This is an interesting account of some leading scientists looking for the origin of life.... one of them Professor of Biology Dean Kenyon (apparently one of the leading chemical evolutionists in the world in the 70's) wrote a book called Biochemical Predestination and how he came to disbelieve his own theories. If you can sit through an hour of these videos it is fascinating.
Evolution disproved by 11 year old niece
by StopTheTears 285 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
Flat_Accent
Cool story bro.
There was another episode where House said:
" Rational arguments don't usually work on religious people. Otherwise, there wouldn't be religious people."
I like House. =)
-
TD
One area of interest to me in these types of discussions revolves around trivial facts about the human body. They make a certain sense from the standpoint of evolution, but don't have much of an explanation from the standpoint of creation. Here's two quick examples:
Human skin contains a specialized sweat gland that produces pheromones. These are apocrine glands and are only found on certain parts of the body. Typically, armpits, the aerole of nipples, genitals and feet. Why feet?
From the standpoint of primitive primates living in scattered groups, that makes a certain sense, because sex and even sexual receptivity could be gauged simply from the smell of a foot print. It would be a survival advantage in bringing prospective mates together. But humans don't have a sensitive enough sense of smell to track potential mates by smell like animals do. Without it, apocrine sweat glands on the feet are entirely pointless.
Another piece of trivia concerns human sperm. Most of us were taught in school that the sperm all swim together through the thin layer of mucosa lining the female sexual apparatus in one big mad dash to reach the egg. But that's not entirely true. Only a small percentage of sperm actually try to fertilize the egg. What the rest do is the subject of some debate, but it is believed that they hang around for the express purpose of stopping the sperm of any other male who subsequently mates with the same female.
Since sperm can live for up to five days in the female sexual apparatus, there is a substantial selective advantage here. And the more promiscuous the species, the more pronounced this phenomenon is. That this has also been observed in humans makes a certain sense from the standpoint of evolution, but again, it's hard to come up with a lucid explanation from the standpoint of creation.
-
-
N.drew
Oh I was thinking the same thing. OK! If there is nothing better in the many many many books about evolution than what TD has offered, I shall forgo making it a priority to read. I like the feet thing!
-
james_woods
I like the feet thing!
At last I finally understand those poor misguided souls who have a fetish for women's shoes.
-
TD
If there is nothing better in the many many many books about evolution than what TD has offered, I shall forgo making it a priority to read.
--Just trying to be conversational. Books on the subject are worth the read. They go far beyond trivia.
-
snare&racket
I can't be arsed reading 13 pages of ignorance, but let me summarise...
If you can't answer Mary's grade school year one questions either A you haven't read the explanation in evolution where you will see why monkeys don't give birth to humans and when and how we know communication developed, or B you are as intelligent as ...plasma, ironic evidence of your ancestry.
Why leave the JWs if you insist on promoting uneducated bullshit when you leave.
Why so hard to say "I don't know Mary, let's read some books and see if they can answer your questions."
Guess what, it's right there in the books!
P.s. this thread is clearly fake, kids don't talk like that, also wtf is plasma ?
-
wallsofjericho
ya, an 11 year old said that. yeah right
only a brain dead, needy adult with low self esteem and an IQ of 65 could come up with something like this and think they sound smart.
This is such a troll thread. 13 pages deep and the original poster has not even responded. what a deucher
-
N.drew
The question came from a Baptist discussion forum.
I think when someone says "evolution disproved" means spontaneous generation can not explain all the life we know and evolution is not proof enough that there is no superior creative force. But it's a dumb way of saying it.
