At some point the sky seemed to say "Tapo rivet, no rain today more ". But soon it began to drizzle .
Saturday, May 7, 2011
Friday, May 6, 2011
Disney Princess Monopoly
Is it a fact demonstrated the evolution of species? and 4
Fossils of DTIS, remains practically the oldest living things found so far.
CONCLUSION:
is desirable to bring clarity to this issue and to test the paradigm, to foster research in these three fields:
· quantification metric morphological variability of the skeletons of the species of higher organisms.
· Inventory and study of sedimentary deposits of pre-Jurassic continental lake.
· Comparison of the 'species' fossil collections of living species preserved in museums.
After the above, I understand that not only the evolution of species is not the only consistent conclusion, but the only conclusion consistent with objective scientific data and especially with the data provided by paleontology, there has been no evolution of species.
Only from a prior ideological stance, or from an uncritical compliance paradigm "scientifically correct" can be interpreted scientific data in an evolutionary sense.
[i] - It was thought by what was known up to 1,990, but exceptions have been found in the mitochondria of all types of living beings, and the nuclear codes of bacteria, yeasts, ciliates and algae. About this view:
A. Sanvicens, op. cit. pg. 146. And Jukes, TH: "Genetic Code 1,990. Outlook "Experientia, 46, 1990, p.: 1149.
Knowing that there are exceptions and peculiarities, it is usually the cells of all living things use the same genetic code. For what concerns us here, we can still be considered an objective scientific observation.
Semogil May 7, 2011 
ON: "THE CONSTITUTION OF ALL BASICALLY LIKE LIVING .... SUPPORT THE IDEA OF EVOLUTION. "
is easy to find statements like this: All living things use the same system to preserve and transmit genetic information, DNA, and mRNA., And "read" by the same genetic code. This is proof that all living beings from a common trunk evolution. The first part of the text, written in plain, is an objective scientific observation. [i]
The second part of the text, written in bold, is a pseudo-scientific interpretation subjective
is an interpretation that does not follow directly from the premise (first part of the text, which itself is a conclusion drawn from the results of the experiments), and is normally deducted from the objective data, interpretation but an interpretation can not be taken not to dislodge them directly, and since no one was able to conduct any experiments to prove or even suggest that any living being comes from another by evolution, is not acceptable that interpretation. The logical thing would be to extract an interpretation consistent with the results of the experiments, for example, living beings to perform their vital functions require an organization based biomolecular DNA.
is pseudo-scientific, since it rules out the experiments that can predict the outcome, as befits any scientific question. See if someone dares to propose an experiment to show what being alive is to evolve a palm tree, for example, and design the protocol to check.
is subjective, as other scientists, can and do draw from the first part of the text, another interpretation entirely. For example, American creationist scientists are in the universality of the genetic code, the unit of creation by God. While scientists Supporters of the theory called "intelligent design" seen in this universality, a powerful test of intelligence that has designed an excellent biological mechanism. Other scientists on the other hand, do not feel the need to remove any "conclusion" of that evidence.
other hand the fact that life in all its variants use the same key biomolecular or physiological, it says nothing about the evolution of species in order to draw any such conclusion, it must be demonstrated before it is possible life with other nuclear molecules with other different genetic code, etc.
is easy to find statements like this: All living things use the same system to preserve and transmit genetic information, DNA, and mRNA., And "read" by the same genetic code. This is proof that all living beings from a common trunk evolution. The first part of the text, written in plain, is an objective scientific observation. [i]
The second part of the text, written in bold, is a pseudo-scientific interpretation subjective
is an interpretation that does not follow directly from the premise (first part of the text, which itself is a conclusion drawn from the results of the experiments), and is normally deducted from the objective data, interpretation but an interpretation can not be taken not to dislodge them directly, and since no one was able to conduct any experiments to prove or even suggest that any living being comes from another by evolution, is not acceptable that interpretation. The logical thing would be to extract an interpretation consistent with the results of the experiments, for example, living beings to perform their vital functions require an organization based biomolecular DNA.
is pseudo-scientific, since it rules out the experiments that can predict the outcome, as befits any scientific question. See if someone dares to propose an experiment to show what being alive is to evolve a palm tree, for example, and design the protocol to check.
is subjective, as other scientists, can and do draw from the first part of the text, another interpretation entirely. For example, American creationist scientists are in the universality of the genetic code, the unit of creation by God. While scientists Supporters of the theory called "intelligent design" seen in this universality, a powerful test of intelligence that has designed an excellent biological mechanism. Other scientists on the other hand, do not feel the need to remove any "conclusion" of that evidence.
other hand the fact that life in all its variants use the same key biomolecular or physiological, it says nothing about the evolution of species in order to draw any such conclusion, it must be demonstrated before it is possible life with other nuclear molecules with other different genetic code, etc.
Fossils of DTIS, remains practically the oldest living things found so far.
CONCLUSION:
is desirable to bring clarity to this issue and to test the paradigm, to foster research in these three fields:
· quantification metric morphological variability of the skeletons of the species of higher organisms.
· Inventory and study of sedimentary deposits of pre-Jurassic continental lake.
· Comparison of the 'species' fossil collections of living species preserved in museums.
After the above, I understand that not only the evolution of species is not the only consistent conclusion, but the only conclusion consistent with objective scientific data and especially with the data provided by paleontology, there has been no evolution of species.
Only from a prior ideological stance, or from an uncritical compliance paradigm "scientifically correct" can be interpreted scientific data in an evolutionary sense.
[i] - It was thought by what was known up to 1,990, but exceptions have been found in the mitochondria of all types of living beings, and the nuclear codes of bacteria, yeasts, ciliates and algae. About this view:
A. Sanvicens, op. cit. pg. 146. And Jukes, TH: "Genetic Code 1,990. Outlook "Experientia, 46, 1990, p.: 1149.
Knowing that there are exceptions and peculiarities, it is usually the cells of all living things use the same genetic code. For what concerns us here, we can still be considered an objective scientific observation.
Semogil May 7, 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)