Evolution is DEscriptive not PREscriptive

[tas8831]

I'll try to put it simple:
DNA is like a book containing the genetic information. The sentences (aka sequences) are coherent and make sense in context. A mutation is a random change to this book. Most mutations just scramble a few words or sentences - which means the information of those sequences got lost. Some mutations outright delete a sequence - which means the information of those sequences got lost. And some mutations duplicate a sequence - like writing a sentence twice. This doesn't just disturb the flow of reading but it also doesn't add any information. You can read the same sentence a hundred times - you still only get the same information from it.
In order to add information we need a mutation that adds a word, sentence or page to the book that is not only coherent in itself but also makes sense in the context of the entire book. None of the observed mutations has ever done that (and the chances for it are zero).

Overly simplistic.

Try reading this post to see how wrong you and you hero Gitt are about actual genetics.

If you'd like more detailed information I recommend the book "Am Anfang war die Information" by Werner Gitt.

Nah.

He is a creationist pushing a fantasy to the uninformed.

I saw a talk by him once. Nice enough fellow.

Thought he was talking to a collection of creationists. Was taken aback when myself and 2 other scientists were in the audience and started asking questions he had no answer for, including a question re: his assertion that changes to (i.e., mutations) in the 'statistical' level (the DNA sequence) could not affect the 'meaning' of the 'message.'

In the end, he showed himself to be just a typical creationist hawking nonsense to the fawning sycophants in the pews.

 

[Astrid]

What is this denial predicated on? Desires for it not to be?

None of our creationists can explain the
"So far, but no further " line that stops a species
evolving until it is a different species.

 

[AV1611VET]

None of our creationists can explain the
"So far, but no further" line that stops a species evolving until it is a different species.

It stops where God draws the line; since God is a God of boundaries.

At some point, the process halts and DNA can't work in harmony with each other to cause pregnancy.

The old NATURE WILL FIND A WAY axiom gets falsified.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It stops where God draws the line; since God is a God of boundaries.

At some point, the process halts and DNA can't work in harmony with each other to cause pregnancy.

The old NATURE WILL FIND A WAY axiom gets falsified.

LOL! Thanks for the QED.

 

[AV1611VET]

LOL! Thanks for the QED.

Got any pregnant dogs in your area having cats? or foxes having groundhogs?

How about testing it under controlled, laboratory conditions and put the right "ingredients" together in a Petri dish to fertilize a cow egg with a horse?

Keep me posted.

That old CROCODUCK is a crock, isn't it?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Got any pregnant dogs in your area having cats? or foxes having groundhogs?

How about testing it under controlled, laboratory conditions and put the right "ingredients" together in a Petri dish to fertilize a cow egg with a horse?

Keep me posted.

That old CROCODUCK is a crock, isn't it?

See, the irony here is that that wouldn't happen via evolution either.

 

[AV1611VET]

See, the irony here is that that wouldn't happen via evolution either.

Thus my point.

I was asked what the barrier was, and I replied "DNA recognition."

You can mix and match kinds (genera) in a Petri dish all day long and beg them to recognize each other and produce something new, and it's not gonna work.

Miss Egg will tell Mr Sperm to get lost.

No zygotes here!

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Thus my point.

I was asked what the barrier was, and I replied "DNA recognition."

You can mix and match kinds (genera) in a Petri dish all day long and beg them to recognize each other and produce something new, and it's not gonna work.

Miss Egg will tell Mr Sperm to get lost.

No zygotes here!

DNA recognition is... eh, hybridization is a very weird thing. Most times, it will be a one and done deal, with only the one creature being born (ligers are the best example since they can't breed more ligers).

But, there are prizzly bears - a polar bear gross breeding with a grizzly bear, which is apparently a combination that has happened in history. But it's hard to say if this is something that will continue since I can't see anything to say if they can breed.

But yeah, you won't get a dog giving birth to a cat.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Also, as the author of this thread, I do need to say kudos to the one person who clicked "Sort of".

 

[AV1611VET]

Also, as the author of this thread, I do need to say kudos to the one person who clicked "Sort of".

Thank you very much!

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Thank you very much!

Was that you? I'm only asking because it's not given me the option to see how clicked what answer.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Got any pregnant dogs in your area having cats? or foxes having groundhogs?

How about testing it under controlled, laboratory conditions and put the right "ingredients" together in a Petri dish to fertilize a cow egg with a horse?

Keep me posted.

That old CROCODUCK is a crock, isn't it?

Luckily no. That would be evidence against evolution. Thanks for bringing up another test that could possibly refute the theory. You were just kidding when you claimed that the theory was unfalsifiable. I forgot about tests that support creationism.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Thus my point.

I was asked what the barrier was, and I replied "DNA recognition."

You can mix and match kinds (genera) in a Petri dish all day long and beg them to recognize each other and produce something new, and it's not gonna work.

Miss Egg will tell Mr Sperm to get lost.

No zygotes here!

Sorry. What is a "kind"?

 

[AV1611VET]

Was that you?

Affirmative.

 

[AV1611VET]

Luckily no.

Why do you say that?

Can't Mother Nature have what Mother Nature wants?

That would be evidence against evolution.

Why do you say that?

Why can't it be evidence for ... say ... call it, "dynamic incipient evolution"?

Thanks for bringing up another test that could possibly refute the theory.

Oh, I very seriously doubt some test "written on paper" is going to falsify evolution.

After all, if it worked, scientists could just give them a fancy label and be satisfied with it.

Like ... say ... "monotreme" or "cryptid" or "chimera" or whatever.

You were just kidding when you claimed that the theory was unfalsifiable.

Not hardly.

I forgot about tests that support creationism.

Such as?

 

[AV1611VET]

Sorry. What is a "kind"?

Genus.

Before the term was hijacked by scientists and changed.

Using Bible terms aren't exactly welcomed in the academic world.

Ever notice how Chess players will adjust their pieces before a game begins, just to "claim their territory" for themselves?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Why do you say that?

Can't Mother Nature have what Mother Nature wants?Why do you say that?

Why can't it be evidence for ... say ... call it, "dynamic incipient evolution"?Oh, I very seriously doubt some test "written on paper" is going to falsify evolution.

After all, if it worked, scientists could just give them a fancy label and be satisfied with it.

Like ... say ... "monotreme" or "cryptid" or "chimera" or whatever.Not hardly.Such as?

No. Nature is not a God. It is limited by natural laws.

But thanks for showing that you know that you are wrong again.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Genus.

Before the term was hijacked by scientists and changed.

Using Bible terms aren't exactly welcomed in the academic world.

Ever notice how Chess players will adjust their pieces before a game begins, just to "claim their territory" for themselves?

Then evolution at the "change of kind" level has been observed.

 

[AV1611VET]

No. Nature is not a God. It is limited by natural laws.

Oh ... like DNA recognition?

Thanks for the QED.

 

[AV1611VET]

Then evolution at the "change of kind" level has been observed.

Anything can be shown on paper.

All it takes is a fancy scientist artist.