The Myth Of Evolution
This photo is original
Hello Steemians!
Recently I have been shown information that has caused my faith to be renewed, both in God, and myself. It has been a long road for human kind up to this point in time and as our technology advanced, so did our understanding of our world. As we build microscopes that are able to see things smaller and smaller, telescopes that see farther. As we develop more advanced methods of biological and chemical research. As we break down our reality to it smallest components, and theorize about quantum mechanics we realize over and over that we really don't know much at all.
I have to wonder sometimes if humans are even capable of conceiving the mechanics of how our universe, our world, and our many species of creature were made. It may very well be beyond our capabilities to imagine or understand. Even in this modern day, things like particle physics and quantum mechanics seem like magical concepts, I can imagine that 3000 years ago, before any of our modern scientific knowledge was discovered people could not conceive God, or acts of God, as anything other than magical or supernatural.
I would not minimize the awesome power and majesty of our Father or the miracle of our creation by calling it science. Science is a human made term used to describe our limited collection of detailed knowledge of specific things that we have been able to observe in our limited capacity or theorize about and we can see in our history books that the majority of the widely accepted scientific theories that we have come up with regarding various concepts have been proven incorrect time and time again. A few examples that you might want to google are spontaneous generation, telegony, and the flat earth theory.
It seems to me that in order to be accurate, science should be observable. That is to say that when we theorize about something that we don't actually have evidence for chances are we will be wrong. Therefore the only science that truly matters to us on our journey of dicovery is observable science backed by actual evidence that we can see or touch.
In my humble opinion the theory of evolution lacks the formentioned, actual observable evidence that it would require in order to be anything more than just another in a long list of theories about how our universe works or was created. The two main points that stand out to me are as follows:
Genetic Mutation: In any species, any kind of genetic mutation considerably hinders a creatures chances of survival. It is not always life threatening, especially in humans, since we can use technology to compensate for physical disability, but it is never helpful. Trey Smith said in one of his videos, referring to a land animal evolving onto a flying animal, that the appendage would make a bad leg long before it made a good wing. This means that the in between stages of evolution would likely hurt the species chances of survival, and possibly lead to the death of the species.
Actual Evidence: As a curious species, we humans spend a lot of time digging up clues about our past. We have dug up many artifacts and even more bones. We have found human bones, animal bones, and dinosaur bones. The latter, dinosaur bones are apparently millions and millions of years old and we find lots of them, it seems that dinosaur bones are a dime a dozen. So where are the bones from the in between species that are in different stages of evolution? There doesn't seem to be any. You could say that Lucy is our "missing link" but I think they are just monkey bones. Even if Lucy is a missing link that's one, 1, and I repeat one set of bones. Sounds more like wishful thinking to me...
Those are two points, there are many more. There is a great deal of evidence that supports the great flood that the bible speaks about.
This is my first article of this nature but not the last. I am not an expert in religion or theology, I am simply one of God's children trying to make sense of it all and sharing my discoveries.
I want to share with you the source of the information that I have recently been shown. His name is Trey Smith, he is on YouTube but I highly recommend purchasing his DVD video sets as they are so much more than you would get on YouTube and also gives you the opportunity to help spread the word and blessings of YHWH so that many of our brothers and sisters may join us in our Fathers house.
You can check out Trey's website at www.godinanutshell.com
And this is his YouTube link:
https://www.youtube.com/user/treysmithnutshell
Trey doesn't know me but he is the one that gave me a lot of the answers I was looking for and helped me choose my path.
Until next time my friends!
I Am lostinthewoods
Dear @lostinthewoods,
The cornerstones of the theory of Evolution are the beliefs in random or undirected variations in the genetic make-up of living creatures that are produced by mutations. Mutations are a change in a DNA sequence, usually occurring because of errors in replication or repair.
Each time a cell divides into two daughter cells, its full genome is duplicated; for humans and other complex organisms, this duplication occurs in the nucleus. Each daughter cell receives one old and one new DNA strand. The cells adherence to these base-pairing rules ensures that the new strand is an exact copy of the old one. This minimizes the incidence of errors (mutations) that may greatly affect the resulting organism or its offspring. Subtle DNA abnormalities (mutations) are responsible for many inherited diseases such as cystic fibrosis and sickle cell anemia or may predispose an individual to cancer, major psychiatric illnesses, and other complex diseases.
This semiconservative replication of DNA ensures the stable inheritance of genetic traits. In other words, mutations are unlikely to occur. Instead, genetic traits are passed on. When mutations do occur, they result in disease or even death. To believe in evolution is to have faith in a theory that contradicts what modern science has revealed concerning DNA replication.
Blessings in Messiah, Steven Sherman @lastdays
The reason why we are running out of antibiotics is due to both the, in human terms, extremely rapid and vast generation of, well.. new generations. If we then try to kill them off, we further help the evolution of bacteria resistant to antibiotics. This makes the bacteria stronger in its current habitat, not weaker / degenerate. Exactly like all other form of evolution. Intentional cross-breeding and then inter-breeding of specific traits is not how stable life-forms are created, which is probably where you have gotten the idea of errors. Not to mention the everyday use of "genetic mutation" coupled with diseases.
Dear @jwamshop,
The reason certain strains of bacteria become resistant to antibiotics is not caused by their evolving resistant traits through positive mutation. They have lost the ability to absorb the antibiotic. In any case, they have not evolved into a different microbe, they still are bacteria. this is not a case for evolution but variation within a species that keeps the life form from extinction.
Thanks for the reply, @lastdays. When you say that "they have lost the ability to absorb the antibiotic" rather than it being caused by resistant traits, wherein are you saying this capability of resisting it lies, and how did it came to be?
Claiming "Variation within a species" is a bit of a fallacy, as the definition and classification of species is done by us. Humans are not dogs. But we are of the category "great apes", as well as the category of "mammals". Dogs are also part of this category, just a different branch.
This does not mean that Dogs are Human, or that "Human can evolve into dogs". It only means we have common ancestor. If we had decided to call what we call "Mammals" "species" instead, then yes, we would still be of the same species.
You already know that we have done extensive research on this in many different fields of science. Biochemistry (DNA), Archaeology, Zoology, Medicine, Chemistry (like carbon dating), all point at the same conclusion. As a result, we are able to illustrate the tree of life extensively, including species that are long gone.
As an example, see this fantastic image (courtesy of "The Tree of Life Web project")
(Don't forget to zoom in on it! It's amazing)
Externalists (evolutionists) see the environment as the subject acting on an organism as an object. They view organisms as modeling clay squeezed by the hands of the environment over time via “selective pressures” that are external to, and imposed on, organisms. Additionally, they consider that “the environment directly instructs the organism how to vary” during adaptation. Believing that nature’s selection process operates in a way similar to human volition, externalists see nature as exercising an agency that enables it to see, select, save, and build organisms. Thus, nature is the cause of life’s diversity. Those trained in biology view living things through the lens of Darwin’s bold counter-perception of organisms as the objects of environmental actions.
This is a natural conclusion from the notion that nature exercises selective agency to mold living things. Causality is linked to credit—or blame—for why something exists or happens. Darwin was very knowledgeable of biological-design theory and recognized this. But Darwin’s approach is not a necessity of scientific methodology and is only the expression of his naturalistic worldview. Even though his externalism projects mystical powers onto nature and invokes such expansive imagination where pots make potters and nature crafts designers, externalists must adhere to it, as Harvard geneticist Richard Lewontin candidly says, “no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated” because of their rigid commitment to naturalism.
Yet another approach sensibly uses engineering principles to explain biological systems that fit patterns of design—no initiation is required. Organisms wouldn’t be viewed as passive modeling clay but seen as having engineered innate adaptability that enables them to be active, problem-solving entities. Discoveries of diverse internal mechanisms foster another new concept: Adaptation is based on a compilation of engineered systems that enable rapid growth and physiological changes to environmental cues and challenges.
A design-based, organism-focused model could posit that as organisms actively travel through space-time, they continuously track environmental conditions, and their inherent capabilities express suitable traits. These features are the outworking of systems with intrinsic sensors and programmed logic that are accurately described with engineering causality—which is characterized as internal to them.
When causality is objectively determined by an approach like engineers use—one that identifies all biological elements in a process and omits mystical events—the observed elements of a self-adjusting process confirm internalism and conflict with externalism. Thus, an organism’s surveillance systems seem to actively acquire data that they process into information; they aren’t “sent instructions” by the environment. Their internal programming specifies what condition will be a stimulus or a signal. An integrated sensor for that condition is the vital trigger of their response. Many responses appear to be highly targeted to specific conditions, not the hit-and-miss solutions conjectured by selectionism. Finally, these mechanisms don’t appear to be randomly implemented but are highly regulated and characterized as rapid, repeatable, and sometimes reversible.
Using engineering principles , it isn't the environmental pressures that cause genetic changes over long periods of time to develop the ability for an animal to adapt (evolutionary theory). God designed each type of animal (felines, bovines, canines, etc.) with the capacity to perceive changes and activate or shut down certain genes which already existed resulting in adaptation.
To listen to the audio version of this article click on the play image.
Brought to you by @tts. If you find it useful please consider upvote this reply.
Not sure i necessarily believe the genetic mutation part but overall great post. Not all genetic mutations are necessarily bad, and genetic mutations can be small scale. Totaling up into a large change that is observable after many generations. And of course Darwin's theory of survival of the Fittest stands strong in regards to the last sentence of point one. If this creature with a bad leg were really unfit to survive. IE (not being able to outrun predators, get food, etc.) It would die and the mutation would be lost anyway. Darwin observed the species on Galapagos and noticed that on each island similar species had different characteristics, based on where they were located what they had to eat etc. so the theory of evolution is partly observable under the right conditions. but just because something changes from how it originally was doesn't disprove any heavenly creation theories either. In fact, I think somewhere down the line humanity will learn that science and the supremely powerful force of creation are really one in the same. As we gaze upon the miracles of life we seek to understand, not just our origins but the entire world around us. in the words of Arthur C. Clarke "any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." with 'technology' as a blanket term that quote can be applied to all things that seem supernatural. Science grounds us in reality but without our imaginations and intellect we wold cease to advance, and learn and we would never be able to definitively answer the question of weather there is a God, we might not even have the concept at all. What i'm trying to say is just because there is a God doesn't mean what we call science isn't what was used to develop the universe. for all we know God could be an amazing scientist, with knowledge we have yet to attain. will definitely check out the link tho it seems really interesting.
That is exactly the direction I am going. God and science do seem to be one in the same. We will all see it a little bit differently, even if we believe the same things. I think in the end the details are less important than the big picture. I have always thought that I needed to know all the details in order to fully believe in something but lately it seems that choosing, and having faith might be enough. Not that I don't want to learn, I love learning, just that I don't think that when I die it's going to matter is I got a few details wrong.
Thank you for you very constructive response, it's nice to be able to discuss these things in a friendly manner!
I have the answers, well, perhaps not all of them :) First of all, it's a well written article with great controversial content. Congratulations on reaching this particular truth!
I'll just add that science is subject to Existence aka (God-Spirit-Consciousness-All That Is), whereas Existence is not subject to anything! God is the Master scientist, physician, meta-physician etcetera.
The second thing is about evolution. You see, linear time and by definition, space are illusions of our mind. Time is more like a marker for an event, so that we can meet for a coffee at a particular place at a certain “time.” However, in truth, all that’s real is the eternal moment of “now.” Absent “time” there’s obviously no place for anything to evolve. Therefore, the dinosaur and the bird are two completely different ideas conjured up by God for different "times."
So Darwin has mislead us for all these years, oh dear. I hereby nominate him for - wait for it - the Darwin award 8-)
We recommended this post here, here and here.
Amazing
there is more evidence to support flat-earth then one might see at first glance, especially in the bible
"And the sun stood still, and the moon stopped until the nation took vengeance on their enemies. Is this not written in the Book of Jashar? The sun stopped in the midst of heaven and did not hurry to set for about a whole day." - Joshua 10:13
if the earth is revolving around the sun then God would have made the earth stop, and we all know what that would do...
I'm not sure how that verse is related to flat-earth but as far as God stopping the sun and moon, or the earth, it seems to me that the creator of this universe can change the rules and do what he likes with the sun, moon, and earth. It's also possible that what happened is that nothing actually stopped bit the earth and sun and moon aligned in such away that it appeared as though the sun and moon stopped, for a brief time. We see extremely rare and unusual astrological events from time to time. As I said I am not an expert, perhaps someone more educated can shed some light on that verse for us. Thanks for commenting!
I love the picute and the message behind it.
yo personalmente no descarto la teoría de la evolución; en la biblia el orden en que Dios creo la tierra es el mismo dado en la teoría de evolución, por lo que la equivocación y el debate están en la evolución humana.
This is real nature display potraying the technic used while taking the photo
I am not sure if there is a God, but there are many reasons for this, that it is very likely. Our knowledge is still very small, and i think that this term - science - does not exclude the existence of god - for me -
it seems that it goes hand in hand with the idea of God. Great post and nice photo :)