|
|
| Page 1 of 1 |
|
|
 Posted: Wed, 9th Jul 2008 21:46 Post subject: Platypus Genome Analysis and Evolutionists’ Distortions |
|
 |
In its 8 May, 2008, Nature magazine carried a report titled “Genome analysis of the platypus reveals unique signatures of evolution.” The report stated that scientists have deciphered the genetic code of the platypus, which has various mammal, bird and reptile characteristics. “It is hoped that genetic analysis of the platypus will help explain how mammals, including human beings, in some way evolved millions of years in the past,” it said.
However, there are no objective grounds for this claim regarding the supposed evolution of mammals on the basis of the genome of the life form in question. Scientists who accept evolution as a dogmatic truth right from the outset assume that the platypus shares an evolutionary history with mammals and interpret the structural and sequential features in their genomes accordingly. In fact, the platypus constitutes a huge dilemma for the theory of evolution and provides no evidence whatsoever for the supposed evolution of mammals.
1. Evolutionists’ dilemma regarding the platypus
The scientific name for the platypus, which lives in lakes and rivers in Australia and Tanzania is Ornithorhynchus anatinus. Males reach up to 50 cm in length, and females around 20% less. As the report says, the platypus is classified as a mammal because it has fur and suckles its young. This animal, which is able to use its tail like a rudder, also possesses a bird-like beak and reptilian venom. These animals, which generally live underwater, carry their poison in their hind legs. The platypus is also covered in fur like a mammal and suckles its young, although it reproduces by laying eggs and produces venom, both reptilian characteristics. It has a beak, just like birds, but also spends most of its time in water, as do amphibians. As all these features make clear, the platypus is a “mosaic” life form which possesses characteristics belonging to very different living groups. Although evolutionists at one time sought to portray these animals as an intermediate form, this idea has been abandoned by leading palaeontologists. Stephen Jay Gould openly states that “mosaic creatures” such as the platypus cannot be regarded as intermediate forms. (S. J. Gould & N. Eldredge, Paleobiology, Vol 3, 1977, p. 147) In any case, evolutionists have no evidence, and no fossil remains, as to how these mosaic features might have evolved from one group to another.
Darwinism maintains that all the striking and very different mosaic characteristics must have evolved at the same time and in a flawless manner from different life forms. However, they have absolutely no scientific findings or any evidence at all with which to account for this proposition. The different features of the platypus are unique to it and are incapable of explanation by Darwinism. Attempts to depict a life form that represents such an insoluble dilemma for the theory of evolution as being evidence for evolution is enormously significant in terms of revealing the dimensions that evolutionist deceptions can assume.
2. The idea of mammalian evolution is based on no evidence whatsoever
In its report, It is hoped that genetic analysis of the platypus will help explain how mammals, including human beings, in some way evolved millions of years in the past. The fact is, however, that the idea of mammalian evolution is a myth, devoid of any scientific evidence and kept alive solely for reasons of dogma.
Evolutionist reference sources are silent when it comes to the origins of mammals. That is why the evolutionist palaeontologist Roger Lewin has had to admit that “the passage to the first mammal is still a mystery.” (Roger Lewin, "Bones of Mammals, Ancestors Fleshed Out", Science, Vol. 212, 26 June 1981, p. 1492)
George Gaylord Simpson, one of the most eminent evolutionist authorities of the 20th century, refers to this state of affairs that comes as such as surprise in terms of the theory of evolution as follows:
The most puzzling event in the history of life on earth is the change from the Mesozoic, the Age of Reptiles, to the Age of Mammals. It is as if the curtain were rung down suddenly on the stage where all the leading roles were taken by reptiles, especially dinosaurs, in great numbers and bewildering variety, and rose again immediately to reveal the same setting but an entirely new cast, a cast in which the dinosaurs do not appear at all, other reptiles are supernumeraries, and all the leading parts are played by mammals of sorts barely hinted at in the preceding acts. (George Gaylord Simpson, Life Before Man, New York: Time-Life Books, 1972, p. 42.)
These statements by an evolutionist are in fact confessions. The point that evolutionists are reluctant to state openly, but which is still an absolute reality, is that there is not one example of an intermediate fossil from a period before mammals or other life forms.
Conclusion:
As we have seen, the platypus’s mosaic features represent no evidence for the theory of evolution, and there is no basis in the fossil record for the idea of mammalian evolution. Evolutionists are trying to pull the wool over the public’s eyes regarding the intermediate forms they have been unable to find by dotting the research into the platypus genome with evolutionary expectations. Our advice to the Nature magazine is that they accept the fact that such distortions can lead nowhere and that they abandon depicting the evolutionary presumptions they have adopted as a dogma as if they represented scientific evidence for Darwinism.
http://www.darwinism-watch.com/index.php?git=makale&makale_id=1535
http://www.harunyahya.com/
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nouseforaname
Über-VIP Member
Posts: 21306
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 9th Jul 2008 22:39 Post subject: |
|
|
What religious propaganda bullshit. Lets say we can't prove the evolution of this one creature at the moment. We have already proved many others to have evolved.
A recent test has also proven evolution to be a true. On a test with bacteria. So now mankind has evolution not only witnessed first hand but also is able to repeat it over and over. Theres no denying it any longer.
http://www.newscientist.com/channel/life/dn14094-bacteria-make-major-evolutionary-shift-in-the-lab.html
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
$en$i
VIP Member
Posts: 3127
|
| Posted: Wed, 9th Jul 2008 22:52 Post subject: |
|
|
Dunno what was your point in posting this sectarian crap hercules18.
I know that Adnan Oktar dude for a previous book that he tried to give to some school libraries in France = major fail.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harun_Yahya
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nouseforaname
Über-VIP Member
Posts: 21306
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Serben
Banned
Posts: 1428
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Thu, 10th Jul 2008 00:00 Post subject: |
|
|
It had already been proven and observed previously in fruit flies. And it can be tested over and over since fruit flies have a generational cycle of only a few days.
Gigabyte S-Series GA-G33-DS3R, Intel C2D Quad Q6600 OC @ 3.2Ghz, 4gb Kingston PC8500 1066Mhz DDR2, Geforce 7800GTX (will get a 9800GTX when they are released), 2 x 250Gb HD's and a case with built in paper and lotion dispenser.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 10th Jul 2008 01:04 Post subject: |
|
|
| Serben wrote: |
It had already been proven and observed previously in fruit flies. And it can be tested over and over since fruit flies have a generational cycle of only a few days. |
True I forgot about that. Well looks like there are 2 proven and repeatable samples now. I just can't understand how people can't accept evolution to this day.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
$en$i
VIP Member
Posts: 3127
|
| Posted: Thu, 10th Jul 2008 08:41 Post subject: |
|
|
| NuclearShadow wrote: | | I just can't understand how people can't accept evolution to this day. |
Because it contradicts their 'holy' book, you know Adam on Eve between others fairy tales.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 10th Jul 2008 22:47 Post subject: |
|
|
Im not trying to convert anybody, its a personal choice i think... And as pistolshrimp said if the world only took only the values of the quran and practiced them our world would be a world of peace and prosperity... Our world needs a change and it got to be soon...!
May God the almighty help us... I saw once a stupid show on islam saying that "hijab" leads to some kind of sexual thoughts and the muslim culture is obsessed with the sexual bullshit... Who is the one whos obsessed?!! A girl who shows her ass in front of every body or one who wears modestly not covering every thing but only showing the face and the hands...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 10th Jul 2008 23:08 Post subject: |
|
|
It is the values, and the IDEA behind religion that makes it good. People don't do that. They fuck everything up and the next thing you know we have people killing for their religion. When is that ever right? It is wrong. That is why I distrust religion.
There are good things can come from the values of the Quran, Bible, and other religions as well, buddism as well.
@hercules18
I am ok with you quoting me but be careful. Don't use me to make your point. I have my own ideas.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 11th Jul 2008 11:45 Post subject: |
|
|
Humans have morality, they dont need religion. Only the ones who have fucked up morality seek substitutes.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 11th Jul 2008 12:12 Post subject: |
|
|
| hercules18 wrote: | | its a personal choice i think... |
It's a shame that not everybody thinks this way.
I don't believe. Why people hate and try to push their values/way of living onto me is what really gets to me.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 11th Jul 2008 16:08 Post subject: |
|
|
| NuclearShadow wrote: | | I had the misfortune of reading some of it. Its not different from the "others" for the most part. Virgin births , talking palm trees, No thanks I'll stick to reality. |
And which "reality" is that exactly? 
http://www.nfohump.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=45481 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 1 of 1 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB 2.0.8 © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
|
 |
|
