Total Posts:6|Showing Posts:1-6
Jump to topic:

Disevolution.

GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/10/2010 9:16:44 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I hate to do this again, but my spelling have to be perfect. Its annoying now there are three of these. (This one if the official one)
'Disevolutionism'

Also known as 'disevolution', it is a philosophical concept that makes a distinction between limb and feature. A limb being percise in relation to a particular animal/creature, and feature being renown for a general ability which a species possess. An example of a limb would be an arm. An example of a feature would be the ability to lift.

Because the limb is percise and not general (as a species does not have limbs, rather features) this has become problematic for evolutionists. The evolutionary theory states that all biological life gradually evolves due to the environment over millions of years. However for life to consist of macroevolution, new limbs must evolve to produce new features, rather than just improving on the species current and already exiting ones. For that matter, as a species as a whole does not have limbs but instead features, it is philosophically difficult to conceive how one species would evolve into another species.

Limbs are not visible since there is a consistent movement of a feature(s), the feature is always in use even when the limb is still. But when the limb is moving, the feature(s) are being used so you cannot see the limb moving rather the features. The feature(s) act like a skin covering the limb. For evolution to proceed, new features must be applied to species current limbs which already consist of features. But when a feature adapts it merely improves, and therefore new limbs must evolve to feature new feature. However limbs are subjective and percise, they are not consistent with a species as a whole, due to that a whole species cannot grow new limbs but only new features, which are formed by individual animals/creatures. And in which cannot grow new feature, because they cannot grow new limbs.
PoeJoe
Posts: 3,822
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/10/2010 9:18:21 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/10/2010 9:16:44 PM, GodSands wrote:
I hate to do this again, but my spelling have to be perfect.

You spelled "precise" wrong three times in your rant. :P
Television Rot: http://tvrot.com...
studentathletechristian8
Posts: 5,810
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/10/2010 9:18:44 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/10/2010 9:18:21 PM, PoeJoe wrote:
At 6/10/2010 9:16:44 PM, GodSands wrote:
I hate to do this again, but my spelling have to be perfect.

You spelled "precise" wrong three times in your rant. :P

*Incorrectly, not wrong.
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/10/2010 9:23:08 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
: At 6/10/2010 9:18:44 PM, studentathletechristian8 wrote:
At 6/10/2010 9:18:21 PM, PoeJoe wrote:
At 6/10/2010 9:16:44 PM, GodSands wrote:
I hate to do this again, but my spelling have to be perfect.

You spelled "precise" wrong three times in your rant. :P

*Incorrectly, not wrong.


Yeah I know, but do I want to make a forth? Shall I just call it something esle?
Valtarov
Posts: 136
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/18/2010 6:11:10 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 6/10/2010 9:16:44 PM, GodSands wrote:
I hate to do this again, but my spelling have to be perfect. Its annoying now there are three of these. (This one if the official one)
'Disevolutionism'

Also known as 'disevolution', it is a philosophical concept that makes a distinction between limb and feature. A limb being percise in relation to a particular animal/creature, and feature being renown for a general ability which a species possess. An example of a limb would be an arm. An example of a feature would be the ability to lift.

Because the limb is percise and not general (as a species does not have limbs, rather features) this has become problematic for evolutionists. The evolutionary theory states that all biological life gradually evolves due to the environment over millions of years. However for life to consist of macroevolution, new limbs must evolve to produce new features, rather than just improving on the species current and already exiting ones. For that matter, as a species as a whole does not have limbs but instead features, it is philosophically difficult to conceive how one species would evolve into another species.

Limbs are not visible since there is a consistent movement of a feature(s), the feature is always in use even when the limb is still. But when the limb is moving, the feature(s) are being used so you cannot see the limb moving rather the features. The feature(s) act like a skin covering the limb. For evolution to proceed, new features must be applied to species current limbs which already consist of features. But when a feature adapts it merely improves, and therefore new limbs must evolve to feature new feature. However limbs are subjective and percise, they are not consistent with a species as a whole, due to that a whole species cannot grow new limbs but only new features, which are formed by individual animals/creatures. And in which cannot grow new feature, because they cannot grow new limbs.

Could you provide definitions of "limb" and "feature", and possibly some synonyms to each? I'm thinking that the definitions I normally think of with these are not the ones you are using, and defining said terms might make it a lot easier to understand what you are trying to say.
"We are half-hearted creatures,
fooling about with drink and sex and
ambition when infinite joy is offered us,
like an ignorant child who wants to go on
making mud pies in a slum because he
cannot imagine what is meant by the offer
of a holiday at the sea. We are far too easily
pleased."—C.S. Lewis, "The Weight of Glory"