Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Members Blogs
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Self Moderated Area
Tiger Blog
Origins Thread
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Tiger" data-source="post: 120686" data-attributes="member: 353"><p>Answering your question over here [USER=202]@Professor[/USER] </p><p></p><p>So, here are the five most well known robust lines of evidence that are a stumbling block for evolutionists (all of which have been discussed many times in this thread)</p><p></p><p>a) Irreducible Complexity: Molecular machines like the bacterial flagellum or the ATP synthase motor demonstrate systems that fail without all their components present—making stepwise evolution via mutations highly implausible.</p><p></p><p>b) Fine-tuning of DNA Information: DNA isn’t just a molecule; it’s an information storage system encoding complex algorithms. The origin of specified information, particularly the instructions for building life forms, remains unexplained by undirected processes.</p><p></p><p>c) The Cambrian Explosion: Sudden appearances of diverse animal forms with no apparent evolutionary precursors challenge gradual Darwinian processes</p><p></p><p>d) Epigenetics and Non-Coding DNA: Discoveries in epigenetics show regulatory systems that go beyond random mutations and natural selection, pointing toward pre-designed adaptability mechanisms.</p><p></p><p>e) Cosmic Fine-Tuning for Life: The extreme precision of constants in the universe necessary for life (e.g., gravity, electromagnetic force) suggests purpose, not accident.</p><p></p><p>These examples aren’t fringe but are grounded in empirical data and highlight areas where Neo-Darwinism offers no satisfactory explanation.</p><p></p><p>There are also tons of recent studies challenge the Neo-Darwinian framework, revealing that mutation rates are influenced by genomic and environmental factors, undermining the notion of purely random mutations driving evolution. This suggests more intricate mechanisms at work, requiring a conceptual expansion beyond traditional model sifting toward an "Integrative Synthesis," incorporating epigenetics, systems biology, and adaptive mechanisms that go beyond gene-centric views.</p><p></p><p>Additionally there are also other emerging fields in biology—such as niche construction theory—which are forcing a reconsideration of how evolutionary processes could even possibly operate. While some evolutionary biologists are attempting to integrate these ideas into a broader synthesis, there remains a lack of consensus on how to reconcile these findings with the traditional Neo-Darwinian model, mainly because there is no logical way. </p><p></p><p></p><p>In terms of Universities offering courses in evolution. That doesn't really mean anything in practical terms. It's a box ticking exercise. </p><p></p><p>Those same Universities almost certainly also all have a 'gender studies' course or a 'queer theory' course too. Universities often offer niche courses or disciplines that have limited direct applications or employment opportunities. There's stuff like - Medieval Studies, Comparative Mythology, Paleography, and Theoretical Mathematics, which are primarily relevant in academia or niche fields like museums or archives. Similarly, Postmodern Literary Criticism, have little practical connection to mainstream industries.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Tiger, post: 120686, member: 353"] Answering your question over here [USER=202]@Professor[/USER] So, here are the five most well known robust lines of evidence that are a stumbling block for evolutionists (all of which have been discussed many times in this thread) a) Irreducible Complexity: Molecular machines like the bacterial flagellum or the ATP synthase motor demonstrate systems that fail without all their components present—making stepwise evolution via mutations highly implausible. b) Fine-tuning of DNA Information: DNA isn’t just a molecule; it’s an information storage system encoding complex algorithms. The origin of specified information, particularly the instructions for building life forms, remains unexplained by undirected processes. c) The Cambrian Explosion: Sudden appearances of diverse animal forms with no apparent evolutionary precursors challenge gradual Darwinian processes d) Epigenetics and Non-Coding DNA: Discoveries in epigenetics show regulatory systems that go beyond random mutations and natural selection, pointing toward pre-designed adaptability mechanisms. e) Cosmic Fine-Tuning for Life: The extreme precision of constants in the universe necessary for life (e.g., gravity, electromagnetic force) suggests purpose, not accident. These examples aren’t fringe but are grounded in empirical data and highlight areas where Neo-Darwinism offers no satisfactory explanation. There are also tons of recent studies challenge the Neo-Darwinian framework, revealing that mutation rates are influenced by genomic and environmental factors, undermining the notion of purely random mutations driving evolution. This suggests more intricate mechanisms at work, requiring a conceptual expansion beyond traditional model sifting toward an "Integrative Synthesis," incorporating epigenetics, systems biology, and adaptive mechanisms that go beyond gene-centric views. Additionally there are also other emerging fields in biology—such as niche construction theory—which are forcing a reconsideration of how evolutionary processes could even possibly operate. While some evolutionary biologists are attempting to integrate these ideas into a broader synthesis, there remains a lack of consensus on how to reconcile these findings with the traditional Neo-Darwinian model, mainly because there is no logical way. In terms of Universities offering courses in evolution. That doesn't really mean anything in practical terms. It's a box ticking exercise. Those same Universities almost certainly also all have a 'gender studies' course or a 'queer theory' course too. Universities often offer niche courses or disciplines that have limited direct applications or employment opportunities. There's stuff like - Medieval Studies, Comparative Mythology, Paleography, and Theoretical Mathematics, which are primarily relevant in academia or niche fields like museums or archives. Similarly, Postmodern Literary Criticism, have little practical connection to mainstream industries. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Name
Verification
Does Doxxie know his real father.
Post reply
Latest Threads
J
Varadkar "confronted by far right" while walking down street inDublin
Started by Jay Homer Simpson
Yesterday at 8:02 AM
Replies: 6
Public Chat and Announcements
B
BIG FAT HOOR TO SHRINK.
Started by BIG FAT HOOR
Wednesday at 2:54 PM
Replies: 39
Health
B
RAW NAKED TRUTH FROM PASTOR RICK WILES
Started by BIG FAT HOOR
Tuesday at 10:51 AM
Replies: 6
USA
Food price inflation in Ireland rose to a 20-month high of 5%
Started by Anderson
Tuesday at 8:29 AM
Replies: 1
Economy
46% of Irish population now have health insurance
Started by Anderson
Tuesday at 8:27 AM
Replies: 1
Health
Popular Threads
Ukraine.
Started by Declan
Feb 21, 2022
Replies: 15K
World at War
US Politics.
Started by jpc
Nov 7, 2022
Replies: 6K
USA
Mass Migration to Ireland & Europe
Started by Anderson
Feb 26, 2023
Replies: 5K
Nationalist Politics
C
🦠 Covid 19 Vaccine Thread 💉
Started by Charlene
Sep 14, 2021
Replies: 3K
Health
General Chat in The Marcus Lounge.
Started by Declan
Dec 30, 2024
Replies: 3K
Public Chat and Announcements
The Climate Change scam
Started by Anderson
Jul 29, 2022
Replies: 2K
Climate Change
Forums
Self Moderated Area
Tiger Blog
Origins Thread
Top
Bottom