• In total there are 3 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 3 guests (based on users active over the past 60 minutes)
    Most users ever online was 616 on Thu Jan 18, 2024 7:47 pm

promoting my ebook: Logic against Evolution

Authors are invited and encouraged to showcase their NON-FICTION books exclusively within this forum.
person123
The Great Gabsby
Posts: 61
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 9:54 pm
4
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: promoting my ebook: Logic against Evolution

Unread post

this discussion is going off the rails. This always happens because people start to introduce more and more insignificant details instead of admitting that evolution has nothing.

-your first claim was that all organisms are related and can be arranged in a tree diagram. i told you that human products exhibit same charasteristics of having similaraties and having many models with incremental changes and improvements... but then you say "iphone didn't come from nowhere"... what that means? iphone is just an example of a concept, that tree diagram and incremental changes can be a result of intelligent creation, and not necessarily a darwinian evolution.

-you have to prove that darwinian mechanisms can be the creational force that is behind all the living organisms that we see. but you can't do it, instead you start playing "why this and why that" games. How is this going to help you?
In human case it's only 14 megabyte of new data, you should be able to prove that it can be produced by random mutations.
Last edited by person123 on Sun Nov 17, 2019 6:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
DWill

1H - GOLD CONTRIBUTOR
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 6966
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 8:05 am
16
Location: Luray, Virginia
Has thanked: 2262 times
Been thanked: 2470 times

Re: promoting my ebook: Logic against Evolution

Unread post

person123 wrote: In human case it's only 14 megabyte of new data, you should be able to prove that it can be produced by random mutations.
The other 98% is also what makes us human; all of it constitutes our evolution. What accounts for our genome as well as that of a goldfish? Time and natural selection. About the origin of life, evolution claims no authority.

I don't want to offend you, but I don't plan to buy your book. Would you be able to tell us how you account for the diversity of life and the story told by the fossil record? Evolution is such a foundational principle of biology, so well researched and supported, that anyone denying it needs to have an alternative theory.
User avatar
geo

2C - MOD & GOLD
pets endangered by possible book avalanche
Posts: 4779
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 4:24 am
15
Location: NC
Has thanked: 2199 times
Been thanked: 2200 times
United States of America

Re: promoting my ebook: Logic against Evolution

Unread post

person123 wrote:Ok... I explain it in my book. You provided right now a specific data, an evidence. The fact that humans and apes share similar DNA. doesn't mean that the unique DNA that each species has could have evolved by random mutations and natural selection.
If you take Windows xp, Windows Vista and Windows 10, or Call of Duty 1,2,3, I'm pretty sure they share some amount of identical code. But except the identical code, there is some unique code that each program has that sets it apart from the rest.
So the fact that we share 98-99 percent of identical DNA with apes doesn't necessarily prove that we evolved, but maybe we were designed by same designer just like COD 1, 2 and 3.
The key is inside that 1-2% unique DNA that each species has, and for some reason the evolutionists are quiet about it.
A couple of thoughts. You don't actually explain anything here. Your "argument" actually looks like something out of the Holocaust deniers handbook. As Michael Shermer has written, history relies on the same kinds of scientific methods as paleontology and archaeology. Some people deny that the Holocaust really happened, but there’s far too much converging and corroborating evidence that it did. Deniers will focus on trivial inconsistencies, and use those to deny the Holocaust, but they are missing the big picture on purpose, denying the overwhelming preponderance of evidence that does support the Holocaust.

Bottom line: the fact that evolution doesn't make sense to you is because you are motivated to not believe it. And so you focus on a few trivial details—your personal bugaboos—which are based on misconceptions and sheer obstinateness. It's true that we don’t fully understand what makes humans so different from bonobos, based on this tiny difference in our DNA, but this doesn’t work against evolutionary theory at all. Neither are gaps in our knowledge evidence for God or your pseudo-Creator (or the alternate theory you have not formulated).

It's interesting, this is the second time I have seen the software metaphor as an argument against evolution. But Dawkins and Dennett and others have explained in great detail how natural selection, as a mindless, mechanical and algorithmic process, is restricted to the resources available to it. There’s no going back to the drawing board, so to speak, to improve upon the design. Look at the blind cave fish as an example. As underground caves are often poor in food and oxygen, natural selection would favor individuals with reduced visual capacity. There’s a very obvious cost-benefit tradeoff.

Likewise, the flounder spent so much time on its side that it evolved to have asymmetrical skulls, with both eyes located on one side of the head. Flatfish fossils show us the transition. The flounder’s basic body structure reveals its evolutionary heritage as prominently as a peacock's tail. The designer, so to speak, had to modify the existing architecture. This is perfectly consistent with evolutionary theory.

The idea that Call of Duty games rely on the same Unreal engine is not a very apt point. You would know this if you explored the subject of evolution with an open mind and with some semblance of intellectual humility.
-Geo
Question everything
person123
The Great Gabsby
Posts: 61
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 9:54 pm
4
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: promoting my ebook: Logic against Evolution

Unread post

1. "The other 98% is also what makes us human; all of it constitutes our evolution. What accounts for our genome as well as that of a goldfish? Time and natural selection. "
Look at my Harry Potter books example. Just because two Harry Potter books are 99% identical, doesn't explain how a spaceship blueprint got there. So the fact that humans and apes share 98-99% of identical DNA, doesn't explain how we got that 1-2% unique DNA. You claim that time and natural selection did it, then you have to prove it. If you can't prove it, then it's the same as saying "god did it". You have to present that 1-2% unique DNA, and show that it is mathematically possible to produce it by random mutations and natural selection.
2. "I don't want to offend you, but I don't plan to buy your book"
it's ok, you don't have to. it's a free country.
3."that anyone denying it needs to have an alternative theory"
No I don't. This is not how it works. Read in my first post about George and Ross trial example.
Last edited by person123 on Mon Nov 18, 2019 4:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
person123
The Great Gabsby
Posts: 61
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 9:54 pm
4
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: promoting my ebook: Logic against Evolution

Unread post

1. "A couple of thoughts. You don't actually explain anything here. Your "argument" actually looks like something out of the Holocaust deniers handbook. As Michael Shermer has written, history relies on the same kinds of scientific methods as paleontology and archaeology. Some people deny that the Holocaust really happened, but there’s far too much converging and corroborating evidence that it did. Deniers will focus on trivial inconsistencies, and use those to deny the Holocaust, but they are missing the big picture on purpose, denying the overwhelming preponderance of evidence that does support the Holocaust."

During WW2 Germans demonstrated a motive and capability to kill jews. In Kiev for example they took the whole Jewish community to the forest, and killed all the people. Thousands of people excecuted in mass shooting in few days, only for being jews. Also we know that all over occupied europe, germans were seperating jews from the rest of population, and moving them into camps. So after the war they counted how many jews left, and discovered that 6 million people were missing. So it is reasonable to assume that they were murdered by germans in those camps.

On the other hand we have never witnessed random mutation and natural selection producing new complexity or new information... so why would we expect that it is the creative force behind all the living organisms?

2. "Bottom line: the fact that evolution doesn't make sense to you is because you are motivated to not believe it. And so you focus on a few trivial details—your personal bugaboos—which are based on misconceptions and sheer obstinateness."

This is not trivial details. You have to have 14 megabytes of unique DNA in order to go from ape to human. If you can't explaine how these 14 megabytes came to be, and you just say "evolution did it", how is it different from saying "god did it?". 14 megabytes is not much data, why the evolutionists can't show how this data can be produced by natural processes?

3. "Look at the blind cave fish as an example. As underground caves are often poor in food and oxygen, natural selection would favor individuals with reduced visual capacity. There’s a very obvious cost-benefit tradeoff."

This is an example of an organism losing information due to random mutations and natural selection, instead of producing new information. This is the opposite from what you claim your evolution can do. This is devolving instead of evolving.

4. "Likewise, the flounder spent so much time on its side that it evolved to have asymmetrical skulls, with both eyes located on one side of the head. Flatfish fossils show us the transition. The flounder’s basic body structure reveals its evolutionary heritage as prominently as a peacock's tail. The designer, so to speak, had to modify the existing architecture. This is perfectly consistent with evolutionary theory."

Why is it perfectly consistent with evolutionary theory? Why can't the designer modify the existing architecture? Don't we humans modify our existing products all the time?
Last edited by person123 on Mon Nov 18, 2019 4:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
DWill

1H - GOLD CONTRIBUTOR
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame
Posts: 6966
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 8:05 am
16
Location: Luray, Virginia
Has thanked: 2262 times
Been thanked: 2470 times

Re: promoting my ebook: Logic against Evolution

Unread post

Are you someone, then, who believes in microevolution but not macroevolution: that organisms do change through variation over time (and can be bred to guide this variation, e.g., dogs), but never have departed from their type to form new types (separate breeding populations)?

There are thousands and thousands of organisms in the fossil record that no longer exist in the forms that are fossilized. How do you account for the fact that extinction attrition hasn't led to a great poverty of species? Hasn't there instead been a burgeoning of diversity of organisms (though we humans are doing our best to reduce them!)? How did that progression of diversity happen?

You say your approach uses logic to disprove evolution. Reasoned, logical objections have been raised to your claims but not answered. You also say that a conspiracy of scientists over a century and a half has produced evolution theory. That is a position that itself is lacking in logic. Also, the analogy between priests enforcing supernatural beliefs and scientists enforcing evolution orthodoxy is flawed. Priests were never working with evidence.
person123
The Great Gabsby
Posts: 61
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 9:54 pm
4
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: promoting my ebook: Logic against Evolution

Unread post

I don't like the term "microevolution" because it leaves the door open for "macroevolution".
It's a fact that we can breed different types of dogs, so it will be very stupid on my part not to believe in that.

My point is that there is no reason to think that the evolution mechanisms were behind the emergence of new speacies. Every year humans develope new products, new electronics, news machines etc. But that doesn't mean that darwinian evolution was behind it.
Same with living organisms. The emergence of new speacies and increase in diversity may be the result of intelligent creation. Meaning that the intelligent designer occasionally modified existing organisms, and introduced new genetic code.

"Reasoned, logical objections have been raised to your claims but not answered"

What exactly I haven't answer?

"You also say that a conspiracy of scientists over a century and a half has produced evolution theory."

Not a conspiracy, but a human stupidity and the will to believe in myths. The scientific establishment is no different than the church establishment. The scientists are the same priests, only in new dressing.

"Also, the analogy between priests enforcing supernatural beliefs and scientists enforcing evolution orthodoxy is flawed. Priests were never working with evidence."

Yes they did. The priests would always use real life events to reaffirm the bible. "This happened because god was angry, and that happened because god was happy."
User avatar
Dexter

1F - BRONZE CONTRIBUTOR
I dumpster dive for books!
Posts: 1787
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2010 3:14 pm
13
Has thanked: 144 times
Been thanked: 712 times
United States of America

Re: promoting my ebook: Logic against Evolution

Unread post

person123 wrote: Not a conspiracy, but a human stupidity and the will to believe in myths. The scientific establishment is no different than the church establishment. The scientists are the same priests, only in new dressing.
Honest question, what books, if any, have you read on the subject? Since you bothered to write something about it, presumably you have done some research?
person123
The Great Gabsby
Posts: 61
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 9:54 pm
4
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: promoting my ebook: Logic against Evolution

Unread post

Dexter wrote:
person123 wrote: Not a conspiracy, but a human stupidity and the will to believe in myths. The scientific establishment is no different than the church establishment. The scientists are the same priests, only in new dressing.
Honest question, what books, if any, have you read on the subject? Since you bothered to write something about it, presumably you have done some research?
Why do I need to read any book? What book am I expected to read? All the evolution information is a common knowledge and is presented to the public by mass media.
Last edited by person123 on Tue Nov 19, 2019 11:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Dexter

1F - BRONZE CONTRIBUTOR
I dumpster dive for books!
Posts: 1787
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2010 3:14 pm
13
Has thanked: 144 times
Been thanked: 712 times
United States of America

Re: promoting my ebook: Logic against Evolution

Unread post

person123 wrote: Why do I need to read any book? What book am I expected to read? All the evolution information is a common knowledge and is presented to the public by mass media.
Well, that's embarrassing. Good luck with your book.
Post Reply

Return to “Authors: Tell us about your NON-FICTION book!”