(May 11, 2014 at 2:57 pm)RDK Wrote: The ideas that am presenting here are not difficult to comprehend.

They also aren't at all accurate to the theory you're claiming to disagree with, which is the problem. You are misrepresenting what evolution is.

Quote: Consider a single cell organism that doesn't require a mate to propagate. Out of the ooze of non life comes a living creature. IMPOSSIBLE!

Except that we have experimental results that show that it is possible, and you have... a bare assertion that it's not. Caps lock doesn't make your point any more true, genius.

Quote: You must consider that each of the component parts that make up that creature had to be working from the start, SIMULTANEOUSLY!

Yes, but each of those parts could develop in complexity from simpler versions of themselves. There's no requirement that they suddenly poof into existence fully formed, and evolution doesn't at all say that they would. Again, learn what you're talking about before you decide that it's wrong.

Quote: If a cell could live with half of it's necessary parts missing, how did it manage to live years later while waiting for the needed ones to evolve? It couldn't. All of those NECESSARY parts are needed TOGETHER, AT THE SAME TIME, in order to be ALIVE!

And prior generations of any given organism had slightly less advanced versions of the same equipment. Why do you keep asserting that we think otherwise?

Quote: Most all animals around us are complete LIVING units that can't wait for new life altering parts to arrive. They simply had to be assembled as complete working mechanisms, not collections of un-aggregated pieces waiting to be assembled so that they can live.

You aren't even listening, are you?

Ugh.....just no.

A living cell is required to have a collective, communicative cooperation of all of it's parts functioning together to provide for it's (symbiotic), life providing relationship to occur. In order for future alterations to occur (future animal designs), extra parts that are under consideration would have to be attached to this creature for use at a later time. Does the animal know what these parts will be, as they should have some appropriate rightful fitment within the integrity of the creature. If this is the way that animals change, then we should all have hundreds of experimental appendages all over us as these chance extra parts make their way into our future life.
Do you think that extra time is all that's required for these things to finally find their way onto a completed animal. NO WAY! Time is not a variable for the design of creatures. Most every animal is fully complete to use every available part to it's fullest advantage. Not only are we considering the modification of individual body parts, but we have to consider all of the "hard-wiring" of these components parts as well. There would have to be constant planning for connections such as nerve networks, blood supply, waste removal, regeneration of damaged tissues, inter-cellular communication, ETC.ETC.
To imagine that non-intelligent elements gathered themselves together with order to form anything at all makes no sense. The number of useful connections between these things would be truly astronomical, and this all happened by chance? NO WAY!!!

(May 11, 2014 at 3:35 pm)RDK Wrote: The number of useful connections between these things would be truly astronomical, and this all happened by chance?

The evidence suggests that the astronomical chance did occur naturally.

The chances could always be against something happening, but that does not discount the fact that there is a chance of it happening.

And RDK keeps showing just how much he is ignorant of the mechanisms that have been proposed to accomplish the tasks he's trying to understand.

(May 11, 2014 at 3:35 pm)RDK Wrote: A living cell is required to have a collective, communicative cooperation of all of it's parts functioning together to provide for it's (symbiotic), life providing relationship to occur. In order for future alterations to occur (future animal designs), extra parts that are under consideration would have to be attached to this creature for use at a later time.

"Under consideration," seriously? You do understand that even really small, simplistic changes can still have a use to the organism, right? The eye started out as a patch of slightly light sensitive cells, and evolved over millions of years into what we have today; it's not a matter of the eye being totally non-functional right up until the moment that it fully transitions into being a human eye. Where would you ever get the idea that it would be that way?

Quote: Does the animal know what these parts will be, as they should have some appropriate rightful fitment within the integrity of the creature. If this is the way that animals change, then we should all have hundreds of experimental appendages all over us as these chance extra parts make their way into our future life.

We might just, you know: who knows what future purpose vestigial organs like the appendix may serve? See, that's the problem, you're (dishonestly) looking for, like, extra fingers or something, when you've been told the changes will always be gradual.

Quote: Do you think that extra time is all that's required for these things to finally find their way onto a completed animal. NO WAY!

What do you mean, "completed animal"? Every animal is a complete creature, and every animal is undergoing evolution. It's not like there was ever half a dog that had to evolve all the pieces of a dog together and then pop, it was a dog. No, prior, equally complete organisms (wolves, in this case) gradually altered over generations into the dogs we know today.

You do understand that doing what you're doing, when you haven't even so much as looked at the wikipedia entry for evolution, is tantamount to lying, right? You do get that?

Quote: Time is not a variable for the design of creatures.

It is, in that time is what it takes to breed.

Quote: Most every animal is fully complete to use every available part to it's fullest advantage.

Fullest advantage? Your spinal nerves beg to differ; they're the spinal nerves of a quadrupedal animal.

Moreover, evolution never, ever said there would be a half creature. It fully acknowledges that each animal is a complete animal, just one that can vary gradually into something else.

Quote: Not only are we considering the modification of individual body parts, but we have to consider all of the "hard-wiring" of these components parts as well. There would have to be constant planning for connections such as nerve networks, blood supply, waste removal, regeneration of damaged tissues, inter-cellular communication, ETC.ETC.

Yet more unjustified anthropomorphizing: "Planning."

Quote: To imagine that non-intelligent elements gathered themselves together with order to form anything at all makes no sense. The number of useful connections between these things would be truly astronomical, and this all happened by chance? NO WAY!!!

Argument from incredulity. You also understand that most of the species on earth are extinct, right? And beyond that, the number of individual offspring that die, taking their evolutionary changes to the grave, is many orders of magnitude more? Nobody ever said that evolution gets it right every time, you cretin.

Now shut the hell up before you embarrass yourself even more, if that's possible.

(May 11, 2014 at 2:57 pm)RDK Wrote: The ideas that am presenting here are not difficult to comprehend.

True. They're just wrong.

Unlucky for you.

(May 11, 2014 at 2:57 pm)RDK Wrote: In order to understand what is happening to us now, we have to understand how it started.

Jesus, right? Lulz.

(May 11, 2014 at 2:57 pm)RDK Wrote: Consider a single cell organism that doesn't require a mate to propagate. Out of the ooze of non life comes a living creature. IMPOSSIBLE!

FALLACY - Argument from ignorance.

(May 11, 2014 at 2:57 pm)RDK Wrote: You must consider that each of the component parts that make up that creature had to be working from the start, SIMULTANEOUSLY! If a cell could live with half of it's necessary parts missing, how did it manage to live years later while waiting for the needed ones to evolve? It couldn't.

FALLACY - Argument from ignorance.

(May 11, 2014 at 2:57 pm)RDK Wrote: All of those NECESSARY parts are needed TOGETHER, AT THE SAME TIME, in order to be ALIVE!
Most all animals around us are complete LIVING units that can't wait for new life altering parts to arrive. They simply had to be assembled as complete working mechanisms, not collections of un-aggregated pieces waiting to be assembled so that they can live.

FALLACY - Argument from ignorance, personal incredulity.

I don't know why you think you wouldn't be accepted by other Christians/ theists. Your ignorance and lack of understanding of even the most basic of scientific (reality) concepts is pretty much bang on the money!

I love the evolution of the mitochondrion. People that understand it, rejoice on such a marvelous process. What fucks with theists is that no god is needed on such an evolution. Meh, their loss.

The ability for animals to change gradually was certainly designed into each working creature. What you see is an organ or animal feature which is already in use,altering itself slightly for the benefit of the creature. That new change is simply handed down through genetic transfer. This is a complicated feature that is integral to the function of the animal in the first place. I am not saying that changes don't take place. I am emphasizing that it is a feature of animals to enhance their life challenges.
You can change the shape and sizes of dogs over time, but they can still mate to make more variations of themselves. What I want to emphasize is that this capability is designed into the functions of the creature. This could not happen without some pre-creation planning. One change can amount to billions of cellular adjustments, and an almost uncountable number of (chance) atomic ones.

---

(May 11, 2014 at 3:38 pm)Kitanetos Wrote:

(May 11, 2014 at 3:35 pm)RDK Wrote: The number of useful connections between these things would be truly astronomical, and this all happened by chance?

The evidence suggests that the astronomical chance did occur naturally.

The chances could always be against something happening, but that does not discount the fact that there is a chance of it happening.

You do know what an argument from ignorance is, right?