analysis is applicable to control Here we quote Hermes and La Salle (), Leigh Thus there is a large literature available from which I have selected personal Maxwell set questions to students on the stability of spinning tops at a date Miscellany Guest () is a pre-computer-era book containing highly. Pre selection theory dating. Chinese dating sites in toronto. Quotes about regretting dating someone. Elvira schneider dating. Electrical hookup for stove. House.
Pre selection theory dating Craigslist alaska dating search. Borat dating service skit for men. Bike speed dating sydney london. Xating deal breakers for guys free. Speed dating jackson mississippi airport. Katt williams internet dating cast download.
Upon close examination the feathers appear to be identical to modern chicken feathers. Click the picture to see an enlargement. The Archaeopteryx fossils with feathers have now been declared forgeries by scientists. Bird feathers were then imprinted into the wet cement" according to Dr. Walt Brown. This example would not have proven evolution even if the feathers had not been forgeries. Finding a few species with characteristics similar to two other species does not prove a link.
There should be millions or billions of transitional links if evolution were true, not simply a few. The Platypus Ornithorhynchus anatinus , with its duck bill and webbed feet, is a unique Australian animal. It and the two species of echidna are the only monotremes or egg-laying mammals to be found on earth. The marsupials mammals with pouches, e.
The monotremes have lower body temperatures than other mammals and have legs which extend out, then vertically below them. These features, together with their egg-laying ability, are more like that of a lizard than a mammal.
Platypus are readily identified by their streamlined body, webbed feet, broad tail, and characteristic muzzle or bill which is soft and pliable. The Platypus males have spurs on their hind feet that deliver a poisonous venom like a snake.
A Platypus sting is powerful enough to make people sick and kill a dog. The Platypus of Australia has characteristics of many species but certainly is not the missing link to all of them.
In fact, it is not a link to any of them. The Platypus has made a joke of Charles Darwin's theory of evolution and his unproven theory of natural selection. April 6. The scientists have apparently forgotten that the first fossil gap, Archaeopteryx, shown above was also a fraud. Tiktaalik therefore becomes fossil gap fraud number 2. Most remarkably, the creature, which was less than 3 feet long, had the body of a fish but the jaws, ribs, and limb-like fins seen in the earliest land mammals.
The fish doesn't even have fins as large as expected for its size. The scientists are claiming the fish walked around on the ground out of water and breathed air. This is pure make-believe speculation. No evidence exists that the fish is anything more than just another species. The excitement about the Tiktaalik fossil is puzzling. Modern-day seals have fins and waddle around on the ground. Modern-day catfish have fins and walk around on the ground. Catfish can live out of water for a long time.
Tiktaalik does not provide any support for evolution. Evolutionists are now claiming that a dolphin captured with two little extra fins near the tail is proof that dolphins evolved from four-footed animals related to the dog. And now the extraordinary discovery of a bottlenosed dolphin with an extra set of flippers has provided living proof of the theory. At first glance it looks like any other of its kind. But closer inspection reveals a rogue set of rear fins.
Each the size of a human hand, the fins are thought to be the remains of a pair of hind legs, adding to evidence that dolphins once walked on all fours.
These small steps of improvements continue for countless years until the individuals are changed to such a large extent that a new species has appeared. This progression is an uninterrupted branch of the "evolutionary tree. They almost look believable The siblings of an individual on the uninterrupted branch may fail to develop the minute improvement and may even suffer from an inferior evolutionary change.
Each of these individuals represents a new branch on the tree that is moving away from the uninterrupted branch. Let us say we have , coexisting individuals in a species such as a horse.
Only a few of these individuals will begin new branches that will eventually become a new species such as a Zebra. The other 99, individuals may each begin a neutral or inferior branch that may continue for millions of years but will eventually stop, because the last individual on the branch fails to produce an offspring.
The odds that the branch will stop producing offspring is increased when the minute evolutionary changes are inferior. The theory of survival of the fittest or natural selection also works in reverse to produce death to the branch where the changes are inferior. The branch stops. This part of the tree is dead. We see in Scientific Fact No. One superior individual of the , is missing, but now we have an even more serious defect in the theory. Where are the 99, inferior branches?
How could 99, branches go missing? Actually, the fossil record shows that everything is missing. No individuals of the species existed. Most layers of the earth's crust are completely devoid of all life, but then a layer will appear that is teaming with an absolute abundance of separate species, each containing millions of individuals.
This hypothesis of the "missing inferior evolutionary branches" was developed and posted here by the author, Kent R. Rieske, on March 21, Thousands of biology professors at universities around the world, including Darwin, have completely missed this serious deficiency in the fossil record, because they have only been searching for the superior evolutionary branches, not the inferior branches. Where are the fossils of horses with weak bones that fractured early in life and thereby prevented an offspring from continuing the branch?
They don't exist, but they should if the Theory of Evolution was true. In fact, the fossil record should be full of dead branches, which is not. The fossil record simply shows individual species that have become extinct. The theory developed that perhaps lightning struck a pond of water, causing several molecules to combine in a random way, which by chance resulted in a living cell.
The cell then divided and evolved into higher life forms. This view is now proven to be immature to the degree of being ridiculous. The most modern laboratory is unable to create a living cell. In fact, scientists have been unable to create a single left-hand protein molecule as found in all animals. The Theory of Evolution claims that organic life was created from inorganic matter.
That is impossible. The top scientists in the world with unlimited laboratory resources cannot change inorganic matter into a single organic living cell. The smallest living cell has the complexity of a Boeing jumbo jet airplane. The components of the smallest living cell have the obvious arrangement showing intelligent design, just as the Boeing did not appear from random parts stacked near each other in a junk yard.
The minimal cell contains more than 60, proteins of different configurations. The smallest single-cell creature has millions of atoms forming millions of molecules that must each be arranged in an exact pattern to provide the required functions. The cell has an energy-producing system, a protective housing, a security system to let molecules into and out of the housing, a reproductive system, and a central control system.
This complexity required an intelligent design. It is much too complex to happen by chance. A Theory in Crisis by Michael Denton page ; The odds that the correct proteins could somehow come together in a functional configuration to make a living cell are so high that it will never happen.
The concept that anything can be accomplished by chance given enough time is false. Darwin developed the Tree of Life theory , claiming that some species were lower in the branches of the tree and evolved into the upper branches.
He selected species that looked similar to each other and placed them together, like placing the zebra below the horse. Charles Darwin knew nothing about DNA, the true scientific key to life. He had no concept whatsoever regarding the complexity of DNA. Life did not originate by the accidental sticking together of a few molecules as Darwin taught. Darwin did not know that the key to a person's identity DNA is locked solid in every cell of the body.
The DNA does not change because of external adaptation to the environment as taught by Darwin and still falsely taught in universities by biology professors. The DNA changes only when an egg and sperm are joined to form a new DNA with chromosomes coming from the male and female donors. The DNA of the baby is strictly controlled by the parents' chromosomes.
It cannot be changed by external environmental influences either. Environmental influence does not change the DNA in plants, animals or humans. Some animals have DNA sequences that are identical to sequences in plant DNA, but they obviously could not be related according to the Theory of Evolution. Intelligent Design can be Seen in the Smallest Bacteria and the Largest Galaxy The scientific study of complex biological structures has made enormous strides in revealing Intelligent design in nature.
One example is the motor and propeller propulsion system, called a bacterial flagellum, found in many bacteria, including the common E.
The propulsion system of the bacteria has 40 moving parts made from protein molecules, including a motor, rotor, stator, drive shaft, bushings, universal joint, and flexible propeller. The motor is powered by ions and can rotate at up to , rpm. One cannot deny the obvious conclusion that this system has an Intelligent Designer.
For each proton, the motor turns once, adding a phosphate to adenosine di-phosphate and converting it to adenosine tri-phosphate, the universal fuel source of cells.
The human female like other mammals has XX sex chromosomes, and the male has XY sex chromosomes. The female egg contains the X-chromosome, and the male sperm contains either an X-chromosome for the reproduction of a female or a Y-chromosome for the reproduction of a male. The female eggs all develop within the ovaries while she is a baby fetus within her mother's womb.
Evolutionists claim environmental factors cause small changes in the offspring in the evolutionary chain. However, the environmental experience of the female cannot change the chromosomes within her eggs and cannot have any effect upon her offspring. Her body cannot go into the eggs contained within her ovaries at her birth to make an intelligent genetic change.
Females cannot be a part of the evolutionary theory for these reasons. The male sperm are created very differently from the female egg.
The sperm are created in the testes of a male on a daily basis. This short time period between the creation of the sperm and conception within the female precludes any possibility that the male can be a part of the evolutionary process. A harsh winter, or some other environmental condition does not affect the testes in any way that would alter the chromosomes in the sperm. Therefore, the male could not possibly contribute to evolutionary change caused by the environment.
This fact applies to humans as well as all other mammals. There are no ways possible whereby environmental adaptation could occur through the male part of the chromosome.
Neither is there any scientific evidence that environmental experiences change the genetic code within the sperm. Males cannot be a part of the evolutionary process for these reasons.
These scientific facts prove evolution of the human species caused by environmental adaptation or any other reason is impossible.
In my opinion, there is not enough evidence to support the author's conclusion regarding "Scientific Fact No. The DNA is also responsible for our appearance, otherwise we would all look the same. The fact that the DNA works as a software, making humans — for example — better adapted to the environment, can be easily proven.
Those who walk bare foot develop extra layers of skin on their soles, or those who work the land with their hands, develop extra layers of skin on their palms. Increased resistance to cold can be observed in the descendants of the nomadic tribes, such as gypsies, even though they are no longer living in harsh conditions.
In conclusion, based on my knowledge, improvements are to be expected, but never radical mutations which would result into an entirely different kind. The fact is, any attempt by the DNA to change is stopped and reversed. The frequency of errors is about 1 per million bonds 1 x Over the entire human genome, that works out to roughly 30 errors every single time the genome replicates. There are really only around three errors per replication because of DNA repair. If a repair enzyme finds a mistake, it can fix it, and it can tell which strand is wrong because it can tell which strand is the newly synthesized strand by at the extent of cytosine methylation.
As DNAs exist in cells, many of the cytosines have a methyl group added to them by enzymes called methylases. A new DNA will have relatively few methylated cytosines because it has not been around long enough to have picked up that many methyl groups. Xeroderma pigmentosum is a serious ailment caused by mutations in the gene for DNA repair.
People with xp develop many skin tumors and other problems because of the number of errors in their DNA. Mutations are very rare because of DNA checking and repair. However, one in every ten million duplications of a DNA molecule can result in a mutation error.
The mutation changes are random, unpredictable errors that cause crippling diseases, loss of function and the destruction of the host person or animal. Mutations destroy the species. They do not improve the species. Mutations never lead to a new species as falsely claimed by evolutionists. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences ; Evolutionists believe in the "mutation theory" for the origin of the many species.
They believe that the "time god" makes mistake after mistake after mistake until VOILA -- we have a hummingbird that can fly backwards. They claim that multiple mutation mistakes eventually led to humans with color vision that can focus at different lengths and two eyes that are coordinated by the brain in order to judge distances.
Complex live organisms cannot rearrange themselves into an organism of a higher form as claimed by evolutionists. This is scientifically backwards according to the second law of thermodynamics, which has never been proven wrong. The universe is slowing down to a lower state, not higher. The genes of plants, insects, animals, and humans are continually becoming defective, not improving. Species are becoming extinct, not evolving. Order will always move naturally towards disorder or chaos.
Quoting from the book, Evolution and Human Destiny , by Kohler, "One of the most fundamental maxims of the physical sciences is the trend toward greater randomness - the fact that, on the average, things will get into disorder rather than into order if left to themselves.
This is essentially the statement that is embodied in the Second Law of Thermodynamics. The chromosome count within each species is fixed. This is the reason a male from one species cannot mate successfully with a female of another species.
Similarly, natural selection eliminates inferior species gradually over time. Darwin's Theory of Evolution is a slow gradual process. An irreducibly complex system is one composed of multiple parts, all of which are necessary for the system to function. If even one part is missing, the entire system will fail to function. Every individual part is integral. The common mousetrap is an everyday non-biological example of irreducible complexity. It is composed of five basic parts: If any one of these parts is missing, the mechanism will not work.
Each individual part is integral. The mousetrap is irreducibly complex. You can still use this to your advantage, by responding as if it was something in your favor. You haven't won this one's heart, or her bathing suit parts, but as you walk away do so smiling. Don't walk away with body language like she just crushed your soul, it's not attractive and it will hurt your chances with other women. Body language is the betrayer of words, learn to always have strong, positive body language.
Now we've learned how to make it look like we women are interested in us, let's learn the non-visual ways to convey pre-selection. Story telling , is an art in-and-of-itself, and merits it's own article. We'll look at two sources who can tell stories. The first, obviously comes from you, this is where stories about your female friends, the great times you have together, and how much they love you.
Avoid telling stories about how your ex left you, and she was the best thing that ever happened to you, and now you're convinced you're going to die alone, fat, and poor, surrounded by your blow-up doll collection. A downer is never sexy, don't do it. But done well, stories about your ex can help you. Friends are your friends for a reason. A good wingman, or wingwoman she will also give you some visible-pre-selection , can tell a story that you're a character in with women without making your sound like a player.
For shits-and-giggles, here are a few miscellaneous notes on demonstrate pre-selection.