The Evolution Deception

tupperaware

Well-known member
Messages
283
Reactions
769
So you're suggesting that hydrogen and oxygen are capable of self-determination, have a will to self organize and, in combination, are possibly able to form memory and intelligence? That, in itself, is intelligent design even if it is self-emanating intelligence. Are they also able to somehow overcome the laws of the natural world by negating entropy? I'm asking because I'm too sleepy to watch the video tonight (which may answer these questions).
I indicated that "water" in all its forms could offer a "sort" of intelligent design. I did not say how intelligent. Perhaps if we were to figure out an IQ test for water we would find much to our disappointment that it has the intelligence of an ant on a local scale but a very large ant colony on a large scale. In this case water would be like a fungus cultivating ant and we and other species are the fungi. As long as the sun shines there is no problem on Earth negating entropy. Crystal growth negates entropy.

I am also very interested in intelligent design where some alien species sets up life on Earth and then takes notes for millions of years. Its hard to say which is the simpler explanation.

Here is some good text on EZ water. The Fourth Phase of Water - The Weston A. Price Foundation

17026

17027
 
Last edited:

whitewave

Well-known member
Messages
1,570
Reactions
5,434
It sounds like you're referring to entropy differentials as expounded on in Schroedinger's paradox.
Crediting the beginnings of man to an alien race simply shifts the goalpost. There must be an a priori; in other words, how did alien life begin?
 

tupperaware

Well-known member
Messages
283
Reactions
769
It sounds like you're referring to entropy differentials as expounded on in Schroedinger's paradox.
Crediting the beginnings of man to an alien race simply shifts the goalpost. There must be an a priori; in other words, how did alien life begin?

Refering to entropy as order from disorder via energy input as from the sun like via photosynthesis. Alien life might have self organized via unknown self organizing principles or it might have been more directly created by previous life.

A major gene survey study came out early last year with "startling" implications for evolution. Sweeping gene survey reveals new facets of evolution

"The study's most startling result, perhaps, is that nine out of 10 species on Earth today, including humans, came into being 100,000 to 200,000 years ago."This conclusion is very surprising, and I fought against it as hard as I could," Thaler told AFP.
That reaction is understandable: How does one explain the fact that 90 percent of animal life, genetically speaking, is roughly the same age?
Was there some catastrophic event 200,000 years ago that nearly wiped the slate clean?
....
"And yet—another unexpected finding from the study—species have very clear genetic boundaries, and there's nothing much in between.
"If individuals are stars, then species are galaxies," said Thaler. "They are compact clusters in the vastness of empty sequence space."
The absence of "in-between" species is something that also perplexed Darwin, he said."

On a TV documentary about Intelligent Design a zoo researcher said much the same thing about species being very distinct.

I came across a paper on mitochondrial DNA studies that maintained this approach for gene surveys is off by a factor of 20 too high. That means this mystery species reset occurred somewhere around 20,000 years ago and not 200,000. Maybe its off a bit more making the reset even closer.

So here we have major evidence for a recent reset for a very large number of species. Species seem to be very distinct as if "husbanded". This one study seems like huge support for something applying a reset, wiping out most species, then repopulating via a species "drop".
 
Last edited:

whitewave

Well-known member
Messages
1,570
Reactions
5,434
Sorry it took so long to read your article but I have several tabs open atm and it took a bit to get around to your link. And then I had to read the original study rather than just the synopsis of it presented in the link.

"It is textbook biology, for example, that species with large, far-flung populations—think ants, rats, humans—will become more genetically diverse over time. But is that true? The answer is no," said Stoeckle, lead author of the study, published in the journal Human Evolution."

Interesting study. Their tests were on mDNA (easier and cheaper to test) rather than nDNA. DNA from fossils were not tested/compared to living species. Of course, it was a big job to do all the testing they did do so I don't fault them for excluding extinct species. Still, their results seem to indicate that Darwin was mistaken. Species divergence via neutral mutation (small changes that neither help nor hinder survival, ie: brown wings vs. tan wings, etc.) point to species remaining the same and NOT changing into other species.

The 100k-200k year time range given for all current life on earth to have arisen also poses a problem for evolutionists. Either there was, as you suggest, some global catastrophe that wiped out almost all life on earth 1-2 hundred thousand years ago (possible) or life on earth is not as old as evolutionists require for the mutations resulting in divergent species. The last global catastrophe admitted to by the academicians occurred about 65 million years ago.
 

Radal16

Well-known member
Messages
57
Reactions
330
You might find this article interesting: More than 1,000 scientists sign ‘dissent from Darwinism’ statement - The College Fix

“I think more scientists are realizing the limitations to Darwinism, specifically in regard to the origin of life and the complexity of the cell. So much of how cells actually work reveal how impossible it is that life arose from mutation and natural selection. As we have learned more and more about molecular and cellular biology, more scientists doubt Darwinism although they may not admit it for fear of repercussions,” Dewitt told The Fix in an email interview.
 

tupperaware

Well-known member
Messages
283
Reactions
769
"It is textbook biology, for example, that species with large, far-flung populations—think ants, rats, humans—will become more genetically diverse over time. But is that true? The answer is no," said Stoeckle, lead author of the study, published in the journal Human Evolution."
So, a very significant peer reviewed study shows that species don't become more genetically diverse over time.

Isn't that exactly what a zoo keeper would want to keep his zoo in top shape and species distinct over the millennia should other zoo keepers stop in to take a look?

Now suppose even though the species remain distinct by design but things just don't develop from an ecological perspective like the zoo keeper wanted - time for a reset, redesign and redeployment. Maybe things were not "progressing" as hoped.

My guess is we have not been reset for 20,000- 200,000 years because things have progressed nicely since humans, the keystone species are exactly where he wanted us to be - ready to go off planet and shake hands with the zoo keeper.

I recall reading that one of our simian ancestors for 700,000 years was chipping the same flint tool design - 700,000 years....... That would be enough to drive any zoo keeper mad.
 

whitewave

Well-known member
Messages
1,570
Reactions
5,434
Historically, we don't know what we were doing 200 years ago. I don't know how anyone can say with a straight face that they KNOW what we were doing hundreds of thousands of years ago. All things are possible supposedly but not all things are probable.
 

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
5,086
Reactions
21,242
Historically, we don't know what we were doing 200 years ago. I don't know how anyone can say with a straight face that they KNOW what we were doing hundreds of thousands of years ago. All things are possible supposedly but not all things are probable.
I totally agree with this. Where this "thousands of years ago it was like this" information is coming from, is a mystery to me. Meaning I know that scientists and people say things like that, but where the actual knowledge of the events is coming from, that is a mystery.
 

tupperaware

Well-known member
Messages
283
Reactions
769
Historically, we don't know what we were doing 200 years ago. I don't know how anyone can say with a straight face that they KNOW what we were doing hundreds of thousands of years ago. All things are possible supposedly but not all things are probable.
There is kind of a hierarchy of believability like:
  1. What we see and hear with our own eyes and ears. Its well known that laughing distorts that routine connection to reality.
  2. What we record with our own hands then read a few minutes later on an interesting forum like this.
  3. Strata where cuts are made through perhaps a gravel bed that might be 50 feet deep and homogeneous all the way through. Interesting things are in the strata and the layering rate on the strata deposition rate is thought to be well understood as in +/-50% or so.
  4. Disbelieving any and all belief systems. I thought I would throw this one in for a chuckle :}
Maybe #4 should be #1.
 

BrokenAgate

Well-known member
Messages
416
Reactions
1,547
Here's How the Giraffe Got Its Long Neck (Infographic)

I see a lot of claims, drawings, and diagrams, but no actual evidence, that giraffes evolved in the manner that they claim. Wouldn't shorter-necked animals simply eat off the ground, or browse on low shrubs? This infographic reads like an Aesop' s fable! "How the Elephant Got His Trunk." "How the Giraffe Got His Neck.""How the Scientist Got His Degree."
 
OP
TH Dialectic

TH Dialectic

Well-known member
Messages
122
Reactions
604
Freemasonic records state that Charles Darwin’s grandfather Erasmus Darwin was a philosopher, scientist and physician who advanced ideas on evolution back in the 18th century. Before coming to Derby in 1788, Dr. Darwin had been made a Mason in the famous Time Immemorial Lodge of Cannongate Kilwinning No. 2 of Scotland. He also maintained close connections to the Jacobin Masons in France and Adam Weishaupt’s Illuminati. Sir Francis Darwin and Reginald Darwin, two of his sons, were also made Masons in Tyrian Lodge No. 253 at Derby. Charles Darwin does not appear on the rolls of the Lodge but it is most likely that he, like his Grandfather, his Sons and his “Bulldog” T.H.Huxley, was a Mason. Charles wrote that he used to listen to his grandfather’s ideas of evolution and was greatly influenced by them. Erasmus was the first man to put forward the notion of evolution in England. He was known as a “respected” person, but he had a very dark private life and at least two illegitimate children. Charles himself would go on to marry his first cousin and have three children die due to complications from inbreeding.

“Masons, thinking that Darwinism could serve their goals, played a great role in its dissemination among the masses. As soon as Darwin’s theory was published, a group of volunteer propagandists formed around it, the most famous of whom was Thomas Huxley who was called Darwin’s ‘bulldog.’ Huxley ‘whose ardent advocacy of Darwinism was the single factor most responsible for its rapid acceptance’ brought the world’s attention to the theory of evolution in the Debate at the Oxford University Museum in which he entered into on June 30th, 1860 with the bishop of Oxford, Samuel Wilberforce. Huxley’s great dedication to spreading the idea of evolution, together with his establishment connections, is brought into further light according to the following fact: Huxley was a member of the Royal Society, one of England’s most prestigious scientific institutions and, like nearly all the other members of this institution, was a senior Mason. Other members of the Royal Society lent Darwin significant support … In short, Darwin wasn’t acting alone; from the moment his theory was proposed, he received the support that came from the social classes and groups whose nucleus was made up of Masons.”
- Harun Yahya, “The Theory of Evolution Revisited”

“An important example which proves the fact that Darwinism is one of the biggest deceptions of atheistic freemasonry is a resolution carried in a mason meeting. The 33rd degree Supreme Council of Mizraim Freemasonry at Paris, reveals in its minutes its promotion of evolution as science, while they themselves scoffed at the theory. The minutes read as follows: ‘It is with this object in view [the scientific theory of evolution] that we are constantly by means of our press, arousing a blind confidence in these theories. The intellectuals will puff themselves up with their knowledge and without any logical verification of them will put into effect all the information available from science, which our agentur specialists have cunningly pieced together for the purpose of educating their minds in the direction we want. Do not suppose for a moment that these statements are empty words: think carefully of the successes we arranged for Darwinism.’ Atheistic freemasonry in the United States has picked up the resolution of Mizraim before long. New Age magazine in its March 1922 issue stated that the kingdom of atheistic freemasonry will be established by evolution and the development of man himself. As seen above, the false scientific image of evolution is a deception set in the 33rd degree atheist Masonic lodges. Atheist masons openly admit that they will use the scientists and media which are under their control to present this deception as scientific, which even they find funny.”
- Harun Yahya, “The Fundamental Philosophy of Atheistic Freemasonry”

17227

TH
 

BrokenAgate

Well-known member
Messages
416
Reactions
1,547
Just try to find information on elephant evolution and you'll find articles like this one: Ancient elephant remains discovered in sultanate - Oman Barytherium is a reconstruction apparently based on a few fragments of skull and legs. It is said to have eight short tusks, but I can't find photos showing this. I cannot find pictures of actual skeletons or skulls. Depending on the artist's preference, this animal is variously shown resembling a modern pig, elephant, hippopotamus, or tapir, so it could have been anything, really. That didn't stop scientists from developing a whole story about it, including that it was semi-aquatic and ate this, that, or the other vegetation, and was an ancestor of modern elephants.
 

freezetime26

Well-known member
Messages
81
Reactions
228
Just try to find information on elephant evolution and you'll find articles like this one: Ancient elephant remains discovered in sultanate - Oman Barytherium is a reconstruction apparently based on a few fragments of skull and legs. It is said to have eight short tusks, but I can't find photos showing this. I cannot find pictures of actual skeletons or skulls. Depending on the artist's preference, this animal is variously shown resembling a modern pig, elephant, hippopotamus, or tapir, so it could have been anything, really. That didn't stop scientists from developing a whole story about it, including that it was semi-aquatic and ate this, that, or the other vegetation, and was an ancestor of modern elephants.
The more you go into the theory of evolution the more you know it is some kind of religion/sect.
 

BrokenAgate

Well-known member
Messages
416
Reactions
1,547
What do you know, I actually found a picture of a Barytherium fossil! Barytherium grave Andrews, 1901 - Google Arts & Culture It's just part of a lower jawbone, though.

Right maxilla of barytherium, photo apparently taken at a museum: File:Barytherium by Hatem Moushir 2.JPG - Wikimedia Commons

Drawings next to crappy photos of barytherium skulls: Figure 1 from New Observations on the Skull of Pyrotherium (Pyrotheria, Mammalia) and New Phylogenetic Hypotheses on South American Ungulates - Semantic Scholar

I don't know how they can get a complete image of what this creature looked like based on so few findings. I used to just accept that somehow, they knew what they were talking about.

The more you go into the theory of evolution the more you know it is some kind of religion/sect.
It certainly seems that way, and this has been bothering me for quite some time, long before I found these forums. Well, that, plus nobody can really explain exactly how evolution works, what is the mechanism that prompts, for example, a giraffe to grow a long neck to reach tree foliage when it could just eat off the ground and not bother changing at all. The long neck, combined with a long, prehensile tongue, serves the same purpose as the elephant's trunk. Why wouldn't elephants similarly evolve long necks to reach things, instead of trunks? Or why didn't the giraffe grow a trunk? I don't know of a single scientist that I could ask such questions and not instantly be dismissed as a creationist nutter. I unsubscribed to the evolution groups I belonged to on Facebook. I just can't stand the hypocrisy anymore.
 

ScottFreeman

Well-known member
Messages
129
Reactions
474
So you're suggesting that hydrogen and oxygen are capable of self-determination, have a will to self organize and, in combination, are possibly able to form memory and intelligence? That, in itself, is intelligent design even if it is self-emanating intelligence. Are they also able to somehow overcome the laws of the natural world by negating entropy? I'm asking because I'm too sleepy to watch the video tonight (which may answer these questions).
I'd seen some of these a few years ago and was fascinated.

water memory - YouTube

I asked myself: "Can water be the real 'life' in our universe?" That would make all other life forms part of a larger whole. If water does have a memory and is recycled from one form to another over time, gathering memories and information, are we just more advanced containers?

I can't disprove that theory. We're told that we are 'carbon based life forms' while ignoring the larger part of our body weight...water. Looked at in another way, water may be just a mechanism for storing and transmitting information in an organic system.

Who knows. Fun to think about while stuck inside though.
 

realitycheck

Active member
Messages
38
Reactions
201
BrokenAgate reply reminded me when I was child and when we learned about evolution I asked teacher similar question - how do they know how exactly ape-man (or pre-modern man) looked when they have only small part of them (like small part of skull or part of jaw)? As she was showing us slides of different stages of human evolution with "evidence" of each stage and picture of how it looked whole. Of course I was quickly silenced in manner of who are you to ask questions and doubt what I teach here, this is what scientist concluded and you are not scientist so don't doubt them. At that time I didn't know about conspiracy theories and as child with big imagination I was thinking that maybe scientist have some machine where they put in bone and it gives them picture how whole being looked when it was alive. I was disappointed with answer especially as I didn't find out how they got pictures of ape-mans. But that was intro in how school works, other times I had that kind of questions no matter biology, history, geography I would be quickly silenced without getting answer and if I was pushing for answer usually teacher would get angry or ridiculed me in class. So I learned pretty fast that school is no place to ask questions - and as I got older it became clear why...
 

Paracelsus

Well-known member
Messages
344
Reactions
1,600
He personally mailed a copy to that unwashed bastard Karl Marx. From there you start descending into Franz Boas and the whole "race and gender is a social construct" lunacy. Maybe epigenetics has some credence, but, evolution realistically is utterly delusional.

For instance, the human bio-energetic field was designed absolutely perfect from the beginning. Think about modern electronic warfare and the concept of the EMP (electro-magnetic pulse) based weapon. Not only can this type of weapon interfere with devices, it can even physically destroy them. Who would have ever conceived that human beings would be exposed to EMP's? Yet, conventional EM based weapons don't lethally interfere with humans the same way they do with computers. On a fundamental level we are intrinsically protected from fairly considerable electrical and gauss fields. This was before we even anticipated the risk and needed to evolve some protective capability.

The most extraordinary fact of all is that billions of cellular actions occur incessantly without any conscious direction. If there was any credence to evolution, why are human beings becoming - ostensibly - more frail? Kids allergic to strawberries, are you kidding, delicious strawberries are your widowmaker!?

The H.M.S. Beagle sails on a sea of lies!
 
Top