Creationist Perspective on Mitochondrial Eve

[justellus]

About the science presented, if there is some error in my texts, then anyone is free to point it out. But some just stating they believe there is error, wihout providing some type of scientific argument is not going to work. Nor is just referring over to sites. The first site they referred to the other day was already basically knocked down....so now they come are asking for us to knock the next one down. Fine, and then it is done. Then they will throw another one at us, and on and on it will go. It is obvious it becomes a game of just feeding links at us while avoiding a discussion altogether.

As stated previously, the entire system of evo is bent and skewed and they cannot see their own error. We have demonstrated how it is not as they claim with humans and chimps being 99% identical. Not as they say. If some have an argument to refute this, or prove that what has been presented is wrong will be fine. But just to claim, "your science is full of errors" and the like is not going to convince us or anyone. We are to strong and inter-connected for that to work. And then how can a religious scholar, bart, claim all those arguments against evo are incorrect? And again, even scientists disagree.

Clearly the system is skewed in favor of these evo people. Nobody can even join the club of science unless they are a sworn evo. That is how controlled they got the thing. Recently it has occured to me how the same individuals who control the media are those who throw at us this evo stuff. They are the same also who hire guys like Behrman to study that book Richard refered to, so discretely. We all know who these guys are and what their intent is. So who next are they going to throw at us, some supposed expert on evo?

One has to admit these guys are funny......

[ooberman]

You are welcome to ignore one of the most robust and solid scientific theories in all of history if you'd like.

I have no intention of defending the fact of evolution, or the fact that the sky is blue.

If any one has specific questions regarding evolution, I would suggest a scientist and not their priest.

Talkorigins is a great site to start with and has links to the peer-reviewed studies.

justellus, if you have a specific question, why not ask it clearly and tell us what evidence you would accept, since you have written off 99% of the scientific community.

Maybe you can start your research with Francis S. Collins, M.D., Ph. D., Head of the Human Genome Project where he firmly supports Evolution, vehemently opposes ID and...

is a staunch Christian.

Only religious extremists deny Evolution. There is the motive. Like the Taliban deny evolution, modern science and anything else that doesn't already agree with the tenets of their Faith.

I am glad to be on the side of Science, and not of the Taliban.

[Antisthenes]

down with extremists/fundementalist/conservatives like this chameleon name changer, that floods this form with their ignorant pseudo religious floods

learn, practice science. start with a small experiment if you are skeptical

the process is key

[ooberman]

[justellus]

That is fine if others wish to ignore the evidence, and ignore those of us who are demonstrating the fallacies of the system.

When people have their mind made up, they don't even consider the facts and cannot see the errors being clearly shown with this evo thing.

It is evident they have no argument for their claims, as rather then discuss the topics in an intelligent way, they keep coming back here to flood the topic with their hatred and derogatory comments. They seek any opportunity they can to cut down those who can demonstrate evo a failing system.

They do not discuss this in an intelligent manner, nor can they point out the supposed errors, as they are all imaginary.

They claim the science is flawed, but are not capable of discussing the same. Obviously they are contradicting themselves.

The only thing they can do is flood this topic with their remarks of no value which only demonstrate their ill intent.

And on the "staunch Christian" remark - well unless he is a wishy washy one, then he would admit God as a creator. One can still support limited views of particular types of "evolution", which are not real evolution, in this case, but mere evidence of mutation, random selection and other natural processes that do not prove that one species can become another. He may oppose I.D. simply because he is cautious to mix what some consider "religion", with science. So people's mnds need to be re-wired, so as to speak, before they will be able to realize that the entire evo thing is all contrived and cannot be proven. It is not fact as they would have us believe. For example, on the man monkey protein connection, the error has already been demonstrated and this is just the tip of the iceberg.

And to claim only religious extremists deny evolution is another fallacy, among the many of others which had been mentioned previously.

An this anti guy never has anything to contribute to this thread except his mean face, spewing out contemptuous remarks.....

[Antisthenes]

projection.

everything you say has more to do with you than anybody else

your context is self imposed

hahaha

so how long have you been here posting these 'ideas'? if you don't mind answering a simple question rather than going off on a tirade generalized attack.

[justellus]

[Antisthenes]

you come back for more i see

you are always going to loose and be laughing stock borderline annoyance because you have zilch to back up anything you say.

i can only imagine the same thought echoing around in your brain

[justellus]

Everything has been amply backed-up, contrary to what the fools claim. They might as well hide their head in the sand as ostridges.

The Edge of the Universe

Rare alignment between two spiral galaxies at the edge of the universe.

A powerful collision of galaxy clusters that shows separation of the dark from ordinary matter

Two galaxies in the constellation Leo swing past each other due to gravitational pull
-->>

A ring of dark matter, formed long ago during a titanic collision between two massive galaxy clusters, provides strong evidence that dark matter exists.

(The nb. of galaxies in this one photo is amazing!)

This arc of light is the biggest, brightest and hottest star-forming region ever seen in space.

A close-up of the Horsehead Nebula.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/10/09/gallery.hubble.photos/

[justellus]

The Fundamental Limit of Time Space

The theory we have previously postulated that there is an edge or limit to the space time continuum is based on science, not imaginary thought.

Here is what was presented earlier

PostPosted: Sun Dec 21, 2008 6:23 pm Post subject:

[ooberman]

[justellus]

Taken from this article -->>

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20126911.300-our-world-may-be-a-giant-hologram.html

Next topic and related -->>

Our World May be a Giant Hologram

[justellus]

Ober - quote -- what qualifications do you have to claim that the scientists you support are right? i claim the scientific consensus, peer-review process, the scientific method (and quite a bit of reading about the subject, especially the bacteria flagellum) are better judges of what is probably true. --->>>

Response -->>

Just read the science being presented. I am to busy demonstrating how other scientists are proving my theories, then to engage in a discussion with those who have no scientific insight into these subject matters.

[ooberman]

[justellus]

The new dimension is what the scientists are observing and describing as the grains, or ripples at the microscopic quantum level. When dark holes crash in on themselves, the information is not lost, under this view, but rather converted into a 2D planar of information. This 2D planar generates a type of holographic image which projects itself into the space-time continuum as observable energy and matter. At the planar level, it is the boundary between this dimension and the next dimensioin. At the universal limit point, it creates this boundary where the infinitely small quantum convulsions are pulling in matter, expounding the outer limit of our universe at an accelerating rate. It is at this planar level where the standard link between matter, energy and space is created. Beyond this planar, space has not yet been filled with dark matter and thus is "nothingness". In that region, light, matter and energy cannot enter. It is, if you will take it, the boundary past the fifth dimension.

Thus, it is not dark matter in itself creating this external tug on the universe, but the formation of matter, energy, light and new space as a result of the crash of dark matter into a 2D planar of information, which depends on the absorption of new dark matter to tug the universe out at an expanding rate. (It is possible this never ending process leads to sub-sequent gallaxy mergers and the birth of new gallaxies as well, as these forces are constantly re-shaping the stellar map and depending on the 2D planar location, the external tug may vary, as the rate of dark matter absorption by the 2D planar can also vary per planar coordinate. This explains also the pringle shape.) I believe also that the waves of this space-time continuum distortion at the planar boundary cast their waves throught our universe in a dense infinitely small string level, where dark matter exists. It is the presence of these strings that explains various observable phenomena. At the outer edges of the universe, this 2d planar can be detected as a type of background noise. This background noise is in essence a reflection of this microscopic infinitely small quantum level ripples of this continuum, where the same ceases to exist in it's present state.

Our interconnected mind can understand these concepts, once we enter into and embrace a fusion of mental energy towards this greater understanding of our cosmos.

The other related concepts have been described above in brief detail. Inspiration comes with both a scientific mind, knowledge of the sciences, the cosmos and current theories of science. It is this inter reaction and exchange of ideas that leads to the progress of science. It is however, the limited mind that depends on scientific opinion of a "consensus" to establish his world views. When we throw out these pre-established views, we are able to see science in a new objective light, and postulate new theories which can have also a revolutionary influence on the work of other scientists. Where they are getting their ideas from we can only speculate. But certainly they are thinking along the same line of thought.