Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Evolution Scientists vs True Scientists [Spirituality & Religion]

DNA is an incredibly complex information (and language) system. Scientists have only scratched the surface of the complexity of this molecule of heredity. Despite the obvious hallmarks of design, many geneticists attribute DNA to random chance processes over millions of years. But there are many problems with this idea (for example, we never observe information arising from non-information), including the question of why DNA and the code for proteins embedded in DNA evolved “into a nearly uniform blueprint that arose from trillions of possibilities.” Well, a group of researchers are arguing they know the answer. They believe scientists need to expand Darwin’s ideas to include an “energy code”: Darwin's theory of evolution should be expanded to include consideration of a DNA stability "energy code"—so-called "molecular Darwinism"—to further account for the long-term survival of species' characteristics on Earth. The origins of the evolution of the DNA genetic code and the evolution of all living species are embedded in the different energy profiles of their molecular DNA blueprints. Under the influence of the laws of thermodynamics, this energy code evolved, out of an astronomical number of alternative possibilities, into a nearly singular code across all living species. They claim thinking about DNA this way will “provide entirely new ways of analyzing the human genome and the genome of any living species.” AiG’s Dr. Georgia Purdom explains what these researchers mean: Ever since the elucidation of the genetic code, evolutionists have pondered how it came into existence. The genetic code is composed of nucleotide triplets (in DNA and RNA) known as codons. The codons, as their name suggests, code for specific amino acids. For example, the codon CGA codes for the amino acid arginine. Amino acids are the building blocks of proteins, which are responsible for the structure and function of every living thing. DNA is composed of 4 nucleotides, or bases, abbreviated A, C, T, and G. There are 64 possible combinations of these 4 letters in triplets and there are 20 amino acids. The code is redundant, meaning that multiple codons code for the same amino acid. For example, four codons code for arginine. It’s hard to imagine how something this complex could have evolved by random chance over millions of years, yet that’s exactly what evolutionists have to do! A new study attempted to explain the evolution of the genetic code (called “molecular Darwinism”) by calculating the energy levels of the codons. The conclusion was that the genetic code, “evolved under the influence and regulation of a series of interlocking thermodynamic cycles.” However, what the authors really crafted was a STORY based on the OBSERVATION that some codons have low free energy (are less stable) and some have high free energy (are more stable). The observations may be relevant in understanding certain aspects of the genetic code, but they provide no evidence as to how the genetic code evolved (except in the imagination of the authors!) Researchers continue to propose the preposterous to avoid the truth they know in their hearts but suppress in unrighteousness—that God is the Creator of all life and everything else (see Romans 1).

Evolution scientists see what they want to see in the evidence, true scientists see what is actually there in the evidence.
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
SteelHands · 61-69, M
To reason that any educational point of view.. .

:: about the origins of intelligent human life.. .

:: must completely reject any or all possible theories

:: of any or all pre existing contributor intelligent life.. .

Is highly suspect.

Runs counter to what I consider academic inquiry.

Rules out the possibility of a predecessor species and any other legacy species.. .

And persecutes intellectual progress itself by purging science of all other examinations these institutions, over some, which they hold dominance.
Kwek00 · 41-45, M
@SteelHands
[quote]Rules out the possibility of a predecessor species and any other legacy species.. .

And persecutes intellectual progress itself by purging science of all other examinations these institutions, over some, which they hold dominance.[/quote]

Because there is a severe lack of evidence supporthing these ideas. If there is no evidence for it, then it's just an hypothesis. If it's just an hypothesis, then it shouldn't be part of the curriculum. If we are going to teach every hypothesis that lacks evidence, we would kinda fuck up our species more then it already is.
SteelHands · 61-69, M
@Kwek00 Ever heard of suppression of evidence and censorship?

Maybe you'll decide you've been led by your pride far from the path of finding answers to your intellectual curiosity one day and stop being part of the suppression problem.

You may ask what problem but the fact is hundreds of millions already dead, several world wars, usurpation of the diety for murderous purposes, a million or more people in devastated family hardship "reducation" camps more like concentration camps is a problem.

So is no answers to mountains of archeological finds, primary educational progress dropping standards, a widening living standards gap, political corruption, rarified individualism, endorsement of authoritarianism, scientific proofs absconded with by consensusarians, and a hundred more sick and disgusting things you might actually embrace.

Now that you know where the rest of the world departs from your darwiniN religion, maybe you want to 'splain to me what your real problem is with the God of creation.

And spare me the insult of accusing people like me of allopathic malpractice, the military industrial complex, and inducement of phobias.

Because that's a fart in a hurricane from where I see things.
Kwek00 · 41-45, M
@SteelHands Ever heared of the scientific method?

If all those people that complain about "suppression of evidence and censorship" start applying the scientific method then there would be no "suppression". And there might be actual "evidence" instead of things they pull out of their ass.

Because that's the problem with these kinds of things. You want to do science, good for you. Follow the method that gives science it's basis and you can play in schools and university. Pull shit out of your ass and expect people to buy into it just because you can't shake off your own delusions, and get thrown out of the scientific community. Either you accept that you didn't follow the rules or start moaning as if you are a victim in the hope to get some mental support from paranoid delusional individuals like yourself that are already deep into the make believe that conciouss parents should try to keep out of their schools before their kids turn into crackpots.
SteelHands · 61-69, M
@Kwek00 Insults don't show me how intelligent you are. Where's your curiosity?

Nah. Rather. Fuck you go get your own college.

Thanks for proving my point.
Kwek00 · 41-45, M
@SteelHands The scientific method doesn't hinder curiosity.

I don't need my own college. I just want schools to be voided from people that pretend some big conspiratorial network is keeping out the incredible evidence for the incredible claims that have been researched and proven wrong. That's all I want.

I also wonder what point I've proven?
SteelHands · 61-69, M
@Kwek00 I'm saying that's what your response indicated you directed me to do.

Are you telling me that you're unaware of the collection and disposal of archeological materials throughout the us by the Smithsonian?

Are you telling me you're unaware of the prohibition of further examination of the deeply buried ruins in Egypt?

Are you telling me that the oceanic underwater structures, pyramids actually, don't reveal a probable prehominid intelligent life on planet earth?

Don't hump my leg and tell me it's a muscle twitch. I'm all done listening to people that parrot the cite of "scientific method" while burying all physical proof that female brains are extremely different than a male brain, that water vapor made the sky blue, and that trees uptake water through capillary action when they have no capillaries. And by the way you're atom theory is shot to sh*t too.

I'm so fixkin done with your gravitational baloney as well.

I do understand Einstein's formula. Not the theory the actual formula. So. Have a massive day. Lol
Kwek00 · 41-45, M
@SteelHands My response indicated what?

These 3 points that I'm telling you: disposal of material, prohibitions to further examination, the underwater pyramids... what's are your sources for all that?

I'm not going to hump your legg.
Yeah, I guess it's looking bad for the atom-theory. Maybe it's not worth saving... I don't know but I love to hear about it.
QuixoticSoul · 41-45, M
@SteelHands [quote]To reason that any educational point of view.. .

:: about the origins of intelligent human life.. .

:: must completely reject any or all possible theories

:: of any or all pre existing contributor intelligent life.. .
[/quote]
Good thing this isn't required.

[quote]Runs counter to what I consider academic inquiry.
[/quote]
That's because you don't understand how any of it works.

[quote]Are you telling me you're unaware of the prohibition of further examination of the deeply buried ruins in Egypt?

Are you telling me that the oceanic underwater structures, pyramids actually, don't reveal a probable prehominid intelligent life on planet earth?[/quote]
🤣🤣🤣
This message was deleted by its author.
QuixoticSoul · 41-45, M
@SteelHands Toodles, dumbass.

This message was deleted by its author.