Science > Physics > Re: Is Evolution a Law like the 'Laws' of physics?
| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"George Hammond" |
| Date: |
25 Sep 2005 03:14:36 AM |
| Object: |
Re: Is Evolution a Law like the 'Laws' of physics? |
On Sat, 24 Sep 2005 00:38:33 GMT, "Bill Hobba" <rubbish@junk.com>
wrote:
[Hobba]
Evolution is a law (with several components) that is as
well substantiated as any other natural law, whether the law of gravity, the
laws of motion or Avogadro's law.
[Hammond]
OBVIOUSLY "Evolution" is a scientific law. The mentality of a 9 year
old is sufficient to see that:
1. All life is genetic in origin.
2. Mutation of the genetic code is random.
3. Survivability (Natural Selection) will sieve
the random mutations and yield what we
call "Evolution".
Anyone who would DENY this as an obviously PROVEN scientific
theory is hopelessly mistaken.
[Hobba]
Evolution is a fact, disputed only by
those who choose to ignore the evidence, put their common sense on hold and
believe instead that unchanging knowledge and wisdom can be reached only by
revelation. '
[Hammond]
WRONG.......... ABSOLUTELY WRONG
Just because EVOLUTION is correct.... DOES NOT MEAN that
CREATIONISM (Genesis) is wrong.
Fact is... BOTH Evolution (Darwin) and Creationism (Genesis)
are ABSOLUTELY SCIENTIFICALLY RIGEROUS AND VALID
SCIENTIFIC THEORIES.
Now... the "Religious Fundamentalists" are CORRECT in believing that
the world is only 100,000 years old, and that "God created the world
100,000 years ago", just like it says in Genesis. However.... they
don't have the scientific ability to PROVE it.... so, they revert to
the absurd position that "Evolution is wrong".
However this is a FORGIVABLE error on their part.... BECAUSE.. in
fact "Evolution" has perpetrated a GREATER EVIL on mankind than that..
by denying that the Genesis Creation Story is a scientific fact!
SO IN THE END....... THE SCIENTISTS have committed a greater crime
against humanity than the Fundamentalists have!
Now... having passed judgement on both the Scientists and the
Fundamentalists.... and declared the Fundamentalists to be the moral
winners.... let me explain the SCIENTIFIC FACTS behind all this.
The Genesis Creation Story describes the creation of "human reality
itself". Since even Science agrees that reality cannot exist without
humans (i.e. physics is framed in terms of "observables"... hence, no
observers... no observables...and no observables, no physics).
Therefore "observable reality" COULD NOT have existed prior to 100k
years ago because that is when Homo Sapiens sapiens (modern Man) first
appeared.
Evolution on the other hand, describes the process of biological
progress "as if" a human observer were there to see it. Of course we
know there were no human observers a billion years ago... but our
description of life a billion years ago TACITLY ASSUMES what it would
look like IF there was a human observer present. In fact ALL OF
PHYSICS "presumes" the existence of a "human observer"... even for
times PRIOR to the existence of humans.
Therefore, PHYSICS does not even QUESTION the "origin of
reality"... it just PRESUMES that it has ALWAYS EXISTED... when in
FACT... as anyone can see, it COULDN'T have existed prior to 100k
years ago..... because there were no humans present. Furthermore....
PHYSICS TACITLY ASSUMES that this presumption is "trivial" and
irrelevant, obvious, and "meaningless".
HOWEVER........ UNKNOWN TO SCIENCE.... is the fact that this
presumption is NOT MEANINGLESS........ because in FACT.... there is a
SYSTEMATIC ERROR between "objective reality" and "subjective reality"
being due to the Secular Trend in human brain growth... and this
phenomenon causes what is commonly called "GOD".... and which renders
the "PHYSICS PRESUMPTION" that "there is only one reality" and that it
is "independent of human observers".... to be UNTRUE.... and to be
untrue in a very practical and even HISTORIC way... it cause the
phenomenon of GOD! This FACT has been known by religious people for
thousands of years... and yet Scientists are completely IGNORANT of
it.... this was expressed by St. Augustine when he said:
"The World was created WITH time, not IN time."
(St. Augustine, ca 300 ad)
meaning that "time itself" (e.g. "reality itself") was CREATED 100k
years ago when the modern human brain came into being.... i.e. was
created in GENESIS 100k years ago..... not during the Big Bang as
physicists think. It is only "within time itself" (which was created
only 100k years ago)... that the Big Bang "happened" 13.5 billion
years ago!
SO THE UPSHOT is that BOTH "Evolution and Genesis" are "proven
scientific facts"!
Thanks
Bill
========================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
=======================================
Join COSA church (Church of the Scientific Advent)
Send a blank email to
and your email address will be added to the
COSA discussion list (free, no obligation)
===========================
and please ask your news service to add:
alt.sci.relativistic-proof-of-god.moderated
===========================
.
|
|
| User: "|-|erc" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Evolution a Law like the 'Laws' of physics? |
25 Sep 2005 03:38:58 AM |
|
|
"George Hammond" <nowhere1@nospam.org> wrote in
: meaning that "time itself" (e.g. "reality itself") was CREATED 100k
: years ago when the modern human brain came into being.... i.e. was
: created in GENESIS 100k years ago..... not during the Big Bang as
: physicists think. It is only "within time itself" (which was created
: only 100k years ago)... that the Big Bang "happened" 13.5 billion
: years ago!
:
: SO THE UPSHOT is that BOTH "Evolution and Genesis" are "proven
: scientific facts"!
So if a tree falls in a forrest, does anyone hear a big 'bang'?
Herc
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bob Cain" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Evolution a Law like the 'Laws' of physics? |
26 Sep 2005 01:57:51 PM |
|
|
George Hammond wrote:
OBVIOUSLY "Evolution" is a scientific law. The mentality of a 9 year
old is sufficient to see that:
1. All life is genetic in origin.
2. Mutation of the genetic code is random.
Random?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transposon
Bob
--
"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."
A. Einstein
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Evolution a Law like the 'Laws' of physics? |
29 Sep 2005 08:09:53 AM |
|
|
George Hammond wrote:
On Sat, 24 Sep 2005 00:38:33 GMT, "Bill Hobba" <rubbish@junk.com>
wrote:
[Hobba]
Evolution is a law (with several components) that is as
well substantiated as any other natural law, whether the law of gravity, the
laws of motion or Avogadro's law.
[Hammond]
OBVIOUSLY "Evolution" is a scientific law. The mentality of a 9 year
old is sufficient to see that:
1. All life is genetic in origin.
2. Mutation of the genetic code is random.
3. Survivability (Natural Selection) will sieve
the random mutations and yield what we
call "Evolution".
You have attempted to define life, quite a difficult task and
unnecessary for the topic.
"Evolution" means the passage of time. That systems evolve is perhaps
the most fundamental physical law. Things change. It is quite
humorous to see people deny it!!
Of course the devil is in the details - how does system x or y evolve?
Your points 2 and 3 are close to the right track for describing how
species evolve.
[Hobba]
Evolution is a fact, disputed only by
those who choose to ignore the evidence, put their common sense on hold and
believe instead that unchanging knowledge and wisdom can be reached only by
revelation. '
[Hammond]
WRONG.......... ABSOLUTELY WRONG
Just because EVOLUTION is correct.... DOES NOT MEAN that
CREATIONISM (Genesis) is wrong.
Did you just read Hobba's quote above? Who are you arguing with here?
Who said creationism is wrong, and in what context?
Fact is... BOTH Evolution (Darwin) and Creationism (Genesis)
are ABSOLUTELY SCIENTIFICALLY RIGEROUS AND VALID
SCIENTIFIC THEORIES.
Both Darwin and the authors of Genesis are fallable humans, who have
demonstrated errors but have also contributed greatly to human
knowledge.
Now... the "Religious Fundamentalists" are CORRECT in believing that
the world is only 100,000 years old, and that "God created the world
100,000 years ago", just like it says in Genesis. However.... they
don't have the scientific ability to PROVE it.... so, they revert to
the absurd position that "Evolution is wrong".
Well then you are using an alternative definition of "year". Also,
where in Genesis does it say that? Most biblical scholars quote a
figure a factor of ten less.
However this is a FORGIVABLE error on their part.... BECAUSE.. in
fact "Evolution" has perpetrated a GREATER EVIL on mankind than that..
by denying that the Genesis Creation Story is a scientific fact!
I think your key word above is "Story". It is a scientific fact that
there exists a Genesis Creation Story, much of which was taken from
previous literature such as the Gilgamesh epic.
SO IN THE END....... THE SCIENTISTS have committed a greater crime
against humanity than the Fundamentalists have!
Now... having passed judgement on both the Scientists and the
Fundamentalists.... and declared the Fundamentalists to be the moral
winners.... let me explain the SCIENTIFIC FACTS behind all this.
The Genesis Creation Story describes the creation of "human reality
itself". Since even Science agrees that reality cannot exist without
humans (i.e. physics is framed in terms of "observables"... hence, no
observers... no observables...and no observables, no physics).
Therefore "observable reality" COULD NOT have existed prior to 100k
years ago because that is when Homo Sapiens sapiens (modern Man) first
appeared.
Whoops! You don't understand what an observation is I guess. Nothing
requires the observer to be "human"!
Evolution on the other hand, describes the process of biological
progress "as if" a human observer were there to see it. Of course we
know there were no human observers a billion years ago... but our
description of life a billion years ago TACITLY ASSUMES what it would
look like IF there was a human observer present. In fact ALL OF
PHYSICS "presumes" the existence of a "human observer"... even for
times PRIOR to the existence of humans.
Observations are ALWAYS of things that already happened, i.e. they
happened in the past. We can make observations of one billion years
ago by studying stratigraphy, or by pointing our telescopes to faraway
galaxies.
Therefore, PHYSICS does not even QUESTION the "origin of
reality"... it just PRESUMES that it has ALWAYS EXISTED... when in
FACT... as anyone can see, it COULDN'T have existed prior to 100k
years ago..... because there were no humans present.
This makes no sense at all. Who cares whether the observers have
opposable thumbs or not? And what is your criteria for "human"? What
happened 100k years ago to fundamentally change one generation from the
next?
[..]
"The World was created WITH time, not IN time."
(St. Augustine, ca 300 ad)
meaning that "time itself" (e.g. "reality itself") was CREATED 100k
years ago when the modern human brain came into being....
That's not what he meant at all. You keep talking about this "modern
brain" as though it were produced from a vacuum.. brains very similar
to ours have been around a lot longer than 100k years. Rocks will be
making observations long after mother Earth is swallowed by the Sun.
Thanks for your thoughts -
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mike" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Evolution a Law like the 'Laws' of physics? |
25 Sep 2005 11:40:57 AM |
|
|
George Hammond wrote:
On Sat, 24 Sep 2005 00:38:33 GMT, "Bill Hobba" <rubbish@junk.com>
wrote:
[Hobba]
Evolution is a law (with several components) that is as
well substantiated as any other natural law, whether the law of gravity, the
laws of motion or Avogadro's law.
[Hammond]
OBVIOUSLY "Evolution" is a scientific law. The mentality of a 9 year
old is sufficient to see that:
1. All life is genetic in origin.
meaningless statement
2. Mutation of the genetic code is random.
meaningless statement
3. Survivability (Natural Selection) will sieve
the random mutations and yield what we
call "Evolution".
meaningless statement
Anyone who would DENY this as an obviously PROVEN scientific
theory is hopelessly mistaken.
No theory can be proven. Only corroborated by experimentation. Every
hypothesis, true or false, implies a true fact. learn to live with the
paradox of material implication.
[Hobba]
Evolution is a fact, disputed only by
those who choose to ignore the evidence, put their common sense on hold and
believe instead that unchanging knowledge and wisdom can be reached only by
revelation. '
[Hammond]
WRONG.......... ABSOLUTELY WRONG
Just because EVOLUTION is correct.... DOES NOT MEAN that
CREATIONISM (Genesis) is wrong.
This statement has some meaning.
Fact is... BOTH Evolution (Darwin) and Creationism (Genesis)
are ABSOLUTELY SCIENTIFICALLY RIGEROUS AND VALID
SCIENTIFIC THEORIES.
Do not confuse theory with conjesture or hypothesis. They are both
hypotheses. Far from being theories.
Now... the "Religious Fundamentalists" are CORRECT in believing that
the world is only 100,000 years old, and that "God created the world
100,000 years ago", just like it says in Genesis. However.... they
don't have the scientific ability to PROVE it.... so, they revert to
the absurd position that "Evolution is wrong".
No, the world is only 5 minutes old, created with all the artifacts and
memories needed to believe it is 100,000 or 1M or 13.7B years old.
(Russell)
What about this "theory"?
However this is a FORGIVABLE error on their part.... BECAUSE.. in
fact "Evolution" has perpetrated a GREATER EVIL on mankind than that..
by denying that the Genesis Creation Story is a scientific fact!
SO IN THE END....... THE SCIENTISTS have committed a greater crime
against humanity than the Fundamentalists have!
No woman, no crime, says the song :)
Now... having passed judgement on both the Scientists and the
Fundamentalists.... and declared the Fundamentalists to be the moral
winners.... let me explain the SCIENTIFIC FACTS behind all this.
There are no scientific facts to support either conjesture, so I snip
the rest to save bandwidth.
Mike
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Evolution a Law like the 'Laws' of physics? |
29 Sep 2005 09:57:18 AM |
|
|
Mike wrote:
George Hammond wrote:
....
What about this "theory"?
However this is a FORGIVABLE error on their part.... BECAUSE.. in
fact "Evolution" has perpetrated a GREATER EVIL on mankind than that..
by denying that the Genesis Creation Story is a scientific fact!
SO IN THE END....... THE SCIENTISTS have committed a greater crime
against humanity than the Fundamentalists have!
No woman, no crime, says the song :)
Now... having passed judgement on both the Scientists and the
Fundamentalists.... and declared the Fundamentalists to be the moral
winners.... let me explain the SCIENTIFIC FACTS behind all this.
There are no scientific facts to support either conjesture, so I snip
the rest to save bandwidth.
Mike
There is no longer any issue of saving bandwidth. Use Google groups.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "sam ende" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Evolution a Law like the 'Laws' of physics? |
25 Sep 2005 04:57:06 AM |
|
|
George Hammond wrote:
[Hammond]
OBVIOUSLY "Evolution" is a scientific law. The mentality of a 9 year
old is sufficient to see that:
1. All life is genetic in origin.
2. Mutation of the genetic code is random.
3. Survivability (Natural Selection) will sieve
the random mutations and yield what we
call "Evolution".
Anyone who would DENY this as an obviously PROVEN scientific
theory is hopelessly mistaken.
how do you know that life is genetic in origin and what does genetic
mean anyway ? statement 1 is meaningless. i don't think mutations are
random, i think there is a reason for mutations, or a cause, ie
environmental. point 3 may be accurate.
sammi
.
|
|
|
| User: "|-|erc" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Evolution a Law like the 'Laws' of physics? |
25 Sep 2005 07:22:02 AM |
|
|
Lets try a small mutation
sam ende
same end
How do you know life is genetic in origon? Same End!
Why does your name answer your question?
Intelligent design.
Herc
"sam ende" <sam@sende.co.uk> wrote in
: George Hammond wrote:
:
:
: > [Hammond]
: > OBVIOUSLY "Evolution" is a scientific law. The mentality of a 9 year
: > old is sufficient to see that:
: >
: > 1. All life is genetic in origin.
: > 2. Mutation of the genetic code is random.
: > 3. Survivability (Natural Selection) will sieve
: > the random mutations and yield what we
: > call "Evolution".
: >
: > Anyone who would DENY this as an obviously PROVEN scientific
: > theory is hopelessly mistaken.
:
: how do you know that life is genetic in origin and what does genetic
: mean anyway ? statement 1 is meaningless. i don't think mutations are
: random, i think there is a reason for mutations, or a cause, ie
: environmental. point 3 may be accurate.
:
: sammi
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
