Evolution on the chessboard

 Atheists can panhandle in paddling-pool, but in deep water, pansies are submerged.

The chess pieces are ready to play chess on the chess table. It is obvious that the pieces cannot create themselves and the chessboard. The course of chess is like the course of evolution, with certain forms of movement taking place according to certain rules. But there must also be an origin.

The basic question is: - Where did the first subjects of the initial organisms capable of evolution come from, which could not have been created by evolution, because then evolution would have created its own capability by evolution? Where did the capabilities come from by which the alleged evolution takes place? How can evolution ensure this, when it depends on their existence?! So the subjects of evolution must first be created. Darwinism has already failed here!

"The evolutionary units must have the "trick" of reproducing, they must have heredity, they must have hereditary variation... 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." /Evolutionary biologist Eörs Szathmáry/ 

The origin of the rules of chess is like the origin of the genetic code that controls life. "However, this suggestion, even if plausible, is only one side of a much more general and difficult problem, perhaps the most formidable problem in all of evolutionary biology. In fact, it goes without saying that any scenario of the origin and evolution of the code will remain empty unless it is combined with an understanding of the coding principle itself and the translation system that embodies it. At the heart of this problem lies a terrible vicious circle: WHAT SHOULD BE THE SELECTIVE FORCE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SYSTEM OF TRANSLATION INCLUDING A SYSTEM OF SYSTEMS, WHAT WOULD BE THE FACTUAL FEATURES? AND OF COURSE, THERE CAN BE NO PROTEIN WITHOUT A SUFFICIENTLY EFFICIENT TRANSLATION SYSTEM." /The origin and evolution of the genetic code: the universal mystery - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3293468/

It is like having the description of the whole system of chess hidden in the minds of the chess pieces, which are inside the closed chess table. In order to build the chess table with the chess pieces, the construction information hidden in the heads of the chess pieces is needed. The need for one implies the need for the other. In order to play chess, both component factors are needed at the same time. This is the vicious circle. And there is no such thing as which came first, because both are needed at the same time!

The execution of chess according to the rules.

In principle, to create from a single stem cell [LUCA - protobacterium] any species that did not exist before, could only and exclusively be by long term controlled selection - just as in artificial selection, specific species are bred under constant supervision. But the unguided operation of natural selection, which is "essentially a random wandering in the field of genetic possibilities" /Stephen Hawking/, is directed at selecting the most viable individuals of existing species, not at selection for species. Therefore, it is not possible to evolve basic species by a blind evolutionary mechanism, in which the evolutionary mechanism can already exert its effects by inducing flexible adaptation to the natural environment. And there is not one such species, but millions!

The moves with the chess pieces are so different that they cannot be mixed, because we move the king differently and the queen differently, etc. If we want to create a healthy herd, we breed healthy subjects and exclude the stunted from breeding. For example, if we want to breed cows that milk well, we do not focus on selecting healthy cows, we focus on selecting cows that milk well.

"Breeding Holstein-Friesian cattle is focused on maximising milk production, which requires rigorous genetic selection and a well thought-out breeding programme. The aim of breeding is to produce animals with high milk yields, balanced conformation and longevity" -https://www.anivetdirect.hu/fajtaismertetok/szarvasmarha/holstein-friz

If you select and mate only healthy cows, you will never get a Holstein-Friesian that will produce very good milk.

And natural selection chooses the first of the two options, selecting the healthy ones, the ones with the best adaptive capacity, adapted to the dynamically changing natural environment, to maintain the species, its representatives ensuring the succession of generations.

"Chess is the only game that completely removes itself from the tyranny of chance." (Stefan Zweig)

Chess is not possible by the random wandering of chess pieces according to the possibilities provided by the chess table, while spontaneous evolution is "essentially random wandering in the field of genetic possibilities". Wandering around the chessboard with the chess pieces is only good for keeping the pieces on the chessboard, but it is neither giving chess nor getting chess. Especially not mate.

                                          Evolution is constantly subject to the tyranny of chance due to the effects of a changing environment.

It is equally impracticable for any cell to reproduce itself according to a system that is based on some kind of species trait. For that requires a strategic pathway, and for that a precisely controlled and monitored selection pressure maintained constantly in the necessary direction. And as many species (theoretically hypothetical series of branchings in practice) evolve from that stem cell, so many different selection pressures are needed, which implies following the principle of artificial selection.

But there is no relation between the two, as letting cows roam free on the breeding field is hardly the best breeding strategy. Having chess pieces roaming around on the chess table is the same and no different. The natural selection of existing species is for the survival of viable individuals and populations, but this process has nothing to do with some imaginary ancient species of unknown origin [LUCA] evolving into millions of different species merely on the basis of viable individuals reproducing through the means and framework provided by their genetic program. [See the rules of chess.]

Thus, the subjects of evolution that we see today successfully surviving in their natural environment cannot be provided by the process of evolution itself from the very beginning, especially given the necessary fine-tuning between the living being and its environment, which is provided by genetic control. And in the control there must be invisible information.

"Suppose you have 100 nucleotides. You accidentally hit that structure on the first try. And then what? You have one piece. And there should be tens of millions! Quite sure it will never happen again. The random creation of nucleic acids with the exact structure is TOTALLY UNPOSSIBLE! Without it there is no material life structure. And nucleic acid is only one of the tasks, it must be produced proteins, hormones, sugars, fats, everything. This is the chemical picture of living. There can be no coincidence behind causal events!" /Baumann, biochemist Miklós Baumann: Origin or creation! - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVcPGUrgMNg/

Just as on the chess board the good moves are controlled, in nature there is genetic control to allow the endgame to unfold, the successful survival of the living creature on nature's board. This is the realisation of an adaptation that can adapt to natural changes through formal and trait refinements. /Species variability by exploiting the genetic potential within its own species/. This is what evolution, adaptation, not phylogeny, means from the ground up.

Just as the pieces of a chess game cannot create the subjects needed to play chess, evolution cannot provide the subjects capable of evolving. The biological process as a process of the game of chess is in a ready-to-operate, equipped state, and does not equip itself. What equips it is none other than a conscious, invisible divine intelligence, which certain circles explicitly deny. And the reason for the denial is nothing less than to dominate the whole process in order to deprive the participants in the process /people/ of the full realization of their potential.

Manipulation is never disinterested, it is the desire of the manipulators to dominate the manipulated. To use the appropriate term: to keep them at bay by stifling their potential.

Summary:

1. Chess can only work with ready-made chess tools, just as evolution can only work with ready-made subjects.

2.The chess tools must be created, like the table, pieces and rules, the genetic code that drives evolution requires the same tuning and combination.

3.You cannot play chess by wandering around with chess pieces, nor can you make purposeful progress by random moves, nor can you blindly create a non-existent species with complete anatomical and trait characteristics.

4.The essence of evolution is adaptation, as in chess, movement in relation to the position of the pieces on the chessboard, a directed sequence of moves. 

"Darwin's principle essentially says that there can be evolution in populations of individuals that reproduce, that inherit certain traits, but that this inheritance is not exact, that occasionally errors occur, and that if the inherited traits affect how successfully the individual survives and how fertile it is, then evolution by natural selection will occur in the population of such individuals. Done. That's what we're dead sure of." /Evolutionary biologist Eörs Szatmáry/

These alleged defects are nothing more than genetically-based expressions of variability, but as it turns out, genetic mutations do not occur randomly.

"The results of a new study have dramatically challenged the established theory of evolution. For years, we have thought that genetic mutations occur randomly - but new research suggests they are much less random than originally thought." (Genetic mutations are not random -https://frontlinegenomics.com/genetic-mutations-may-not-be-random/

This is the so-called microevolution at the species level. And so-called macroevolution above the species level does not exist, as we have seen, because macroevolution is the evolution of an ancient cell into a specific species, and there is no one-way selection pressure in nature over millions of years that would result in selection for a species trait that is a strategic goal in artificial breeding.

"In evolution, there is no such thing as 'permanent advantage', only 'temporary advantage' for the time and place in which the organism happens to reside. The same thing that enables survival today may kill you tomorrow." /Steven Haddock Toronto, Quora/

5. If evolution is a development in itself, why did the theory of evolution not develop on its own, why did it need Darwin and his intellectual successors to develop it? If the theoretical process required intelligence, why did the physical process not require intelligence? Is it not conscious antipathy that denies the divine background intelligence at all costs?! Or is the whole evolutionary process nothing more than an expression of an atheistic scientific worldview that deliberately rejects any spiritual entity capable of dominating matter and controlling it through natural laws?!

If we consider that the adherence of people brought up on mainstream science to their own arbitrary moral laws trumps all other priorities, then it is understandable why this requires an adherence to the theory of evolution, which could provide a scientific justification for this worldview. But that it cannot is amply demonstrated by the reasons given in this paper.

„Darwin made it possible for us to become intellectually fulfilled atheists.” /Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker (London: Penguin, 1991) 6./ 

Nudity is not shameful, only if one display oneself as if one is clothed.