journalist or the journalist misunderstood the conference.
Mike misunderstood the journalist?
The journalist may have simply been speaking about the need to update the theory of evolution, but his context got lost in YEC quoting of a few words without the surrounding context.
Journalist misunderstood the conference?
It is also possible that the journalist misunderstood the conversation among scientists. It would not be the first time that has happened. 
How to Avoid Perpetuating the Misunderstandings
I am completely convinced of your sincerity, Mike. I don’t for a second believe you would intentionally misrepresent what scientists said in 1980 or what they say today. I’m also sure you agree that everyone involved in the conversations–including here on the forum–should try to be well enough informed to avoid the kinds of mischaracterizations you (unwittingly) made in your post.
I am sure you are interested in learning the conclusions of scientists who actually attended the 1980 conference. A good place to start would be here.
I would also think you are interested in learning about updates to the theory of evolution that have occurred in the past 40 years. These would include:
- The role of regulatory gene networks
- Evo-devo
- Improved fossil evidence
- Comparative genomics
- The power of drift
- Analysis of historical and laboratory genetic change
- Nested hierarchy modeling
(Since I am not a biologist, I have probably left out one or more important updates. I invite any biologists reading this thread to correct my omissions or misunderstandings.)
Are you interested in learning about these updates to the theory of evolution, Mike? Just say the word, and someone here (maybe even I!) would be happy to connect you with a resource or two.
Best,
Chris
2 Likes
At the Chicago conference, Harvard’s famed, Stephen Jay Gould, added, “For millions of years species remain unchanged in the fossil record, and then abruptly disappear, to be replaced by something that is substantially different but clearly related.” (That is still known to be true in 2020!). This confirms my belief that God has destroyed and started over many times in many places in Earth’s history! The fossil record shows stasis and then totally new creatures, devoid of the expected transitional forms. If evolution ever happened or is happening, there should be obvious transitional forms here now by the octillions! Where are they? Not in my backyard! Are we to believe evolution always took place in the deep past, but doesn’t now, when we can check it out? “The central question of the Chicago conference was whether the mechanisms underlying microevolution can be extrapolated to explain the phenomena of macroevolution. The answer can be given as a clear, No.” (See "science.sciencemag.org).
Yes Chris–send it over!
I was taking about a SCIENTIFIC publication not the spin some lying journalist chooses to write. I couldn’t find one but only such a publication can tell us what the scientists really said.
From Larry Moran at Sandwalk
There was a lot of talk about punctuated equilibria at the Chicago meeting and how the ideas of Eldredge and Gould conflicted with the gradualism that was part of traditional Darwinian evolution.
When I took biology in high school and had the theory of evolution explained to me it took me less than 24 hours to realize that this is not something that would happen at a steady pace but would be greatly accelerated in remnant populations on the brink of extinction – exactly when you are highly unlikely to find any fossils. Punctuated equilibrium thus is an immediate logical derivative of the basic principle of natural selection and no scientist at the conference would have suggested otherwise.
This is typical creationist methodology based on grasping for anything which can be used to support your beliefs. There is no more interest in honesty than with a defense attorney. It is all about proving your case no matter what. Science doesn’t work that way.
2 Likes
I quoted a source that quoted: “science.sciencemag.org!” And again, this “Punctuated equilibrium” is NEVER observed among the octillions of animals on Earth today! It is just as much a farce as the other evolutionary theories! None of them has EVER EVER EVER been seen to happen! No animal can possibly EVER evolve a body plan different from the one it has! And that’s why, among the octillions of animals on Earth today, it’s NEVER been seen! If if ever happens, which is impossible genetically, let me know!
Back to the “were you there?” argument. I wasn’t at the battle of Waterloo, but I’m pretty sure it happened. Silliness on steroids.
1 Like
Out of the multiple octillions of animals that have existed over the past, let’s go with two thousand years, NOBODY has ever seen an animal give birth to an animal unlike itself. EVERYTHING we KNOW, tells us Genesis is correct by saying God created the different “kinds” of animals, without evolution involved. People reported seeing “the battle of Waterloo,” but NOBODY has EVER reported seeing an animal give birth to a different “KIND” of animal.
I think you misunderstand the punctuated equilibrium hypothesis (PE), Mike. PE contends that changes that require millions of generations under stable conditions might take place in hundreds of thousands of generations during periods of great environmental changes.
No scientist is suggesting that you would notice any changes in the course of a lifetime or even hundreds of lifetimes.
I appreciate your openness to learning more about the biological sciences. I am hoping that someone else reading in this thread can make a few suggestions. If not, I hope to do so this weekend. I appreciate your patience in the meantime.
Grace and peace,
Chris
1 Like
My point is that neither extremely slow (Darwinian) evolution nor much faster, though not extremely fast, (PE) are being seen anywhere! The entire sequence of octillions of transitional forms that should be here if any type of evolution were going on, is simply missing, pointing strongly to Creation without evolution. We don’t have an Earth full of transitional animals, and since it’s such a slow process, octillions should be here at all times! Or do you expect us to believe it used to happen, but we live in a time when it doesn’t? And don’t forget, it’s known from the fossil record that animals didn’t change for millions of years!
Modern bees were in Patagonia 100 million years ago! For one thing, it must be admitted that there’s no reason to disbelieve any part of Genesis! Again see my “Local Creationism and the Statement of Fact View” here.
I think this is a pretty important finding … buried within one of the hundreds of YouTube videos on Evolution ! A one-celled animal feeds on algae cells by engulfing them… but every once in a while an algae cell refuses to die… and helps both cells survive in different kinds of extreme environments.
Protists that fed on algae cells swallowed some that would not be digested and did not die… and they were lucky they did! Those algae cells helped the Protists survive starvation - - and provide an exquisite example of how life forms can dramatically change in just a generation!
[The image immediately below is my highlighted image from the video. The video’s link is below!]
That video, sad to say, was useless in proving any type of evolution from one animal into another and gave no examples of such a thing! The constant use of the word “MAY” is extremely revealing, showing they do not KNOW how any animal can do the genetically impossible and in some unknown way, produce an animal with a different body plan! In fact, this video doesn’t even attempt to show an example! I only go by “TRUE SCIENCE,” not a science that shows no examples and and keeps saying “MAY.” It MAY be that green toads with purple eyes became lions! When “MAY” is used any silliness can be stated! There are no KNOWN transitional forms on Earth now or in the fossil record. That is a FACT! The very best any evolutionist can do is to say that in some unknown, unobserved way, against ALL THE KNOWN SCIENCE OF GENETICS, an animal (any animal), gave birth to an animal with a different body plan! No matter how many generations, the genetically impossible, ALWAYS remains so! All attempts to PROVE an animal can get here other than being directly created by God have failed miserably! It’s telling that you had to rely on a video that had nothing to do with my assertion that “NO ANIMAL CAN EVER GIVE BIRTH TO AN ANIMAL OTHER THAN ONE WITH THE SAME BODY-PLAN IT HAS!” If anyone can overturn that fact, I will grant that evolution is possible! So far in 55 years of asking, nobody has ever produced proof of how the impossible could ever happen! Instead ALL I’ve ever read tells us TRUE SCIENCE cannot allow for such an absurdity! Let’s take for example, one of the famous “supposed,” “assumed” transitional forms, ARCHAEOPTERYX. True science would never say it’s a known transitional species! Why not? Twelve have been found in the fossil record. Does this point to them being created directly by God or to being transitional, having arrived by evolution? The FACT that no animals were found leading up to it, nor evolving away from it, strongly implies it was created and did not evolve! After all, can we expect that there would be 12 of them found and none of all of the generations around it??? God has created animals that we needed, like horses and honey bees. He created animals for us to enjoy, like dogs, cats, butterflies and birds. But He also created some animals just to show us what He can do, like the duck-billed platypuses, humming birds, dragon flies and archaeopteryxes! If we say God making man from the dust of the Earth and breathing into him the breath of life shows “evolution,” then we can make the Scriptures mean whatever we fancy! By sending this video, you changed the subject away from whether or not an animal can give birth to one with a different body-plan in an evolutionary chain! But I will not allow this attempted dodging the question! I am a Genesis/Creationist fanatic! Winston Churchill said, “A fanatic is someone who won’t change their mind and won’t let you change the subject!”
I have no idea what you think you are saying.
The study examines protists that have swallowed algae that refuses to die.
And so, in the process, when there wasn’t much to eat for the protists, the normal sugar production of the algae contributed to the survival of the surrounding protist.
And when there wasn’t enough sunlight, the swallowed algae was able to survive on what the protist processed in its normal metabolism.
Excellent information, but doesn’t have anything to do with the subject! You haven’t shown that any animal has given birth to another with a different body-plan, which is required if evolution ever happened, which is a genetic impossibility, regardless of what an animal swallows or what lives in it, the animal remains the same animal it was. Abraham Lincoln asked, “Say a horse has one less leg–how many legs does it have?” The answer given was “three.” But Abe said, “Four, because saying it has one less leg, doesn’t make it true!”
Evolutionary theory does not predict that one animal will evolve into another animal. Every animal will be the same species as its parents. It is only over long periods of time that species diverge and they do so as populations.
That is not a fact. You are misinformed.
No “evolutionist” would ever say anything close to “an animal gives birth to an animal with a different body plan.” The fact that you think this is an accurate depiction of what the theory says shows your complete ignorance of what it actually proposes. Please do not presume to come on a forum with scientifically literate people and spew this kind of nonsense. Either ask questions about what you clearly don’t understand, or go somewhere else with your ALL CAPS and exclamation points.
2 Likes