-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
Young Earth Creation as opposed to Old Earth Creation (aka evolution lite)
- Thread starter Metal Minister
- Start date
Will watch that Genry vid soon MM.
Mark.
"There is even an arctic fish that evolved a brand new gene that produces a protein that keeps them from freezing in the arctic. "
Apriori i know it is impossible for new functionally sequenced bases arising via a mutation that code for a NEW functional protein. This would be like 1+1=3. If it was possible that means that created 'kinds' could (ill use the pseudoscientific term) 'evolve' into other 'kinds'. We have ~30,000 proteins in us. I dont know how many fish have. If say they have 5,000 then there is 25,000 proteins that need correctly sequenced bases to (pseudoscientific term) 'evolve' so as to code for those functional proteins. I can predict in advance when i look at the literature for that arctic fish reference from wiki they will be using the molecular clock to assign this alleged neofunctionalization event to x million years ago/unobserved past. Again when we actually observe gene duplication what happens? Disaster. As one would expect from a copying mistake. Mutations=destructive. The neodarwinian myth is that genetic mutations+natural selection acting over aeons of time produces newly functionally sequenced bases that code for new functional proteins and a atom can change into a Adam. Lenksis ecoli, nylonase 'enzyme' have you read these literatures? These are what is held as 'proof' that new functional information (bases coding for proteins) can arise via mutation. In some cases mutation may destroy something so as to allow, depending on the environment a selective advantage to arise.
A Scientific Defense of a Creationist Position on Evolution
"Evolution" is inherently atheistic. If someone wants to take a little doctrine from here and there and mix them together ok. Its unfortunate that the word "evolution" is also used, by evolutionary biologists to mean things that creation week, fall of man+Noahs ark predict (mutations,adaptation,variation, natural selection). Natural selection is deemed as the 'saviour' by evolutionary biologists. Selection kills the unfit and allows (depending on the environment) the fit to go on. It has no creative force. It is a 'checking' process.
Mark.
"There is even an arctic fish that evolved a brand new gene that produces a protein that keeps them from freezing in the arctic. "
Apriori i know it is impossible for new functionally sequenced bases arising via a mutation that code for a NEW functional protein. This would be like 1+1=3. If it was possible that means that created 'kinds' could (ill use the pseudoscientific term) 'evolve' into other 'kinds'. We have ~30,000 proteins in us. I dont know how many fish have. If say they have 5,000 then there is 25,000 proteins that need correctly sequenced bases to (pseudoscientific term) 'evolve' so as to code for those functional proteins. I can predict in advance when i look at the literature for that arctic fish reference from wiki they will be using the molecular clock to assign this alleged neofunctionalization event to x million years ago/unobserved past. Again when we actually observe gene duplication what happens? Disaster. As one would expect from a copying mistake. Mutations=destructive. The neodarwinian myth is that genetic mutations+natural selection acting over aeons of time produces newly functionally sequenced bases that code for new functional proteins and a atom can change into a Adam. Lenksis ecoli, nylonase 'enzyme' have you read these literatures? These are what is held as 'proof' that new functional information (bases coding for proteins) can arise via mutation. In some cases mutation may destroy something so as to allow, depending on the environment a selective advantage to arise.
A Scientific Defense of a Creationist Position on Evolution
"Evolution" is inherently atheistic. If someone wants to take a little doctrine from here and there and mix them together ok. Its unfortunate that the word "evolution" is also used, by evolutionary biologists to mean things that creation week, fall of man+Noahs ark predict (mutations,adaptation,variation, natural selection). Natural selection is deemed as the 'saviour' by evolutionary biologists. Selection kills the unfit and allows (depending on the environment) the fit to go on. It has no creative force. It is a 'checking' process.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Metal Minister. yes what is he referring to when he says " a seperate earlier creation?" Job 38.7 "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy"? KJV biblegateway.com.
Upvote
0
Progmonk, these guys are young earth creationists and they use what they discovered about radiopolonium halo imprints in rocks to support their creationism so im guessing they are referring to something else...but not sure?
Upvote
0
progmonk said:
Jinx- I believe what he is refering to is a theological theory that this is not the first creation, but the second. Some believe that when Satan rebelled, he destroyed the first earth. This also begins the idea that Eve was not the first woman, but Lillith was. http://paracleteforum.org/archive/email/history/lilith/dialogue.html
It's malarky but some people buy it...
Progmonk-while you're right that many gap theorists believe in this first destruction and rebuild of earth, many yec's have fallen for it as well...
May God Richly Bless You! MM
Upvote
0
I apologize, my last response was poor. Please give me a little bit of time and I will give you a far better, more in-depth answer.
May God Richly Bless You! MM
May God Richly Bless You! MM
Upvote
0
An amusing Victorian story claims a dog ran off with Adam's rib and devoured it before God found him, so Eve was made using one of the dog's ribs. lol
Upvote
0
jinx25 said:
Could this be the origin of the phrase "dog gone" lol. On a serious note, don't ever let a woman hear you repeat that! Rotfl
May God Richly Bless You! MM
Upvote
0
- Mar 16, 2004
- 22,030
- 7,265
- 62
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Calvinist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Let's just say, a novel protein gene was composed of simple repeats and coevolved in two different ways.
"This is the first clear example of how an old protein gene spawned a gene for an entirely new protein with a new function," said Cheng. It is also one of very few newly-minted genes whose evolution can be so clearly traced.
"Demonstrations of this sort at the molecular level are rare and noteworthy," write John Logsdon and W. Ford Doolittle in a commentary on the paper.
nsf.gov - National Science Foundation (NSF) News - Evolution of Fish Antifreeze Gene Sheds Light on Climate History - US National Science Foundation (NSF)
Really don't have the time to go into it but there are protein coding genes that can be changed. Not every adaptation is a mutation but the term is a misnomer anyway. I don't think it's novel information per se, I think it's the result of molecular mechanisms that did the same thing, in virtually identical genomes. The big thing to consider here is that there was nothing random about it, the mechanism was designed.
I'll be back to explain a little more thourghly when I get the chance.
Grace and peace,
Mark
Upvote
0
Evolution of an antifreeze protein by neofunctionalization under escape from adaptive conflict
"Collectively, these results strongly suggest that a genomic region (estimated at ~12 kbp) containing the LdSAS-B gene and its immediate neighbor sequences (including LdCR1-3) was duplicated and translocated to a site between Synuclein and LIM domain binding 3b genes; from this, the primordial AFPIII gene evolved, and the large AFPIII locus arose from in situ gene family expansion under selection pressure from polar sea-level glaciation. "
"strongly suggest"
"We then examined for sequence and functional properties that might have compelled the ancestral LdSAS-B duplication and neofunctionalization of one duplicate into AFPIII, and we found strong evidence that would fulfill the predictions of the EAC model."
"we found strong evidence that would fulfill the predictions".
Look at protein families/gene families today and based on the apriori axiom "humans/plants/animals came from inorganic matter ~3.5 billion years ago" establish a model of predictions (ie- protein family x will be similar to protein family z) find similarity, confirm prediction that "humans/plants/animals came from inorganic matter ~3.5 billion years ago"
Antifreeze protein - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"The remarkable diversity and distribution of AFPs suggest the different types evolved recently in response to sea level glaciation occurring 1-2 million years ago in the Northern hemisphere and 10-30 million years ago in Antarctica."
If ones apriori axiom is "in the beginning God created" then a common construction material is expected (~20 amino acids, 5 nucleic acids, sugars, lipids etc)
"Collectively, these results strongly suggest that a genomic region (estimated at ~12 kbp) containing the LdSAS-B gene and its immediate neighbor sequences (including LdCR1-3) was duplicated and translocated to a site between Synuclein and LIM domain binding 3b genes; from this, the primordial AFPIII gene evolved, and the large AFPIII locus arose from in situ gene family expansion under selection pressure from polar sea-level glaciation. "
"strongly suggest"
"We then examined for sequence and functional properties that might have compelled the ancestral LdSAS-B duplication and neofunctionalization of one duplicate into AFPIII, and we found strong evidence that would fulfill the predictions of the EAC model."
"we found strong evidence that would fulfill the predictions".
Look at protein families/gene families today and based on the apriori axiom "humans/plants/animals came from inorganic matter ~3.5 billion years ago" establish a model of predictions (ie- protein family x will be similar to protein family z) find similarity, confirm prediction that "humans/plants/animals came from inorganic matter ~3.5 billion years ago"
Antifreeze protein - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"The remarkable diversity and distribution of AFPs suggest the different types evolved recently in response to sea level glaciation occurring 1-2 million years ago in the Northern hemisphere and 10-30 million years ago in Antarctica."
If ones apriori axiom is "in the beginning God created" then a common construction material is expected (~20 amino acids, 5 nucleic acids, sugars, lipids etc)
Upvote
0
jinx wrote:
Why not also: If ones apriori axiom is "in the beginning God created" then a common construction material is expected (electrons, protons, neutron, energy, etc, from the Big Bang)
Of course, just a "common construction material" doesn't explain the fact that every possible line of evidence gives the same family tree of life, many of them using the same methods that everyone accepts in todays world - paternity tests, DNA tests at a murder trial, etc. Those tests are yet one more reason why common descent of life on earth is more solidly established than the existence of the Roman Empire or the war of 1812.
btw, the anti-freeze proteins, like many proteins, are good examples of evidence for evolution because the genes that code for them follow the same nested hierarchy of common descent shown by other methods, such as comparative anatomy. This same genetic family tree is also shown in genes that don't code for proteins, and is confirmed again and again by widely divergent methods.
It's so obvious that many creationists have given up arguing against portions of it, instead incorporating the idea of hyperevolution after a supposed flood, making branches of the tree of life. Of course, the same methods that make the branch structure obvious also work on the rest of the tree as well.
Papias
Why not also: If ones apriori axiom is "in the beginning God created" then a common construction material is expected (electrons, protons, neutron, energy, etc, from the Big Bang)
Of course, just a "common construction material" doesn't explain the fact that every possible line of evidence gives the same family tree of life, many of them using the same methods that everyone accepts in todays world - paternity tests, DNA tests at a murder trial, etc. Those tests are yet one more reason why common descent of life on earth is more solidly established than the existence of the Roman Empire or the war of 1812.
btw, the anti-freeze proteins, like many proteins, are good examples of evidence for evolution because the genes that code for them follow the same nested hierarchy of common descent shown by other methods, such as comparative anatomy. This same genetic family tree is also shown in genes that don't code for proteins, and is confirmed again and again by widely divergent methods.
It's so obvious that many creationists have given up arguing against portions of it, instead incorporating the idea of hyperevolution after a supposed flood, making branches of the tree of life. Of course, the same methods that make the branch structure obvious also work on the rest of the tree as well.
Papias
Upvote
0
jinx25 said:
This is a common mistake I've seen. Many try to say the "sons of God" are some intelligent being created before the Genesis account. Some use a gap theory as progmonk mentioned, and others say that the Genesis account is the account of God creating the earth again, after satan fell and destroyed it. The problem is, first the sons of God refrence is to angels. This is not some earlier human life, or even earth that people may read into the text. Second, Job is a poetic book in the OT. The sons of God refrence is most likely speaking of the angels of heaven rejoicing and the stars singing is a refrence to psalms 96. The gap theory in its proposal of "lilith" is based on babylonian myth. A similar word meaning owl in Hebrew that is used only once is the basis for this idea.
Some OEC's and YEC'S have clung to this idea as a way to reconcile what people believe modern science has "proven" with the account in Genesis. OEC's claim this is the second earth that God fixed after Satan's fall, and yec's claim that Genesis starts during this reconstruction. The only difference is that OEC's think Genesis is the account of the first earth and the yec's believe it is the account if the second earth.
May God Richly Bless You! MM
Upvote
0
"btw, the anti-freeze proteins, like many proteins, are good examples of evidence for evolution"
Which definition of 'evolution'? Speciation? Adaptation? Mutation? Variation? Change over time? Change in allele frequency over time? Natural selection? Genetic drift? Some mythical fabled mutation that has never been observed and runs contrary to every observed law of nature in documented history that can turn a frog into a prince?
If ones apriori axiom is "in the beginning God created" "beast of the earth after its kind" "great sea creatures with which the water abounded after their kind" "birds of the air after their kind". Similar protein/gene families are to be expected.
Is the evolutionary tree changing into a creationist orchard?
Delusional i mean "evolutionary' tree and creationists 'orchard'
Which definition of 'evolution'? Speciation? Adaptation? Mutation? Variation? Change over time? Change in allele frequency over time? Natural selection? Genetic drift? Some mythical fabled mutation that has never been observed and runs contrary to every observed law of nature in documented history that can turn a frog into a prince?
If ones apriori axiom is "in the beginning God created" "beast of the earth after its kind" "great sea creatures with which the water abounded after their kind" "birds of the air after their kind". Similar protein/gene families are to be expected.
Is the evolutionary tree changing into a creationist orchard?
Delusional i mean "evolutionary' tree and creationists 'orchard'
Upvote
0
- Mar 16, 2004
- 22,030
- 7,265
- 62
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Calvinist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Democrat
I don't know what the problem is here but novel protein coding genes are not delusional, they are rare enough but it does happen. But of course they do, it's called adaptation.
So, what does this case tell us about the evolution of new genes? This AFGP gene is one of a very few newly invented genes that have arisen by processes other than duplication or exon-shuffling whose evolutionary history can be traced with confidence.
(Origin of antifreeze protein genes: A cool tale in molecular evolution. PNAS April 1997)
The gene actual coevolved in the northern arctic as well as the southern arctic but of course they did. Some things evolve and some things don't. One of the things I have always wanted to figure out is the evolution of arctic wildlife. I was reading where they discovered a polar bear/Grizzly bear off spring. Apparently with the advent of global warming their territory overlap now.
I just wonder how one of the transposable traits, color, always comes out white in arctic wild life. Natural selection is such a lame explanation, what did nature do, select random colors until one of offspring just happened to come out with a white coat?
Remember that I believe in accelerated adaptive evolution in a rather brief period of time.
Grace and peace,
Mark
Upvote
0
"whose evolutionary history can be traced with confidence."
"The gene actual coevolved in the northern arctic as well as the southern arctic but of course they did."
Antifreeze protein - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"The remarkable diversity and distribution of AFPs suggest the different types evolved recently in response to sea level glaciation occurring 1-2 million years ago in the Northern hemisphere and 10-30 million years ago in Antarctica."
"5500 years ago a rock on pluto 'evolved' into the two rocks i see today on my driveway". The rocks evolutionary history can be traced with confidence.
"The gene actual coevolved in the northern arctic as well as the southern arctic but of course they did."
Antifreeze protein - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"The remarkable diversity and distribution of AFPs suggest the different types evolved recently in response to sea level glaciation occurring 1-2 million years ago in the Northern hemisphere and 10-30 million years ago in Antarctica."
"5500 years ago a rock on pluto 'evolved' into the two rocks i see today on my driveway". The rocks evolutionary history can be traced with confidence.
Upvote
0
'For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths' (2 Timothy 4:3-4).
May God Richly Bless You! MM
May God Richly Bless You! MM
Upvote
0
NGC 6712 said:
How are you feeling? It's good to hear from you!
May God Richly Bless You! MM
Upvote
0
Had a another misfortune actually. Had surgery and my first day out of bed with crutches - I slipped and fell on our polished stone floor and broke my shoulder and arm. I'm not kidding I have suffered more injuries in the last 3 weeks than my entire life beforehand.
So currently I have ruptured achilles, torn MCL and ACL on the right side and broken shoulder/arm on the left.
I think I might spend the next few months wrapped in cotton wool. Maybe then I won't do some more damage.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
