Is the evolution of modern man going to stop

quote:

---

Is evolution in modern man still going on or will it be suppressed by medicine science and our way of life.

---

A far more vital question hovers. Are other life forms also going to advance as has humans? Why has only one life form attained a higher brain and speech - the most powerful tools a life form can possess? This says a life form [species] follows its own kind, and is not fundamentally impacted by evolution but the directive program transmitted by the host parents.The question becomes all the more impacting when we consider other life forms have the advantage of time - they had all the time to advance further, if not in the path of humans, then in other equally advanced paths. What we find instead, is that all life forms, despite their difference in skeletal designs, advance in one path with a common denominator, while humans have taken a singular, unique different path, one different in kind: the ratio is all trillions of life forms VS one human kind.If evolution impacts all life - this impact is not the factor applying with humans. The math says so.

quote:

---

In that case, perhaps you could clear up something that I wanted to ask one of you guys --- how in the world can you reconcile orthogenesis with adaptive radiation?

---

If you refer to what is described as a life form harbouring an inner force which makes it advance, which challenges natural selection [external environmental impacts]. Both appear fantastical and fail when the seed factor is considered. Regardless of any other proposed factor, the transmitted data from the host parents rules: try and evidence any case without it!

quote:

---

If evolution impacts all life - this impact is not the factor applying with humans. The math says so.

​

Curiously enough, you have omitted to include any math in your post.

---

Did you not notice the ratio factors given: all trillions of life forms VS 1? And the time factor as well? Here's another math busting factor for you:An on-going prowess is not affected by time. We should see all life forms older than humans to be more advanced - but this is not the case. It is proof the host seed rules! These are the reasons I see great wisdom in Genesis - from a science, not theological, POV. Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.

quote:

---

In what way does it say that? As far as I can see it is a complete non sequitur. Unless you choose to completely ignore reality you can't escape the fact that the genetic 'program' passed from parents to offspring is modified and therefore susceptible to change and a suitable substrate for evolution.

---

Negative. There is in fact no modification whatsoever: the basic life form design remains: a life form [zebra] follows it own kind [zebra again] - the design of stripes do not constitute a modification but intellegence and wisdom of the system. Minutae variances like individual eye color and other tendacies defy your conclusion: these are factored in, with all such variations being internally processed via a permutation of odds covering billions of sperm and egg cells which determines these minor sub-set variations at what point they connect.

quote:

---

I'd also question your criteria for saying that speech and a complex brain are the most powerful tools a life form can possess. It seems very anthropocentric, essentially saying 'What we do best must be the most important things, because we are the most important things". Going by most biological criteria for success, population size, rate of growth and adaptability

---

I admit that what a mosquito or snake can do in its own situation is supreme, and a human in the exact same circumstances could not do better. This factor only says each life form group has a particular program which defies evolution's environmental impacts: the thing happens internally via a directive program! However, the criteria of all life forms following one set of rules applies to all trillions of life forms - while one specie differs fundamentally: they all perform best in their world but humans break this barrier. Consider the example which applies to speech: communication is common to all life; speech is limited to one. The factor of adaptability is thus blown away by a ratio of all VS 1.You won't agree because evolution has become a fundamentlist religion!

There's no reality behind adaptive radiation; this is just a neo doctored premise given to the variety of life forms., and disregards the directive program transmission. Why do you not see this happening everywhere now!? AR is calling all the different cars as externally created, while ignoring the car manual, car factory and the car maker.I gave you many mathematical premises you choose to disregard.

There is no modification. If one looks closely, they will find variances in their hand five seconds later or two zebras display different stripe designs: but they still remain hands and zebras. This is generically common: no two points in the universe are the same, not because of evolution but because the space and time is moving.When will you guys get to the part what role a host tranmittance to the offspring plays - remember that teeny weeny factor!?

That's a coherent non-response. As in incoherent ignore mode of the most primal factor in repro: the seed.Is speech determined by eons of years of NS - or a specificity of what is transmitted by the host to the offspring?

quote:

---

Maybe when you can coherently explain just what the hell you are talking about? Those of us in touch with reality know what it is that is transmitted between parents and offspring, it is principally genetic material in the form of DNA along with a few proteins and some organelles.

---

The mysterious word is translated as the 'seed', referring to a core essence embodying al the make-up in the male/female duality. This is the earliest, first recording of an embryotic science, which cannot be better said considering the then limitations of words.You say this seed is genetic material. I say this genetic configuration is better described as a code of a directive program, which contains all the data required in determining the offspring, to the extent it leaves no margin of play for any other factors as impacting. It aligns perfectly with a seed following its own kind - as in a chip in your mobile. Specifically then, what other factors are you saying impacts the offsrping, noting you have not even given the seed even cursory relevance till I pushed you there?

quote:

---

We also know that this genetic material is subject to changes and that such changes can have effects on morphology, cognition, speech, behaviour and a host of other factors.

---

And specifically what are you saying causes these changes - the wind carrying bundles of data - the sun mixed with blue light - jitterbugging quarks randomly banging together? You have not clarified at all in any semblance of science compared to the transmitted data criteria.

Quit the naive deflection mode. I already explained what a seed refers to - the word species cannot apply with an ancient time's writings and it cannot have any other meaning in the provided context.I also asked what factors outside the seed applies which evolutionists seem to always refer to: what specifically causes changes other than a program in the seed [aka genes; dna]?

quote:

---

I get it now. You use these imprecise words such as 'seed' so that (in your head) you are 'aligning' what the bible says with our current scientific understanding.
When we talk about chromosomes and dna and genes and so on and so forth you can justifiably (in your head) say:

​

"Ah, but see. It was written in the bible. Chromosomes and dna and genes and so on and so forth were written about in the bible but they used the word 'seed'. And so, let it be shall."

​

That's why you keep busting into threads and basically saying the same thing. Why don't you put the following in your sig:

​

"I beleive the bible is the foundation for modern science"

​

Then you would not have to write anything else at all and, potentially interesting threads like these could live up to their potential.

​

That's a pretty

---

Its not mine nor any unprecise words. There is no other reading to a seed acting as a chip in your mobile. Whatever do you think this precisely means:

quote:

---

12 And the earth brought forth grass, herb yielding seed after its kind, and tree bearing fruit, wherein is the seed thereof, after its kind.

​

The seed factor is used for all other life forms:

​

the great sea-monsters, and every living creature that creepeth, wherewith the waters swarmed, after its kind, and every winged fowl after its kind.

---

Substitute genes or chip for seed and there is no difference in its meaning from today's science. To me this is 100% a vindicated scientific description, al beit stated in ancient terms, and the first recording of a depiction away from the occultism of ancient times. Today we know that the dna is a code, each component gene representing different processes in a life form, aligning directly with the species and particular individual. We do not look to temperatures and windflow to establish a life form.

quote:

---

As an aside, you do know that in some reptiles temperature determins the sex of the off spring, rather than the 'seed'?

---

You read something, say AAH and swallow - without ever questioning it. Snake sex is NOT determined by external temperatures - the seed factor does this. The offspring may adjust its sex before its sex is determined; many life forms do this. It cannot perform this trick without the seed's directive program allowing it to do so: the factor you obviously never considered!Real science demands honesty.

quote:

---

o my supposition that you are trying to lump genes, chromosomes and so on and so forth in the word 'seed' so it fits in with your bible was correct.

---

No, I was correct - I said that. I also said there is no other reading of the text and no other context. I challenge you or anyone else to sit in a time machine, go back 3,500 years and alter that statement to say genes and dna are the same as 'seed' - in the language of the people. I say you will either arrive as the same sentence or that you will not perform any better. Its also ridiculous to ridicule this writings - it gave the world more than any other humanity possesses - its the first advanced alphabetical book?

quote:

---

Crocodile embryos do not have sex chromosomes, and unlike humans sex is not determined genetically. Sex is determined by temperature,....

---

No it does not. Take a temp lump and perform that trick w/o the seed! You also ignore how 'a seed following its own kind' produces a croc - not a temp creature.

quote:

---

I say this genetic configuration is better described as a code of a directive program, which contains all the data required in determining the offspring, to the extent it leaves no margin of play for any other factors as impacting.

​

Any other factors. That would include temperature.

​

Can't be put any clearer than that.

​

You say it is the 'seed' alone; but a quick check of reality and you are shown to be very wrong.

---

Other factors are not impacting because the offspring only follows its host parents. Remove the seed factor and then prove your case. That's what I call a reality check.

quote:

---

Now can we get back to the topic?

---

I am. You want to leap over a false premise as a proof of a follow-up false premise.

quote:

---

However, it is fair to say that some genes will impact wealth.

---

Literary comprehension transcends math. The term 'thereof' clearly answers the above:

quote:

---

wherein is the seed thereof, after its kind.

---

Clearly, if skeletal design is passed on, a host of other accumulated faculties retained by the host parents' seed will also be passed on - again to the extent all such work is performed and processed solely by the seed data, making all other factors nothing more than utilized stepping stones to effect the pristine science embedded in Genesis. That, IMHO, displays a transcendent math affirmed in the literary. Of course such views were never embraced because it affronts the new religion of athiesm and any who disagree are born of devils and/or apes or subjected to a bad career move.

Knock-knock! I did give you a mathematical proof resting on mathematical premises. I also tested your own math when I said an ongoing process is unaffected by the time factor. If anyone has a noive - I can also proof the vastness of the universe and the distance/time factor 'PROVES' no life exists outside earth by the mathematical 'probability' factor. Start such a thread if you dispute this.

quote:

---

What about other environmental factors such as exposure to lead or mercury, or a mothers use of alcohol? Is there some subroutine in the seeds program that says if exposed to high levels of X then the offspring will turn out like this instead of that?

---

One can conjure reasonable responses to this with credibility. If mercury effects the basic consruct in a human or other life form, to the extent that it becomes part of that life - it will be passed on. We know that one prone to desease factors can be assisted by tinkering with genes - so mercury can also cause such an effect. That does not mean the impacted external factor of mercuy is the cause of repro design; it means only that the offspring follows the host parent transmission. I would say if someone breaks a leg while horse riding - this will not effect the offspring because it did not become part of the host's imprint in the sperm cell/egg.Alcohol and other addictions appear to effect the metabolism and can act as a heriditary factor, becoming intrinsic of the person - meaning it can get transmitted down. Yes this does show an external factor can internally impact a life form, but this is varied from external impacts like environment, namely the fundamental factor is what is or becomes embedded in the seed transmission, while the external impact becomes a carry over only if it becomes part of the transmission as a side effect. The environment thus becomes ancillary or accumulated baggage to the pivotal transmission.The proof of this is acohol and mercury on their own do not cause an offspring without the seed factor. Clearly, these either are or are not conducive to 'baggage' carried over by the seed.The most prominent error made by evolution, IMHO, is that it says the observation of a process is the proof of the process. In effect this is more than a distortion or error; it is saying nothing; it is not a scientific methodology but a corruption of science, which is of course also open to widespread corruption for agenda based reasoning. Its like finding out how a car works and shouting Eureka! No car maker! I see the reverse applying: the process only proves a processor factor. Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.

Yes/No are of course absolutely mathematical proof factors!