ToE says [as opposed what it does not say], briefly in headings:
1. A process of change.
2. Changes of life forms.
3. The life forms are deivided in groups [speceis], according to common, base traits.
4. The changes are said to occur via speciation [branching in groups]; survival of the fittest [many don't make it, same with the drama of sperm cells, allowing only one fit to succeed]; and Adaptation [learning or acquiring means to prevail environmental conditions].
5. The said changes occur at the micro level, via genes in the dna, and these pass on data [a program], which keeps enlarging its memory over successive generations and time - accumulating signs of good and bad actions, accumulatively. Here, a gene will propell instructions, and the host acts on these impulses - it fails till it succeeds, and when a crevice of elevation is found, it is said to evolve into a higher, more hardy life - this is termed as a mutation - while it helps a life form to progress to a new, higher level, it also destroys the original host form. The micro process has been traced to what is called a retro-virus, which, before perishing away, lodged an implant in a dna's gene, and this was passed on, even as the retro did not survive.
6. While Darwin himself never said all life forms emerge from one molecule, or that there is cross-sepciation, this is the inferred premise, which has been expanded and accepted by the faculty called ToE.
What Darwin or ToE does not say:
1. How life originally began; thus evolution is a process, picked up in mid-point of a process, and refers only to post original life emergence; namely is illustrates a process which has already began. This is not a lacking, because true origins of all things are unknown generally. However, we find a list of pre-life occurences in the genesis morde of evolution, namely anticipating life, and includes the seperation of the elements in critical modes, eg. seperation of water and land, light and darkness, male and female; for sure, life could not have emerged without these precedent events, despite all of the factors nominated in ToE.
2. ToE does not account for the emergence of male/female distinctions. A counter to it is that the origin of life was a dual-gendered entity, which became seperated later [Genesis]. This is a valid premise, as opposed to a male appearing and then a female being found with the exact, recipient traits in a sync mode: the odds for such are not plausable.
3. TE does not account for speech being a unique trait, one which makes modern humans a distinct species. Thus ToE focuses only on skeletal and biological imprints; as opposed to what else, one may ask here. While speech is seen by evolutionists as a mere different form of communication, this does not factor in the correct division of differentials, namely there are millions of communication modes - but only one which is speech. Here, speech has proven itself to be a difference in kind than degree, and no other life form has evolved to attain speech, despite the benefits of time and greater audio dexterity.
4. ToE does not successfully prove its cross speciation, aside from very doubtful and limited lab deconstructionism. Namely, it does not evidence itself in cross-speciation transit points in our midst, citing that this is because it is a very slow pace and takes millions of years. But this is a mathematical glitch: the time factor has no impact when the process is said to be 'on-going', which means w/o pause. This says, every second of time must evidence speciation, in our midst, and upon all places of the planet.
5. The first premise of evolution was recorded in genesis, as well as the first introduction of survival of the fittest, speciation and adaptation: these are cushioned in latent biblespeak, but are evident when read carefully, and was assuredly the means which sparked Darwin's evolution. Lets examine the differences between the two forms of evolution, as a means of understanding what evolution is, within these differences.
Differences between Darwinian and genesis Evolution.
1. Species in ToE are based on skeletal traits, and sub-devided into further sub-groups with common traits within that basic group. These are referred to as species. In genesis also, the life forms are devided in groups, and these are referred to as a 'KIND'. The genesis groupings are based on: immobile, sprouting life form [vegetation]; water based [fish]; air-borne [fowl]; land based [animal] and human. Within these groups, Genesis also caters to micro life forms such as bacteria and virues [swarms; dust], mammals, insects and creepy crawleys. Genesis also caters to a form of speciation, but limits this to a 'kind', namely a fish does not become an animal; a fruit tree does not become a bird; etc. Darwin contradicts genesis here by positing fossil imprints which signify a specie cross-changed from a previous one, bu pointing to certain fossil imprints which fit, like pieces of a jigsaw. However, other reasons can apply aside from cross-speciation here, and there is no evidential track record of a half/bird/half zebra [noting that the time factor does not apply in an on-going process]. In contrast, Genesis allows a saber tiger to evolve into a cat [feline sub-group of animals] - because they belong to the same 'kind' [land based]. There are arguements for and against here - it is by no means conclusive for ToE: the maths, when properly applied, negates ToE, which relies on the time factor.
2. The other factor of differential between these two modes of evolution refers to the transmission mode. Genesis says the seed factor is adequate to transmit all data, including skeletal and dna imprints, requiring no other assistance from any other source or one which goes back millions of years. Here, the seed factor, like speech, is totally disregarded by Darwin. But we have the situation whereby Genesis' mode can function without ToE's time factor, while ToE cannot subsist w/o the seed factor - and this is the proof ToE must overcome to prevail itself - namely it must evidence its various theories without the seed factor. This seed factor, and the speech factor, poses fundamental threats to ToE.
My view: I see the minutae process breakdowns of Darwin as a great knowledge base and contribution for science, but I see this as applying only to sub-groups. I also favour, via my own science based assessment, that Genesis' seed factor, dual-gendered original life forms, speech allocation for a seperate group, and its limitations to cross-speciation - as superios and more plausable than ToE.
You're wrong.
Except, of course, the bits that are written in IAmJosephese, rather than English, which are not even wrong.
You will have to choose between being wrong and being meaningless, 'cos you can't do both simultaneously.
™ Version 4.2
