A Reccommendation To Fellow Young Earth Creationists

[h2whoa]

That's fine. I will PM Mark Kennedy, since he is the one who has studied the most in terms of genetics.

As a working molecular geneticist, I can assure you that Mark's knowledge of genetics is... not so good.

 

[mark kennedy]

As a working molecular geneticist, I can assure you that Mark's knowledge of genetics is... not so good.

Considering I learned most of what I know about Genetics debating evolutionists on here it's a wonder I know anything at all.

 

[busterdog]

As a working molecular geneticist, I can assure you that Mark's knowledge of genetics is... not so good.

Unfortunately, too many TEs have preceded you with manifestly frivolous accusations in similar areas. So, we tend to blow by this stuff as same doo doo on a different day. And without apology.

 

[holdon]

Anything not repaired is a mutation

But then it's a matter of defining the standard that is the real problem. What is "repaired" and "not repaired"? It stems from the supposition of wild type = normal type = "repaired" state. But who says what that is?
It seems variations in the DNA sequence (mutations) are only allowable within certain rather narrow limits. These variations are still "repaired" in the sense that the DNA can be reproduced and passed on, otherwise they would be a non-event anyway.

 

[mark kennedy]

But then it's a matter of defining the standard that is the real problem. What is "repaired" and "not repaired"? It stems from the supposition of wild type = normal type = "repaired" state. But who says what that is?

What will most often happen when a mutation has an affect is disease and disorder. When the DNA is not properly transcribed and translated you get things like cancer and tumors:

Failure of DNA repair mechanisms

DNA repair mechanisms maintain the integrity of DNA, which often acquires mutations during replication. If these mechanisms fail, or if the cell does not undergo apoptosis (a genetically encoded cell “suicide”), more mutations may occur, and the cells will proliferate. If the proliferation is slow and localized to the area in which it begins, the result is a benign tumour. With fast, uncontrolled growth and the invasion of other tissues, a malignant tumour arises.

Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc. ​

It seems variations in the DNA sequence (mutations) are only allowable within certain rather narrow limits. These variations are still "repaired" in the sense that the DNA can be reproduced and passed on, otherwise they would be a non-event anyway.

Variations and mutations are two different things. You get a lot of variety (size, color, texture...etc) when genes cross over.

All About Mutations

There are genetic mechanisms that will adapt living systems to their environment. Mutations are not the vehicle, the true explanation is actually in keeping the DNA as it was originally designed.

 

[FallingWaters]

...DNA repair mechanisms maintain the integrity of DNA, which often acquires mutations during replication. ..

Seems very similar to what keeps happening to Windows 98.

 

[h2whoa]

Unfortunately, too many TEs have preceded you with manifestly frivolous accusations in similar areas. So, we tend to blow by this stuff as same doo doo on a different day. And without apology.

Translation: "rather than listen to an actual qualified geneticist, I'll listen to an unqualified person because they agree with me."

 

[holdon]

There are genetic mechanisms that will adapt living systems to their environment. Mutations are not the vehicle, the true explanation is actually in keeping the DNA as it was originally designed.

And that brings us back to square one: what is the "original configuration"? My contention is that even allele differences (variations which have "mutations" of genetic code at the basis) are somehow programmed through the mechanism of "repairability". By the way, I was not talking about cancers and other anomalies with DNA in cell multiplication, but about the reproductive process. Mutatis mutandis.

 

[mark kennedy]

Seems very similar to what keeps happening to Windows 98.

That is actually a pretty interesting analogy, Windows is a hybrid of the old DOS operating system. I'm trying to get away from the debate thing and I've been looking into things like this:

Even so, while the debate over the true affinites of pandas were settled through genetic studies, the position of polar bears have come into question as a result of mitochondrial DNA testing, suggesting that some populations of Brown Bears (Ursus arctos)are more closely related to polar bears than other brown bears. While polar bears and brown bears may have shared a more recent common ancestor than previously believed and can produce fertile hybrids, I still don’t see how this undermines the status of the polar bear as a distinct species. Polar bears aren’t a species? Since when?
​

As a creationist this is exactly what I would expect, the closest living relative of the Polar Bear would still be very close to them in their DNA. We think that in order for a population of bears to adapt to an arctic environment that they need to change their genetic code somehow. This thinking is wrong, Windows still uses the old DOS, it has just integrated it into Windows.

 

[busterdog]

Seems very similar to what keeps happening to Windows 98.

Hmmmm.

As far as I can tell my operating system has never mutated for the better.

Anyone else ever benefit from random change in digitical code?

 

[busterdog]

Translation: "rather than listen to an actual qualified geneticist, I'll listen to an unqualified person because they agree with me."

Not at all.

My field is law.

Do lots of lay people have valid comments about the First Amendment? Sure they do.

Same applies to genetics.

I am qualified at many things and I can also be adept at avoiding the issue, speaking down to someone and deliberating misrepresenting what they say. I rarely do it here. But it is not a question of qualifications and education.

Have you done so?

Certainly I can't charge you with that.

I would suggest you take issue with those who have preceded you and who won't give the time of day to a creationist post, except to say, "You biblical time-telling idiots always fail to account for Greenwich mean time and the Navy observatory." The question becomes whether it is worth our time to listen much. Too many disappointments. The presumption is against you , but the presumption is rebuttable.

 

[MatthewDiscipleofGod]

I never can get enough of Mark's awesome visuals.

 

[busterdog]

Seems very similar to what keeps happening to Windows 98.

Wouldn't the code for Windows sort of be analogous to the seed of the Nephilim, which some blame as the cause of the flood?

 

[FallingWaters]

Wouldn't the code for Windows sort of be analogous to the seed of the Nephilim, which some blame as the cause of the flood?

I'm afraid I don't understand Windows that well.
All I know is that my computer guy has always told me that the reason for my problems is that Windows self-corrupts.

 

[mark kennedy]

Translation: "rather than listen to an actual qualified geneticist, I'll listen to an unqualified person because they agree with me."

As a geneticist does the known divergence expanding from less then 1% to 5% give you are reason to question the ape/human common ancestor? Especially, I am interested in knowing how the change of mutation rate that would be required causes any difficulties.

This is what I'm talking about and all I ask is you think about it.

Abstract
The developmental and evolutionary mechanisms behind the emergence of human-specific brain features remain largely unknown. However, the recent ability to compare our genome to that of our closest relative, the chimpanzee, provides new avenues to link genetic and phenotypic changes in the evolution of the human brain. We devised a ranking of regions in the human genome that show significant evolutionary acceleration. Here we report that the most dramatic of these ‘human accelerated regions’, HAR1, is part of a novel RNA gene (HAR1F) that is expressed specifically in Cajal– Retzius neurons in the developing human neocortex from 7 to 19 gestational weeks, a crucial period for cortical neuron specification and migration. HAR1F is co-expressed with reelin, a product of Cajal–Retzius neurons that is of fundamental importance in specifying the six-layer structure of the human cortex. HAR1 and the other human accelerated regions provide new candidates in the search for uniquely human biology. (An RNA gene expressed during cortical development evolved rapidly in humans. Nature 443, 167-172 14 September 2006)​

Ok, I'm not a geneticist but this gene was supposedly changed by 18 substitutions. What do you think happened? How does this gene allow only 2 substitutions in 400 million years and then suddenly manage to accumulate 18?

Think about it and I will carefully consider your response.

By the way, if you are more comfortable having this discussion unlimited then simply invite me into a more open forum.

 

[mark kennedy]

I never can get enough of Mark's awesome visuals.

Your very kind, I just wanted to tell you I am very grateful for your links.