Dawkins, the knocking it down of the philistine giant
Aramic Bible in Plain English
And
David said to the Philistine: “You come against me with a sword and
with a spear and with a shield, and I am come against you in The Name
of LORD JEHOVAH, God of Hosts of the ranks of Israel, whom you have
reviled! 1
Samuel 17:45
„The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriously malevolent bully.” /Richard Dawkins, In the opening paragraph of his second chapter in his 2006 best-seller, The God Delusion!/
The biggest pseudo-scientific fraud in history
Supported by 98% of the world's scientists, the theory or hypothesis known as Darwinian evolution, which keeps the world's society in thrall through the formal education system, is false and debunkable. Why, despite so much criticism and justified attack, is it not allowed to fail? Because it would undermine the credibility of the very science that fully supports it, embraces it, and that is unacceptable to them.
Science has taken up a position in everyday life which is based on authoritarianism and where the search for truth from outside has no legitimacy. If, on the other hand, the Darwinian concept of the origin of living beings is based not on truth but on the service of higher interests, then the life-assurance of the subordinate stakeholders is not based on scientific truth either, but is at the mercy of hidden spiritual forces which the average person does not even know whether they eat or drink.
Behind all this is the master of delusion, scientists are just its petty henchmen, paid off with dubious glory, for which they are most eager to gain in their careers anyway.
The Bible report goes like this:
"And there was war in heaven; Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; the dragon fought, and his angels, but they did not prevail, and they had no more place in heaven. So the great dragon was cast down, the serpent of old, who is called the Devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world; he was cast down to the earth, and his angels were cast down with him." (Revelation 12:7-9)
Would men of science have joined Satan in his service? At the same time, is the current world war situation being pressured in the interests of Satan, who is working through people undercover?
Jesus said of Satan that he was a murderer who did not stand in the truth. He is a liar and the father of lies (John 8:44).
If the theory of evolution is based on a lie (pseudo-scientific self-suggestion, blind faith), then the connection is clear. Scientific hubris and the pursuit of scientific fame leads to this: the rejection of divine creation at all costs!
Anyone who agrees with this has his soul on the line. But anyone who is not a committed prisoner of authoritarianism can bravely take up the challenge of testing the difference between real and pseudoscience.
HUN-REN EXPERIMENTAL MEDICINE RESEARCH INSTITUTE
"Current estimates suggest that life may have appeared soon after this, 4.41 billion years ago, but 3.465 billion years ago the first single-celled organisms were almost certainly formed. After that, things moved very slowly for many hundreds of millions of years. Between 2.1 and 1.7 billion years ago, the eukaryotes, the cells with nuclei, appeared, and among them the unicellular 'animals' (and 'fungi') with endosymbiotic mitochondria and the unicellular 'plants' with mitochondria and colour bodies (chloroplasts). Evolution was then accelerated, as the nucleus allowed more complex genetic regulatory mechanisms. Evolution could start experimenting more efficiently, and had more fuel at its disposal, as endosymbionts effectively accelerated the metabolism of eukaryotes. Even so, we still had to wait 1 billion years for the first multicellular organisms to emerge... Using network analysis methods, biologists have shown that these regulatory networks also evolved very early and were conserved throughout evolution." /Early evolution and the emergence of multicellular organisms.” - https://koki.hun-ren.hu/cikk/a-korai-evolucio-es-a-tobbsejtuek-kialakulasa
"One of the world's leading chemistry journals, Nature Chemistry, has published the results of an experiment in which academic Eörs Szathmáry and colleagues have shown what mechanisms might have led to the formation of reproductive cells at the dawn of life. They demonstrated that autocatalysis and the separation of reactions into tiny droplets may be sufficient for the proliferation and growth of these 'precursor cells'. It is possible that similar processes gave rise to life on Earth…
The whole experiment is more of an analogy, the researchers say, and they don't think that these are the ingredients that would have given rise to real living cells billions of years ago. However, the formose reaction itself may indeed have played a role in the transition between chemical and biological evolution, as it autocatalyses sugars that can be used to build organic molecules. Although we don't know of any bacteria in which the formose reaction is the core of metabolism, Eörs Szathmáry suggests that in the early stages of evolution, completely new biochemical systems may have replaced the previous ones, so it cannot be excluded that the formose reaction was involved in the origin of life." /Hungarian academic brings us closer to understanding the origin of life - https://mta.hu/tudomany_hirei/magyar-akademikus-reszvetelevel-kerultunk-kozelebb-az-elet-keletkezesenek-megertesehez-113101
"Who was Darwin?There is hardly a more influential work in the history of science than Charles Darwin's The Origin of Species. For, unlike many other treatises of similar importance, the 1859 book did not remain in the ivory towers of scientific society, but spread to the world of the general public. And no wonder: it was the beginning of one of the most accepted truths that religions had taught for thousands of years. Someone came along who claimed that humanity had evolved from ape-like ancestors, and that it had all happened according to the laws of nature, which had no idea of creating man in the first place... the theory of evolution eventually came together in a coherent whole that has not been disproved by anyone since." - https://hang.hu/konyveshaz/ki-is-volt-valojaban-darwin-107786
„Evidence
for evolution
Evidence for evolution: anatomy, molecular
biology,biogeography, fossils, & direct observation.
Key
points:
• Evidence for evolution comes from manydifferent
areas of biology:
• Anatomy. Species may share similar
physical features because the feature was
present in a common
ancestor (homologous structures).
• Molecular biology. DNA and
the geneticcode reflect the shared ancestry of life.
DNA
comparisons can show how relatedspecies are.
• Biogeography.
The global distribution of organisms and the unique features
of
islandspecies reflect evolution and geological
change.
Fossils. Fossils document the existence of now-extinct
past species that are
related topresent-day species.
•
Direct observation. We can directly observe small-scale evolution in
organisms
with short lifecycles (e.g., pesticide- resistant
insects).
Introduction
Evolution is a key unifying
principle in biology. AsTheodosius Dobzhansky once
said,
"Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light
of
evolution." /Khan Academy Science · Biology
library • Evolution and the tree of life - https://www.uc.edu/content/dam/refresh/cont-ed-62/olli/s21/kahn-evidence-of-evolution.pdf
The Darwinian delusion:
The theory of evolution states all species alive on earth today evolved from simple life forms over three billion years.
„Evolution
Evolution is a process by which inherited characteristics in a population change over time due to natural selection. Natural selection is the theory that organisms that are more suited to their environment are more likely to survive, reproduce and pass on their advantageous genes. Over time, this can lead to new species being formed in a process called speciation. Charles Darwin was the first to propose the theory of evolution by natural selection, that all species have evolved from simple life forms over billions of years. If a species cannot evolve quickly enough, they could become extinct…
What is Evolution?
Evolution is the process by which inherited characteristics in a population change over time due to natural selection:
Organisms within the same species will all have different characteristics (phenotypes) due to their genetics.
Some of these phenotypes might make certain individuals better adapted to their environment than others. For example, they may be better at acquiring food or camouflaging from predators.
Individuals with these advantageous traits are more likely to survive and successfully reproduce. This concept is called survival of the fittest.
Alleles that cause the advantageous traits will be passed on to the offspring .
Over time these advantageous characteristics will become more common in the population so the population has changed.
If this process repeats enough times, populations may change so much that they form whole new species.
The theory of evolution states all species alive on earth today evolved from simple life forms over three billion years…
Theory of Evolution
The theory of evolution states that all species on earth today have evolved from simple life forms over three billion years.
Charles Darwin is recognised for work on natural selection which he published in ‘On the Origin of Species‘ (1859).
He gathered evidence during an around the world expedition.
He did years of experimentation and discussions.
He linked his findings to geological and fossil evidence.
He found that individuals in a population show a wide range of variation for different characteristics. Some characteristics make the individual more suited to the environment and so are more likely to survive and successfully reproduce. The advantageous characteristics get passed on to their offspring.
Darwin’s theory was quite controversial at the time because it challenged the belief that God created all organisms on earth and there was also very little evidence to support the theory. Gradually, with the collection of more evidence and an improved understanding of genetic inheritance, the theory became accepted.
Evolution Worksheet and Example Questions” - https://mmerevise.co.uk/gcse-biology-revision/evolution/
The above texts are illusionist hypotheses of pseudo-scientific lies of an explicitly materialist worldview transposed into the biological domain, for which there is no evidence whatsoever, but which are full of acrobatic reasoning with a semblance of credibility. /"The theory of evolution states all species alive on earth today evolved from simple life forms over three billion years.”/ Regardless, it is being shoved down society's throat in a state-sponsored show of force.
Deliberate slippage at the beginning of a sentence is a mother, which gives birth to the infant of deception by the end of the sentence.
"The origin of life (OOL) problem remains one of the most challenging scientific questions of all time" - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3718341/
"The origin of life on Earth is one of the great mysteries of science. Various answers have been proposed, all of which remain untested." - https://news.uchicago.edu/explainer/origin-life-earth-explained
"The origin of life is the deepest mystery of all science. What is known about the origin of life remains a mystery; the deepest remains when chemists and biochemists ask.... There is a huge gulf between the simplest living cell and the most complex mixture of naturally occurring inanimate chemicals. We have no idea when, how and where this gap was crossed...
There is the RNA-world hypothesis, which posits that before life was based on DNA and proteins, the world had only RNA, which acted as both a replicator and an enzyme. But in fact, there is no good theory that explains how we can go from a soup of amino acids and nucleotides to a living organism in a world of RNA locked in a cell wall. The transition from RNA to DNA is also not clear. " /Prof. Dr. Cebo Daniel, Cyber Biosafety and Artificial Intelligence Biology Researcher - https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/opinion-origin-life-biggest-unanswered-question-biology-cebo
"Most chemists believe, as I do, that life arose spontaneously from a mixture of molecules in the prebiotic soil. How? I have no idea." /Whitesides GM, 2007, "Revolutions in Chemistry", Chemical & Engineering News 85(13):12-7. - George Whitesides, Professor of Chemistry at Harvard, in a speech to the American Chemical Society Scientific Society./
Evolutionary biologist Eugene Koonin: "The 'dirty', seldom-told secret... is failure - we still have no plausible, coherent model, let alone a plausible scenario for the origin of life on Earth." /Koonin EV, 2011, The Logic of Chance: The Nature and Origin of Biological Evolution , FT Press, p. 391./
"Life is not derived from physical existence consisting of matter-energy and is not reducible to matter-energy. Life itself does not involve any fundamental particle of physics... life does not arise from non-life; it is reproduced from life." /The Eighteen Characteristics of Life - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10123176/
"All models of the origin of life, be it the first proto-metabolism or the early informational self-replicative model before the RNA/RNA world, meet the same dead end:... there is no naturalistic mechanism to guide objects and events towards ultimate functionality. There is no insight, motive, foresight or momentum to integrate physico-chemical reactions into a cooperative, organized, pragmatic effort." /Dr. David L. Abel - https://www.academia.edu/23926569/Is_Life_Unique
"It is essential for life that nucleotides are joined together, but the chances of a nucleic acid (DNA) being created are minimal - ten to the minus 158th power (to be clear about the ratios, ten to the minus second power is one hundredth). This could not have happened by chance, without conscious intervention...
Suppose you have 100 nucleotides. You accidentally hit that structure on the first try. And then what? You have one piece. And you need tens of millions! Pretty sure it will never happen again. The random creation of nucleic acids with a precise structure is NOT POSSIBLE! Without it there is no material life structure. This frog must be swallowed by materialism. And nucleic acid is only one of the tasks, we have to produce proteins, hormones, sugars, fats, everything... It takes nearly a hundred thousand nucleotides to make a non-poisonous snake into a poisonous snake, for example... This is the living chemical picture. There can be no coincidence behind causal events!" /Prof. Miklós Baumann, biochemist, Creation or creation?/ - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVcPGUrgMNg
Nobel Prize-winning physicist Max Planck /who, along with Albert Einstein, the founder of quantum mechanics, laid the foundations of modern physics/ says: "As a man who has devoted his whole life to the purest science, the study of matter, I can say that as a result of my research on atoms, matter as such does not exist! All matter comes into being and exists only because of a force that makes the particles of the atom vibrate and holds this smallest solar system of the atom together. Behind this force we must assume the existence of a conscious and intelligent spirit. This mind is the matrix of all matter." /Das Wesen der Materie [The Nature of Matter], speech in Florence, Italy (1944) (in Archiv zur Geschichte der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft, Abt. Va, Rep. 11 Planck, No. 1797)/
"In the laws of nature such a high order of intelligence is revealed that the rationality of human thinking and ordering is a pale reflection in comparison!" /Albert Einstein: Mein Weltbild. - Published by C. Seeling, Zurich-Stuttgart-Vienna 1953. 21.1/
"Evolution requires faith, but how much faith!
Faith in the spontaneous generation of L-proteins and DNA codes, which is absolutely impossible;
faith in an ancient environment that would have destroyed any chemical conditions for life in reality;
belief in experiments that only prove that life cannot arise without a mind;
faith in a primordial ocean that would not only not have condensed but would have hopelessly dissolved chemical compounds;
faith in natural laws, including the second law of thermodynamics and biogenesis, which in reality disprove the possibility of life's self-creation;
faith in future scientific inventions that only reveal new dilemmas;
faith in possibilities that act treacherously: denying evolution and proving the existence of a Creator;
belief in transformations that never existed;
belief in mutation and natural selection that disprove evolution;
belief in fossils that prove only stability and the absence of transitional forms." /Wysong Randy. L.: The Creation-Evolution Controversy: Implications, Methodology and Surveys of Evidence, East Lansing, 1976/ [Short presentation of the book here: - https://www.grisda.org/origins-05101]
„Indeed, as Miller’s experiments showed, it’s not difficult to create amino acids. The far bigger challenge is to create nucleic acids – the building blocks of molecules like RNA and DNA. The origin of life lies in the origin of these “replicators”, molecules that can make copies of themselves. Lane says, “Even if you can make amino acids (and nucleic acids) under soup conditions, it has little if any bearing on the origin of life.” /Scientist finish a 53-year-old classic experiment on the irigins of life/ -https://www.discovermagazine.com/planet-earth/scientists-finish-a-53-year-old-classic-experiment-on-the-origins-of-life
"... despite a long history of research and the accumulation of considerable circumstantial evidence, none of the three main theories about the nature and evolution of the genetic code is clearly supported by the currently available data." /The origin and evolution of the genetic code: the universal mystery/ - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3293468/
THE UN SOLVED PROBLEM OF BIOLOGY - "Unfortunately, hypotheses about how ribozyme works DO NOT EXPLORE how the Darwinian drive generates the genetic code between catalytic amino acids and their corresponding codons and anticodons." (2023 - On the origin of the genetic code - https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/ggs/98/1/98_22-00085/_html/-char/ja
"The notion of self-organization is a concept used by physicists... The detailed mechanisms of these processes are not yet well understood." /Cellular movement and pattern formation - András Czirók, Associate Professor. PhD (Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, 2000) - https://www.termvil.hu/archiv/fiatalok/czirok.html
"Evolutionary units must know the "trick" of reproducing, they must have heredity, hereditary variation."/Eörs Szathmary - https://24.hu/tudomany/2020/12/09/a-jovo-megmentoi-evolucio-szathmary-eors/
"The basic problem is that the first evolutionary units could not have arisen by evolution, because they did not have the necessary properties at that time." /Eörs Szathmáry - http://www.c3.hu/~tillmann/konyvek/ millennial /szathmary. Html
"Darwin never actually talked about the origin of species in The Origin of Species." /Niles Eldredge, Time Frames: The Rethinking of Darwinian Evolution and the Theory of Punctuated Epuilibria (1985), p. 33./
He confessed to a fellow scientist, Asa Graynek, about his book: "I am aware that my speculations are rather beyond the bounds of real science." /N. C. Gillespie, Charles Darwin and the Problem of Creation, 1979, p. 2/.
Darwin once wrote to a friend that he prided himself on being an expert in the "master art of twisting". /Life and Letters of Charles Darwin, vol. 2, p. 239/.
To some of his fellow scientists, he said of his theory: "It's a simple ragged hypothesis, with as many bugs and holes as it has intact parts... but I can take my fruit to market in it... He wrote this to another colleague: "I... have dedicated my life to a fantasy." /Adrian Desmond and J. Moore, Darwin: The Life of a Tormented Evolutionist, 1991, pp. 475-477./
A Darwinian-era Harvard paleontologist, Louis Agassiz, who never accepted Darwinian evolution, said of Darwin's writings: "The possibilities were assumed to add up to probabilities, and the probabilities were then raised to certainties." /From H. Enoch, Evolution or Creation, 1966, p. 335/.
"The concept of the tree of life is prevalent in the evolutionary literature... Prokaryotic evolution and the tree of life are two different things and should be treated as such, not extrapolated from macroscopic life to prokaryotes... Belief in the existence of a universal tree of life, including prokaryotes, is stronger than the evidence from genomes to support it." /Eric Bapteste, Prokaryotic evolution and the tree of life are two different things - PhD in evolutionary biology and philosophy of biology. Director of CNRS/ - https://biologydirect.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1745-6150-4-34/
"There is no evidence for evolution at the molecular level. Even DNA sequence data do not have direct access to the processes of evolution, so that objective reconstruction of the lost past can only be achieved by the creative imagination."/NA Takahata, "Genetic Perspective on the Origin and History of Humans",Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics (Vol. 26, 1995)/
"... the question of eukaryotic origin is one of the most enduring mysteries of modern biology" - https://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/display/document/obo-9780199941728/obo-9780199941728-0108.xml
"The origin of the complex organisms called eukaryotes - which include all animals, plants and fungi - is one of the greatest mysteries in biology" - https://www.nationalgeographic.com/premium/article/lost-world-reveals-new-chapter-in-evolution-of-life
"Ultimately, the multiplicity of evolutionary patterns and mechanisms, such as the disruption of the evolutionary process at the prokaryotic-eukaryotic divide, leads to a pluralistic approach to the study of evolution, with different views and values" - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2761302/
"DNA mutations are not random as previously thought" - https://www.ucdavis.edu/food/news/study-challenges-evolutionary-theory-dna-mutations-are-random
"The random occurrence of mutations in terms of their consequences is an axiom on which much of biology and evolutionary theory rests... However, new discoveries in genome biology are inspiring a rethinking of classical views." - https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-04269-6
Professor of Biology Scott Todd C., Kansas State University: "Most importantly, it must be made clear in the classroom that science, including evolution, has not disproved the existence of God, but it cannot be allowed to be considered /presumably/. Even if all the data points to an intelligent designer, such a hypothesis is excluded from science because it is not naturalistic." /Todd Scott C., A View from Kansas on the Evolution Debates, Nature, vol. 401. September 30, 1999/
"The irony is devastating. The main aim of Darwinism was to drive out of biology the last vestige of an incredible God. But the theory replaces God with an even more incredible deity: omnipotent chance." /T. Rosazak, Unfinished Animal (1975), pp. 101-102./
"When it comes to the origin of life on earth, there are only two options: creation or spontaneous generation (evolution). There is no third way. Spontaneous generation was disproved 100 years ago, but it only leads to another conclusion: supernatural creation. We cannot accept this for philosophical reasons (personal reasons); so we choose to believe in the impossible: life arose spontaneously, by chance." /George Wald, winner of the 1967 Nobel Peace Prize in Science, Lindsay, Dennis, "The Dinosaur Dilemma", Christ for the Nations, vol. No. 35, No. 8, November 1982, pp. 4-5, 14 / - https://www.conservapedia.com/George_Wald "When this dogma is accompanied by a pronounced
"When this dogma is accompanied by a pronounced atheism, it takes on the characteristics of an ideology. And if you place science within the framework of ideology and dogma, then there are no facts, no truth, no science, and then you become anti-science. It is catastrophic for society and for science." /Dr Radmil Roncevic, retired surgeon -https://www.sbs.com.au/language/serbian/sr/podcast-episode/serbian-intellectuals-challenge-darwinism/vj1ca23q7
EVOLUTION IS A MATTER OF LIFE AND DEATH
The truth of the theory of evolution is a matter of life or death, because if evolution is not true, there is no way to say, sorry, we were wrong. For the Creator regards anything that goes against his revelation as rebellion against his creation. In God's book, the Bible, creation is emphasized, not uncontrolled evolutionary development.
Jeremiah 27:5 I created the earth, man and beast that are upon the face of the earth, by my great power, and by my outstretched arm,
Revelation 4:11 Worthy are you, O Lord, to receive glory and honor and power; for you created all things, and for your will they are and were created,
Matthew 19:4 Have you not read that from the beginning the Creator made them male and female,
James 3:11-12 Does the source /Darwinian theory/ from the same orifice /common ancestor/ gush sweet and bitter /by gradual development/? Or, my brethren, can the fig tree produce olive seeds, or the vine figs, /a transition from one species to another, from reptile to bird, from fish to land creature./
James 4:4 Fornicators, men and women /spiritual unfaithfulness to God/, do you not know that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? Whoever therefore would be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God.
[By the way, do you sell in the shops hiking boots with semi-glued soles or running shoes for athletes? A parachute whose leader cord is currently being tested? A diving breathing tube that is floppy inside a diving mask? If useless, half-finished constructions are harmful to commerce, why are functional organs in the process of development in nature not harmful?
"...There were many reasons for rejecting Darwin's proposal, but above all that many innovations cannot come about by the accumulation of many small steps, and even if they could, natural selection cannot bring them about because the initial and intermediate stages are not advantageous." /S. Lovtrup, Darwinism: The Refutation of a Myth, p. 275 (Beckenham, Kent, U.K.: Croom Helm Ltd., 1987)/
"What eyes and wings have in common is that they can only function when they are fully developed. In other words, a half-developed eye cannot see; a bird with half-developed wings cannot fly. How these organs came into being remains one of nature's mysteries that still needs to be elucidated." /Engin Korur, "Gozlerin ve Kanatlarin Sirri" [The Mystery of the Eye and the Wings], Bilim ve Teknik, No. 203: 25 (October 1984)/.
If undeveloped features and organs never existed in nature, why do they exist in conscious design and manufacturing? If bringing them to market is lethal here, why not there? Or are all organs optimally developed at all times? The why isn't that the same as creation, which is the launching of finished products on the market as a result of engineering?]
FACTS, THAT MUST BE FACED
- Life does not originate anywhere by itself, and therefore neither do living things. Life cannot arise from the inanimate because life is not a set of material parts (just as a symphony is not a spontaneous arrangement of raw notes), but a form of expression of the underlying spirit that governs the parts.
- Those who carry life at the biological level are programmed, which is intelligence-dependent in relation to the complexity of the life they carry. So-called evolution is the adaptability of organisms already equipped with survivability within a given lifetime in response to ever-changing environmental selection pressures.
- You cannot retroactively develop abilities that are necessary from the beginning to start evolution.
- Mutation cannot create the genetic base in which mutation provides the raw material for the evolutionary process to unfold.
- The posterior mechanism of natural selection cannot be applied to the origin of DNA, because if natural selection is the child of evolution - it can only be the child of posterior division - it cannot also be the father - which creates the possibility of division!
- Genetic code /DNA/ does not mean common origin, as the composers of all the symphonies in the world use the same musical notation, yet one symphony did not evolve from another, they have nothing to do with each other!
- The DNA code, like any other code, has spiritual content because it is the master plan for life on earth and the source of the amazing diversity we see around us. The spirit of coding is personal, not raw chemistry. Without a personalised spirituality, no complex system can be explained.
- Tracking changes in nature is precisely not conducive to long-term evolution, because natural selection's strategic goal is to respond immediately to the challenges of an ever-changing environment, by selecting for those best suited to that environment. So the divergent survival of organisms has nothing to do with the imaginary evolution that takes millions of years to evolve from some stem cell into millions of organisms with complex structures that can adapt to their environment.
- The more complex an organism, the more it requires specific, fine-tuned selection pressure. This cannot be provided by constantly changing natural forces, especially over long periods of time.
- In nature, it is a matter of selecting the most favourable options, the most productive ones, with the aim of survival and not of achieving some strategic goal. Evolution that goes far beyond mere survival and results in the emergence of entirely new species over millions of years exists only in the imagination, not in reality!
- Evolution does nothing more than keep in balance, through natural selection, the living things that already exist and have the capacity to survive from the beginning. Because if it could not survive, it could not be kept in balance. Natural selection can be compared to tuning a piano, not composing a tune.
- Man consciously selects subjects for his strategic goal, but nature cannot consciously select subjects, because its goal is not the evolution of a given organism, but the survival of a given organism, and it selects subjects for this purpose /this tendency prevails/, so nature's strategic goal is to meet the challenges of the ever-changing environment immediately, and it selects the most suitable ones for this.
- The Darwinian selection of evolutionary theory for a strategic purpose is a fictional theory, at least it uses the stacking of short-term evolutionary steps to form the long-term strategic purpose, and attributes their existence to these stackings. /Microbe to microbiologist in millions of years./ But it cannot trace back, because this stacking leading to a strategic goal is alien to nature.
- In artificial selection, a strategic process is intelligently controlled by breeders, whereas in natural selection, a random process is generated by natural forces and directions that vary in an absolutely uncoordinated way. And in both, the result is supposedly the same thing, a creature with qualitatively superior anatomy and traits. Of which there are millions, and all of them of different kinds, with totally different functions of life and reproduction.
Darwinian evolution builds up a living world of millions of organisms from one or more cells, so that different traits are developed by external environmental pressure, without any breeding programme.
In an ever-changing environment, where will the necessary environmental selection pressures come from for the millions of organisms not yet fully evolved to reach full maturity? So it is not a question of inheriting the more favourable traits of one organism, but of developing all the favourable traits of millions of organisms that did not exist before!
The principle of artificial selection could not be copied by natural selection without intelligence to exert a constant one-way selection pressure to ensure the complex structure of millions of living organisms. It even thwarted it with constant environmental changes. So that this continuous perfectionism on the imaginary evolutionary tree is just pseudoscientific fantasy. Regardless, the miniature dinosaur from who knows where is said to have crept forward from the ancestor to man, as if pulled by a string. Except that this is not the merit of natural selection, but of evolutionists catching the end of the string.
- The alleged new species are always variants of a particular species, like many kinds of cars and many kinds of trams, but they don't cross paths, they don't evolve from each other and engineers don't develop them from each other. Evolution is simply the practical realisation of a variation of adaptation to the existing natural environment, the validity of which has been confirmed by natural selection.
Watchmaker Richard Dawkins' random wanderings into the field of genetic possibilities are as far from real science as the Dutch sailor's legend of a ship doomed to sail the seas of the world until the day of the Last Judgement, when it was caught in a violent storm that tore sails and broke masts as the wind blew against its direction of travel, constantly pushing it back.
How was the spontaneous unidirectional evolution of the subjects of evolution not reversed by the dynamic change of natural forces? The cyclical variation of weather factors prevents such an idea.
"It must be understood that the relative suitability of different properties depends on the current environment. Thus properties that are suitable now may become unsuitable later if the environment changes." /Understanding natural selection: basic concepts and common misconceptions/ - https://evolution-outreach.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1007/s12052-009-0128-1
"With changes in climate and topology, favourable traits in a living organism may become poorly adapted for survival in the face of significant changes in the environment" - https://www.vedantu.com/biology/evolution-vs-progress.
This little-known side of the facts is not much preferred, but rather emphasised: "Selective pressures give organisms with certain phenotypes an advantage in survival and reproduction. Over time, this leads to evolution" - https://catherinephamevolution.weebly.com/selection-pressure.html
This is a huge slippage, because the same selection that retains beneficial changes will also select out the same changes as soon as the direction of selection pressure changes. So the same positive selection and negative selection in response to changing natural environment and selection pressure!!!
Selection shuffles back and forth, one time chalking up something as an advantage, then the same thing as a disadvantage. All this happens WITHIN a species, so you can't stack imaginary advantages on top of each other to create an imaginary new species, because new anatomical and character changes can easily become disadvantages!
Yet they are unwilling to accept any alternative other than this: "mutations are the result of random effects, the mutation-carrying individual only rarely gains an adaptive advantage ... The occurrence of a beneficial mutation is, of course, random, but it can also confer a significant selection advantage... The unlikely weak effect of beneficial mutations, however, is the only currently known (and recognised) effect responsible for the emergence of diversity in the biota /living world/ and the emergence of new traits that subsequently confer an advantage..." /Mátyás Csaba: Forestry - conservation genetics - Mezőgazda Kiadó/
"In the real world, beneficial mutations are rare. Most mutations have no effect or a harmful effect." - https://evolution.berkeley.edu/dna-and-mutations/the-effects-of-mutations
What does it say? "The unlikely weak effect of beneficial mutations is, however, the only currently known (and recognised) effect responsible for the creation of diversity in biota and the emergence of new traits that are subsequently beneficial." In other words, there is no other driver behind the whole of the natural world other than the unlikely weak effect of rare mutations. It's about the same: all world literature is the result of the improbably weak impact of extremely rare, yet beneficial, coincidences (sic!)
The meat sector can be very successful if it supplies the trade with marketable goods from accidental misses in the slaughterhouse amidst the big rushes. In the same way, it is obviously the weakly acting drugs that are the truly functional agent in promoting healing, as the mechanism of action of homeopathy guarantees.
But it is the energizing from the spirit world behind homepathy that gives the healing power, not the spontaneous healing memory of matter.Likewise here, the information from the spirit world dictates that the weak and rare mutational effect is the only factor for the complete construction of the living world, it is not by chance that atheistically committed science excludes Design, background intelligence and personal consciousness. Of course, it does all this with personal consciousness, for without it, this mechanical assembly line, served up in refined wit, could hardly function.
- If evolution did not create new species, then mankind would not exist, which is as silly as saying that if the designer did not create new kinds of cars, then there would be no trams or trains.
The Bible does not mean to say that every form of plant or animal that humans see comes from the hand of the Creator, exactly as they see it. No, the multiple breeds of dog: fox terrier, dachshund, collie, were not created to remain the same forever, but the natural breed is the dog descended from the ancient wolf.
The "kinds" of Genesis do not refer to the "regular" kinds defined by man, but to the natural kinds which the world is full of, which have the power to change within themselves in such a way that the members of the kind are not all exactly alike, but which nevertheless cannot go outside the limits set by the Creator. Evolution does NOT "create" new species, it modifies species.
The God of love did not create through a process of evolutionary suffering. In the present age, living creatures live in constant struggle and compulsively devour each other alive in order to survive, but in the beginning, evolution of survival was not necessary. Creation started with perfect harmony and will return to the same. Darwinian evolutionary theory challenges both by making the current biological mechanism, which is temporary, an idea, a permanent process.
Christ also went through suffering in order to bring the believer in Him back to the intimacy of God through redemption, but this journey was made necessary by the fall. In the same way, evolution is part of the present world order; in the kingdom of Christ, the forced practice of evolutionary adaptation will no longer be necessary.
THE NAKEDNESS OF EMPEROR DARWIN - QUESTIONS THAT NEED ANSWERS
- If the entire biological world that exists today is the result of selection from genetic variations /errors/, what came from the flawless initial genetic base?
- How did the unchanged state before genetic variation get into the genetic code if it is exactly the deviation from it that drives evolution?! If variation is the point, how can variation initially cause the original invariance from which it subsequently deviates?
- Since when is evolutionary change a response to the origin in which evolutionary change occurs?
- From where did the first subjects of the initial living beings capable of evolution come from, which could not have been created by evolution, because then evolution would have created its own ability by evolution?!
- From where are the capacities by which the alleged evolution takes place? How can evolution ensure this when it depends on their existence?!
- The universality of the genetic code /DNA/ is evidence of a common Author, as all the composers of all the symphonies in the world use the same musical notation, yet one symphony did not evolve from another, they have nothing to do with each other! Do we come from stardust like Mona Lisa's smile comes from paint molecules?
- Evolution has no purpose, but evolution is used for anti-God purposes by its defenders. Why is evolution based on a deliberate, God-denying philosophy?
"Darwin's greatest achievement was to show that the complex organisation and functioning of living things can be explained as the result of a natural process - natural selection - without recourse to a Creator or other external agent." /Francisco José Ayala : Darwin's greatest discovery: design without a designer/ -https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.0701072104
The anti-God arrogance of science reflects the spirit of the biblical Satan, who said: "I will ascend into heaven, I will set my throne above the stars of God, and I will dwell on the mountain of the church in the far north. I will ascend to the high clouds and become like the Most High. But you will go down to the grave, to the depths of the pit." (Isaiah 14:13-15).
The pseudo-scientific teaching of the scientific academies, by ignoring the bankruptcy of Darwinism, completely misleads all the other non-scientific academies, which do not specialise in biology but in other areas of society. But if, as a result of an education system that serves a materialistic world view, people have a false understanding of the basics of life and their own origins, they have become victims of a fraud that will 100% affect their future, how they live, what they choose to do with their lives, what they spend their time on. Whether it's to pave their own careers, or to prepare for a whole new world that will soon begin with the 2nd coming of Christ. See Daniel 2:44; Matthew 24:3; Revelation 16:15
PROBLEMS WITH DARWIN'S THEORY OF SELECTION
In 2024, Darwin's evolutionary theory of the origin of species will be 165 years old, and it is based on the idea that living organisms compete with each other for survival, with the most productive individuals passing on their genes through natural selection. However, a closer look reveals that this methodology is not suitable for describing the first species by the analogy of artificial selection, which always selects for the most suitable trait, i.e. the individuals of a species that have the most desirable traits in the hope that their offspring will inherit these desirable traits.
When a breeder starts a breeding process, the process must be followed through with the selection of the necessary subjects, otherwise the breeding objective will not be achieved. See for example the breeding of Holstein-Friesian cattle. This cannot be done without intelligent planning and constant supervision!
What does Charles Darwin say in his autobiography about how natural selection works? "... in the operation of natural selection there is no more design than in the direction in which the wind blows." What did Richard Dawkins and Stephen Hawking say about the same thing? "Natural selection is the blind watchmaker; blind because it cannot foresee, because it does not plan consequences, because it has no purpose in mind... biological evolution is essentially a random wandering in a field of genetic possibilities." This is exactly the opposite of the process of human breeding.
If this method were used in human breeding, what could one breed without a purpose, mating subjects haphazardly without any breed character??? For example, different breeds of dogs within a breed (German Shepherd, Pomeranian, Boxer, etc.), or mixed breeds of mongrels? Obviously they would create mutts!
If science were to produce a single species from a single cell, it would require a single strategic pathway inch by inch, and as many species as it produced would each require a single strategic pathway until the desired species were fully formed. And all this would have happened without any control in nature?
This completely calls into question the intelligent control of artificial selection! Therefore, the role of natural selection in the evolution of ancestral species needs to be reviewed, because it is not suitable for that purpose, based on the facts. Survival of the fittest is not the same as survival of the individuals necessary for the evolution of a species.
To evolve non-existent organisms from scratch under uncontrolled selection pressures, in an ever-changing environment, wandering in a field of wild genetic possibilities - well, this is not science, but a distinctly materialistic worldview dressed up in scientific garb - with an extremely strong aversion to accepting conscious intelligence behind the universe.
Darwin's theory of selection in determining the origin of species is a false path, and it is high time that the competent people of science faced up to it!
o o o o o o o o o o o
"Charles Darwin's work is still relevant and important today. His theory of evolution is the foundation of modern biology and helps us understand how living things change over time. It has practical applications in medicine, agriculture and conservation" - https://captaindarwin.org/charlesdarwin/
"Charles Darwin's theory of evolution is one of the most solid theories in science' - https://www.livescience.com/474-controversy-evolution-works.html
"Darwin's theory of natural selection evolution is the only scientific explanation for the spectacular diversity of life on Earth. It provides a powerful framework for understanding nature and is one of the fundamental theories at the core of science." - https://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/darwin/evolution-today/social-responses
"The Darwinian theory of evolution is, as is usual in the sciences of evolution, not completely closed, but it is scientifically sound and adequately describes the origin and transformation of species." /Presidium of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences. 2008/
"Evolution is as much a fact as anything we know in science." /Kenneth R. Miller, American biologist/
" The basic theory of evolution is so fully confirmed that most modern biologists regard evolution as simply a fact.... evolution is the worldview of modern man." /Ernst Mayr, "Evolution".Scientific American (V. 239, September 1978), p. 47./
The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) defines it as "an observation that has been repeatedly confirmed and accepted as 'true' for all practical purposes."
"No serious scientist doubts evolution." /Ralf Sommer, evolutionary biologist at the University of Tübingen/.
"Behind the refutation of the theory of evolution always lies some kind of theory of God bound to a nugget and (biblical) text." /Vilmos Csányi, ethologist/
"Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection is satisfying because it shows a way in which the simple can evolve over time into the complex, showing how disordered atoms could cluster into increasingly complex systems until man was created. Darwin offers a solution - the only rational one so far - to the profound problem of our existence." /Boldogkői Zsolt, molecular biologist, Doctor of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Head of the Department of Medical Biology at the University of Szeged./
"THE TERMS OF THE WORLD CAN BE UNDERSTOOD - A REASON TO SEE THE WORLD THROUGH THE EYEWORK OF SCIENCE - The connected message of Darwin's life's work is that it is worth turning to science rather than mysticism to understand the general context... Science is not only a method of knowing the world, but can also be the basis of a world-view, provided we understand its logic, its claims and its limitations." /Boldogkői Zsolt: The Three Dimensions of Darwinian Thought - https://nepszava.hu/3184644_boldogkoi-zsolt-a-darwini-gondolat-harom-dimenzioja
"In fact, evolution has in a sense become a scientific religion; almost all scientists have accepted it, and many are prepared to 'bend' their observations to fit it." /H. Lipson, British physicist, "A Physicist Looks at Evolution", Physics Bulletin 31 (1980), p. 138./
"You can be absolutely sure that if you meet someone who claims not to believe in evolution, they are ignorant, stupid or insane (or evil, but I'd rather ignore that)." /Richard Dawkins, "Put Your Money on Evolution", The New York Times Review of Books, 1989./
"Over the years, the system set up to promote scientific progress has become a way for narrow-minded people to block any progress they find unacceptable. This needs urgent revision: otherwise, as astronomy has relied on the fairly accurate but flawed Ptolemaic model, science will be locked into a respectable but inaccurate view of reality." /The LINDAU READING - Brian D. Josephson, Ph.D., Nobel Laureate in Physics, 1973; Annual Meeting of Nobel Laureates, Lindau, Germany - 30 June 2004./
"Anyone who claims to have objective knowledge of anything is trying to control and dominate the majority... There are no objective facts. All supposed facts are tainted with theories, and all theories are tainted with moral and political doctrines... Therefore, when a guy in a lab coat tells you that such and such is an objective fact... it must be a political agenda." /"Suppressed by evolution". Discover magazine (1998)/
"Can the state allow its citizens to decide how the world is? If there is a form of knowledge that is honoured today, it is scientific knowledge. Can a contrary view be taught to millions of children? If so, the status of one of the most important institutions in society - science, which is responsible for the creation of knowledge - would be undermined." /Gábor Zemplén: Creationism - pro and con WORLDWIDE 2006/6-7/
Science has dug a pit for God, which it has fallen into. And it cannot get out of it because it has become unworthy of transmitting to society a value in which life can flourish and be fulfilled. What it promotes is a belief in the meaninglessness of life, the supremacy of moral self-righteousness and the unstoppable vortex of corruption. With their unrepentant atheistic commitment to their scientific position, they are incurring the wrath of God!
[PSEUDOSCIENCE - A system of thought dressed up as science, but often serving the power or material interests of classes or individuals rather than the honest and honest service of truth, which is created by ignoring or falsifying facts, or is based on incorrect methods and therefore incorrect conclusions.]
"We are basically committed to materialism. Materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow God to put his foot in the door." /The New York Review of Books, "Billions and Billions of Demons," by Richard C. Lewontin, January 9, 1997, pp. 28-32./
"Naturalistic evolution has clear consequences, which Charles Darwin understood perfectly well. 1) there are no gods worth having; 2) there is no life after death; 3) there is no ultimate basis for ethics; 4) there is no ultimate meaning to life ; and 5) human free will does not exist." /William Provine, atheist professor in the Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology at Cornell University (1998)/
"Humans cannot tolerate the belief that the Universe and life are meaningless. In fact, that is what science tells us. Meaningless in the sense that there is no externally determined purpose or point in the Universe. As atheists, this is obviously true for us. We determine our own meaning and purpose." /Jerry Coyne Jerry Coyne Professor of Biology, (2012), "The Odd Couple: Why Science and Religion Shouldn't Cohabitate," Speech to Glasgow Skeptics, December 21./
"Mankind must accept that science has destroyed the justification for belief in cosmic purpose, and that the survival of purpose is fuelled only by emotion." /Peter Atkins, Oxford professor of chemistry; "Will science ever fail?" [Will science ever fail?] New Scientist, 8 Aug. 1992, pp. 32-35./
"We are children of chaos, and the deep structure of change is decay. At its root is nothing but corruption and an unstoppable wave of chaos. The goal is gone; only the direction remains. This is the bleakness we must accept as we look deeply and dispassionately into the heart of the Universe." /Peter Atkins (1984), The Second Law (New York: Scientific American), p. 200.
CORRUPTION: MORE THAN A CANCER - 'The cancer of corruption is on the rise. It is growing metastatically. It is becoming more frequent, more complex, more multi-layered, more elusive and more deeply rooted."-https://www.transparency.org.uk/corruption-more-cancer
o o o o o o o o o o o
CONCLUDING WORDS AND MESSAGE
Man was originally created for ETERNAL LIFE on a paradise earth, to spread it to the whole planet. He has all the anatomical endowments to do so. The human brain is the most complex structure in the universe, containing some 86 billion neurons, 85 billion other cells and over 100 trillion connections. Hundreds of millions of dollars of research have failed to fully map its structure, showing that it was created with a conscious purpose and not by blind chance for a lifespan of about 70-80 years.
The human brain is programmed to learn any language. The human body has the ability to heal itself, it has an immune system, its bones are stronger than concrete, the appendix is important for our immune system, especially in young children. It acts as a reservoir of good bacteria, helping the intestinal tract to recover after illnesses that cause diarrhoea. Our eyes make up only about 2% of our body weight, yet we can see 10 million different colours and detect a single photon of light in total darkness. Millions of unparalleled functions make everyday life easier. Why have this ability if you're barely going to live a few decades?
According to atheism, any part of the human body is programmed - at the very moment when engineers are supposed to create it - while biological man is said to have evolved on his own! All of man's creations are designed, all the clothing he wears daily, but the anatomical wonders underneath were not designed by anyone, they were created completely purposelessly, meaninglessly by ignorant nature! Nobel Prizes are awarded for some tiny decipherment of the wonders of the universe, but the GREAT WHOLE UNIVERSE has no Creator according to atheistic scientists. But why? They are stealing from God so they can take the glory for themselves.
How would you like it if your intelligent creations were attributed to chance by industrial spies and thieves, and they made fame and huge financial gain for themselves, and gave you nothing? Would you not be outraged? Yet that is what they teach you, that life has no meaning!
THE TRUE MEANING OF LIFE
Luke 19:10 For the Son of man came to seek and to save that which was lost. - What was lost? The real purpose of life is to live your life consciously in accordance with God's will. And not to be at the mercy of false ideas, propaganda, self-serving party ideologies, false church philosophies. Churches are also incapable of identifying God. Their ideology is that God is in three persons, yet one. But if all three persons /Father-Son-Holy Spirit/ are real God, then there are three Gods and not one!
Jesus spoke of one God, who is His heavenly Father, to whom He prayed, who sent Him, whose teachings He brought, and with whom He wants to reconcile you so that you can live according to His will forever on a recreated earth. Conversion is like taking the cresk test in traffic. You learn and obey the traffic rules.
God's moral principles are based on love. All men are originally your neighbors, for we are created of one blood. But people have become alienated from each other. They start misleading you in school. They don't teach you about the return of Jesus and the promise of a new world because they don't know it themselves. The ordinary organs do not inform you about it because they are in the dark about it.
Where does the light begin? The Bible tells us, "For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life." (John 3:16) What you do with this love is up to you.
May God bless you with true knowledge and true judgment of the eternal life He has given you by His free grace.-
with love in Christ,A follower of the Apostle Paul
1 Corinthians 11:1 Be my followers, as I am Christ's.
Megjegyzések
Megjegyzés küldése