Prayer Warrior
Well-Known Member
LOL!!!!! Explain to us what "gemmules" are. Please do!
And then there's the whole idea of spontaneous generation that scientists of his day bought into. Hmm
Does Charles Darwin approve of “Answers in Genesis”?
- Thread starter theophilus
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
LOL!!!!! Explain to us what "gemmules" are. Please do!
And then there's the whole idea of spontaneous generation that scientists of his day bought into. Hmm
Actually, modern texts use photographs,showing the same things. Infuriates creationists no end.
The drawings are sometimes presented as cautionary tales about drawings and Haeckel's odd misunderstanding of recapitulation.
They look alike (except that the pre-amniotes have a yolk sac attached) because the tissues in all of them come from the same cells in the early embyryo. So the stuctures that form feeding filters in primitive chordates, the gills in fish, the jaws in amniotes and the middle ear in mammals all come from the same cells in the early embryo. We don't become in sequence fish,amphibians, reptiles and mammals,but the same tissues are converted to different things in different classes of chordates.
We can see this quite clearly in the opossum embryo, for example:
To get a better idea of how the mammalian ear might have evolved, Sears, Urban and their colleagues chose to study the gray short-tailed opossum, a small and charismatic South American marsupial whose key stages of jaw and ear development take place gradually and after birth.
The group first detailed the anatomical progression of middle ear development in their opossums, capturing images that revealed the changing architecture of cartilage and bone. They observed that the progression of structures in the developing opossum jaw and ear appeared to re-enact the evolutionary progression of these structures in the mammalian fossil record.
"It was truly remarkable how well the developmental stages of our extant opossum model organism matched up with the transitional fossils . . . this makes our study organism, the gray short-tailed opossum, a fantastic living model to aid in the understanding of development of long extinct taxa," Urban said. "By using this modern analogue, we can learn so much more about these earlier species and the origins of mammals."
The team also explored changes in gene activity and individual cells that occurred during the breakdown of Meckel's cartilage. They identified a set of genes whose increased activity was correlated with the self-destruction of the cells that connect the future jaw to the future ear.
Among these genes, the researchers focused on a gene called TGF-β for further investigation. When they treated developing opossums with a drug that blocks the signaling of the TGF-β protein, the death of cells within Meckel's cartilage was prevented, and the malleus and incus remained a part of the jaw. With one tweak of gene activity, this one detail of anatomy appeared to have slid backward through evolutionary time.
https://phys.org/news/2017-02-ears-opossums-echoes-evolutionary-history.html
I can only suppose creationists think it's O.K. if they do it for a good cause.
The world, the pagans, the scientists, the financiers, the religious and politic leaders are human, and they lie.
Evolutionists are people , mostly..... (does the devil count, since it is his idea first ? !)
Prayer Warrior
Well-Known Member
At least if a creationist lies, he KNOWS that he will stand before God and give an account of his evil deeds. Unfortunately, atheists like Darwin (what he became after rejecting God) don't believe the truth. BUT they will bow before Almighty God, and they will know the truth.
2 Chr. 34:19
Well-Known Member
telomeres and centromeres
Humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes
Chimps have 24 pairs.
(just how The Lord created-good)
So, scientists have invented a fusion theory. Fusion theory is an agenda
Scientists say they have definitive proof of fusion theory - they’re lying.
The missing chromosome between humans and chimps-Chromosome no.2 developed fusion.
Telomeres and centromeres cannot fuse together! Telomeres actually prevent chromosomes from sticking together (or fusing) That’s their job!
Genes are never located in the telomeres or centromeres.
There’s a similarity in genomes in all species of mammals because they are the ones that work in certain organs eg. brain, heart etc. (Which both humans and chimps and all mammals have).
There is absolutely no evidence for any common ancestry between primates and humans.
It is all taught as fact and it is a lie. Mutations cannot change, they degrade.
Genesis 1:27 so God created man (A)in His own image; in the image of God He created him; (B)male and female He created them.
(Dr. Georgia Purdom paraphrased)
Pangenesis was Charles Darwin's hypothetical mechanism for heredity, in which he proposed that each part of the body continually emitted its own type of small organic particles called gemmules that aggregated in the gonads, contributing heritable information to the gametes.[1] He presented this 'provisional hypothesis' in his 1868 work The Variation of Animals and Plants under Domestication, intending it to fill what he perceived as a major gap in evolutionary theory at the time.
Pangenesis - Wikipedia
About Darwin's time, Mendel figured it out, and in doing so, solved a major problem for Darwin's theory. You see, if inheritance is in the blood, as most scientists assumed at the time, it would be difficult to see how a new trait would not be blended out of existence like a drop of red paint in a barrel of white paint. But Mendel showed that heredity was more like sorting beads than like blending paint. When Mendels work was rediscovered in the early 1900s, most scientists then became Darwinists.
Which had nothing to do with Darwin's theory. Darwin was skeptical of that idea precisely because he realized that some kind of particulate heredity was necessary to explain the evidence at hand. "Gemmules" was his admittedly "provisional hypothesis." Turns out, heredity is indeed particulate as he predicted,but in the form of genes, not somatic gemmules.
2 Chr. 34:19
Well-Known Member
I don't believe anyone would willing accept or learn or teach or believe evolution nor any such thing if they knew the source of it < play-do, goo > , and the end of it .... 'evolving' into hot lava , so to speak .....
There's no possible gain of any true value nor worth in believing in evolution.....
There's no possible gain of any true value nor worth in believing in evolution.....
Perhaps creationists agree with Martin Luther that God would not mind a "good strong lie" for a good cause. Not all of them, of course. Some like Kurt Wise, Harold Coffin, and Todd Wood, admit the evidence supports evolution and an ancient Earth.
Darwin was an Anglican Christian when he wrote his book, but late in life,said he was "leaning toward agnosticism."
2 Chr. 34:19
Well-Known Member
HANG ON!
Someone might find them - in the file with the photos of bigfoot.... and elvis.... doing a duet .....
2 Chr. 34:19
Well-Known Member
If they’re brainwashed as children, only The Lord can deliver them. Let’s pray for yehran’s deliverance
2 Chr. 34:19
Well-Known Member
2 Chr. 34:19
Well-Known Member
2 Chr. 34:19
Well-Known Member
You've been lied to about that. Scientists hypothesized that if a certain human chromosome (which is precisely like two ape chromosomes joined together) was the result of a fusion, they should find remains of telomers at the site where the would have joined. And when they looked the remains of the stop codes were there.
Actually, it's observed in labs to happen:
Karyotype engineering by chromosome fusion leads to reproductive isolation in yeast | Nature
Happens in nature, too...
Chromosome fusion polymorphisms in the grasshopper, Dichroplus fuscus (Orthoptera: Acrididae: Melanoplinae): Insights on meiotic effects
You were lied to, again.
Ya think? Do you understand what these things are?
By definition, they are changes.
The vast majority do pretty much nothing. A few are harmful. A very few are useful. Natural selection sorts them out. There's quite a list of favorable mutations. Would you like to learn about some of them?
Perhaps creationists agree with Martin Luther that God would not mind a "good strong lie" for a good cause. Not all of them, of course. Some like Kurt Wise, Harold Coffin, and Todd Wood, admit the evidence supports evolution and an ancient Earth.
Luther might have been an occasional liar and an anti-Semite, but you'll never convince me that he was an atheist. Sorry.
Luther might have been an occasional liar and an anti-Semite, but you'll never convince me that he was an atheist. Sorry.
Similar threads
