iconoclast
New
Evolution, in the atom-to-human sense (not to be confused with simple genetic variation, which is confined to syngameons [kinds], and goes nowhere):
>Is not scientific since it has never been observed or experimentally proven.
>Is not logical, nor can it be true, since it violates several laws such as
-the law of biogenesis (life can only arise from preexisting life)
-the second law of thermodynamics (things left on their own become disordered, not ordered)
- the law of information (functionally complex information can not arise or increase spontaneously)
-the law of probability (the information within living organisms is at an improbability equaling impossible)
-the laws of chemistry (prevent complex biomolecules from forming spontaneously, and if they should form, to degrade immediately)
>Cannot prove the origin of consciousness.
>Has never been proven by a necessary step-by-step biochemical progression.
>Is contradicted by the fossil record since there was a sudden profusion of life forms at the Cambrian period.
>Is contradicted by the fact that the supposed earliest life forms (3.5 billion years ago) are alive today in stromatolites unchanged from their precursors. Other creatures alive today (living fossils) look identical to their earliest fossil relatives.
>Cannot prove with specificity ANY of the millions of complex features of organisms, such as biochemical pathways, sight, flight, migration, synchronous appearance of opposite sexes, autonomic functions, instinct, the immune system . . . and on and on.
>Is absolutely defeated by the existence of free will: atoms, which are bound to obey chemical and physical laws, cannot have free will.
Complete proofs and documentation are available free at asifthinkingmatters dot com.
>Is not scientific since it has never been observed or experimentally proven.
>Is not logical, nor can it be true, since it violates several laws such as
-the law of biogenesis (life can only arise from preexisting life)
-the second law of thermodynamics (things left on their own become disordered, not ordered)
- the law of information (functionally complex information can not arise or increase spontaneously)
-the law of probability (the information within living organisms is at an improbability equaling impossible)
-the laws of chemistry (prevent complex biomolecules from forming spontaneously, and if they should form, to degrade immediately)
>Cannot prove the origin of consciousness.
>Has never been proven by a necessary step-by-step biochemical progression.
>Is contradicted by the fossil record since there was a sudden profusion of life forms at the Cambrian period.
>Is contradicted by the fact that the supposed earliest life forms (3.5 billion years ago) are alive today in stromatolites unchanged from their precursors. Other creatures alive today (living fossils) look identical to their earliest fossil relatives.
>Cannot prove with specificity ANY of the millions of complex features of organisms, such as biochemical pathways, sight, flight, migration, synchronous appearance of opposite sexes, autonomic functions, instinct, the immune system . . . and on and on.
>Is absolutely defeated by the existence of free will: atoms, which are bound to obey chemical and physical laws, cannot have free will.
Complete proofs and documentation are available free at asifthinkingmatters dot com.