Evolution would've given us infrared eyesight

No. However, I believe the fact that we have numerous cases of bonafide precognition indicates there is a creator, and that He really is in control - guiding and directing.Our best science today concludes that time travel is impossible. That doesn't mean it is, but the ability to see into the infrared spectrum when we can already see into the red spectrum is not such a significant difference. It is only a mutation away in evolutionary terms. I have considered that very point at length before. It was one of the things I wrestled with in my early faith. Over time I came to see the beauty in the Bible and in Jesus, and I concluded that it was a loving God who created everything rather than some trickster who used the common, observable world around us to enslave us through a fabricated belief system. I believe it is the work of God as the entire book conveys a single author (the Holy Spirit - truth), through many man writers. Everything that exists evidences creation, and a loving God. Psalm 19: Psalm 19; NIV - Psalm 19 - For the director of music. A - Bible GatewayWe are His creation. But the truth is, while He does guide the way of the sparrow, and the direction of the wind, and the clamoring of the sea, and everything that there is, He has given us free will. We have the opportunity now to accept His love, or reject it; to see Him as He has revealed Himself to all of His creation, or to put on blinders and go our own way.We are unique in His creation in that regard. And I can show you love, and kindness, and consideration and I can do everything He has asked me to do to the best of my ability, and yet I will not be as He is. Even if someone appeared to you as the nicest, kindest, most loving person you've ever met, they do not hold a candle to God because we are still in this flesh.The Bible says that right now we only see in part, but then (after we die and cast off this flesh) we will know in full. Nothing will be withheld for those who believe.But for now, because Adam sinned, and because we are all in this flesh because of Adam's sin (and are mortal in this flesh, destined to die), we cannot know everything. It is God's plan to allow each of us to choose if we will love Him, choose Him, choose truth and life, or if we will go our own way and choose death.It might sound harsh, but all of us are without excuse because that still small voice, when the TV is off, and there are no conversations being had, and we are there alone only with our thoughts, He is there speaking to us in ways we know on the inside. His voice is not silent, but it requires that we hear it.That is how we know He is real, and that we are His. I did not move this thread here. I posted a thread in the are where new threads are posted. Someone else moved it here. That does not change my belief, my ability to answer, what I consider relevant or anything else. I am here explaining my beliefs on this issue, even in the areas of things that I do not believe are true, but am able to explain my reasoning about them - such as evolutionary concepts.

---

- Rick

Infrared cameras operate when warm, cold or hot. They do not cease to function because they are in a warm environment. They simply record the radiation in that spectrum regardless of the temperature of the lens, the sensor, the box, etc.Infrared thermometers are not affected by temperature either. When it's 20F outside they can read the temperature of a hot water pipe, or the frozen ground, or the engine block. Same as when it's 100F outside.They simply use materials which are invisible to infrared light for their receptors. The same would be true in an evolutionary adaption for warm blooded mammals. Silicon is invisible to infrared light. It's how modern day semiconductor manufacturers are able to observe circuits in operation without disassembling them or adding debug ports. They literally use laser probes in the infrared spectrum which "see" right through the silicon to the individual copper wires beneath. They can analyze current flow because each time an electron moves in copper it changes energy state and emits an infrared photon. The more photons, the more electricity.I personally visited Intel's debug lab in Oregon in November, 2007. TGDaily – More than the newsI disagree with that statement. We use those abilities today because of the way God made us, not because of evolution.

---

- Rick

Science today is creating artificial structures that do not require sleep. Nanoscopic electro-chemical-mechanical systems. They can operate continuously without sleep. And these are engineered clunky things compared to life.It has been shown that even today there are people who can get by with 1hr of sleep per day. It would've been an evolutionary advantage to not sleep, and therefore it is something that should've evolved. IR is not impossible in endotherms. It's only impossible if you use materials which are not invisible to infrared light.Costly activities are only "costly" because there are not adequate systems which keep everything in operation. Evolution should've sorted that out. If cells were not getting enough oxygen, then a better circulatory or respiratory system. If cells were not getting enough energy, then a better endocrine system or digestive system. If cells need to take a break, then have cells which switch off and work 50% of the time on some kind of duty cycle.There are evolutionary answers to these questions, and not all of them are unviable.

---

- Rick

Sure there have. Twins have known the other one was in an accident. Mother and child have had similar connections, even across continents. There have been countless instances of people knowing things before they had any natural way of knowing them.There are cases of people walking into music stores for the first time ever, sitting down and playing Chopan or Bach flawlessly - having never touched an instrument before.There are many cases that have been reported over the years.My mother personally experienced one when my brother went to Russia in the 1990s. There was a train wreck when he was there, very mild and no one was hurt, but the train was damaged. She knew something was wrong and was freaking out for a long time before she finally heard from him.

---

- Rick

There may not be a cost to the ability gained by fending off the flying creature. Maybe it was skin pigmentation, or an ability to lay flat. Those traits may not otherwise impede anything.Over the course of billions of years and countless mutations and genetic drifts, there would be lots of evidence of things we don't need still around. They would not have all magically gone away simply because they weren't needed. By definition it will. It will supply us with a wide array of things which are useless. However, in a few generations those creatures with the useless (potentially costly or harmful) traits would've died off. That doesn't mean they won't come. And in a true evolutionary system, they should be coming constantly. As you say, there is a cost. If the cost is zero, then useless features will abound. They will be introduced into the creature and, if they don't hurt anything, will continue to exist. And, they don't have to be external. Internal genetic modifications which have no outward effect. In DNA there are portions which we believe today are useless. Evolution would introduce random static and trash into those unused portions if they had no cost in the outcome. I don't understand where people get the idea of features disappearing through genetic drift. This does not happen. There are no creatures today which are not already programmed with a wide array of abilities which, over time, will be weeded out of the genetic code (or active genetic code) by selective breeding or the "micro evolutionary process" which does actually exist (changes made from information already there).I'm stating that evolution does not exist in the form that we came from pre-animate goo to where we are today. Micro-evolution does exist, and does allow dogs, over time, to be bred into taller dogs, fatter dogs, longer dogs, etc. But that does not mean a dog can produce a non-dog.Features will not simply disappear if they are not needed. The natural variations within that organ's features, or within that gene's features, will allow whatever changes are possible for that thing over time to come out. But that does not mean it will go away. If the ability is already there encoded within it for it to go away, then it will go away. If it is not possible to take it away then it will not go away, it will simply move about into whatever ultimate form it happens on over time - per the evolutionist's theory. There are no vestigial features. If something is there, it has a purpose. Rather than me following those links, sum up in a paragraph or less what you believe are vestigial features.

---

- Rick

There is no evidence except that which is accepted through faith. Through faith I have evidence written in the Bible many thousands of years ago. I can read it today and it verifies the events taking place today with remarkable accuracy.Without faith, there is nothing I can point to except possibly the realization that these things typically happen unexpectedly, sporadically, and at certain times. The young child walking into the music store has never demonstrated any propensity toward playing music until such time as he/she sees the piano. And then, through an overwhelming desire that is not common in any other area of their life, they sit down and play.In addition, the instances with twins are often during times of great distress, indicating an emotional struggle of some kind, and possibly a physical one as well.There was a man I saw on TV whose twin brother worked with him as an electrician. His brother was electrocuted and died, and at that very instant the twin knew it. He got a phone call from his boss saying his brother had had an accident, and the alive twin said on the phone, "I know it. Bill is dead."There is nothing I can point to where I can say to you "Look there, it's a 7 on that chart, and that 7 indicates it is deity."BTW, God set it up that way ... we have to accept Him on faith, denying ourselves. Read Matthew 5: Matthew 5; NIV - Introduction to the Sermon on the Mount - Bible Gateway. It explains the humble, meek nature Christians are to assume on this Earth.On a personal note I would like to say that it's very difficult confronting so many individuals on continuous posts like this.

---

- Rick

Yes, and were an agressor species to come along I would be wiped out - which is what should've happened many millions of years ago according to evolutionary theories. The creature most adapatable to its environment would've won out ... specifically the one who could make more use out of the number of hours of each day (and the one that could see better via infrared). Reading: "IR is not impossible in endotherms."Okay, IR is not impossible in endotherms (considering the sum total of all avaialble resources which could exist to support an IR organ).Reading: "It's only impossible if you use materials which are not invisible to infrared light."Okay, meaning if you assume the lens and materials between the lens and the receptor are visible to infrared, then it won't work. But if you use materials that are invisible to infrared light, then no matter what temperature they are infrared will pass right through it. Your inability to grasp the concept I'm explaining here relating to IR invisibilty components does not allow you to claim things about my level of understanding on anything. Were we to chop off the head of some athelete and hook him up to a computer which caused his muscles to move, heart to beat, lungs to operate, etc., so that his body could live, then we would not be able to make him go indefinitely. He would still require resting, recuperation, etc.However, in an evolutionary system there should be no reason why that is necessary. I do not buy the cost factor of metabolism, and therefore the necessity of sleep, because in an evolutionary system all of those "costs" are just variables that could be overcome.Sharks never stop swimming. Their bodies have been designed so that they can continue to operate continuously. So it is possible in living creatures.In my belief, if evolution were true, that trait would've been introduced. The creatures that required less sleep would've been able to reproduce more often, hunt more often, etc. They would've won out over time. Same is true for creatures that could see better at night.Nocturnal creature today have huge pupils. They adapted to their environments, from an evolutionst's point of view, using visible light entering from larger openings which let in more light. They can see better in the dark for that reason. They have an advantage and are able to move about.Going back to the earliest creatures which should've existed in an evolutionary system, at some point the ability to see red should've given way to the ability to see infrared as well. A mutation or two would've taken them there. They did for much later creatures, so we know the mutation factor is possible. Given the variability of lifeforms with much more rapid lifecycles (reproducing every few hours or days), it should've happened a few times over a few hundred million years.It didn't happen because evolution is not true.

---

- Rick

I didn't put the thread here. Someone else moved it here.

---

- Rick

Or it means its morphology hadn't yet evolved the ability to lie flat which, from that point forward it could now do and is of benefit. Mutation is the only component of evolution that allows something over time to change. The only other possibility is programmed information change, which implies a creator as the original code is continuously programmed to develop into the next best thing.

---

- Rick

Yup. We see in red. Infrared is not that much further away in the spectrum, meaning only slight mutations would be required. Other, more advanced species which were already much more specialized (fish and snakes) have developed the ability, so we know it is possible. Through the many random mutations that should've occurred early on when lifeforms were reproducing every few hours or days, it should've happened at some point.However, if the evolutionist is going to say "it's random, it may have happened, or it may not" then ... that's just a cop out - a way to deny extreme probability in favor of shutting down a possibility. Mutations are changes in genetic code, resulting in modified protein generation. To be passed on to offspring, mutations must occur in reproductive components (sperm, eggs). Unknown. Presumably since all mutations I've ever heard about are unviable, sterility or death - though I don't believe that has to be the case. It depends on the severity of mutations. If the "mutation-producing machinery" were a programmed gene splicer designed to take amoeba DNA and convert it in successive generations to human DNA, then such a mutation-producing machine would be doing its job and would be beneficial. If it were radiation from the sun or Chernobyl, maybe not so much. [qs]And, what happens when you mutation-producing machinery makes too few mutations, too slowly?Unknown. Depends on the environment. In some cases, potentially nothing. In other cases, potentially extinction. I think the idea of an evolutionary system sorting everything out over million and billions of years is beyond ridiculous. We have over one billion nucleotides (about 20,000 genes) - according to a previous poster, and the idea of arranging all of those nucleotides in sequence in the 1.5 billion years science tells us life has existed on Earth ... that's almost a 1:1 ratio. It's 1.5:1 ratio, meaning that every year one of them would've had to have been put in sequence.In order for that to have happened, that means that many countless other thousands per year would've failed. Random mutations cannot account for the correct answer without also producing a significantly greater number of failed organisms, and I'm talking like ten million to one. For every viable mutation, there would have be ten million or more unviable ones.It's not possible that we evolved based on the math alone. And evolutionists always fall back on the concept of "millions and millions of years."According to evolutionary branches I've seen, less than 10 million years ago some common ancestor between us and apes/monkeys existed. And we are supposed to believe that in only 10 million years (say a 2 year average reproduction cycle (from mother to child), that's 5 million generations max, that this proto creature evolved specifically and directly from what it was to what we see today without not only countless intermediate steps and forms, but rather also the other tens of millions of versions that were unviable and died off.It's not evidenced by nature as we see today, fossil records, anything. We are what we are, and we reproduce what we are with only the very smallest number of changes.To think that man in the past 50,000 years has changed any, or even 350,000 years ... is ridiculous - even from the evolutionist's point of view.

---

- Rick

The cost factor I'm saying I don't buy is that it could not be overcome through evolution - were evolution real.I'm saying there's nothing which prohibits a creature that has the ability to operate continuously without needing sleep, without getting tired, from then not operating continuously and conserving energy.

---

- Rick

I understand this is the belief, and I say "hogwash." In order for there to be a beneficial mutation, it would have to be extremely specific. And in order for something specific to happen in an environment of "random mutations," there would have to be an enormous ratio of failed mutations (unviable mutations) to the one beneficial one. I estimated previously 10 million to 1.I don't see that happening today. I haven't seen one example of mutation on any level which would allow for, in another few hundred thousand years, to move from man or monkey to something nuvo-man or nuvo-monkey, with an additional split in the genetic tree to allow numo-monkey2 or nuvo-man2.It's an absolute absurdity to think it could happen in so few years, as our evolutionary charts show us today it happened from some proto-hominid about 4-10 million years ago. It's beyond ridiculous actually. The math doesn't add up.Edited by RickCHodgin, : Getting tired, had to fix grammar.

---

- Rick

I have never heard of any mutation which shown to benefit the offspring. Every textbook I've seen which talks about mutations shows something like the poor, battered fruit fly who, when bombarded with radiation, produces offspring with oval eyes, or curled wings or damaged legs. They include text like "Here we see an example of a mutation. This mutation is negative and will be weeded out through natural selection. Beneficial mutations are passed on to future generations, allowing evolution over time."They never show a single beneficial mutation, such as a before an after pictures of something that was observed to have a new benefit. No. I'm referring to mutations which produce blue skin, and red eyes, and thicker hair, denser bones, more teeth, clawlike finger nails, more digits, less digits, more jointed arms, etc. And if we go back to the original creatures evolution say existed at some point, the original mammal from which all others developed, then it should've had all kinds of abilities to generate all kinds of what we see today. It should've constantly been producing offspring with longer noses, longer ears, shorter noses, shorter ears, more toes, fewer toes, thick hair, unthick hair, long nails, thick nails, nails on only two fingers or toes, nails further up its fingers, thicker skin, thinner skin, more legs, more arms, longer necks, etc.Every possible trait should've been produced so that the offspring could go off and find their niche - were evolution true.

---

- Rick