Предлагаем восстановить, заказать, купить диплом Вуза в любом городе России. Только настоящий бланк ГОЗНАК с гарантией.
Viewings: 4476Scientists say that science has proof of Darwin's theory, but for 151 year of its existence has not provided any!
Life on Earth is everywhere: in the forest in the trees, under the trees; the earth the cave; in the water in rivers, streams, Brooks, in the ocean to the depth of eleven miles in the sea, lake, swamp, in the air. On the ground - after the rain, the sun has warmed, and very soon in the water appear in many different organisms, and from the land of the tender grass. If the Bank settled with tap water to throw a pinch of hay, then three days later there you can see a lot of moving points - of microorganisms. Life is like in standby, hibernate form spores and seeds of mushrooms and plants, microorganisms, waiting for favorable conditions to continue to live. Life exists on Earth is vast and very tightly - from the North pole to the South, and just started down the snow, immediately appear plant, grow, blossom, then vanish as somewhere, being replaced by others, and in autumn there are different plants. Changes during the year and fauna - some birds fly away, others arrive. On Earth more or less studied than a million species of animals and plants, and still continues to open new.
How did such diversity of animals and plants?
In 1859 appears main work of the English naturalist Charles Darwin's"the Origin of species by means of natural selection", in which an attempt was made to explain the emergence of various forms of life on Earth. This doctrine has received recognition and support of the majority of scientists and known now as the theory of evolution of Darwin. But whether this is the teaching of the theory? By definition, theory - a system of views, ideas, principles in a certain area of knowledge, a form of knowledge, giving a complete picture of the subject matter and the links in it. Theory generalizes the received knowledge, analyzes and displays patterns, makes conclusions. The correctness of the theory is tested in practice and is confirmed by her. As we will see further, Darwinism is not a theory to explain everything from the origin of life before the appearance of diversity of species of fauna and flora and, finally, man. There is no full understanding and confirmation of practice, and there is only a hypothesis, the hypothesis. By definition, a hypothesis is a tentative statement of something that still has to be studied through the accumulation of factual material and the analysis of this material. The hypothesis becomes a theory or rejected as not found confirmation practice.
Itself, Including Darwin did not dealt with the question of the origin of life because of its extraordinary complexity, he admitted that life could be created in the form of several basic shapes, perhaps even one. The assumption of self-conception of life was made later by other biologists, the most acceptable is the point of view A. Oparina. In accordance with it, life appeared on Earth about 3 billion years ago by spontaneous generation from non-living. Later in the struggle for existence was supposed to have survived the stronger, more adapted individuals who gave more acceptable and more numerous posterity. It is alleged that in the future there was a formation of more and more complex and organized forms of life, which has led to the emergence of mammals and subsequently the origin of man from APE.
Let us consider briefly these "three whales", three hypotheses Darwin's the origin of the living the self-conception of the inanimate, the formation of numerous forms of life through natural selection and the origin of man from APE-like ancestor.
If a living organism is happening only on a living organism, where did the first body? Supporters of spontaneous generation of life from non-living matter say that in the beginning was the geological evolution of the Earth. Earth was formed as a glowing ball, which then slowly cooling down, appeared the oceans and the atmosphere. Under the influence of radiation, electrical surges, volcanic eruptions, ultraviolet rays of the Sun began to appear low-molecular carbon-containing molecules that, lipase with each other, forming an even larger, forming a so-called primary broth, which later formed amino acids and koatservatnyh drops. Part of their structure carbon differs from other elements that can form many connections with other chemical elements are complex molecules that are part of the organic substances. It is alleged that from amino acids and koatservatnyh drops to the simplest microbes "hand". However, even the simplest organism, unicellular or non-cellular - virus, a lot more complicated than just created by man. And from the amino acids produced during the experiments, to the simplest living beings distance much greater than from rusty paperclips to complex computer.
To imagine the complexity of the problem, imagine such an experiment. Let's say that in some country, all its inhabitants stopped working, and took part in one experiment. On a piece of paper write the word WORLD, cut into three pieces and toss with the aim to create the word. For example, it took a month. Then, in order thus formed the word of four letters, you will need a year, from five to 10 years, etc. To itself formed the simplest living organism, not enough time for the Universe.
Moreover, the connection must be, not what some molecules and not somehow, and strictly certain way to form a living organism. Moreover, should be formed not one living organism, and some of them, one organism as will appear, and will die. And every microorganism must eat (what?), to protect themselves, reproduce, etc. I.e. the microorganism must immediately have several ready authorities with their ready - to feel enemies, to escape from them, to escape from extreme cold and extreme heat, feel the food, find it, to distinguish edible from unpalatable or poisonous to digest food and dispose of waste, etc. and, Finally, it has to be divided, and each part should be as vigorous, possess the same properties.
How can all this be formed itself?
And in nature in the formation of living organisms are also the process of destruction. If possible, the self-organization of protein-like molecules in the simplest organism, samochodowej, for example, alarm clocks, pens and other items should be taken on a mass character, and people who are concerned about now, where it can be taken, should be concerned about how to get rid of them. The simplest organism is much more complex computer. But no one argues that it is possible "samochodowej", the emergence "nothing" computer, which is also when activated, would begin to work, and here "samochodowej" microorganism - as if there are no problems. Even the simplest living organism is in its complexity real miniature chemical factory. In inanimate nature has the second law of thermodynamics, which says in a General form: increasingly complex breaks down into simple elements. Only in a living organism is the reverse process takes place the complication, development, improvement, only a living organism is not subject to this law. This can only talk about one thing: all life is supported by an external force.
How does the second law of thermodynamics in our lives? Air is a mixture of gases, mainly oxygen, nitrogen and carbon dioxide. Comes, for example, one man home and finds out that he's in the same room oxygen, and in other - nitrogen. It is clear that this is impossible, always all gases are evenly distributed, mixed by volume, and in order to divide them, need to do some work.
Or - gardener comes to suburban area and sees that all rows and all landing on their places, and the weeds grow together in one corner. Looking at neighboring sites - the same thing. And why is this not possible? There are only few hundred weeds that randomly would have grown in one place. Of course, the weeds are evenly distributed across the garden. But even if all existing suburban areas once the weeds would grow only in one place, it would be less a miracle than education simplest organism, so it is difficult. Supporters of Darwin's hypothesis say something like: we don't know how to live formed from lifeless, but believe that it was formed itself.
Scientists in different countries have not once did this experience. Took solutions of various substances were irradiated with various radiation, subjected to electric discharge, trying to prove the possibility of self-organization of molecules in the body, but none of the experiment was not successful. Life in its simplest form has never been created in the lab, and no one ever watched its self-conception of inanimate nature.
But as science can say, now is the manufacturer is difficult, now it is impossible, but with time, science and technology has reached such a level that first protozoa microorganisms, and then more complex will be constructed, as now buttons.
May we wait for a time, even if not we but our descendants. But that's not all - the production of "microorganism", it actually means nothing for the emergence of life. The main thing - that "it" became a living. This most important moment of the costs of the researchers of the topic. For example, scientists have produced a microorganism is no different from a real, live. This microorganism - lives, moves, eats, breathes, protected, runs away from the unpleasant effects - chemical, or thermal, etc. and made not a move, not alive, as scientists tried to revive him. Put it in a nutrient medium is not fed, not moving. Put him among microorganisms larger - eat it or not? Do not eat, and not even notice. What's the matter? What living is different from inanimate? F. Engels said: life is a way of existence of protein phone Now live fish, that's exactly the same, but only that "asleep", the non-living, the same protein of the body is what makes them different? From the point of view of chemistry or anatomy - nothing. Or microorganism live - and that's the same, but still, lost. That we should consider the life of that birth and that death?
Biologists have not yet resolved the question of what should be considered as the beginning of life and the power which connects molecules in a living organism, which begin biochemical reactions and processes that are passed from generation to generation. What distinguishes living organism from the same, but the inanimate? Why occurring in living organisms is opposed to the current in nature, omnipotent beginning of the second, or the second law of thermodynamics, the increase in entropy, or disorder, according to which all destroyed, decomposes, decays and inanimate, and live after death?
The beginning of life is the soul, the end of life-the departure of the soul from the body. But science does not study the soul, the soul where science is nothing. Consciousness, the soul does not disappear with the so-called death (clinical death), but continues to live. At the time of death the human body becomes easier for about seven grams is not enough in order not to notice and not be able to measure. And distinguishes living from non-living presence of the soul. There is a soul in the body - it was alive, goes the soul is the body dies. Death convulsions of a dying animal is the liberation of soul from the body. Of course, the soul of an animal than human, more primitive, but it is. Even more primitive soul in plants. While there is a soul in the body - the animal, plant - it lives and is opposed to destruction. Takes a soul - and nothing can withstand the processes of destruction, and the body that was alive, decomposes.
What a soul is and where it comes from is the theme of another conversation. Will or will not be able scientists to construct the microorganism is not the question. They will not be able to construct the soul, and without it he is only a toy. Experiments to create the simplest living organism - animal or plant - are doomed to failure. If he is made like a living organism, it does not mean that he is alive. Made by man in the laboratory will always be inanimate mechanism, "your player", but will never be alive, albeit primitive organism. And even if so manufactured "microorganisms", the same, or different, to fill the entire visible Universe, among them there is not one living, none of them will not even stir. And live always eats alive, and therefore will not have live microorganisms produced "bacterium", as becomes a cat is a toy mouse, no matter how she looks like this. For this reason, never will be created food products from non-living material, for example from oil.
Never be received life in the laboratory. Although the successes of science doubtless, in this case as it is powerless now, so it will be powerless in the future. The more impossible the self-conception of the living from non-living is impossible samoistselenie molecules so that was formed something like a living, and it is impossible revival. The self-conception of the living from non-living, so double-impossible.
Let us now consider, as is the case with the advent of species diversity. H. Darwin explained. One species of animals have individuals are more strong, active, and there are more weak. Stronger more adapted, they are better fed, better protected, survive better, more active and in reproduction and give a more viable offspring, less adapted quickly died and gave less adapted offspring or not given at all. The result for many millions of years, it is claimed, is the development of existing and formation of new, more perfect.
But there are at least two serious question. The first question. In museums of the world are collected millions of bones and fragments of prints previously lived organisms, there are bones and fossils of fish, reptiles, birds, etc. but no bones transitional forms, "missing links", no bones, no imprint. And again there are questions. First, was the transformation of a simple animal in a more complex, we need a reasonable external force, deliberately leading the transformation process. Because undeveloped or half-developed organs, if any, whether legs or wings or other, impeded animal, made him clumsy and more vulnerable. In the animal world, where some species exist at the expense of the other, such "advanced" individuals would be eaten first. And individuals "advanced" must mate necessarily with the same would otherwise be wasted, all the efforts of millions of years.
Moreover, transitional forms must be significantly greater than "stable". H. Darwin knew about it, and the absence of confirmation of variation was a significant drawback of his teachings, but he assumed that over time, the evidence will be found. However, they have not been found until now, and never will be found: transitional forms were not. Fossil record shows that new species appear, as if from nowhere, no transitional forms. Long transitional form was considered lobe-finned fish, or coelacanth, which was considered extinct millions of years ago. Recently, however, several instances of Alicanto were caught off the coast of Africa. During this time, this fish is not only evolved in different appearance, but and has not changed.
The second question in connection with the formation of new species. If, as is claimed, the entire existence of life was the transformation of one type to the other, then why new types are not formed now? All existing types are perfect, complete, there is no type with underdeveloped eyes, fins, wings, teeth, etc.
Supporters of Darwin's hypothesis say, evolution occurs through mutation and selection. However, there were no reports that the mutation has improved some kind that it is sustainable and that the mutants produce offspring. As a result of selection is not displayed none of the new type, cat remained a cat, and an Apple an Apple. In General, the evolution varies for microevolution and macroevolution. Macroevolution is the transformation of one species into another. Micro-evolution is change within a species, when there is no conversion of one type to the other, it deducing of new breeds, plant varieties. In the result of artificial selection formation of new animal breeds and plant varieties, but, first, Apple will always be an Apple, and a dog is a dog, and to maintain species or varieties required constant work of a person. Left to themselves, and apples, and dogs quickly, within a few generations back to the original initial forms, "running to seed".
Supporters of the doctrine say it is proved by science that there is proof of its correctness, but for 151 year of its existence has not provided any.
Neviaser in his book "Faith in the age of science" writes in detail about "Theory of punctuated equilibrium". "On the basis of detailed studying of fossils Gould and Eldridge concluded that the gradual evolution of the species is not observed. On the contrary, the fossil record shows that usually this kind is in constant, "equilibrium" state for a long time, and then, very occasionally, this equilibrium is suddenly interrupted rapid evolutionary change. Gradualism of evolution does not occur in the fossil remains never". Professor Niles Eldridge curator of the worldwide known American Museum of Natural History in new York, Steven Gould Professor of Harvard University, one of the leading experts in evolutionary biology.
There are no evidence of gradual transformation of the monkey into a man.
Australopithecus, which considered the intermediate link, had a brain volume of only 1/3 of the volume of the brain of modern man, and does not apply to people, because I couldn't make tools.
CRO-magnon man, whose remains were found in the town of CROs-magnon in the South of France, was quite civilized, inferior to modern man only by the level of development, and was not a missing link.
Finally, another failed link". In the journal "Technology towards the youth" №6, 1991 article printed "Who had "Woodworth miracle"? We are talking about eoanthropus, or paldauskas man. In the region of the village Pitchdown in England was allegedly found the skull of the APE-man. However, forty years later it turned out that it is fake. Was taken fragment of a skull of one of the medieval tombs and jaw monkeys that were treated with chemicals to be mineralized, and the skull were filed teeth. Every important detail were false.
Thus, the theory in the teaching of Darwin never was, and from "three whales" is left nothing. Was the hypothesis, which he called a theory, now and hypotheses. And it is on the surface. But the more studying the problem, the more visible the failure of the hypothesis. Supporters of this doctrine from the textbooks, from book to book bypass "sharp corners", and on the surface it appears solid, all explaining the theory. Charles Darwin suggested humanity erroneous doctrine, for a hundred and fifty years guiding research on the wrong track. Was the visibility of the theory, and people believed that , most likely, the way it happened. We used to believe that if the scientists said, then it is. Have Full knowledge of how a correct understanding of the existing reality, and there is a science that studies the material, visible world, is available to the human senses.
What was it like in reality? The researchers of this subject does not give a clear answer to this question, or say what happened exactly as written in the Bible - in six ordinary days. But this statement does not correspond to the available information on the age of the Earth and the time of existence of flora and fauna. Although in this case it is not the fault of the Bible, and was not exactly made the translation. The Hebrew word translated as "the day"also implies a certain time, means and a certain period of time or the time during which something was happening.
In the book "Bible code. Countdown" Michael Drosnin announces the discovery in the code of interesting information. In one of the computer printouts information appeared: "DNA arrived on the ship". When he called the Nobel prize in biology Francis Crick and asked him, could it be, F. Crick answered him: I published a theory about that a quarter of a century ago, and it is the only possibility of the emergence of life on Earth - targeted managed panspermia. We are talking about the appearance of the simple life forms.
This relates to the emergence of the simplest forms of life on Earth. As there was such variety of species?
To resolve this complex issue needs on the basis of available information, on the basis of the facts.
The fact that life appeared on earth millions of years ago.
The fact that the life could not come by itself, the self-conception of the non-living.
The fact that at earlier stages of development of the Earth on it dwelt more primitive organisms, later began to appear more and more complex forms.
The fact that there are no transitional forms.
The fact that new species appeared immediately, as if out of nowhere. Evolution occurred, but not according to the teachings of Darwin, and in a few steps.
The fact that simultaneously appeared and flowering plants, and insects their pollinators.
The Bible and other spiritual sources - given the Higher mind, and they contain the same information about God, about the nature and man.
The fact that during the existence of the Earth, the amount of biomass has not changed, was only her change, development in an increasingly complex shape (the output of the Century academician Vernadsky).
Then it is logical explanation.
In the beginning the Earth was created and the appropriate conditions for the existence of the simplest forms of life on it. Lifeless rocks, clay, water in these conditions could not be living creature, if it appeared here. People buying a kitten or aquarium fish, knows where they will live and what to eat.
At a certain time have been established (registered) simple organisms - animals and plants. Simple microorganisms demanded and simpler conditions for its existence. Simpler organisms prepared habitat of more complex organisms, which in turn pave the way for even more complex. At a certain time, when was prepared habitat of more complex organisms, they were created from simpler, etc. At a specific time appear simultaneously flowering plants and insects. How would explain Darwin's hypothesis of the emergence, for example, insects? From a worm at the same time begin to appear little wings, legs, eyes, the veil with "notches", from which insects and got its name, but all of this at the moment the worm does not need and will only hinder him, makes it awkward and more vulnerable. It is clear that everything happened in a different way, that every body was organizing the Mind and targeted actions. At a certain time were created mammals as the more highly organized animals, and eventually people.
As for humans, the scientists simply cannot explain the phenomenon of appearance of CRO-magnon man, a man almost modern type. Between him and neardistance - a huge difference. Since the introduction to the present time he practically has not changed, was only the psychic evolution.
You are reading news Дарвин был не прав if You liked the article Дарвин был не прав, prokomentiruet her.