耶鲁大学著名教授解释达尔文的进化论为何不符合科学

2019年10月4日13:03:38耶鲁大学著名教授解释达尔文的进化论为何不符合科学已关闭评论 44724048字阅读80分9秒
摘要

科学从不停止质疑。当一个理论作为一个不容置疑的事实被教授时,它应该是相当明显的,有些事情是错误的。今天,科学并不是真正的科学,这不仅适用于诸如进化论这样的主题,在许多领域也是如此,在这些领域,科学被强大的腐败势力用作议程。

耶鲁大学著名教授解释达尔文的进化论为何不符合科学

Science never ceases to question.When a theory is taught as an unquestionable fact,it should be quite obvious that something is wrong.Today,science isn't really science,and this is not only true for topics such as evolution,it's true in many areas where science is used for an agenda by powerful and corrupt forces.

科学从不停止质疑。当一个理论作为一个不容置疑的事实被教授时,它应该是相当明显的,有些事情是错误的。今天,科学并不是真正的科学,这不仅适用于诸如进化论这样的主题,在许多领域也是如此,在这些领域,科学被强大的腐败势力用作议程。

Health sciences are a great example.As Bud Relman,former editor of the New England Journal of Medicine said:

健康科学就是一个很好的例子。正如《新英格兰医学杂志》(NewEnglandJournalofMedicine)前主编巴德雷尔曼(BudRelman)所言:

"The medical profession is being bought by the pharmaceutical industry,not only in terms of the practice of medicine,but also in terms of teaching and research.The academic institutions of this country are allowing themselves to be the paid agents of the pharmaceutical industry.I think it's disgraceful."

"医疗行业正在被制药行业收购,不仅在医疗实践方面,而且在教学和研究方面。这个国家的学术机构允许自己成为制药工业的有偿代理人。我认为这是可耻的。"

Today,some scientific publications are silenced and others are pushed forward,depending on how they affect corporate and political agendas.It's not actually about the science.What the mainstream media preaches as"settled science"is not actually settled.

今天,一些科学出版物被压制,另一些则被推向前进,这取决于它们如何影响企业和政治议程。这实际上并不是科学的问题。主流媒体所宣扬的"固定科学"实际上并没有得到解决。

In fact it is often highly dubious.Why don't more people see this?The answer is simple,it's because we rely on outside sources to tell us'what is,'instead of taking the time,as individual researchers,to really look into something.

事实上,它经常是非常可疑的。为什么没有更多的人看到这一点?答案很简单,因为我们依赖外部资源来告诉我们"是什么",而不是像个别研究人员那样花时间去真正研究某件事情。

The Theory Of Evolution

进化论

The'Theory of Evolution'falls into this category.Scientists who have rejected the basic premises of Darwin's theory continue to be condemned and shunned by the mainstream community and powerful people.

属于这一类。拒绝接受达尔文理论基本前提的科学家继续受到主流社区和有权势的人的谴责和回避。

This is because their paradigm-shifting thoughts and ideas on the subject,though more grounded in fact,threaten the goal of the global elite,which NSA whistleblower William Binney says,is"total population control."

这是因为他们关于这个问题的思想和观点虽然事实上更加根深蒂固,却威胁到了全球精英的目标,国家安全局的告密者威廉·宾尼说,那就是"全面控制人口"

The average person who gets a bachelor's degree in science is trained to simply repeat the same old textbook rhetoric as to why evolution is the be all and end all of human existence,without actually looking into why the theory is highly questionable.

获得科学学士学位的普通人被训练只是简单地重复同样的教科书式的修辞来解释为什么进化是人类存在的全部和终结,而没有真正研究为什么这个理论是高度可疑的。

One of the latest dissenters is David Gelernter,a prominent scientist and distinguished professor of computer science at Yale University.He recently published an essay in the Claremont Review of Books explaining his objections to a premise behind Darwin's theory.

最新的反对者之一是耶鲁大学著名科学家和计算机科学杰出教授大卫·格勒尼特。他最近在《克莱蒙特书评》上发表了一篇文章,解释了他对达尔文理论背后一个前提的异议。

He first points to the famous"Cambrian Explosion"which occurred half a billion years ago,in which a number of new organisms,including the first ever known animals,pop up suddenly in the fossil record over a period of approximately 70 million years.

他首先指出了5亿年前出现的著名的"寒武纪大爆发",其中包括第一个已知的动物在内的许多新的生物体,在大约7000万年的时间里突然出现在化石记录中。

Apparently,this giant explosion of spontaneous life was followed by evolution,slow growth and"scanty fossils,mainly of single celled organisms,dating back to the origins of life roughly three and a half billions years ago."

显然,这次自发生命的大爆发之后是进化、缓慢生长和"主要由单细胞生物组成的稀少化石,可以追溯到大约35亿年前的生命起源"

From here,he explains how Darwin's theory predicts that new life forms evolve gradually from preceding ones.but if this is applied to the Cambrian creatures as well,it doesn't work.The predecessors to the Cambrian creatures are missing,something that Darwin himself was disturbed by as well.

从这里,他解释了达尔文的理论是如何预测新的生命形式是如何从先前的进化而来的。但是,如果这也适用于寒武纪生物,它就不起作用了。寒武纪生物的前辈们正在消失,这也是达尔文自己也感到不安的地方。

Furthermore,even without this fact,many scientists have already used other aspects of the fossil record to demonstrate that Darwin's theory is clearly wrong.

此外,即使没有这个事实,许多科学家已经用化石记录的其他方面来证明达尔文的理论明显是错误的。

"The Cambrian explosion had been unearthed,and beneath those Cambrian creatures their Precambrian predecessors should have been waiting–and weren't.In fact,the fossil record as a whole lacked the upward-branching structure Darwin predicted…the ever-expanding fossil archives don't look good for Darwin,who made clear and concrete predictions that have(so far)been falsified—according to many reputable paleontologists,anyway.

"寒武纪大爆发已经被发掘出来了,在那些寒武纪生物之下,他们的前寒武纪祖先应该已经在等待了——而事实并非如此。事实上,化石记录作为一个整体,缺乏达尔文所预测的向上分支结构......不断扩大的化石档案对达尔文来说并不乐观,因为达尔文做出了清晰而具体的预测,而这些预测(迄今为止)已经被证明是错误的——至少许多著名的古生物。

"When does the clock run out on those predictions?Never.But any thoughtful person must ask himself whether scientists today are looking for evidence that bears on Darwin,or looking to explain away evidence that contradicts him.There are some of each.Scientists are only human,and their thinking(like everyone else's)is colored by emotion."(source)

"这些预测什么时候结束?从来没有。但任何有思想的人都必须扪心自问,今天的科学家是在寻找与达尔文有关的证据,还是在寻找与达尔文相矛盾的证据。每一种都有一些。科学家只是普通人,他们的思维(和其他人一样)受到情感的影响。"

The Genesis Of New Life Forms

新生命形式的起源

His next point goes a little deeper.Many people point to the fact that variation occurs naturally among individuals and different traits are past on,this is something observable and something that we all know.Many scientists actually use this point as a proof for evolution,which doesn't make much sense.

他的下一个观点更深入一些。许多人指出这样一个事实:个体之间的差异是自然发生的,不同的特征已经过去了,这是可以观察到的,也是我们都知道的。许多科学家实际上用这一点作为进化论的证据,这没有多大意义。

According to proponents of the theory of evolution,natural variation is the consequence of random change or mutation to cells,to the genetic information within our cells that deal with reproduction.These cells pass on genetic change to the next generation,which,according to Darwinians,changes the future of the species and not just the individual.

根据进化论的支持者,自然变异是细胞随机变化或突变的结果,是我们细胞内处理繁殖的遗传信息的结果。这些细胞将基因变化传递给下一代,达尔文主义者认为,这改变了物种的未来,而不仅仅是个体的未来。

The engine behind this thought,as Gelernter explains,is'change'driven by the survival of the fittest and,obviously,lots and lots of time.He then goes on to ask a very crucial question:What exactly does generating new forms of life entail?

正如盖兰特解释的那样,这个想法背后的引擎是由适者生存驱动的变化,显然,还有很多很多的时间。他接着问了一个非常关键的问题:生成新的生命形式究竟意味着什么?

Many within the field agree that generating a new shape of protein is the key to it.But does Darwinian evolution even purport to be able to do that?For Chris Williams,A Ph.D.,Biochemistry Ohio State University,the full scope of Darwinian Evolution barely touches upon this important matter:

该领域的许多人都同意,生成一种新的蛋白质形状是其关键。但达尔文进化论是否声称能够做到这一点呢?作为俄亥俄州立大学生物化学博士,达尔文进化论的全部内容几乎没有涉及到这个重要问题:

"As a biochemist and software developer who works in genetic and metabolic screening,I am continually amazed by the incredible complexity of life.For example,each of us has a vast'computer program'of six billion DNA bases in every cell that guided our development from a fertilized egg,specifies how to make more than 200 tissue types,and ties all this together in numerous highly functional organ systems.

"作为一名从事基因和代谢筛查的生物化学家和软件开发人员,我一直对生命难以置信的复杂性感到惊讶。例如,我们每个人都有一个由60亿个DNA碱基组成的庞大的计算机程序,这些DNA碱基在每个细胞中指导着我们从一个受精卵开始发育,详细说明了如何制造200多种组织类型,并将所有这些结合在许多高度功能的器官系统中。

"Few people outside of genetics or biochemistry realize that evolutionists still can provide no substantive details at all about the origin of life,and particularly the origin of genetic information in the first self-replicating organism.What genes did it require—or did it even have genes?

"除了遗传学或生物化学之外,很少有人认识到,进化论者仍然无法提供有关生命起源的任何实质性细节,特别是第一个自我复制有机体中遗传信息的起源。它需要什么基因,或者它有没有基因?

"How much DNA and RNA did it have—or did it even have nucleic acids?How did huge information-rich molecules arise before natural selection?Exactly how did the genetic code linking nucleic acids to amino acid sequence originate?Clearly the origin of life—the foundation of evolution–is still virtually all speculation,and little if no fact."

"它有多少DNARNA?或者它甚至有核酸吗?在自然选择之前,大量信息丰富的分子是如何产生的?连接核酸和氨基酸序列的遗传密码究竟是如何产生的?显然,生命的起源——进化的基础——实际上仍然只是推测,很少甚至没有事实。"

Intelligent Design

智能设计

More and more,the evidence points to the great intelligence apparent in the system of life-creation.The reason that Darwinian Evolution is being left behind,and for many is obsolete,is because it is completely based on random,non-intelligent processes.

越来越多的证据表明,在生命创造系统中显而易见的巨大智慧。之所以被落在后面,对许多人来说已经过时,是因为它完全基于随机的、非智能的过程。

Edward Peltzer Ph.D.Oceanography,University of California,San Diego(Scripps Institute),Associate Editor,Marine Chemistry,uses a clear real-life laboratory example to explain the need to posit the existence of an overriding'intelligence'in order for things to make any sense:

博士。海洋学,加利福尼亚大学圣地亚哥分校(斯克里普斯研究所),海洋化学副主编,用一个清晰的现实生活中的实验室例子来解释为了让事情变得有意义而假定存在压倒一切的"智慧"的必要性:

"As a chemist,the most fascinating issue for me revolves around the origin of life.Before life began,there was no biology,only chemistry—and chemistry is the same for all time.What works(or not)today,worked(or not)back in the beginning.

"作为一名化学家,对我来说最吸引人的问题是关于生命起源的。在生命开始之前,没有生物学,只有化学ーー化学一直都是一样的。今天行得通(或不行),在开始时行得通(或不行)

"So,our ideas about what happened on Earth prior to the emergence of life are eminently testable in the lab.And what we have seen thus far when the reactions are left unguided as they would be in the natural world is not much.Indeed,the decomposition reactions and competing reactions out distance the synthetic reactions by far.

"因此,我们关于生命出现之前地球上发生了什么的想法,在实验室中得到了很好的验证。到目前为止,我们所看到的,当这些反应像在自然世界中一样,没有被引导的时候,它们并不多。实际上,分解反应和竞争反应远远超过了合成反应。

"It is only when an intelligent agent(such as a scientist or graduate student)intervenes and"tweaks"the reactions conditions"just right"do we see any progress at all,and even then it is still quite limited and very far from where we need to get.

"只有当一个智能介质(比如科学家或研究生)介入并"调整"反应条件"恰到好处"时,我们才能看到任何进展,即便如此,进展仍然相当有限,距离我们需要的目标非常遥远。

"Thus,it is the very chemistry that speaks of a need for something more than just time and chance.And whether that be simply a highly specified set of initial conditions(fine-tuning)or some form of continual guidance until life ultimately emerges is still unknown.

"因此,正是这种化学反应说明,我们需要的不仅仅是时间和机会。这是否仅仅是一组高度特定的初始条件(微调)或某种形式的持续指导,直到生命最终出现,仍然是未知的。

"But what we do know is the random chemical reactions are both woefully insufficient and are often working against the pathways needed to succeed.For these reasons I have serious doubts about whether the current Darwinian paradigm will ever make additional progress in this area."

"但我们所知道的是,随机的化学反应不仅远远不够,而且经常阻碍成功的途径。出于这些原因,我严重怀疑当前的达尔文范式是否会在这一领域取得更多进展。"

Gelernter brings this conversation specifically to the generation of proteins:

格勒尼特特别把这个对话带到了蛋白质的产生:

"Proteins are the special ops forces(or maybe the Marines)of living cells,except that they are common instead of rare;they do all the heavy lifting,all the tricky and critical assignments,in a dazzling range of roles.

"蛋白质是活细胞中的特种部队(或者可能是海军陆战队),只不过它们是常见的,而不是稀有的;它们承担所有繁重的任务,执行所有棘手和关键的任务,扮演一系列令人眼花缭乱的角色。

"Proteins called enzymes catalyze all sorts of reactions and drive cellular metabolism.Other proteins(such as collagen)give cells shape and structure,like tent poles but in far more shapes.Nerve function,muscle function,and photosynthesis are all driven by proteins.And in doing these jobs and many others,the actual,3-D shape of the protein molecule is important.

"一种叫做酶的蛋白质催化各种反应,推动细胞的新陈代谢。其他蛋白质(如胶原蛋白)赋予细胞形状和结构,如帐篷杆,但形状要多得多。神经功能、肌肉功能和光合作用都是由蛋白质驱动的。在做这些工作和许多其他工作时,蛋白质分子的实际三维形状是很重要的。

"So,is the simple neo-Darwinian mechanism up to this task?Are random mutation plus natural selection sufficient to create new protein shapes?"

"那么,简单的新达尔文机制能胜任这项任务吗?随机突变加上自然选择足以创造出新的蛋白质形状吗?"

Diving Into Proteins

研究蛋白质

Gelernter goes on to answer that question in great detail,and after going through the entire explanation he comes to what seems to be an inarguable conclusion.That the Theory of Evolution cannot,in any way,be a possible explanation for the generation of new proteins and mutations that are required for evolution to occur at all.

格勒尼特接着详细地回答了这个问题,在仔细研究了整个解释之后,他得出了一个似乎无可争辩的结论。无论如何,这不可能是进化所需的新蛋白质和突变的产生的一个可能的解释。

This explanation is complex,but well worth it if you really want to understand how the'Theory of Evolution'is refuted by the science of proteins:

这个解释很复杂,但是如果你真的想了解进化论是如何被蛋白质科学所驳倒的,这个解释是非常值得的:

"How to make proteins is our first question.Proteins are chains:linear sequences of atom-groups,each bonded to the next.A protein molecule is based on a chain of amino acids;150 elements is a"modest-sized"chain;the average is 250.Each link is chosen,ordinarily,from one of 20 amino acids.A chain of amino acids is a polypeptide—"peptide"being the type of chemical bond that joins one amino acid to the next.

"如何制造蛋白质是我们的第一个问题。蛋白质是链:原子基团的线性序列,每个原子基团彼此相连。一个蛋白质分子是基于一个氨基酸链;150个元素是一个"中等大小"的链;平均是250个。一般来说,每个环节都是从20种氨基酸中选出来的。一个氨基酸链是一个多肽ー""是连接一个氨基酸到下一个氨基酸的化学键的类型。

"But this chain is only the starting point:chemical forces among the links make parts of the chain twist themselves into helices;others straighten out,and then,sometimes,jackknife repeatedly,like a carpenter's rule,into flat sheets.Then the whole assemblage folds itself up like a complex sheet of origami paper.And the actual 3-D shape of the resulting molecule is(as I have said)important.

"但这条链条只是起点:链条中的化学力使链条的某些部分扭曲成螺旋状;其他部分则伸直,然后有时像木工规则一样反复折叠成平板状。然后整个组合就像一张复杂的折纸一样折叠起来。结果分子的实际三维形状(正如我所说的)很重要。

"Imagine a 150-element protein as a chain of 150 beads,each bead chosen from 20 varieties.But:only certain chains will work.Only certain bead combinations will form themselves into stable,useful,well-shaped proteins.

"把一个150元素的蛋白质想象成一串150颗珠子,每颗珠子从20个品种中挑选。但是:只有特定的链条才能起作用。只有特定的微球组合才能形成稳定的、有用的、形状良好的蛋白质。

"So how hard is it to build a useful,well-shaped protein?Can you throw a bunch of amino acids together and assume that you will get something good?Or must you choose each element of the chain with painstaking care?It happens to be very hard to choose the right beads.

"那么,构建一个有用的、形状良好的蛋白质有多难呢?你能把一堆氨基酸放在一起,然后假设你会得到一些好东西吗?还是你必须小心翼翼地选择链条上的每一个元素?很难选择合适的珠子。

"Inventing a new protein means inventing a new gene.(Enter,finally,genes,DNA etc.,with suitable fanfare.)Genes spell out the links of a protein chain,amino acid by amino acid.Each gene is a segment of DNA,the world's most admired macromolecule.DNA,of course,is the famous double helix or spiral staircase,where each step is a pair of nucleotides.

"发明一种新的蛋白质意味着发明一种新的基因。(最后,用适当的号角输入基因、DNA等。)基因组成蛋白质链的各个环节,氨基酸由氨基酸组成。每个基因都是DNA的一部分,而DNA是世界上最令人钦佩的高分子。当然,DNA是著名的双螺旋或螺旋楼梯,其中每一步是一对核苷酸。

"As you read the nucleotides along one edge of the staircase(sitting on one step and bumping your way downwards to the next and the next),each group of three nucleotides along the way specifies an amino acid.Each three-nucleotide group is a codon,and the correspondence between codons and amino acids is the genetic code.(The four nucleotides in DNA are abbreviated T,A,C and G,and you can look up the code in a high school textbook:TTA and TTC stand for phenylalanine,TCT for serine,and so on.)

"当你沿着楼梯的一边读核苷酸时(坐在一个台阶上,一步一步往下走),沿途每组三个核苷酸指定一种氨基酸。每个三核苷酸群是一个密码子,密码子和氨基酸之间的对应关系就是遗传密码。(DNA中的四个核苷酸分别缩写为tacg,你可以在高中教科书中查到这些代码:TTATTC代表苯丙氨酸,TCT代表丝氨酸,等等。)

"Your task is to invent a new gene by mutation—by the accidental change of one codon to a different codon.You have two possible starting points for this attempt.You could mutate an existing gene,or mutate gibberish.You have a choice because DNA actually consists of valid genes separated by long sequences of nonsense.Most biologists think that the nonsense sequences are the main source of new genes.

"你的任务是通过突变——通过一个密码子偶然变成另一个密码子——发明一个新的基因。这次尝试有两个可能的起点。你可以使一个现有的基因变异,或者使一些胡言乱语变异。你有一个选择,因为DNA实际上是由有效的基因组成的,它们之间被长长的无意义序列分开。大多数生物学家认为无意义序列是新基因的主要来源。

"If you tinker with a valid gene,you will almost certainly make it worse—to the point where its protein misfires and endangers(or kills)its organism—long before you start making it better.The gibberish sequences,on the other hand,sit on the sidelines without making proteins,and you can mutate them,so far as we know,without endangering anything.

"如果你修补一个有效的基因,你几乎肯定会让它变得更糟——以至于它的蛋白质失效,危及(或杀死)它的有机体——远在你开始改善它之前。另一方面,胡言乱语的序列,不会产生蛋白质,你可以使它们变异,就我们所知,不会危及任何东西。

"The mutated sequence can then be passed on to the next generation,where it can be mutated again.Thus mutations can accumulate on the sidelines without affecting the organism.But if you mutate your way to an actual,valid new gene,your new gene can create a new protein and thereby,potentially,play a role in evolution.

"然后突变序列可以传递给下一代,在那里它可以再次突变。因此突变可以在不影响有机体的情况下在边线上积累。但是,如果你突变成一个实际的、有效的新基因,你的新基因就可以创造出一种新的蛋白质,从而有可能在进化中发挥作用。

"Mutations themselves enter the picture when DNA splits in half down the center of the staircase,thereby allowing the enclosing cell to split in half,and the encompassing organism to grow.Each half-staircase summons a matching set of nucleotides from the surrounding chemical soup;two complete new DNA molecules emerge.A mistake in this elegant replication process—the wrong nucleotide answering the call,a nucleotide typo—yields a mutation,either to a valid blueprint or a stretch of gibberish.

"DNA沿着楼梯中心分裂成两半时,突变本身就进入了画面,从而允许封闭的细胞分裂成两半,并允许包围的有机体生长。每个半阶梯从周围的化学汤中召唤出一组匹配的核苷酸,两个完整的新DNA分子出现。在这个优雅的复制过程中,一个错误的核苷酸响应了这个调用,一个核苷酸的排版,产生了一个突变,要么是一个有效的蓝图,要么是一堆乱码。

Building a Better Protein

制造更好的蛋白质

"Now at last we are ready to take Darwin out for a test drive.Starting with 150 links of gibberish,what are the chances that we can mutate our way to a useful new shape of protein?We can ask basically the same question in a more manageable way:what are the chances that a random 150-link sequence will create such a protein?Nonsense sequences are essentially random.Mutations are random.Make random changes to a random sequence and you get another random sequence.

"现在我们终于可以带达尔文出去试驾了。从150个赤霉素链接开始,我们能变异成一种有用的新蛋白质形状的几率有多大?我们可以用一种更容易处理的方式提出基本相同的问题:一个随机的150个连接的序列产生这种蛋白质的机率有多大?无意义序列本质上是随机的。突变是随机的。对一个随机序列进行随机更改,就会得到另一个随机序列。

"So,close your eyes,make 150 random choices from your 20 bead boxes and string up your beads in the order in which you chose them.What are the odds that you will come up with a useful new protein?

"所以,闭上你的眼睛,从你的20个珠子盒里随机选择150个,然后按照你选择珠子的顺序把你的珠子串起来。你想出一种有用的新蛋白质的可能性有多大?

"It's easy to see that the total number of possible sequences is immense.It's easy to believe(although non-chemists must take their colleagues'word for it)that the subset of useful sequences—sequences that create real,usable proteins—is,in comparison,tiny.But we must know how immense and how tiny.

"很容易看出,可能出现的序列总数是巨大的。人们很容易相信(尽管非化学家必须相信他们同事的话),相比之下,有用序列的子集(能够产生真正的、可用的蛋白质的序列)微不足道。但是我们必须知道。

"The total count of possible 150-link chains,where each link is chosen separately from 20 amino acids,is 20150.In other words,many.20150 roughly equals 10195,and there are only 1080 atoms in the universe.

"20个氨基酸中单独选出150个连接链的可能总数是20150个。换句话说,许多。20150大约等于10195,而宇宙中只有1080个原子。

"What proportion of these many polypeptides are useful proteins?Douglas Axe did a series of experiments to estimate how many 150-long chains are capable of stable folds—of reaching the final step in the protein-creation process(the folding)and of holding their shapes long enough to be useful.

"这些多肽中有多少是有用的蛋白质?道格拉斯·埃克斯进行了一系列实验,以估计有多少150条长的链能够产生稳定的折叠——能够达到蛋白质创造过程的最后一步(折叠),能够保持它们的形状足够长以使其发挥作用。

"(Axe is a distinguished biologist with five-star breeding:he was a graduate student at Caltech,then joined the Centre for Protein Engineering at Cambridge.The biologists whose work Meyer discusses are mainly first-rate Establishment scientists.)

(埃克斯是一位著名的五星级生物学家:他是加州理工学院的研究生,后来加入了剑桥大学的蛋白质工程中心。迈耶所讨论的生物学家主要是一流的权威科学家

"He estimated that,of all 150-link amino acid sequences,1 in 1074 will be capable of folding into a stable protein.To say that your chances are 1 in 1074 is no different,in practice,from saying that they are zero.It's not surprising that your chances of hitting a stable protein that performs some useful function,and might therefore play a part in evolution,are even smaller.Axe puts them at 1 in 1077.

"他估计,在所有150个连接的氨基酸序列中,1074年有1个能够折叠成稳定的蛋白质。实际上,说你的机会是1/1074与说它们是零没有什么不同。不足为奇的是,你攻击一种稳定蛋白质的机会甚至更小,这种蛋白质具有一些有用的功能,因此可能在进化过程中起到一定作用。艾克斯估计他们在1077年是1

"In other words:immense is so big,and tiny is so small,that neo-Darwinian evolution is—so far—a dead loss.Try to mutate your way from 150 links of gibberish to a working,useful protein and you are guaranteed to fail.Try it with ten mutations,a thousand,a million—you fail.The odds bury you.It can't be done.

"换句话说,巨大是如此之大,微小是如此之小,以至于新达尔文主义的进化论到目前为止是一种死亡的损失。试着从150个乱码链接变成一个有用的蛋白质,你肯定会失败。尝试十种突变,一千种,一百万种,你都会失败。命运埋葬了你。这是不可能的。

Proteins/Mutations Are One of Several Issues

蛋白质/突变是几个问题之一

Despite all of the scientific dogma that plagues this issue,proteins/mutations and lack of fossil evidence are simply the tip of the iceberg when it comes to finding faults found within the Theory of Evolution.There are many facts,information,science and new discoveries that would make one wonder how it's even still being taught.

尽管所有的科学教条都困扰着这个问题,但是蛋白质/突变和缺乏化石证据只是冰山一角。有许多事实、信息、科学和新发现会让人怀疑它们是如何被教授的。

Furthermore,despite the fact that we get pounded with the idea that random mutation is ultimate truth within the mainstream,and that one is wrong for questioning it,there are a number of prominent scientists,who are actually getting together in large numbers to collectively refute Darwinism.

此外,尽管我们被随机突变是主流内部的终极真理的观点所打击,并且质疑它是错误的,但是仍然有许多杰出的科学家,他们实际上正在大量地聚集在一起,共同反驳达尔文主义。

A group of 500 scientists from several fields came together a few years to create"A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism,"as one examples.The issue is that these scientists are never getting any mainstream attention.But clearly there are some very intelligent people here.

一个由来自不同领域的500名科学家组成的小组在几年时间里共同创造了""作为一个例子。问题是这些科学家从来没有得到任何主流的关注。但是很明显这里有一些非常聪明的人。

"The theory will be with us for a long time,exerting enormous cultural force.Darwin is no Newton.Newton's physics survived Einstein and will always survive,because it explains the cases that dominate all of space-time except for the extreme ends of the spectrum,at the very smallest and largest scales.

"这个理论将伴随我们很长一段时间,发挥巨大的文化力量。达尔文不是牛顿。牛顿的物理学在爱因斯坦时代幸存下来,并且将永远存在下去,因为它解释了在最小和最大的尺度上,除了光谱的极端以外,统治所有时空的案例。

"It's just these most important cases,the ones we see all around us,that Darwin cannot explain.Yet his theory does explain cases of real significance.And Darwin's intellectual daring will always be inspiring.The man will always be admired.

"只是这些最重要的案例,那些我们周围看到的案例,达尔文无法解释。然而,他的理论确实解释了一些具有现实意义的案例。达尔文的智慧勇气将永远鼓舞人心。这个人永远会受人敬仰。

"He now poses a final challenge.Whether biology will rise to this last one as well as it did to the first,when his theory upset every apple cart,remains to be seen.How cleanly and quickly can the field get over Darwin,and move on?—with due allowance for every Darwinist's having to study all the evidence for himself?There is one of most important questions facing science in the 21st century."

"他现在提出了最后的挑战。当他的理论打乱了每一个苹果车时,生物学是否会像第一个那样上升到最后一个,还有待观察。这片土地能多么干净、多么迅速地跨越达尔文,继续前进?ーー考虑到每一个达尔文主义者都必须亲自研究所有的证据?在21世纪,科学面临着一个最重要的问题。"

Other Examples That Throw Off The Theory Of Evolution

其他摆脱进化论的例子

Not long ago I wrote about a recent paper published by 33 scientists in the Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology journal suggesting that the flourishing of life during the Cambrian era(Cambrian Explosion)originates from the stars is so fascinating.

不久前,《生物物理学与分子生物学进展》杂志上的一篇论文指出,寒武纪时期生命的繁荣是如此令人着迷的寒武纪大爆发。

"With the rapidly increasing number of exoplanets that have been discovered in the habitable zones of long-lived red dwarf stars(Gillon et al.,2016),the prospects for genetic exchanges between life-bearing Earth-like planets cannot be ignored."(The study)

"随着在长寿命红矮星的可居住区域内发现的系外行星数量的迅速增加,类地生命行星之间基因交换的前景不容忽视。"

There is a great little blurb from Cosmos Magazine,one of the few outlets who are talking about the study:

这里有一个很棒的小广告,是少数几个谈论这项研究的渠道之一:

With 33 authors from a wide range of reputable universities and research institutes,the paper makes a seemingly incredible claim.A claim that if true,would have the most profound consequences for our understanding of the universe.Life,the paper argues,did not originate on the planet Earth.

这篇论文的33位作者来自许多著名的大学和研究机构,这篇论文提出了一个看似不可思议的主张。这种说法如果属实,将对我们对宇宙的理解产生最深远的影响。论文认为,生命并非起源于地球。

The response?

回应是什么?

Near silence.

近乎寂静。

The reasons for this are as fascinating as the evidence and claims advanced by the paper itself.Entitled"Cause of the Cambrian Explosion–Terrestrial or Cosmic?",the publication revives a controversial idea concerning the origin of life,an idea stretching back to Ancient Greece,known as'panspermia.a'.

其中的原因与论文本身提出的证据和主张一样引人入胜。题为"寒武纪大爆发的起因——地球还是宇宙?"该出版物重新提出了一个关于生命起源的有争议的想法,这个想法可以追溯到古希腊,被称为"panspermia.a"

Academics like Francis Crick,an English scientist who co-discovered the structure of the DNA molecule(alongside James D.Watson),argues that there is no possible way that the DNA molecule could have originated on Earth.The generally accepted theory in this field,as explained above,is that we are the result of a bunch of molecules accidentally bumping into each other,creating life.

英国科学家弗朗西斯克里克(FrancisCrick)与詹姆斯•d•沃森(Jamesd.Watson)共同发现了DNA分子的结构。克里克等学者认为,DNA分子不可能起源于地球。正如上面解释的那样,这个领域普遍接受的理论是,我们是一群分子意外地相互碰撞的结果,创造了生命。

However,according to Crick,we are the result of what is now known as Directed Panspermia.Crick and British chemist Leslie Orgel published their paper on it in July of 1973,hinting that we were brought here by chance,or by some sort of intelligence from somewhere else in the universe.

然而,根据克里克的说法,我们是现在被称为。克里克和英国化学家莱斯利·奥格尔在19737月对它进行了研究,暗示我们来到这里是偶然的,或者是来自宇宙其他地方的某种智能。

This is interesting,because then you can get into the lore of creation stories that exists within ancient cultures from around the world,one would be our relation to,for example,what many indigenous culture refer to as the'Star People.'

这很有趣,因为这样你就可以了解存在于世界各地古代文化中的关于创世的故事,例如,我们与许多土著文化的关系

I'm not even going to go into all of the strange skeletal remains that have been completely left out of the record,like the remains of giants,for example.

我甚至不打算去研究那些完全被遗忘在记录之外的奇怪的骨骼遗骸,比如巨人的遗骸。

Read&share:9 Scientific Facts Prove the"Theory of Evolution"is False

阅读和分享:

The Takeaway

外延

The agenda for the maintenance of the neo-Darwinian version of the'Theory of Evolution'was nothing less than to move people away from the notion of an intelligent creator and towards a perception founded in scientific materialism.In this way,those who funded and controlled scientific activity on the planet would have tremendous power.

维持""的新达尔文版本的议程无非是让人们远离智慧创造者的概念,转向建立在科学唯物主义基础上的观念。通过这种方式,那些资助和控制地球上科学活动的人将拥有巨大的力量。

Darwin's theory may have served humanity for a certain phase of our own evolution,but now it is holding us back.It's time for all of us to pierce more deeply into an understanding of the nature of the creation of life if we are to become creators ourselves by studying the current evidence.

达尔文的理论可能在我们自身进化的某个阶段为人类服务,但现在它正在拖我们的后腿。如果我们想通过研究现有的证据成为创造者,那么是时候让我们所有人更深入地理解创造生命的本质了。

As the group of 500 scientists asked,'How cleanly and quickly can the field get over Darwin,and move on?—with due allowance for every Darwinist's having to study all the evidence for himself?'

正如500名科学家组成的研究小组提出的问题,'这个领域能够多么干净、多么迅速地跨越达尔文,继续前进?ー考虑到每一个达尔文主义者都必须亲自研究所有的证据。

来源:http://humansarefree.com/2019/08/prominent-yale-professor-explains-how.html

zhunbeizhuanbian
  • 本文由 发表于 2019年10月4日13:03:38
  • 除非特殊声明,本站文章均来自网络,转载请务必保留本文链接