The theory of Evolution disproved in 20 questions

Student_of_Allah

Shalom Aleikhom,

my first appreciation was that it is impossible for any process based on triyng and errors to create what we see.
It is like writing a book by tiping characters by chance. impossible

I have a little challenge. You can think of it as a learning experience for "both" of us. I quoted you above. Now, the challenge is to Produce "ONE SINGLE" evidence that evolution is what you just stated there. I know that "you" think of it that way. But simply get me the same understanding from any respected known scientist/biologist/authors in the field of evolution.

If you can not, then you are against your "gross misunderstanding" not against "Evolution".

the second was that evolution works by "continuity". That is changes are light changes over millions of years. However discontinuities exists and can't be explained
-First cell
-First ADN
-flying (birds, insects...)
-invention of sex (one gives two to two gives one)

in fact, each biological mecanism is a problem
how evolution knew that we need to see and how it created eyes ? to what served the proto-eyes before they were able to see ?

Life is too complicated for chance.

Evolution is NOT THE STUDY of ORIGIN OF LIFE. You looking for that answer in Evolution does not make sense. Evolution is concerned with adaptation to environment. And the effect it has on species over long periods of time. "Origin of Life" has nothing to do with Evolution.
You are attacking the process based on the assumption that the process itself was aware of the final consequence. Let me put things in perspective by the following example

I say Gravity is responsible for a lot of what you see in the universe. Stars collapse, new ones form, etc, etc.

You say It is impossible for Gravity to know that we need other planets and stars to sustain our life and existence.

Dont you see where you are going wrong ? A process/law of nature on itself is a slave of God. Gravity does not consciously decide to make solar systems. It is God that designed it in a way that it does so without being conscious itself.

Your challenge is to find a SINGLE respected evolutionist that would back up "your understanding" of evolution. Find me one single evolutionist (expert) that would agree with you that the human body all of a sudden decided to evolve an eye.

It looks to me, that you have been ill-informed about evolution by "Young Earth Creationists" or some similar baseless hadith foundation. I am not saying this to condescend , because I myself had those questions till the time I actually read about evolution from experts in that field who have scientific evidence.

I took the time to write all these because of the "first quote". Take that first challenge, either way, both of us will benefit.

Peace
------------ Student of Allah

noshirk

peace

english is my third langage and apologize for mistakes.
Notice that i have also a scientific education. I have read much about evolution and physics.

Your challenge is to find a SINGLE respected evolutionist that would back up "your understanding" of evolution. Find me one single evolutionist (expert) that would agree with you that the human body all of a sudden decided to evolve an eye.

I can't find such evolutionnist and i know what they say. They never formulates evolution as something that is a response for a need. The lie would be too evident.
However they say that all the life we see, all the complicated mecanism are found by chance. Evolution respond to the need by chance without knowing that it is a need and without having a conscience.
The result is the same.

even you, you said

Evolution is concerned with adaptation to environment

the response to a need is between the words you used. Even a kind of conscience can be found in your sentence. But you didn't say that.
I don't judge you on the figure of style you used. Don't judge me on then ones i used.

My analogy whith typing a book by chance comes from biology. The book is the ADN and the typer is the ribosome (that is the guy in the cell that innovate by doing mistakes while doing photocopy).

What evolutionists says is that the ribosome can create all what we see if he has a long period of time. Ribosome is guided by environnement who respond by good (let live and reproduce) and bad (let die). They never evaluate the quantity of work that is necessary and the time that is necessary. They just admit that he succeded doing the right work in the right delay because they admit he is a kind of GOD.

Such saying is not science but a belief.
If I consider my ADN as a Book to write. I am convinced that no ribosome can write it without having to consider all the failures that leads to me.
In fact, i think that whatever be the delay, it can't create even an insect.

Evolution, without conscience, without methodology, without reflexion is doing technological miracles by accumulating mistakes on a long period of time.
That's Evolution. An hymn to the glory of errors.

Evolution is tautology. "Evolution" select the more apt and let him leave and reproduce. Who is the more apt? the more apt is the one who lived and reproduced.
So we can never find a counter example.
However it is obvious (at least for me) that it can't do the right work in the right delay.

Evolution is NOT THE STUDY of ORIGIN OF LIFE. You looking for that answer in Evolution does not make sense.

Evolutionists are in facts also trying to find evolutionnary mecanisms that can justify the creation of the first cell and the first ADN (and the first robosome). They are failing until now but "Evolution is TRYING THE STUDY of ORIGIN OF LIFE".
see http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis
Really Evolutionnists are triyng.

Concerning gravity. I didn't say such a thing. I know that gravity has no conscience.

Einstein said "The eternal mystery of the world is its comprehensibility ... The fact that it is comprehensible is a miracle"

The question is unsolved Why universe have laws ?
And there is another problem.
Physical laws lies on universal constants Who fixed their values ?
What we know is that changing slightly these values leads to an universe that can't form planet, galaxies and life.
--See http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle for scientits asking these questions

Once again, life without very very very very very big chance is impossible.

Now i will give you my understanding of science.
Science is a kind of second quran as quran use the terms "ayats" for natural phenomenons. "Ayats" is word that mean also verses.
6.38 . There is not an animal in the earth , nor a flying creature flying on two wings , but they are peoples like unto you . We have neglected nothing in the Book ( of Our decrees ) . Then unto their Lord they will be gathered .

Quran respond to the question of Einstein. Universe is comprehensible because GOD wanted to.

Understanding the "two qurans" is obtained with the same manner Confrontings verses (ayats).
6104 "Visible proofs have come to you from your Lord; so whoever can see, does so for himself, and whoever is blinded, will be such. I am not a watcher over you."
6105 It is thus that We dispatch the "ayats" and that they may say "You have studied," and We will make it clear for a people who know

i replaced "signs" in the traduction of 6105 with the original word in arabic.
Quran is comprehensible. Universe is Comprehensible. It's GOD promise.
We have to STUDY THEM and HE WILL MAKE IT CLEAR. We are all "Student of Allah"
Unfortunately, i don't think that our generation will understand every thing.
ALL we can do is asking GOD to put us in the right path. That's FATIHA.

Returning to evolution. Evolution is not facts. Evolution is just a theory surronding facts (i will not reproduce the post of jonny_k).
It's a belief.
Darwing "launched" his belief without knowing what is ADN and what is inside a cell.
"Evolution" is also an old religion. I had read somewhere that an old greek said something like that.
So religious Atheits don't need proofs to believe what they want to believe. They are continuously trying to adjust the proofs to their beliefs since the beginning.

Evolution is one of the books of Hadiths in the old religion of Atheits who believe in universe and nature ( falses and mortals gods). Once again, people idolater creation of GOD in place of GOD and once again they are writing their religious book themselves.

Like jonny_k said, many scientists believe in GOD. Science is not atheist and is not only for atheists even if atheits (the majority of humans 12-103) want us to think so.

Now il Will respond somewhat dishonestly to your challenge.
There is no "SINGLE respected evolutionist " that i respect. They are all liars. They are disbelievers. They say "they know" but "They don't know".
I respect scientists. I don't respect evolutionists (the imams of atheism) and read no more their lies.

Peace.

Student_of_Allah

peace

english is my third langage and apologize for mistakes.
Notice that i have also a scientific education. I have read much about evolution and physics.

I can't find such evolutionnist and i know what they say. They never formulates evolution as something that is a response for a need. The lie would be too evident.
However they say that all the life we see, all the complicated mecanism are found by chance. Evolution respond to the need by chance without knowing that it is a need and without having a conscience.
The result is the same.

even you, you said
the response to a need is between the words you used. Even a kind of conscience can be found in your sentence. But you didn't say that.
I don't judge you on the figure of style you used. Don't judge me on then ones i used.