Evolution, 2 cents.


Recommended Posts

hhmm lets see, all organisms have different DNA to a specific degree. So the bacteria DNA is mutated, the organism can now live where is once died, it now has different DNA, sure we still call it the same name, but its not the same at all.

Again, I welcome you to post something that is reputable, not these right wing christian websites. I myself an Catholic, but as a 4th year biology student, I know what is real

What is your educational background?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

username:

Have you read Michael J. Behe?s Darwin?s Black Box : The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution ?

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/068...3853143-1084639

Michael J. Behe, a biochemist at Lehigh University, presents here a scientific argument for the existence of God. Examining the evolutionary theory of the origins of life, he can go part of the way with Darwin--he accepts the idea that species have been differentiated by the mechanism of natural selection from a common ancestor. But he thinks that the essential randomness of this process can explain evolutionary development only at the macro level, not at the micro level of his expertise. Within the biochemistry of living cells, he argues, life is "irreducibly complex." This is the last black box to be opened, the end of the road for science. Faced with complexity at this level, Behe suggests that it can only be the product of "intelligent design."

Evolution : A Theory in Crisis by Michael Denton

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/091...2291716-1044602

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by JimF

username: The example about bacteria becoming immune to many antibiotics is a proof for adaptation not evolution.

You started with bacteria and you ended up with bacteria. you don't have a horse or a tomato.

You really should look up the difference between an adaptation and a mutation.

An adaptation is where a specific difference in a species benefits its fitness (ability to servive and breed) so that difference becomes the norm. An example is the gray and white months where they were the same species but the gray prevailed because they could hide better in the dirty environment of the industrial revolution. Or Darwins finches where two birds that overlapped and competed for the same size seeds moved away and diverged to large beeks and smaller beeks so they would have there own niches and not compete for the same size seeds anymore.

Mutation is a change in the DNA that can be lethal, negative, mutual, or posative. Posative is very rare, the ecoli is an example of this. Or how some blacks are immune to cicle cell anemia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Disclaimer: I am not a scientist - I am a Law Student who will begin practising Law in August. I am familair with the Scopes Trial. i.e. the monkey trials which determined that 'evolution' was a scientific theory which could be tought in our schools (thats it friends and neighbors)

In any event here is my response:

First: Thanks for posting this article. It takes a certain level of intelligence to objectively read this and be willing to share it with the group.

Second: I am appalled by the immaturity of some of the reply posts.

Third: True enough organisms can "evolve," i.e. grow taller, grow bigger ears or hands, or even lose toes, as the article suggests horses did - this is adaption to the environment, not evolution of the species.

But to say that an organisim made a leap from one organized DNA structure to another is too big a step to take.

Furthermore, where would the energy have come for such a leap? The Second law of Thermodynamics (in a simple form) puts forth the idea that all processes manifest a tendency towards decay. An example is a bath tub full of hot water. Let it sit, and it cools off. It will never get hotter unless there is an energy source from the outside. (Dont start bagging the example - its a simplified example). Thusly If processes, i.e. organisms break down (noticable in the way humans age, a plant dies, etc.) how is it possible for systems to improve at their core, in their DNA and Genetic pattens?

Adaption while it can be hypothesized is an improvement does alter organisms, however a human with webbed hands has the same DNA structure (you know what I mean not that humans have the same DNA, but rather if a scientist looks at our DNA he can tell its human DNA) - no change in the core system.

Assuming evolution is correct - where did this bit of energy come from? What caused the shift for say apes to humans? It cannot be a chemical reaction because that would not be a break down in the system . . . it would be an improvement, which on its face appears to be violative of the 2nd Law . . .

Moreover if Evolution as a social theory is to weed out the lower classes and improve the species as a whole - why do apes still exist in their many varieties? Should the species not have evolved in toto?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see the light!!!!!!

I am changed (I'm going to work)!!!!!

jimf

if you belive this fine! i respect you for standing on you pricipals but technally this is a computer forum not the 700 hundered club. please take you doomsday cult ideas somewhere's else!!!!!!

and remember this is a computer forum, not a doomsday cult

Link to comment
Share on other sites

username: The example about bacteria becoming immune to many antibiotics is a proof for adaptation not evolution.

Well you said it yourself, though your are wrong there, you obviously believe in adaptation which is a part in evolution.

DNA polymerase (transcribes DNA) has a known error rate that guarantees that there will always be mutations within DNA, sure most are bad, but the chance is there that the mutation could be beneficial. That?s why no ONE virus could ever kill off everyone on earth because someone would have a mutation that allows them to survive. An example is AIDS, there are some people who have had the virus and are now no longer do. Although very rare, it?s caused by a mutation.

No why don't you give me some examples instead of quotes or books that you have not even read. All I have from you is that bad MS office analogy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

username: I think you are being indoctrinated into one world view by your university and you seem to go along with it. It's well known that schools nowadays are full of evolutionist propaganda

Did you ever take a creation class or read a book supporting creation ? I don't think so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I said I was a Catholic, I know you christain conservatives don't think we are. I also listen to that stuff on AM radio a lot just for laughes when I travel. All modern day science is based on this so please don't argue with me anymore. The reason you get innoculated is because you don't want to wait around for humans to be immune to that specific antigen via evolution, because by the thene there will be all new ones and you would be dead.

Evolution is humans now is just about dead or close to it because we no longer mate based on servival of the fittest. Adaptations, mean nothing these days. We also allow people who should have died from disease or negative mutations to have children and still pass on those bad genes. It will eventually catch up with us, but because evolution is very slow, we have time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lol.... why are you attacking people so harshly ethel?

i dont see immaturity, i see disgust in stupidity.

and who says anything ever leaped. a monkey didnt give birth to you. a monkey gave birth to a slightly different monkey, that gave birth to a slighty different monkey, that gave birth to a slighty different monkey,that gave birth to a slighty different monkey,that gave birth to a slighty different monkey,that gave birth to a slighty different monkey,that gave birth to a slighty different monkey,that gave birth to a slighty different monkey,that gave birth to a slighty different monkey,that gave birth to a slighty different monkey,that gave birth to a slighty different monkey,that gave birth to a slighty different monkey,that gave birth to a slighty different monkey,that gave birth to a slighty different monkey,that gave birth to a slighty different monkey,that gave birth to a slighty different monkey,that gave birth to a slighty different monkey,that gave birth to a slighty different monkey,that gave birth to a slighty different monkey,that gave birth to a slighty different monkey,that gave birth to a slighty different monkey,that gave birth to a slighty different monkey,that gave birth to a slighty different monkey,that gave birth to a slighty different monkey,that gave birth to a slighty different monkey,that gave birth to a slighty different monkey,that gave birth to a slighty different monkey,that gave birth to a slighty different monkey,that gave birth to a slighty different monkey,that gave birth to a slighty different monkey,that gave birth to a slighty different monkey,that gave birth to a slighty different monkey,that gave birth to a slighty different monkey,that gave birth to a slighty different monkey,that gave birth to a slighty different monkey,that gave birth to a slighty different monkey,that gave birth to a slighty different monkey,that gave birth to a slighty different monkey,that gave birth to a slighty different monkey,that gave birth to a slighty different monkey,that gave birth to a slighty different monkey,that gave birth to a slighty different monkey,that gave birth to a slighty different monkey, and out popped YOU.

for the rest of us it may have been a bit more complicated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JimF : Your the one who needs to open your mind to new ideas. Evolution so far has not been disproved scientifically, creationism has. I personally find creationism a laughable subject. To me it's very funny that any intelligent being could believe in it.

To quote Murphy "Faith is beliving in what you know ain't so."

I don't mean to offensive, but to me it is very funny.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

berlamont:

the website you meant to post was http://www.theory-of-evolution.org could not even do that right. The author is not even a biologist but bad a BS in biochemistry and masters in engineering. He goes to say that there is proof of evolution, but no proof of origin of life. I SAID NOBODY KNOWS HOW LIFE STARTED.

JimF:

You tell me how YOU say its not scientific, its a fact. I just game you so many examples. You even said YOU beleived in ADAPTATION.

Furthermore the Catholic church even supports evolution "theory"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by username

hhmm lets see, all organisms have different DNA to a specific degree. So the bacteria DNA is mutated, the organism can now live where is once died, it now has different DNA, sure we still call it the same name, but its not the same at all.

Again, I welcome you to post something that is reputable, not these right wing christian websites. I myself an Catholic, but as a 4th year biology student, I know what is real

What is your educational background?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can't prove evolution nor creation. You have to believe in both. There is no empirical evidence to support evolution. True sciience is testable, observable and repeatable. Evolution fits none of these 3 thefore it's just a philosophy or better yet a form of secular religion. That's why neither one should be tauhgt in schools. Certainly evolution shouldn't be taught as a fact when it isn't. This is my point. Get evolution out of the schools. Why should we all pay for it ?

If you don't agree then I will give you a fish and 20 yers from now I want you to evolve it into a dog. If you can do that then I will accept evolution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What it comes down to is a question of motivations. People who study the process of evolution and continually develop new ideas in this area are motivated only by scientific interest. There is no way a person can "gain" by supporting a scientific approach to this question.

However, the same is not true for "Creation Science" or "Intelligent Design". The people who subscribe to this mythology have easily observable motivations for doing so. The people you see at the forefront of these ideas are politicians, demagogues, and charlatans who desire prominence, power, and control of peoples spiritual lives. No other country on this planet gives rise to these ridiculous unscientific ideologies, quite simply because only in America has the figure of the populist demagogue (changes ideas to suit the popular beliefs) been so unjustifiably successful. It is no surprise that America shows one of the worst rates of illiteracy and undereducation in the industrialized world.

Evolution, itself an "evolving" theory, comes out of the scientific method and attention to the available evidence. Creation Science (an oxymoron of the highest order), comes from the mind of someone who has reached the limits of their intellect and said: "well, I can't explain this really complicated stuff, so it must be God".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, I believe that this would be nice - if it were possible. In reality, however, science of the calibre done by evolutionists is not possible, as a scientific study like this would receive ZERO funding. This is one man's opinion and interpretation of the facts - and that is not how science works. Results needs to be reproducible. Since this type of "science" will never be reproduced - it is not science - is pseudoscience.

Also, I believe that the usage of DNA sub-cloning using plasmid vectors is an example of how malleable DNA can be. We (humans) can actually create new organisms, bacteria that produce insulin, cows that produce HGH, etc. If we can do it after a couple of hours in a lab, don't you think billions of years and adaptation (which you already acknowledge exists - classic peppered moth example) principles would be able to do it? I don't believe you give this planet or "mother nature" enough credit. In fact I find your view egotistical. You are living up to the western, monotheist view - humans are the pinnacle of creation.

If the human race, full of murderers, rapists, racists, prejudices, hate, ignorance, spite, and greed are the "pinnacle of creation" (even God's creation) then that is pathetic. I think evolution gives us all the hope that we may someday become better people, losing some of our more instinctual tendencies and moving towards a better society.

Also, do not presume indoctrination from universities makes everyone believe in evolution. That is absurd. Again, you are being egotistic in assuming that only you are capable of coming up with your own opinions. Also remember that university students actually have to study evolution, unlike the religious fanatics arguing on the street corner that men are too pure and god-like to be related to filthy monkeys.

Seriously, no one has time or cares about creationists, as you might as well argue the world is flat too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just the population balance of nature is based on evolution, the circle of life, all evulution. Nobody can create a perfect biom, it has to evolve into one to live in perfect homeostasis.

This thread is titled "The Scientific Case Against Evolution" I and others have given many examples and explanations, all with science backing them up. The other side has had nothing.

Please close this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JimF:

"Sorry to disappoint you, but there is nothing scientific in evolution. It's just pure speculation. evolution is not even a good hypothesis"

Actually - that is entirely wrong. New (relatively) DNA techniques such as DNA-DNA hybridization, restriction mapping, and sequence analysis have provided ample evidence for evolution.

Man I love it when people make such comments and have nothing to back it up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Knoxca, thank you thank you. I was hoping for a post from someone with some actual knowledge of the issue. This reminds me of the Woody Allen movie where some idiot is arguing with Woody about what Marshall Mcluhan said about media, and Marshall McLuhan shows up and makes the idiot look like exactly what he is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Evolution is when something EVOLVES from something else. You CANNOT evolve from nothing, So. What was that very first thing that everything evolved from? And if you find that out - then what did that thing evolve from......or who or what created that thing.

mmmm answer that......before you just blurt out "That thing was always there"

Everything has a starting and an ending.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They have mapped both the human and yeast genomes and found out that we have many of the same genes in the same places coding for the same proteins. Can't think of the genes name off hand but its name means universal as it is in all living things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.