Evolution?
Time
God of evolution
Time has long been an important subject of study in religion, philosophy, and science, but defining it in a manner applicable to all fields without
circularity has consistently eluded scholars. ...
One view is that time is part of the fundamental structure of the universe—a dimension independent of events, in which events occur in sequence. ...
The opposing view is ... that time is neither an event nor a thing, and thus is not itself measurable nor can it be travelled.
Time itself is not a creative or powerful entity. This is evidenced by the hardcore universal law of entropy.
Things deteriorate and decay with time when left untouched by intelligent human beings. For example
dead matter doesn't become living matter naturally as evolutionists would like to make the world and themselves believe.
Evolution delusion
Dr Cherry Lewis, University of Bristol, UK, said: "The age of the Earth was hugely important for people like Darwin
who needed enormous amounts of time in which evolution could occur. As
Thomas Huxley, Darwin's chief advocate said:
'Biology takes its time from Geology'."
Time is the inherent evolutionary variable. Nothing evolves without its passage. From seconds to millions of years, evolution requires time.
Darwin's slow and gradual macroevolution supposedly required incredible amounts of time.
Since Darwin and his fellow naturalists popularized evolution theory in an attempt to undermine supernaturalism they invented all kinds of additional theories. Unprovable
uniformitarianism stood at the base of the current
belief in for example an old
age of the earth.
Evolution theory depends on geology and geology depends on evolution theory. A
circular theory. Ultimately all of it is based on the unprovable philosophy
naturalism.
In the 19th century naturalists gained in popularity and power and eventually overtook the world of
mainstream science.
Since that time evolutionists have continued on this footing and molded ever more self-invented and biased theories into their huge circular theory.
The geologic column and
radiometric dating are examples of it.
Today many schools and universities present it as a fact to the world.
Of course all this indoctrination had and still has its result on the minds of many fanatic believers...
Evolutionitwit Carl is in the delusion that time can make
miracles happen. He forgets that what is unthinkable in a hundred years is most likely also unthinkable in
a hundred million years. Time is not a living entity and does not perform miracles. Miracles do not happen
naturally. If at all they happen, they happen supernaturally.
The only thing that's certain with time in a natural world is
entropy, the opposite of evolution. Ironically it was also Carl Sagan who said
"For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring."
Now that's one hell of a delusion.
Of course Carl is not the only evolutionitwit who has a hard time accepting reality as it really is...
The important point is that since the origin of life belongs in the category of
at least once phenomena, time is on its side. However improbable we regard this event, or any of the steps which it involves,
given enough time it will almost certainly happen at-least-once. And for life as we know it, with its capacity for growth and reproduction, once may be enough. ...
Time is in fact the hero of the plot. The time with which we have to deal is of the order of two billion years.
What we regard as impossible on the basis of human experience is meaningless here. Given so much time, the "impossible" becomes possible,
the possible probable, and the probable virtually certain. One has only to wait; time itself performs the miracles.
Evolutionist George Wald presents us with a perfect example of
wishful thinking of the worst kind.
The origin of first life is a complete mystery to
science. Thus evolutionists are forced to believe that time can perform
miracles like that despite the fact that everything in this world contradicts that
belief and science has proven that
life only comes from life.
This man believes that time can make the impossible possible. How typical...
To change something like a cat into something like a dog through artificial selection involves modifying not just its morphology, but its physiology, its
brain, its neurology, and its (hard-wired) behavior.
That would take a gazillion generations of artificial selection.
I have no doubt we could do this had we thousands or tens of thousands of years to do that kind of breeding,
but a) we haven't because b) nobody's interested in doing that.
It is not so much that the process of natural selection
is hard to understand, or that it could be responsible for "simple" adaptations like
antibiotic resistance in bacteria. Rather, it is whether there has been enough time for such a process to create all the complex adaptations we see around us.
Evolutionist Jerry Coyne admits that
macroevolution would require the creation and addition of incredible amounts of
specified complexity. No
naturalistic processes are known that could do that. All we know is that only
intelligent agents are able to do that.
Whether he wants it or not, Jerry Coyne admits this by saying that artificial selection is required.
Artificial selection is
intelligent intervention. Antibiotic resistance in bacteria is part of
microevolution. These bacteria remained the kind of bacteria they always were.
Because fanatic evolutionists obviously don't want anything to do with
intelligence or true science they resort to the silly and unscientific time argument, time and again.
On the other hand, it is manifestly impossible to reproduce in the laboratory the
evolution of man from the australopithecine, or of the modern horse from an Eohippus, or of a
land vertebrate from a fish-like ancestor.
These evolutionary happenings are unique, unrepeatable, and irreversible. ... the applicability of the experimental method to the
study of such unique historical processes is severely restricted before all else by the time intervals involved, which far exceed the lifetime of any human experimenter.
Whether he wanted it or not, Theodosius Dobzhansky said that
macroevolution is unscientific because it
supposedly requires so much time that nobody could ever possibly use experiments to verify it.
So at least this evolutionist is fair enough to admit that the time argument just makes evolution theory more
unscientific than it already is.
Practically all evolutionists resort to the time argument in order to seemingly justify their unscientific belief.
So if we read between the lines, time is one of the gods of evolution that supposedly makes the impossible possible.
So, according to evolutionists...
...our conclusion is that when one takes account of the role of
natural selection in a reasonable way, there has been ample time for the
evolution that we observe to have taken place.
Because there is no evidence for macroevolution evolutionists resort to
mathematical or theoretical theories which they invent themselves. See also
neo-Darwinism.
In this article they boast that there supposedly is enough time for
evolution. However...
Wilf and Ewens also make unrealistic biological assumptions that, in effect, simplify the search.
They assume no epistasis between beneficial
mutations,
no linkage between loci, and an unrealistic population size and base mutation rate,
thus increasing the pool of beneficial mutations to be searched.
...they assume that each evolutionary "advance" requires a change to just one locus, despite the clear evidence that most
biological functions are the product of multiple gene products working together.
Ignoring these biological realities infuses considerable active information into their model and eases the model's evolutionary process. ...
Thus, just as Wilf and Ewens are wrong to assume that every intermediate phrase has meaning, so they are wrong to assume that every
intermediate biological stage along some evolutionary pathway will be functional.
This example shows how evolutionists invent a theoretical model and then tweak the assumptions in such a way that they work out in favor of their
belief. They simply work toward a desired outcome.
Their biased conclusions are based on a
preconceived worldview and
wishful thinking.
But natural selection is a preventive or conservative mechanism, not a creative force.
Father Time
Time has always played an important role in mythology.
Father Time is the
anthropomorphized depiction of time.
Anthropomorphism is the attribution of human traits, emotions, or intentions to non-human entities.
Evolutionists do the same with natural selection which they give creative powers.
So they exalt a mindless natural phenomenon, with preventive qualities at best, to become a powerful creative force.
Hence the likeness to Mother Nature, another mythical figure evoked by evolutionists. So can
Father Time conquer the universal law of
entropy and make the impossible possible somehow?
Evolutionists would like to believe so by using time as an argument for the scientifically impossible. It is an essential part of their
religion. But the reality is that time is not a creative force, Father Time is a myth,
macroevolution is a myth, and
entropy is a reality.