Post by Pincho Paxton on Mar 24, 2017 19:23:06 GMT
Not everyone believes in evolution, and those that do may not really realise why it is necessary. Evolution does away with a creator, and a creator is a paradox. The paradox of the creator is "Who created the creator?" If the creator was not created then where did the creator come from?
1/ You are wondering where humans came from.
2/ The Creator created the humans.
3/ You are wondering where the creator came from.
That is a catch 22 paradox. You have not solved anything, you have gone in a circle.
There are other questions to ask... Why do we have hands for holding tools?
1/ Why do we have hands to hold tools?
2/ How did life know that we needed tools?
3/ Snakes eat OK without hands.
Why do we have eyes to see? Bats are fine without much sight, and so are moles.
Why are we on a planet so perfect for life?
To eliminate a creator you can work upwards, and you can work backwards. If you start with the Earth... why was it perfect for life?
Life does not grow on a planet that isn't perfect for life, so nobody on a planet that isn't perfect for life can ask "Why is my planet perfect for life?"
So that is easy to answer.
Why do we have hands?
In evolution we probably started off as a simple creature like a worm, with no hands, and no legs. But the creature's skin was probably not properly formed. The skin may have been irritated by sand, and dirt. If you look at the way that a worm has to move, it wiggles against a surface. With life just starting, having to compete against other forces it was probably prone to blistering, and mutation. This wiggling action against sand, and stone would effect the parts of the body pressing against land the hardest. You see sea worms with all sorts of shapes, frills, tails, and all sorts of heads. The frills remind me of putty moving through sand. If you think of a soft structure like putty then you are also thinking of skin that is slowly altered by friction. The speed of the change in putty is fast, but the speed in the change in skin is slow. So we give the worm frills from friction, and you get closer to an eel shape. These worms are still in the sea, and the sand is loose. We move the frilled worms to land, and now the frills are helping to push across the sand. You get these points that are pressed against the sand due to wiggling, and now those points become irritated by the sand. Those points have to strengthen to hold up against the sand. In a snake all of those points become scales, but when you have a worm with frills you can imagine that the frills strengthen at certain points along the worm body... where the worm pushes against the sand. Those points would become lumps, and then legs. The wiggle is not symmetrical so the legs might end up out of alignment, but with the legs out of alignment the forces move towards symmetry like the eyes on a flat fish move towards symmetry eventually.
So without a creator the physics can create legs due to irritation, and friction. the fingers grow from the legs due to later irritation. The fingers would be like hitting a piece of wood with a hammer, you get splitting through the wood. the fingers grow from splitting of hardened skin pressing against a surface, and then further hardening of the skin, and rotation of the ankle point.
So the split, and rotation will take you all the way from bird feet, to elephant feet...upright, or pointy.
We therefore have hands from walking on four limbs, with limbs pressing against a hard surface.
So is there any evidence of this?
There is a perfect evidence of this in the mole...
The creature with its nose pressed against the ground has a hand where its nose is. What more evidence do you need?
Then if you look at a deep ocean worm, and compare it to the mole nose...
It is pressure, hardening, cracking that created hands not a creator, and if you walked on four limbs then you were not created in God's image, or God walked on four limbs.
But if God walked on four limbs you are back to evolution again.. so God is always a paradox.
Evolution without a creator works really well, and you can see it in other species. But scientists have made mistakes. We did not evolve from fish, because fish have the fins in the place where legs would be from the irritation of the worms walking on sand. So worms left the sea first, and fins are a bi-product of worm physics, and we evolved from worms, and skipped out the fish.
Evolution Does The Hokey Cokey
Worms with their irritations became lizards, and salamander, and Bichir with the skin mutating, and doing the Hokey Cokey.
Nowadays we think of life as stable, and we don't account for the struggle that early life had in adapting to difficult physical problems. But those struggles changed us so that we could survive on this planet.
Why was the Earth perfect for life?
Life does not grow on a planet that isn't perfect for life, so nobody on a planet that isn't perfect for life can ask "Why is my planet perfect for life?"
But also the planet was not immediately perfect for life, we had to adapt to its imperfections, and those adaptations included hands, feet, legs, arms, from irritating surfaces, and difficulties in moving across the terrain.
Pincho Paxton
1/ You are wondering where humans came from.
2/ The Creator created the humans.
3/ You are wondering where the creator came from.
That is a catch 22 paradox. You have not solved anything, you have gone in a circle.
There are other questions to ask... Why do we have hands for holding tools?
1/ Why do we have hands to hold tools?
2/ How did life know that we needed tools?
3/ Snakes eat OK without hands.
Why do we have eyes to see? Bats are fine without much sight, and so are moles.
Why are we on a planet so perfect for life?
To eliminate a creator you can work upwards, and you can work backwards. If you start with the Earth... why was it perfect for life?
Life does not grow on a planet that isn't perfect for life, so nobody on a planet that isn't perfect for life can ask "Why is my planet perfect for life?"
So that is easy to answer.
Why do we have hands?
In evolution we probably started off as a simple creature like a worm, with no hands, and no legs. But the creature's skin was probably not properly formed. The skin may have been irritated by sand, and dirt. If you look at the way that a worm has to move, it wiggles against a surface. With life just starting, having to compete against other forces it was probably prone to blistering, and mutation. This wiggling action against sand, and stone would effect the parts of the body pressing against land the hardest. You see sea worms with all sorts of shapes, frills, tails, and all sorts of heads. The frills remind me of putty moving through sand. If you think of a soft structure like putty then you are also thinking of skin that is slowly altered by friction. The speed of the change in putty is fast, but the speed in the change in skin is slow. So we give the worm frills from friction, and you get closer to an eel shape. These worms are still in the sea, and the sand is loose. We move the frilled worms to land, and now the frills are helping to push across the sand. You get these points that are pressed against the sand due to wiggling, and now those points become irritated by the sand. Those points have to strengthen to hold up against the sand. In a snake all of those points become scales, but when you have a worm with frills you can imagine that the frills strengthen at certain points along the worm body... where the worm pushes against the sand. Those points would become lumps, and then legs. The wiggle is not symmetrical so the legs might end up out of alignment, but with the legs out of alignment the forces move towards symmetry like the eyes on a flat fish move towards symmetry eventually.
So without a creator the physics can create legs due to irritation, and friction. the fingers grow from the legs due to later irritation. The fingers would be like hitting a piece of wood with a hammer, you get splitting through the wood. the fingers grow from splitting of hardened skin pressing against a surface, and then further hardening of the skin, and rotation of the ankle point.
So the split, and rotation will take you all the way from bird feet, to elephant feet...upright, or pointy.
We therefore have hands from walking on four limbs, with limbs pressing against a hard surface.
So is there any evidence of this?
There is a perfect evidence of this in the mole...
The creature with its nose pressed against the ground has a hand where its nose is. What more evidence do you need?
Then if you look at a deep ocean worm, and compare it to the mole nose...
It is pressure, hardening, cracking that created hands not a creator, and if you walked on four limbs then you were not created in God's image, or God walked on four limbs.
But if God walked on four limbs you are back to evolution again.. so God is always a paradox.
Evolution without a creator works really well, and you can see it in other species. But scientists have made mistakes. We did not evolve from fish, because fish have the fins in the place where legs would be from the irritation of the worms walking on sand. So worms left the sea first, and fins are a bi-product of worm physics, and we evolved from worms, and skipped out the fish.
Evolution Does The Hokey Cokey
Worms with their irritations became lizards, and salamander, and Bichir with the skin mutating, and doing the Hokey Cokey.
Nowadays we think of life as stable, and we don't account for the struggle that early life had in adapting to difficult physical problems. But those struggles changed us so that we could survive on this planet.
Why was the Earth perfect for life?
Life does not grow on a planet that isn't perfect for life, so nobody on a planet that isn't perfect for life can ask "Why is my planet perfect for life?"
But also the planet was not immediately perfect for life, we had to adapt to its imperfections, and those adaptations included hands, feet, legs, arms, from irritating surfaces, and difficulties in moving across the terrain.
Pincho Paxton