Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 81 (8972 total)
183 online now:
14174dm, jar, kjsimons, PaulK, Percy (Admin), ringo (6 members, 177 visitors)
Newest Member: Howyoudo
Post Volume: Total: 875,397 Year: 7,145/23,288 Month: 1,051/1,214 Week: 63/303 Day: 24/39 Hour: 0/6


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Can I disprove Macro-Evolution
JRTjr
Member (Idle past 2812 days)
Posts: 178
From: Houston, Texas, USA
Joined: 07-19-2004


Message 1 of 2 (589713)
11-03-2010 11:37 PM


I propose to dedicate a string to whether or not I can, using scientific methods, definitions, and evidences, disprove ‘Macro-Evolution’ {Also known as ‘Darwinian Evolution’ or ‘Natural selection’}.

This idea was prompted by a statement I made in another string: “Macro-Evolution has been disproved as a scientifically plausible explanation for the existence, and proliferation of life”

Someone respond and wanted my evidence for this statement. I wish to present it here.

I want to vary specific here, when I say “Macro-Evolution” I am speaking only of “a scale of analysis of evolution in separated gene pools. Macroevolutionary studies focus on change that occurs at or above the level of species, in contrast with microevolution, which refers to smaller evolutionary changes (typically described as changes in allele frequencies) within a species or population.” {Quoted from Wikipedia.org}

In other words I am not disputing ‘variations in species’ {known as microevolution}, I am saying the evidence does not support microbes becoming multi-celled organisms; multi-celled organisms becoming fish; fish becoming amphibians; amphibians becoming mammals; etc.

Also, I believe, the evidence will show that ‘Life’ could not have come into existence without an intelligent agent involved.

In other words ‘Life’ could not have started on its own, by purely natural means.

The first peace of evidence I would like to bring to the table is DNA.

Techical Stuff:

(DNA) is a nucleic acid that contains the genetic instructions used in the development and functioning of all known living organisms with the exception of some viruses. The main role of DNA molecules is the long-term storage of information. DNA is often compared to a set of blueprints, like a recipe or a code, since it contains the instructions needed to construct other components of cells, such as proteins and RNA molecules. The DNA segments that carry this genetic information are called genes, but other DNA sequences have structural purposes, or are involved in regulating the use of this genetic information.{Quoted from Wikipedia.org}

If one walks by a piece of wood that has ‘Help’ written on it they come to the logical conclusion that someone wrote that message.

DNA is a ‘recipe’ for copying a cell from an original cell. It is a book of instructions; a blueprint.

Recipes, instruction manuals, and blueprints are the hallmark of Intelligent {I.E. someone wrote the DNA code} therefore Life did not arise unaided, on its own, by purely natural means.

Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Get rid of gawd-awful special font used in quote box and elsewhere.


Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3917
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 2 of 2 (589722)
11-04-2010 1:58 AM


Thread Copied to Biological Evolution Forum
Thread copied to the Can I disprove Macro-Evolution thread in the Biological Evolution forum, this copy of the thread has been closed.

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020