My theory on evolution. evolutionists are welcome to read?

Question

consider the case of the bombardier beetle. this beetle has a fully equipped chemical weapon. it has a storage vessel that holds 2 chemicals. hydroquinone, and hydrogen peroxide. normally these chemicals would react but a third chemical stored in the beetle inhibits the reaction. but when threatened, the beetle fills an empty chamber in its body with the chemicals. then, two other chemicals are released into the mixture called catalese and peroxide. these chemicals cause the hydrogen peroxide and hydroquinone to react violently producing a great amount of heat and pressure in the reaction vessel shooting out a 200 degree liquid out at the enemy. now,

any one of these chemicals, or vessels in thebeetle alone, would be useless. if the beetle had everything but the hydroquinone, they would all be useless. now evolution uses the theory of natural selection which is like a puzzle. it adds one piece to the puzzle at a time, and if that piece is useless, it takes it away, CONTINUED EDIT

Answer 1

This is thought of at the very highest levels in the suggested answers to these questions. Your theory is really good. You should try to publish

Answer 2

YOUR theory? Really?

http://talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB310....

http://talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB310_...

Answer 3

Your theory?

If you type in "bombardier beetle evolution" into Google you get

... 14,400 hits ... all of them either presenting that very idea ... or showing how easily it is refuted.

There's even a nice YouTube video giving a nice explanation of the evolution of the bombardier beetle:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SUvLR2yyW...

Answer 4

You shouldnt steal other peoples things and call them your own. it isnt nice :(

Answer 5

BOO-YAKA-BOO-YAKA.. you got your butt handed to you on a silver platter on this one..

frina i hope you were being sarcastic

Answer 6

this "theory" is nonsense ...and is NOT original.The latest attempts by anti-evolutionists to get ID into schools is to question evolution because t*t cannot explain irreducibly complex structures that cannot have evolved  like the eye or bacterial flagellum..well sorry....these are not irreducibly complex as was marvelously explained in the Dover decision..once again the ID wackos had their butts handed to them. the process of exaptation..wherein a structure which had a previous  use can be used for other purposes as evolution proceeds....the flagellum has been shown to have been earlier used as a secretory"pump". Such rhetoric is at best obfuscation and at worst a cannard. better look for some REALLY new ideas .

Answer 7

What you are talking about is irreducible complexity, the idea that biological systems are to complex to have been created through evolution. But, if you were to take one of the chemicals away, the others could serve another usefull purpose. A perfect example used to demonstrate this uses a basic mouse trap. A mouse trap consists of a base, hammer, spring, and a catch. If you were to take away the catch, it would no longer be able to trap a mouse, but it could still be used as a tie clip.

http://www.videosift.com/video/Disprovin...

Answer 8

Your Theory? The bombardier beetle paradox is like in every Bio Book, like Reese/ Campbell  and even Solomon Berg Martin. But I guess you are right, in theory.

Answer 9

you are thinking of irreducible complexity.   this idea has been put forth to try and make it look like evolution couldn't have possibly evolved for several different things including the blood clotting pathways, the complex eye, and bacterial flagella.  this idea has been completely refuted... why, because not everything has to evolve at the same time... these chemicals or precursors evolved earlier for a different reason.  

and the bombardier beetle is not an original idea

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/bombardi...