Evolution using Opposing Electrical Charges

[MeganJ]

I was reading a website called theparkesprinciple.com and it talks about our senses are creating our own evolution with opposing electrical charges based on our contact with our environment. Could this be possible? Does this theory hold any value to Darwin's theory of evolution? I would appreciate any help with this. thanks

[Strange]

I skimmed through the website (I didn't see anything specifically about evolution). It is complete nonsense. So much so that it is hard to know where to begin pointing out the errors. Every page I looked at had unsupported claims and factual errors. For example on the page about energy, it says:

 

Solar Panels capture this Sunlight Energy and put it directly into DC batteries, without any type of conversion whatsoever

 

Which is just not true. We know very well how solar panels work, and they work by converting energy from one form (electromagnetic radiation) to another (electric current). If that energy is then stored in a battery, it is converted to another form (chemical energy).

 

There are similar factual errors on every page. Plus a lot of stuff that is just made up. There is no evidence to support any of the claims.

 

Just another pseudoscientific crank.

And another clanger:

 

In 1860 Angelo Seki ...was the first person to run starlight through a prism

 

No, that would have been Isaac Newton a couple of centuries earlier.

[MeganJ]

Thank you for your quick response and although I don’t want to nit pick I would have to say that you were not quite accurate in your reply.

The following is from wikepedia.

The English philosopher Roger Bacon (1214 – 1294) was the first person to recognize that sunlight passing through a glass of water could be split into colors.

Nearly four centuries later, Sir Isaac Newton coined the term “spectrum” to describe the rainbow of colors produced by sending sunlight through a prism. In 1666, he directed a beam of sunlight through a glass prism and noted the light from the Sun was composed of a continuous spectrum of colors. Newton was not equipped to study the spectrum and was unable to observe the spectrum in more detail. Later, using a telescope and prism, Newton viewed the light from Venus. Again, he noted the light contained a continuous spectrum. Newton’s work with spectral light was not broadly recognized, and little additional work on the nature of spectra was done for 150 years

In 1860 Pietro Angelo Secchi became the father of Astrophysics. (Because he was a priest) He was a pioneer in astronomical spectroscopy, and was one of the first scientists to state authoritatively that the Sun is a star.

Father Secchi made contributions to many areas of astronomy.

However, his main area of interest was astronomical spectroscopy. He invented the heliospectrograph, star spectrograph, and telespectroscope. He showed that certain absorption lines in the spectrum of the Sun were caused by absorption in the Earth's atmosphere.

Your reference to solar panels is also a little inaccurate.

Solar chemical refers to a number of possible processes that harness solar energy by absorbing sunlight in a chemical reaction. The idea is conceptually similar to photosynthesis in plants, which converts solar energy into the chemical bonds of glucose molecules, but without using living organisms, which is why it is also called artificial photosynthesis.

The Solar panel is completely different to this process, it does not have any chemicals in it to convert the energy; The Voltaic Cells only allows the movement of the sun’s rays to pass through to the battery and the battery is not a chemical driven power source, it is only a storage system as is said in that website (theparkesprinciple.com)

However, my question was in relation to Evolution and the possible use of opposing electrical charges as the driving force for this event. The information I read about is on the Creating Life page and if anyone could tell me if it is possible I would really appreciate it.

Thanks

[hypervalent_iodine]

That entire website is complete and utter rubbish (but did almost complete my crackpot bingo card) and I doubt anyone here has time to really list every reason for why. I will however point out my favourite image from the page you reference:

 

 

 

Which is preceded by the text:

 

"This Second Level Connection completes the building process of the entire first single cell to the point that it is a complete unit with a magnetic attraction power ratio of 2.25-1 holding it all together."

 

...right.

[Strange]

The English philosopher Roger Bacon (1214 – 1294) was the first person to recognize that sunlight passing through a glass of water could be split into colors.

And, of course, before that many millions of people had seen rainbows. Anyway, it just shows that the website is wrong about that detail (as it is about everything else).

 

In 1860 Pietro Angelo Secchi became the father of Astrophysics. (Because he was a priest)

I don't know why the fact he was a priest is relevant.

 

The Solar panel is completely different to this process, it does not have any chemicals in it to convert the energy; The Voltaic Cells only allows the movement of the sun’s rays to pass through to the battery and the battery is not a chemical driven power source, it is only a storage system as is said in that website

This is wrong in so many ways. Of course solar cells contain chemicals. Mainly silicon with small amounts of "dopants" in carefully controlled amounts. The way they work is well explained by current theory (which is how we are are able to design them in the first place). The vague and wildly-inaccurate ideas on that website would not allow someone to create a solar cell - it depends on them having already been created by current theory.

 

Also, batteries are entirely chemical storage devices. Whether it is lead-acid or NiMH, charging the cell causes chemical changes which can be reversed to generate electric current.

 

However, my question was in relation to Evolution and the possible use of opposing electrical charges as the driving force for this event. The information I read about is on the Creating Life page and if anyone could tell me if it is possible I would really appreciate it.

Not really my area, but it looks like the same sort of inaccurate and unsupported claims as the rest of the web site.

 

For example, "photosynthesis is simply the expanding of the number of Carbon Atoms within a structure" is just not true.

 

Maybe someone else can do a more detailed critique, but as far as I can see it falls in the class of "not even wrong".

I have just looked at the section on light. It looks very familiar. Is this your father's work, by any chance?

Edited August 9, 2013 by Strange

[hyperion1is]

In the Light section:

"Most scientists’ opinion is that Light shines on and over objects, and that everything is lit up within and because of the presence of Light (Waves & Particles). In reality, Light does not exist until one or more Crealites hit a surface and displays the object itself."

 

 

So let me see if I got it right, he replaced "photons" with "Crealites" and describes the same thing, only that is not calling it Light anymore (something old), he calls it "Electromagnetic Energy" ("something new").

 

"In reality, all empty space is entirely taken up with Electromagnetic Energy in the form of Crealites and other wavelengths of Electromagnetic Energy traveling at speeds of up to 186,000 miles per second."

 

I'm not trying to disprove anything. I will try to read about those Crealites ; just out of curiosity.

[Mellinia]

Water does not reflect heat like the land. Water is a medium that allows most of the Crealites to penetrate it and allow them to operate in different ways than they do on a solid surface.

As the Crealites from the sun continue to bombard the water, the bicarbonate and carbonate ions in the water begin to join and make chains of Carbon Atoms.

Due to the electromagnetic pull and repulsion factor, some of these groups of Carbon Atoms eventually turn around on each other and create a ring of Carbon atoms with many Sub-Parlites inside them growing and expanding into atoms through the processes of Photosynthesis.

This (from the page, http://theparkesprinciple.com/html/creating_life.html) should tell you that the author does not have any understanding of physics concepts, nor, chemistry concepts, and the most important, biological concepts of photosynthesis by algae. I guess that answers your question.

 

No.

[Ophiolite]

Delusional nonsense that is one of the few things that could incline me to the view that some form of censorship on the internet could be a good idea. Persons spawning this intellectual dross should probably be ejected from the species. Abusing ones brain in this way should be criminal.

 

Strange wondered if someone might do a more detailed critique. For that you would need someone who is into coprophilia.

 

I hope that assessment is of some value to you.