Saturday, January 26, 2019


This stream is little more than an hour-long distillation of things I've previously written to explain my skepticism regarding the theory of evolution by natural selection, or, more properly, the Theorum of Evolution by (probably) Natural Selection, Sexual Selection, Biased Mutation, Genetic Drift, and Gene Flow, but a number of the viewers apparently found it to be of interest.
My seven core reasons:
  1. The evidence doesn't exist.
  2. The historical timelines that purportedly support it are constantly mutating.
  3. The theory is a complete failure as a predictive model.
  4. The theory is scientifically and technologically irrelevant. There are no evolutionary engineers.
  5. Theoretical epicycles are increasingly required to maintain its viability.
  6. The theory is a repeated failure as an explanatory model.
  7. There is a very long track record of scientific fraud surrounding it.
My favorite quote about the scientists working in the field of evolutionary is definitely this one:

Scientists usually do not use experimental data because such experiments can be difficult to conduct and because they are very time-consuming.

Labels: , ,


Blogger Lazarus January 26, 2019 9:16 PM  

This is a classic darkstream.

Complex subject rendered comprehensible with little divergence.

Blogger John January 26, 2019 9:50 PM  

Vox, is it relevant to the economic analogy that market actors are willful/imagination and unpredictable/irrational, whereas chemicals are the not?

We do see engineered structures emerging spontaneously from the market, even if we have no way of predicting it.

Blogger Zaklog the Great January 26, 2019 10:08 PM  

I must say, there's a certain irony in that one of your objections is that part of the theory is "constantly mutating". Was that an intentional joke?

Blogger Vaughan Williams January 26, 2019 10:12 PM  

"because they are very time-consuming." Heh. If I wasn't struck silent by the sheer artistry of that joke, I'd be roaring and slapping my knee right now. Sure you don't want to do some stand-up with Owen?

Anonymous Anonymous January 26, 2019 10:24 PM  

Vox, I love you and this was an interesting stream, but the quip about evolution implying that whites are "more evolved" was ridiculous.

If it was also found that an ancestor of west Africans had a mutation that made him faster, would that simultaneously imply that west Africans are "more evolved?" Of course not - that would be a contradiction. Yet it would follow from the same logic that led to your conclusion that whites are "more evolved."

Your dismissal of the rebuttal that it's "not in any direction" is without merit. The fact is that if evolution is true, then different populations will change in different ways, as the result of of different mutations. You could make a rhetorical argument that a particular direction is "more evolved," and that is where any "racist" element would come in. Or you could make a technical argument based on the number of mutations in different populations, but that would be much more involved than your argument, and would be entirely unconvincing.

But to answer your question, yes, this made me more skeptical of TENS.

Blogger JAG January 26, 2019 10:36 PM  

Evolution discussions sure do bring out the gammas in the comments section on youtube.

Blogger sammibandit January 26, 2019 10:51 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger sammibandit January 26, 2019 10:54 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger sammibandit January 26, 2019 11:00 PM  

Regarding that biologists cannot describe rate of evolution I thought about how physicists can describe velocity.

>In mathematical physics, the speed of an object is the ratio of the distance traveled divided by the time it takes to travel that distance, without regard for the direction it is traveling in.


If there is a change in speed, in direction, or in both, then the object has a changing velocity. This is called an acceleration.

There ought to be analogies in TENS to speed, direction, and acceleration. Something like over x years, y mutation became prevalent at a rate of z. It ought to be as simple as measuring bones against timescales. We can do it for pottery so why not bones?

These things are articles of faith so that no one has heard a necessary, scientific explanation to why, for example, our teeth allegedly got smaller and our forebains bigger.

Like you said, it's just observation. I can put into series all hominid skulls I want (many of which are put together out of fragments so we don't know what they look like) but I'll never, ever, be able to explain why australopithecus afarensis "evolved" into homo habilis, into homo ergaster, and so on.

Blogger JAG January 26, 2019 11:09 PM  

OT, but at least mentioned in that stream, and appropriate to Vox: You mentioned a game you helped design called Rebel Moon Revolution. I found this link, but want to make sure I'm not ripping you off by downloading it and depriving of royalties. Is this an ok source to download it?

There was another game mentioned here a while back, and IIRC it was called Elvetica or something similar. I am interested in playing that as well if there is still a download link somewhere for it.

Blogger Ahnaf Ibn Qais January 26, 2019 11:22 PM  

Excellent Stream VD! By far your Best Darkstream ever!

(Yes I am biased because Phil of Science is my field, but whatever lol :P )

You're one of the very few "public figures" out there willing to openly challenge the current Rhetorical salience and Cultural hegemony that TENS has over the masses. A simple "Thank You" is not enough to express the gratitude I have for you taking the time, effort, courage and (most importantly) sheer balls to do this.

If it is any help, just remember that the Vast majority of Philosophers in Phil of Science (especially Phil of Biology) are *behind you* regarding several key points you raised in tonight's stream (especially with regard to how the TENS people utilize Post Hoc Ergo Procter Hoc Rubbish all the time). Thank You Again for all you do! :)

Blogger Justin Bailey January 26, 2019 11:31 PM  

These are my favorite kind of darkstreams.

Blogger One Deplorable DT January 26, 2019 11:35 PM  

Excellent stream. Thank you Vox. I don't know if I could be more skeptical of TENS (I'm obviously in the 'violates entropy' camp), but I still learned from watching your approach to it.

I love that you brought up the fact that the mutations have to come first. Even evolutionary biologists sometimes fall into the subtle trap of thinking or speaking as if environmental pressure can cause mutations which will help the organism deal with said pressure.

Regarding the question on mutation: mutation is any permanent change in a genome. It is not limited to the loss of information. Obviously evolutionists and 'violates entropy' skeptics differ as to whether or not mutation can result in entirely new information. The question probably came up because some creationists have presented mutations as always being negative or always resulting in a loss.

Blogger My Dead Gramps January 27, 2019 12:00 AM  

"The theory is scientifically and technologically irrelevant. There are no evolutionary engineers."

On reddit, a supposed biochemist/geneticist was baffled by a colleague who rejected evolution. I asked what the problem was as long as they could do their job/experiment practically and I got hit with boilerplate evo talk that you learn in high school.

Blogger SirHamster January 27, 2019 12:55 AM  

Nattie Ike wrote:Vox, I love you and this was an interesting stream, but the quip about evolution implying that whites are "more evolved" was ridiculous.

By whatever standard that humans are more "evolved" than chimps, you can probably make a solidly scientific claim that the group of people who faked going to the moon are more "evolved" than mud hut dwellers.

Blogger TSE January 27, 2019 1:21 AM  

Another problem for Evolutionists is that Primates have 24 pairs of chromosomes, while Humans only have 23! Seems that Human Chromosome 2 has been somehow modified -

Since the mid-1800s, biologists have generally shared the belief that all living things descended from a single common ancestor. Based on fossil evidence and comparative anatomy, Charles Darwin proposed that humans and great apes–which include chimpanzees, gorillas, and orangutans–share a common ancestor that lived several million years ago. More recent research has propped up Darwin's theory of common descent (also called common ancestry): genome analysis reveals the genetic difference between humans and chimps to be less than 2 percent. In other words, humans and chimps have DNA sequences that are greater than 98 percent similar.

While the genetic similarity between human and ape strengthened Darwin's theory, a significant, unexplained discrepancy remained. While great apes all have 48 chromosomes (24 pairs), humans have only 46 (23 pairs). If humans and apes shared a common ancestor, shouldn't both have the same number of chromosomes in their cells?

In 2005, a peer-reviewed scientific journal published results of the tests. It turns out that chromosome 2, which is unique to the human lineage of evolution, emerged as a result of the head-to-head fusion of two ancestral chromosomes that remain separate in other primates. Three genetic indicators provide strong, if not conclusive, evidence of fusion. First, the banding (or dye pattern) of human chromosome 2 closely matches that of two separate chromosomes found in apes (chimp chromosome 2 and an extra chromosome that does not match any other human chromosome). Second, a chromosome normally has one centromere, or central point at which a chromosome's two identical strands are joined. Yet remnants of a second, presumably inactive centromere can be found on human chromosome 2. And third, whereas a normal chromosome has readily identifiable, repeating DNA sequences called telomeres at both ends, chromosome 2 also has telomere sequences not only at both ends but also in the middle.

Blogger Seth S January 27, 2019 1:24 AM  

Do you have a theory to explain vestigial limbs,such as hind legs on whales?

Blogger TSE January 27, 2019 1:28 AM  

Then there is this.... which is always subject to later revision... but here it is:

DNA test results confirmed: Paracas skulls are not human – Further testing planned

"As if the shape of the skulls was not mysterious enough, a recent DNA analysis performed on some of the skulls presented some of the most enigmatic and incredible results that challenge everything we know about the origin and human evolutionary tree.

This is where the details about the Paracas skulls gets interesting. The Paracas skulls are anything but ordinary. The cranium of the Paracas skulls is are least 25 % larger and up to 60% heavier than the skulls of regular human beings. Researchers firmly believe that these traits could not have been achieved through head bindings as some scientists suggest. Not only are they different in weight, the Paracas skulls are also structurally different and only have one parietal plate while ordinary humans have two.

The director of the Paracas Museum of History sent five samples of the Paracas skulls to undergo genetic testing, and the results were mesmerizing. The samples which consisted of hair, skin teeth and some fragments of cranial bones gave incredible details that have fueled the mystery surrounding these anomalous skulls. The genetic laboratory to where the samples were sent was not informed of the origin of the skulls in order to avoid ‘influenced results’.

Interestingly, the mitochondrial DNA, which is inherited from the mother, showed mutations that were unknown to any man, primate or animal found on planet Earth. The mutations present in the samples of the Paracas skulls suggest that researchers were dealing with a completely new ‘human-like being’, very different from Homo sapiens, Neanderthals or Denisovans."

Blogger Jon D. January 27, 2019 1:42 AM  

Wonderful stream and perfect reasons why this shouldn't count as a "science".

Anonymous Anonymous January 27, 2019 1:42 AM  

FYI: the 98 percent figure is bunk, produced by carefully choosing which parts to compare, while assuming that the vast majority of the genome is "junk".

As we (A) begin to demonstrate that none of the genome is junk, and (B) perform more inclusive comparisons, the similarity is falling precipitously.

Don't take my word for it; check it out.

Blogger TSE January 27, 2019 1:44 AM  

@1 17 - Do you have a theory to explain vestigial limbs,such as hind legs on whales?

Who has claimed those are vestigial limbs?

Who has observed a Whale walk upon land?

Who has observed a Whale with limbs in those positions?

Where is the evolutionary fossil progression showing Whales with limbs?

You state a conclusion - Whales have vestigial limbs", provide NO evidence, and then want to challenge and debate?????!


Anonymous Anonymous January 27, 2019 1:49 AM  

Regarding Vox' point about statistics and the relative ignorance of biologists, it put me in mind of the infamous hockey stick formula produced by a globally celebrated climatologist.

It took a statistician to show the world that the hockey stick was in the formula, not the data.

"History may not repeat but it sure does rhyme"

Blogger TSE January 27, 2019 1:59 AM  

Lloyd Pye's thoughts on Evolution - he was a proponent of Intervention Theory. It does seem that in Humans - somehow - and miraculously - two genes fused into one - and the mutation was beneficial - all across the board - an entire species experienced this genetic shift at once - so fertile breeding still occurred amongst a population where all like Beings suddenly experienced the same shift at the same time - 24 to 23 - and Homo Sapiens suddenly arose. Miracle upon miracle.

It is possible. Like given enough time - a Monkey who is provided with a typewriter will write an entire Unabridged Dictionary - Chance says it is possible.

Watch at your own discretion: Lloyd Pye - Human Origins Theory & Starchild Skull

Anonymous Anonymous January 27, 2019 2:01 AM  

"Nobody uses evolutionary theory to do anything!"

Except to sell books.

Blogger Tatooine Sharpshooters' Club January 27, 2019 2:03 AM  

I love that you brought up the fact that the mutations have to come first.

Me too, as any thoughtful analysis of this renders the timeline necessary for "natural selection" absurdly large. Unless one willfully ignores the incredibly high mortality rates in most critters (including, for most of our existence, humans), the odds of a mutation in a single individual spreading successfully enough to cause speciation are infinitesimal.

the 98 percent figure is bunk

Even if it were true, that "mere 2% difference" is 60,000,000 base pairs.

the hockey stick was in the formula

When it isn't plain ol' fraud:

Blogger TSE January 27, 2019 2:14 AM  

Evolution & Metamorphosis of Life From Other Planets. Even the Gods have Gods, by Rhawn Joseph, Ph.D.

An alternative Theory to Darwinian Evolution...

Blogger CostelloM January 27, 2019 2:20 AM  

Vox please write "The Irrational Evolutionist". Yes you've got too much on your plate already. And to the ilk before you can say "WHY DON'T *YOU* DO IT!" answer: I'm not Vox Day. I'm not a talented writer and I lack the intellect and acumen to create such a work. As an aside remember when "Vox write the book!" was a thing on this blog? Yeah... that's how long I've been here.

Anonymous Anonymous January 27, 2019 2:25 AM  

"Me too, as any thoughtful analysis of this renders the timeline necessary for "natural selection" absurdly large."

Renders it impossible. Remember that, as the timeline grows larger, so does the possibility (however equally "slight" as the supposed reproductive advantage) of the entire "advantaged" population being wiped out by predation, accident, etc.

The point Vox made about selection is critical here: there simply isn't sufficient selection to eliminate everything that is not advantaged by the mutation and so the chance of it becoming ubiquitous is actually nil.

The "selection cost" (link to economics; HT Vox) required to ensure survival and spread of the advantaged genome is enormous (as per the quoted Dawkins demonstration, you have to eliminate ruthlessly EVERYTHING else in every generation) and simply does not happen.

In "Genetic Entropy" John Sanford says that the selection cost required to even slow down human genetic entropy would be horrific, on the order of 90 % of every generation would have to be eliminated, and simply bears no relation to what actually happens in the real world.

Blogger 1st Earl Hardwicke January 27, 2019 2:39 AM  

Why does the theory of evolution get targeted more at Christianity, than any other religion?

Blogger Azure Amaranthine January 27, 2019 2:49 AM  

"Scientists usually do not use experimental data because such experiments can be difficult to conduct and because they are very time-consuming."

Translation: "When we said that Christians were 'clap your hands if you believe' we were talking about ourselves"

Blogger Seth S January 27, 2019 2:55 AM  

@21 hey Sperg, I just asked a question, not for a debate.

Blogger TSE January 27, 2019 3:01 AM  

@31 - and what is your evidence that Whales have vestigial limbs?

You stated it is so - based upon what?

Circular reasoning?

Someone told me it was so - so it was - and I asserted it was - based upon someone told me it was.

That's simply hearsay.

Thanks for playing.

Blogger TSE January 27, 2019 3:05 AM  

Technocracy News & Trends....

And pics from my Pilgrimage...

From the Georgia Guidestones:

A message consisting of a set of ten guidelines or principles is engraved on the Georgia Guidestones in eight different languages, one language on each face of the four large upright stones. Moving clockwise around the structure from due north, these languages are: English, Spanish, Swahili, Hindi, Hebrew, Arabic, Chinese, and Russian.

Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.
Guide reproduction wisely — improving fitness and diversity.
Unite humanity with a living new language.
Rule passion — faith — tradition — and all things with tempered reason.
Protect people and nations with fair laws and just courts.
Let all nations rule internally resolving external disputes in a world court.
Avoid petty laws and useless officials.
Balance personal rights with social duties.
Truth — beauty — love — seeking harmony with the infinite.
Be not a cancer on the earth — Leave room for nature — Leave room for nature.

Anonymous Anonymous January 27, 2019 3:07 AM  

"Let all nations rule internally resolving external disputes in a world court."

It really is a shame that logic has become so unfashionable.

We live in the Age of Unreason, what you might call a natural evolution from the Age of Reason.

Blogger Solon January 27, 2019 3:11 AM  

Because the current (((elites))) of the world have a hard-on for antagonizing everything Christian. Forget that every other religion has stories of an extra-natural Being or Beings creating man and the world, obviously Christians are stupid and wrong, because they're Christians.

Have you not been paying attention?

Blogger Станислав Бартошевич January 27, 2019 3:22 AM  

The greatest problem with the RM+NS evolutionary theory is that the proposed mechanism simply doesn't work. Sanford (who, accidentally, earned his bread working with the genes) described theoretical reasons why in "Genetic Entropy", but to use the simplest version of his argument, the idea that an instruction for making a lightbulb can turn into an instruction for making an atomic reactor by iterative accumulation of typographic errors and discarding those instructions executing which failed to produce working lightbulbs is nonsense. And he was led to his theoretical thought by the fact that in his working practice exposing plants to mutation-accelerating factors failed to produce anything but degradation and genetic breakdowns.

Blogger Seth S January 27, 2019 3:29 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger TSE January 27, 2019 3:29 AM  

We are now in the Age of Pisces - moving into that of Aquarius - via the precession of the Zodiac.

From an Age of Iron to that of Gold.

@34 -
It really is a shame that logic has become so unfashionable.

We live in the Age of Unreason, what you might call a natural evolution from the Age of Reason.


From the Age of Pisces to that of Aquarius - the Water Bearer who will wash away all sins.

Blogger Seth S January 27, 2019 3:35 AM  

@32 paleontology was a requirement for my B.S in geology, even though I had no interest in it, as I was pursuing a career in economic geology. I remember the Prof discussing vestigial limbs, VD's intro graphic reminded of it. Our text had photos of hind legs on whales. The mainstream view is that whales evolved from bears, making them unique as most land animals evolved from the sea, not the other way around. There are other examples, such as human babies born with tails.

Blogger TSE January 27, 2019 3:57 AM  

@39 - OK - you met the "Requirements"

Now think for yourself.

Did you ever wonder why Humans have the most diversity and genetic defects on the Planet? Why Gene two was sloppily merged with 3?

Ummm. Could it be that we - ourselves are products of genetic engineering - and not well done.

And why should the infinite and endless Universe care?

You are a lost Soul in search of your Creator - ask your god for the answers you seek.

Blogger TSE January 27, 2019 4:00 AM  

Overshoot Loop -

By Jay Hanson - one of the greatest Thinkers - ever -

I have been forced to review the key lessons that I have learned concerning human nature and collapse over the last 25 years. Our collective behavior is the quandary that must be overcome before anything can be done to mitigate the coming global social collapse. The single most-important lesson for me was that we cannot re-wire (literally, because thought is physical[1]) our basic political agendas through reading or discussion alone. Moreover, since our thoughts are subject to physical law, we do not have the free-will to either think or behave autonomously.

We are “political” animals from birth until death. Everything we do or say can be seen as part of lifelong political agendas. Despite decades of scientific warnings, we continue to destroy our life-support system because that behavior is part of our inherited (DNA, RNA, etc.) hard wiring. We use scientific warnings, like all inter-animal communications, for cementing group identity and for elevating one’s own status (politics).

Only physical hardship can force us to rewire our collective-political agendas. I am certainly not the first to make the observation, but now, after 25 years of study and debate, I am totally certain. The “net energy principle” guarantees that our global supply lines will collapse.

The rush to social collapse cannot be stopped no matter what is written or said. Humans have never been able to intentionally-avoid collapse because fundamental system-wide change is only possible after the collapse begins.

What about survivors? Within a couple of generations, all lessons learned from the collapse will be lost, and people will revert to genetic baselines. I wish it weren’t so, but all my experience screams “it’s hopeless.” Nevertheless, all we can do is the best we can and carry on...

I am thankful for the Internet where I can find others bright enough to discuss these complex ideas and help me to understand them.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash January 27, 2019 4:02 AM  

Seth Schueler wrote:hey Sperg, I just asked a question, not for a debate.
What you asked for was a beating. He was being nice.

Blogger TSE January 27, 2019 4:10 AM  

On Collapse....

The Christmas present nobody wants sits under the tree: a worldwide finance crisis along with an establishment that appears to be coming apart at the seams.

The status quo is unraveling from all sides, at the top especially, where managers cannot conceal their panic:

Blogger Azure Amaranthine January 27, 2019 5:06 AM  

Ask a loaded question, get a loaded answer. Possibly both barrels if we're not feeling lazy.

Blogger InformationMerchant January 27, 2019 5:10 AM  

Great stream. These are the best kinds of streams. It reminded me of the demolitions of free trade arguments on Periscope.

My only regret was you had all those books out and didn't say the line. "That is why I am still a skeptic concerning the secularism's epic myth, despite having read every book ever published by Richard Dawkins, despite having read Wilson, and Gould, and Shermer, and Hauser, and a number of other well-regarded evolutionary popularizers. At this point, it might be more accurate to say I am an evolutionary skeptic because I have read those books and been astounded by the panoply of obvious logical flaws, evasions, and handwaving that I have encountered in them."

Blogger Mark Stoval January 27, 2019 5:21 AM  

I have been in the "intelligent design" camp since before it was called that. I have always thought that TENS was just an attack on Christianity, and not science.

I believe that the true believers want to believe that life "just happens" on any planet that can support life and that most of them do. We are not special.

I also believe that the true believers want to believe that life always gets better; that we evolve towards perfection. They think that they can help evolution out by perfecting man's nature. Getting rid of 'badthink' will do the trick!

Blogger Gregory the Tall January 27, 2019 6:26 AM  

1. The descent of TENS is proof of the "survival of the fittest" theory. This theory, of course, has nothing to do with the "amoeba to elephant" through randon or non-random mutation narrative. It just means that animals with a thicker fur of coat will have better chances for survival in a cold climate - at least until they meet "naked apes" endowed with a soul and reason by the Creator.
2. Any calculation of the statistical probability of the amoeba to elephant narrative fails miserably and has to revert to conjectures like the earth actually being trillions and trillions of years old or to the supposed existence of multiverses, interstellar warp drive travel, highly developed grey aliens highly skilled in gene splicing etc. (why are they often so boringly grey - do they not want beauty in their lives - who made them?).
3. Personally I have settled for the explanation that God has used the same building blocks to create a vast variety of species, just like stones can be used to build cottages and cathedrals alike. Hence the genetic similarity of the species.

Blogger Pierre January 27, 2019 6:35 AM  

Resident Moron™ wrote:statistics and the relative ignorance of biologists

Biologists are math gods compared to social scientists though...

Blogger damaris.tighe January 27, 2019 6:38 AM  

OT "Jordan Petersen Dismantled"

Blogger Damelon Brinn January 27, 2019 7:03 AM  

I also believe that the true believers want to believe that life always gets better; that we evolve towards perfection.

It's the Star Trek version of evolution, held by Gen X evolution believers and probably most others. It says that evolution means the species keeps getting "better": smarter, more moral, more peace-loving, etc. And therefore our ancestors were dumber, less moral, more violent, etc. That's why they tend to be progressives who reject the lessons of history out of hand. Thanks to evolution, we are better than our ancestors, and we can be sure that our descendants will be better yet, as long as they have Science.

Of course, evolution promises no such thing. You could easily argue that environmental pressures would reward the violent over the peaceful, the selfish over the altruistic. Whose genes have been passed down more, Genghis Khan's or Mother Teresa's? Yet they believe that the "good" genes will prevail.

If you lay this out for them in black and white, they will claim it's not what they believe, but it is. They have faith that the future will be better, but they don't want to put that faith in God, so they put it in evolution and science instead. It's a lot like Intelligent Design but without a particular designer, just evolution itself wisely producing "better" designs because that's how it works.

Blogger The Cooler January 27, 2019 7:16 AM  

A comment in the chat box:

"Joe Rogan is a mutant strain of wild rice."

That had me crying.

Good stream, Vox.

Blogger Teek-Lor January 27, 2019 7:24 AM  

The molecular biology revolution killed evolution. One alteration of a three dimensional protein structure can kill the organism. Or rather, there are so many possible areas of mutation that they need more time than is available for chance to try everything. Where is the evidence. At least flat earthers are fun.

Blogger Gregory the Tall January 27, 2019 7:43 AM  

The only evidence we have for this is his size, however.

Blogger camcleat January 27, 2019 8:23 AM  


"Tatooine Sharpshooters' Club wrote:the hockey stick was in the formula

When it isn't plain ol' fraud:

Putting the result into the math was the mechanism of the plain o' fraud.

When a random data was thrown at the mathematical model, it still produced "global warming," thus showing the model was programmed to produce the result.

Blogger VD January 27, 2019 8:35 AM  

Do you have a theory to explain vestigial limbs,such as hind legs on whales?

No. I have never spent any time even considering the question.

Blogger ash January 27, 2019 8:39 AM  

Do you have a theory to explain vestigial limbs,such as hind legs on whales?

Why should he? They don't exist. Vox (generally) concerns himself with the facts, not some scientist's appendix fetish.

Blogger Gregory the Tall January 27, 2019 8:58 AM  

At least TENS explains the vestigial lobster claws Jordan Peterson has according to his radiologist.

Blogger Zaklog the Great January 27, 2019 9:31 AM  

@56 I just looked up images of a whale skeleton. I didn't get as close a look as I'd like, but they appear to have something on the back half of the spine that could reasonably be interpreted as the bone structure of vestigial legs. I'm not seriously entering this debate one way or the other, just pointing out the facts.

Blogger camcleat January 27, 2019 9:45 AM  

Entertaining that point:

How can you distinguish between a bone structure that was "evolving into" legs from one that "evolved from" legs?

In other words, doesn't use of the term "vesigial" imply a tautology?

Anonymous Anonymous January 27, 2019 9:55 AM  


Tru dat.

Blogger stevo January 27, 2019 10:17 AM  

It's like the Joe Rogan/Duncan Trussell belief that humanity is moving steadily toward an enlightened state, probably involving virtual reality and lots of DMT.

Blogger David Ray Milton January 27, 2019 11:16 AM  

Vox, to be honest that is the first of your darkstreams that I have made it all of the way through. Haha.

But the subject is fascinating and I would be interested in hearing more. I haven’t heard anyone present anti-Darwinian info since I was a child and my church hosted a creation seminar. And while I am not really interested in proving the creation account to be literally true, any more light you could shine on debunking this narrative (both TENS specifically or more broadly iffy “science”) would be cool. It seeems to be the bedrock of the modern secular outlook (for myself included). If these theories fall, there is a lot that comes down with it. Thanks again.

Blogger sammibandit January 27, 2019 11:32 AM  

Thanks. He seems particularly thick-skulled/dim.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine January 27, 2019 1:04 PM  

With regards to whether mutation is necessarily a loss of genetic information, it is not.

Biologists will be quick to point out certain types of plants that actually become more resistant to drought due to the side effect of thickened cell walls caused by multiple otherwise redundant copies of their original chromosomes.

It's not that there's necessarily a loss of information, there can be a gain in information... it's just that it's never truly both new and useful at the same time. Copied information is more information, but it's not new information.

Blogger Stephen St. Onge January 27, 2019 1:17 PM  

For me, the biggest problem with TENS is intermediate forms. Darwin’s gradualism say the evolution of the bat from some squirrel-or-chipmunk-like animal should show very long fingers that are not yet big enough to support wings. Yet we find no such fossils, and it’s difficult to conceive of any intermediate form that would have any reproductive advantage.

So for evolution to be true, it seems like “saltation” must also be true, saltations being abrupt leaps introducing new features as a unit. But no present theory can account for this.

To me, the rational thing is to say that TENS explains much of biology (e.g., how one doglike species could give rise to dogs, wolves, coyotes, and hyenas), but not everything. But apparently, an honest admission of ignorance is not allowed.

Anonymous Anonymous January 27, 2019 1:28 PM  

On the previous human/chimp DNA comparison, the irony of it is that more recent (non cherry-picked) comparisons produce a genome similarity of about 85%. But since "accepted" neodarwinian theory demands a chimp/human ancestor at around 3 million years ago, a divergence of 15% or more requires too much time, given the "accepted" mutation rate, to be plausible because it would upset every previous branching, destroying the asserted matchups with the current dating of the Cambriann explosion, and etc.

Ironic because these are the people who resolve every problem with the proposition that more time makes everything possible.

In the face of Vox' thoroughly brutal fisking of the theorem this is small potatoes, but however smalland light a straw it may be it goes on the same haystack mounted on the same camel's back nonetheless.

Blogger Vaughan Williams January 27, 2019 1:47 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Wraithburn January 27, 2019 1:49 PM  

The problem with the loss of information question is how the term information gets defined. Most evolutionists use the concept of Shannon Information as the definition, which is appropriated from the field of electronics.

Shannon Information is not concerned with the content of the message so much as it is concerned with the viability of message transfer over noisy channels with low loss. This isn't a terribly useful definition for the purposes, so Gitt has define information as, "… an encoded, symbolically represented message conveying expected action and intended purpose".

For this definition of information, a "gain" would be a major new feature that both did not exist before, was not algorithmically buried in the genome and revealed by recombination, and is not a degradation with a beneficial side effect like sickle cell.

Summing up, "Can mutation create new information? Yes, depending on what you mean by ‘information’. Also, ‘new’ does not necessarily imply ‘better’ or even ‘good’. When evolutionists cite examples of ‘new’ information, they are almost invariably citing evidence of new traits, but these traits are caused by the corruption of existing information."

Details and links to additional papers from this website:

Blogger Vaughan Williams January 27, 2019 1:52 PM  

Gregory the Great wrote:
3. Personally I have settled for the explanation that God has used the same building blocks to create a vast variety of species, just like stones can be used to build cottages and cathedrals alike. Hence the genetic similarity of the species.

Another analogy: DNA is a code, God is the coder. Like any coder, God believes in code re-use, hence the similar and repeated sequences found everywhere. Probably has whole libraries of code routines that can be customized on the fly. If DNA is the low level language, what is the high level language that generates the low level code for DNA. If we had such a language for generating molecules in chemistry, that might be a good start.

Blogger justaguy January 27, 2019 3:30 PM  

Although there are many great arguments against TENS, and these have been scientifically devastating, imho, once we understood the complexity of molecular biology in the 1950s, I think that the spiritual aspect of the argument prevents otherwise rational minds from grasping clear facts and drawing from them. To do so would normally force them to invalidate their own self of supremacy because "science and man has overcome God." In other words-- this is a spiritual battle not on of mind and reason.

So why would any argument they make actually sound reasonable? The answer pounds on their conscience and they can't clear it up without help. It was realizing how utterly bad the reasoning was for TENS that made me go back and analyze with fresh eyes what else K-12 taught me. My undergrad was physics and engineering so not much room for falsehood there- as opposed to k-12 where mindless recitation/regurgitation was required. It must be hard for someone who subjected themselves to a modern (post 1970s) liberal education to get rid of all of the falsehood they were taught as grreat enlightened truths.

Blogger Beardy Bear January 27, 2019 4:44 PM  

It's very simple, and you explained it perfectly: No experiment, no observation, no replication, no science.

Blogger phunktor January 27, 2019 9:13 PM  

“More evolved” like “arc of history”are expressions of the”teleology” bug in human mentation, the attribution of purpose to change over long time spans. “ stands to reason, dunnit?”— doesn’t!! It’s a rescaled variation on “post hoc ergo propter hoc”.

The inability to imagine WhieGenocide without ((((Them))) behind it proves nothing about (((Them))).
This critique is not intended to weaken the” its all coordinated(((Journolist)))”propaganda detection heuristic..

Blogger SirHamster January 28, 2019 2:19 AM  

1st Earl Hardwicke wrote:Why does the theory of evolution get targeted more at Christianity, than any other religion?

Evolution is used as a rationalization to not believe the truth.

Their highly specific opposition serves as a clue to the truth for the observant.

Blogger God Emperor Memes January 28, 2019 3:34 AM  

Yes, it is very hard. Almost impossible, especially if they went to any of the liberal brainwashing facilities known as "universities".
A member of my family got a chemistry degree at a Midwest university, but now has absolutely no ability for critical thinking.

Blogger God Emperor Memes January 28, 2019 3:35 AM  

Yes. It is well understood that early proponents of TOE/TENS were merely wicked men looking for justification for their immoral lives.

Blogger Digger Variant February 16, 2021 7:16 PM  

Human evolution over the past 100,000 years is consistent with evolutionary theory in that substantial subspeciation occurred through hybridization and geographic isolation.

Applying an Fst (genetic distance) of 0.1 to the DNA data of Cavalli-Sforza et al. -- -- results in the following extant subspecies of Homo sapiens being identified:

• Negroid -- in the Sub-Sahara;

• Australoid -- in Australia and New Guinea;

• Oceanoid -- in the Pacific islands and Southeast Asia (the latter incorrectly highlighted with the Mongoloids in the above figure);

• Mongoloid -- in East Asia, the Arctic, and the Americas; and,

• Caucasoid -- in West Asia North Africa, and Europe.

In addition to the obvious geographic isolation, extra-specific hybridization also contributed to the observed subspeciation in the human genome. All non-Negroids are Sapiens × Neanderthalensis hybrids. Australoids, Oceanoids, and probably Mongoloids are (Sapiens × Neanderthalensis) × Denisovan hybrids. An unknown hybridization, with Erectus?, occurred in the Mongoloids, and another unknown hybridization, with Heidelbergensis?, occurred in some of the Negroids.

If an Fst of 0.09 is used to identify subspecies two subspecies are apparent in the Sub-Sahara, the Papuoids are differentiated from the Australoids, and the Ameroids are differentiated from the Mongoloids.

Pseudoscientists vigorously push the idea that somehow humans are immune from evolution, despite the molecular evidence to the contrary. One way they do this is by denoting all extant humans as Homo sapiens sapiens and referring to observed diversity within this supposedly homogenous subspecies as racial. Zoology does not recognize race as a taxonomic level; the only level below species is subspecies. By inappropriately denoting us all as a single subspecies the cosmopolitan pseudoscientists eliminate the ability of biologists to point out the obvious subspeciation that has occurred.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts