NOTE ALL VIDEO LINKS WILL BE AT THE END.
New stuff is in italics … my premise is not to prove creationism but to prove evolution is weak. Also, in the end is doesn’t really matter how we came into existence. The now is what matters … Albert Einstein agrees;-)
Since YouTube does and awful job at sorting threads and we have 500 characters to prove a point, I will blog this response. First I will comment on the video Yeti on Guitar sent me to view. Honestly nothing new was given to me based on the actual science other than the idea whales came from land based animals, I have not seen that connection before. Now the argument could be made this and the horse example given was simply micro evolution in work. The whale case is micro on steroids, but is not a cross species mutation. Also, the question can be asked that why over thousands of years the water buffalo has not shown any change to adapt to the water. I can argue that like with “global warming” data which is infinitely old compared to true data collecting techniques can be manipulated to forward an agenda.
The feathered reptile to bird is really the only true proof he gave for macro evolution in that hour video, I would hope his book gives more compelling evidence and I would have hoped he would have used that in his diatribe against God. In this case he moves from “guess” to “fact” very quickly. Also, for anyone that understands aerodynamics the artist’s rendition of the Sinornithosai Mellenni would never fly. This only proves that this species was there before birds, not that birds evolved from them. Coyne admits the rest is speculation, and then continues to insist that it’s fact.
The five pillars of evolution need to be addressed quickly.
- Not denying evolution defined as changes in species is fact and honestly not denying it could be the way things happened to change life from early days to present just saying the trans species mutation is not fact, just the most plausible explanation at this time outside of creation.
- Evolution is implied in the fossil record and many anomalies are rejected. It does prove species evolved and changed but does not reconcile the origins or changes of types
- This is nothing more than proving species evolved. Man evolved dogs from wolves by breeding characteristics desirable in much the same way.
- The common ancestry gets lost once you leave species.
- Natural selection has only been observed on a mirco level and NEVER on a macro level. It’s only implied in the fossil record.
Now Coyne spends well over a ¼ of the video on trying to disprove God existence, which is the underlying premise to his book and beliefs. If there is no God then we, as man, do not have to answer to anyone. And the premise that God exists is the root of the issue. The idea dinosaurs and humans walked the earth together is mind blowing and as he said would blow away evolution. The fossils that have been found that are anomalies are dismissed by Coyne and Yeti on Guitar as easily forged.
I liken this debate to the abortion debate; on both levels neither argument can be argued. Women should have a choice on what they do with their bodies and the life of an unborn child should be saved. You cannot argue either of those two alone without the underlying premise that the embryo is either a living human granted the same rights as any human that is born OR it’s just a viable tissue mass that is not a human until the chord is cut. You cannot be pro-choice and believe the embryo is a human or pro-life if it’s not. This like evolution is the root. If God exists then He controlled the creation and even if evolution happened it was managed by God. If there is no God, then this just happened and we have to have come from somewhere. Evolution works and in this instance must be FACT so that the existence of God is proven wrong.
So the evidence found that proves creation to those who believe in God has been dismissed as forgery or an anomaly by atheists. This again ties into the science of ancient data that can easily be forged and manipulated to prove a point. Just as the fossil records “prove” that whales came from cows, I can say it just shows different mammals that closely resemble each other. An example is Malachite Man where 10 in tact human fossils were found in the same formation of Lower Cretaceous period. This is quickly explained away by evolutionists as a collapsed mine even though there are no tools or evidence of mining.
There are many instances that contradict the fossil records that are quickly dismissed since they don’t fit the model and again can easily be “forged” in the world of evolutionists. This argument can therefore be applied to the “valid” data that evolutionists use to prove their argument.
Carbon dating is a perfect example, because it’s based on the assumption that isotopes exist and follow the same behavior we have seen over the vast 100’s of years or so of actual verifiable data we have. Exponential decay is a phrase that popped into my head which could cause fits to the data either extending out way further or chopping it way down. Again the data we have does not prove anything.
Mr. Coyne uses Atomic Theory and Germ Theory which are considered fact based by tightly knit hypotheses which prove them beyond a shadow of a doubt and then implies that Evolutionary Theory fits this mold. I content that Evolutionary Theory must be moved into two distinct types, Micro and Macro. Micro Evolution Theory is a true theory based on the mountains of evidence that shows this to be true and this can be demonstrated in recorded history. Macro Evolution is not really a theory since the hypotheses that prove Micro Evolution only imply Macro Evolution. I know one will argue that I am nuts in saying this, but consider the fact that no real mutation has ever been seen in fossil or recorded biological times that prove this. The only thing that can be proven is these trans species changes are destructive and not constructive, therefore could not produce a new species over time.
The idea that MICRO becomes MACRO is valid until you start adding this up. Assuming the view of MICRO evolution is correct and from what we have observed in nature is correct it takes a few generations for minor changes to take place. Assuming we are dealing with a “few billion” changes and assuming each generation is averaged out to 5 years and change may skip multiple generations the numbers start getting outlandishly long. The time is exceeding the age of the universe much less the planet.
The Cambria Explosion is not explained well with this is taken into account. In the period of 20 million years the fossil records show a massive number of new species appearing on the earth and do not work on this time line when talking a few generations for each minor change. Sorry but even Wikipedia states “ Interpretation is difficult due to a limited supply of evidence, based mainly on an incomplete fossil record and chemical signatures remaining in Cambrian rocks.” The other problem is with this rapid change it implies that over the past 1000 or so years of relatively recorded history we should see something new, But we do not see any additions in species, only reductions. Why is this? Did MACRO evolution just stop?
Science is simple when you get down to it. The whole idea is to produce something that is observable and repeatable. Once that is done you can give it to the engineers to do something with it;-) Now the only observable and repeatable evidence is the fossil record which everyone admits it can be forged. So if it’s easily forged how can we trust the ones gathering the data are correct in their assertions?
Now Yeti On Guitar did bring up some valid arguments against needing a fossil record at all to prove evolution. I will admit the top ten engineering school I graduated from did not require us to learn evolution or any sub classifications Mr. Yeti described, so Google and Wikipedia were my sources of information. First was phylogeny, or the evolutionary relationships between species. The underlying premise is evolution is fact and therefore is slightly flawed. Mr. Coyne did touch on this briefly and it does provide some insight to the similarities between species, but does not prove beyond a shadow of doubt that evolution is true. Bet if area 51 released the Roswell alien we would find similar tracings there;-)
Second was cladistics is very similar to phylogeny so my comments would be the same.
Third was biogeography, or the study of distribution of species over time is interesting. It fascinates me that man “evolved” exactly the same with only a few minor differences, over the entire globe. It is interesting that this tends to find that modern man originated in East Africa, which interestingly is close to where the Bible claims Adam and Eve were created. Coincidences or proof in the Bible, you decide.
Finally there is embryology, or the study of embryos, which Coyne also touched on in his video. I will use his example since that was shown to be “proof” that intelligent design had no intelligence. First comment is on the dolphin with “legs” developing at 24 weeks before disappearing. The anomalies Coyne uses where dolphins have a rear set of flippers reminded me of the SU-47 with “stabs” on the front. This could easily been explained away as the evolution of the flippers and flukes and NOT the legs they allegedly had 8 million years ago.
Through all this we don’t even touch spontaneous creation of life and how it has never been proven or done. The only thing close is creation of amino acids, but past that nothing has been proven or even done once.
To end this doesn’t it bother the evolutionists that some old guy writing in “sand script” some 3500 years ago wrote about creation which matches the fossil records and present knowledge of how the big bang worked? Sure the time line is immediately attacked, but Albert Einstein resolves this in Relativity and the observer. We know speed and gravity affect time so therefore if a grain of almost infinite matter was expanding at close to the speed of light, time dilatation implies the one observer could see this happen in 6 days while the other saw it happen in 14 to 16 billion years. In the end who knows and to cite Einstein, a noted scientist, he doesn’t care since the now is all that really matters. Bill Nye’s claim that you MUST believe in evolution in order for science to move forward is CRUSHED by this lowly hack. Honestly it doesn’t matter and has not stopped progress yet.
My contention is God exists and our knowledge of science “aint squat” which makes me a fool in the eyes of evolutionist and atheists. There are 66 books of the Bible with over 40 different authors over around about 1600 years that all point to salvation through Jesus is an odd coincidence. Now hold the name calling since Mr. Coyne already considers me “perverse” and think for yourself.
To sum it all up the above is why I call evolution “weak science” … which is the comment that sparked the debate.
The Video that sparked these comments and started the discussion:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bAHthY9rRfw
Yeti on Guitar suggested video in the thread:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CW9G2YVtBYc
The Original Bill Nye comments with Bill Maher:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSt9dYsQMi0