- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Darwin’s Doubt: the mathematical problem of evolution and DNA
Posted on 12/30/25 at 8:53 am
Posted on 12/30/25 at 8:53 am
This guy, Stephen C. Meyer, is being interviewed by Ben Shapiro, an lays out a rather good argument as to why there are problems with the theory of evolution as is commonly accepted today; namely that the amount of mutations at the DNA level necessary to create single cell life and have it evolve into the vast diversity of complex life we see today, which includes us, simply does not add up. The theory of evolution can explain microevolution, but when it comes to macroevolution, that’s where the math simply doesn’t math.
The video is a little under 10 minutes, well worth the watch.
24
Posted on 12/30/25 at 8:56 am to Darth_Vader
Seen it before, enjoyed it
Seems there are a few problems with accepted science
Seems there are a few problems with accepted science
Posted on 12/30/25 at 9:01 am to Pepe Lepew
quote:
Seems there are a few problems with accepted science
I know this subject will be a flashpoint for some who treat evolution more like a religion than science. But if they really do worship science, then they should adhere to the teachings of scientific method. And if thy do that, the only logical explanation is that the theory of evolution as we know it today simply cannot explain macroevolution.
Posted on 12/30/25 at 9:04 am to Darth_Vader
quote:so then what does?
And if thy do that, the only logical explanation is that the theory of evolution as we know it today simply cannot explain macroevolution.
Posted on 12/30/25 at 9:04 am to Darth_Vader
Downvotes away 
Posted on 12/30/25 at 9:09 am to WestCoastAg
quote:
And if thy do that, the only logical explanation is that the theory of evolution as we know it today simply cannot explain macroevolution.
quote:
so then what does?
Simply put, an I’m not a scientist, though I do possess the ability to use logic and reason, if random mutations cannot explain macroevolution, then the only alternative is that there is nothing random in the makeup of the genetic information contained in DNA.
Posted on 12/30/25 at 9:10 am to Darth_Vader
Recycled intelligent design arguments.
Posted on 12/30/25 at 9:10 am to Darth_Vader
quote:
if random mutations cannot explain macroevolution
You’re assuming that they cannot though.
Posted on 12/30/25 at 9:10 am to Darth_Vader
quote:
The theory of evolution can explain microevolution
Yes. Adaptation and selective breeding; not the evolution of new species.
Posted on 12/30/25 at 9:11 am to Pepe Lepew
quote:
Downvotes away
I fully anticipated that. They cannot argue against the points the guy in the video made, but their religious belief in the theory of evolution will not allow them to accept anything that goes against it. Thus, all they have left to them at that point is a meaningless down vote.
Posted on 12/30/25 at 9:12 am to Darth_Vader
quote:
The theory of evolution can explain microevolution, but when it comes to macroevolution, that’s where the math simply doesn’t math.
Its complete nonsense. This guy has been debunked many many many times
Posted on 12/30/25 at 9:13 am to Pepe Lepew
quote:
Seems there are a few problems with accepted science
Its the theory of evolution, not the law of evolution. You aren't really into science if you aren't into challenging and proving or disproving theory.
Scientific me says the timeline must be incorrect. Normal me says God and moves on to worry about something else.
Posted on 12/30/25 at 9:13 am to Pepe Lepew
quote:
Downvotes away
Ok….gave you your first downvote. Come on….give him what he wants.
This post was edited on 12/30/25 at 9:15 am
Posted on 12/30/25 at 9:13 am to Mo Jeaux
quote:
if random mutations cannot explain macroevolution
quote:
You’re assuming that they cannot though.
False. Watch the video. Scientists have done the math on random mutations being the source of macroevolution and it simply doesn’t add up.
Posted on 12/30/25 at 9:14 am to Darth_Vader
quote:meaning?
then the only alternative is that there is nothing random in the makeup of the genetic information contained in DNA
Posted on 12/30/25 at 9:15 am to Darth_Vader
quote:
False. Watch the video.
I’ve read plenty of criticisms of Stephen Meyer’s arguments, many of which he presents as settled facts, and which you just believe.
Posted on 12/30/25 at 9:17 am to Bridget O
quote:
Ok….gave you your first downvote. Come on….give him what he wants.
Thank you
Posted on 12/30/25 at 9:19 am to Darth_Vader
Your problem is you're watching him talking to Shapiro. You'd get way more out of it if you watched him talking to a peer who challenges some of his assertions.
If I start talking to you about stuff in my field of work (assuming you're not in same field), I can tell you a lot of lies that will sound logical to you.
If I start talking to you about stuff in my field of work (assuming you're not in same field), I can tell you a lot of lies that will sound logical to you.
Posted on 12/30/25 at 9:21 am to Darth_Vader
quote:One variable to add to whether or not there has been enough time for enough mutations to occur to explain macroevolution is non-random but natural factors such as from the environment (e.g. radiation).
False. Watch the video. Scientists have done the math on random mutations being the source of macroevolution and it simply doesn’t add up.
Posted on 12/30/25 at 9:22 am to Darth_Vader
If you have to go to YouTube with your scientific hypothesis…you don’t have a serious scientific hypothesis.
This shite has been debunked time and time again, but it isn’t a good faith argument so it never dies. Keep getting bamboozled, though.
This shite has been debunked time and time again, but it isn’t a good faith argument so it never dies. Keep getting bamboozled, though.
Page 1 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News