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.
I'd have to disagree, since there is variation in the strength of instinct expression between individuals, as well as instinct presence. The instincts are present in MOST members of a species, not necessarily all.Either they were created that way by God, or they evolved. But part of being a given species is having those behaviour patterns already there, implicit in the DNA.
i.e. not at all. basically, according to all living things God Created, His Way.After all, any genetic instinct is going to be subject to change via mutation just as much as any other trait.
-_- do you seriously deny that mutation exists? I'd love to know how you think cells become cancerous, then.i.e. not at all. basically, according to all living things God Created, His Way.
It's not what I (nor you or anyone) thnks that is important, is it ?-_- do you seriously deny that mutation exists? I'd love to know how you think cells become cancerous, then.
-_- I literally took and passed a Cancer Biology course in my last semester of college, which was this year. There are various characteristics most cancer cells have, but the mutations that cause them are not entirely the same.It's not what I (nor you or anyone) thnks that is important, is it ?
Decades ago it was proven what cells are cancerous (identical cells no matter where they are in the body, mostly - something like 20 identical characteristics)
and why. A little research perhaps may reveal this to you. Maybe not, especially if someone does not trust Yahweh, since then they are 'cursed' and not blessed.
-_- I don't think your commentary could have been directed at a worse atheist than myself when it comes to this topic. My degree is in Biomedical sciences and I went out of my way to take an advanced Cancer Biology course over the Virology course due to personal interests. If you think mutation doesn't have anything to do with cancer, you aren't even on a high school level of understanding cancer."I'd love to know how you think cells become cancerous" Really ? Now we will find out.... (if you take any action to truly find out what is already known) ....
Sorry, According to Truth, God's Word, and Jesus,I literally took and passed a Cancer Biology course in my last semester of college, which was this year.
-_- the scientific study of cancer is the reason why childhood acute leukemia isn't an absolute death sentence anymore. It helps those kids to live full lives. My grandmother would be dead if no one had put any effort into treating the disease. If you view prolonging life as pointless, that's a personal opinion I fundamentally would disagree with even if I believed in an afterlife.Sorry, According to Truth, God's Word, and Jesus,
this did not help you nor anyone else.
This is false.the scientific study of cancer is the reason why childhood acute leukemia isn't an absolute death sentence anymore.
..... hmmmm..... you apparently never tried to find out the truth about cancer.... are you even willing now to find out ? It doesn't look like it....... Is there any reason at all you can show, that verifies that you really want to know the truth and to help heal people ?So do elaborate on your knowledge of cancer.
I agree, but how did they appear in the first examples of each species?
-_- who doesn't want to cure cancer? From those who have common decency and would want to cure any ailment even at the cost of themselves, to the most selfish individual on this planet that would use it for financial gain, there are motivations for everyone to want to know that information. Complete disinterest would be extremely abnormal...... hmmmm..... you apparently never tried to find out the truth about cancer.... are you even willing now to find out ? It doesn't look like it....... Is there any reason at all you can show, that verifies that you really want to know the truth and to help heal people ?
-_- so do you think all kids with deadly leukemias die despite attempts at treatment, or do you think survival rates for these diseases wasn't higher during the start of the 21st century versus the start of the 20th century?This is false.
SO sorry.
I'm so sorry you don't seem to care for them.-_- so do you think all kids with deadly leukemias die despite attempts at treatment, or do you think survival rates for these diseases wasn't higher during the start of the 21st century versus the start of the 20th century?
1. I am unaware of any evolutionary scientists who believes evolution to be a random process. It is a process wherein random variations are selected. You have said as much here. You did not say as much in the post to which I objected. That's all you have to do in future: be honest and present the evolutionists' view accurately.
Now, if your seriously believe that there are evolutionary scientists who do not believe this, then just provide a citation to their published work where they state as much. Otherwise cease your misleading rhetoric. It is extremely unattractive.
Epigenetic factors do not offer any long-term, significant mechanism for the inheritance of acquired characteristics. For personal reasons I regret this, since I have been seeking such a plausible mechanism as a vital element in an SF novel I have had on the backburner for four decades.
Seriously? I have to spell it out?
Any characteristic, no matter how small, that conveys an advantage, no matter how small, will be favoured by natural selection.
The fishy ancestors did not have the full range of fishy swimming skills. They didn't need them. They were not competing with other fish. They were competing with other fish ancestors, some of whom had not chanced to acquire a tiny bit of wriggling movement, a movement that provided a survival advantage.
"In the country of those incapable of swimming, the one-wriggle wonder is King."
In short, my answer was concise, pointed and relevant. I even translated it from the Latin for you (in regione caecorum rex est luscus), thus invoking memories of the H.G.Wells short story, which in turn was a peace offering, since the theme of the story provides the only plausible counter attack you could have to my remark. But it seems concision, elegance and erudition are not your thing. I'll keep that in mind.
Yes, God created all the biological components of all creatures. Simply marvelous!scientists are concluding that it is more likely that these propensities and abilities are somehow already written in the genetic code or are pre-coded into what becomes their developed brain. In the former such actions would occur on a purely biological basis but if the latter is more correct (still being based in genetic transmission) then it could constitute what we could call “knowledge”, or imply that important survival based memory is itself inherited.
Yes, God created all the biological components of all creatures. Simply marvelous!
Maybe I did not phrase that as well as I should have. Of course we demonstrate instinctual or instinctive behaviors, and these are from "referenced instructions" predetermined IN "the genetic code"...and I was not referring to reflexes at all which however are also pre-programmed in the coding from before our fully developed birth. (go back to post #1)
Fixed Action Patterns and Their Human Manifestations | RealClearScience
From as early as the embryonic stage it is already a foregone conclusion that this organism will demonstrate these reflexes and they are also part of the expression of the played out code's intent (and I am not referring to the code making a mental choice).
When the software does its job the correct hardware performs the correct functions of the program's intention. For example, I had a 10 year old Dell computer with XP professional as the OS that simply could not use Windows 10 software (that hardware was not capable). The same is most likely true for biochemical codes. Certain hardware can do some things other hardware cannot. For an example of this, consider that a fish embryo can never develop fully functional lungs and breath successfully outside of the water. As an autonomic function it is not part of the program (referenced instructions). The hardware simply is not equipped to handle the software's inherent intention or purpose.
Looking at genetics as an analogy of a combination of software and hardware, is only conceptual.
Genetics is hardware only. There is no "hardware/software" distinction.
Life is, at bottom, just an extreme expression of complex chemistry.
-_- I literally took and passed a Cancer Biology course in my last semester of college, which was this year. There are various characteristics most cancer cells have, but the mutations that cause them are not entirely the same.
Just look at cancer cell karyotypes like these, there is a ton of variation in the genomes of different cancers, regardless of what tissue they are derived from:
https://albertio.imgix.net/user-assets/ebriii/00ce9db4-371d-416b-95ec-b002af7e4915-SKY.jpg?ixjsv=2.2.4&rect=960,490,0,0&w=1
https://www.worldwidecancerresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/karyotype-from-PMID-10865986.png
However, a unifying trait of all cancer cells is that they have mutations that impair mechanisms which control cell growth and division, among others, and that they themselves originate from normal, healthy cells.
The area of cancer research is extremely important to me personally. Nearly half of my family has either died of or suffered from cancer. A close childhood friend of mine is currently dying of cancer. Nearly everyone on this planet has friends or family that have had the disease or are currently suffering from it, so who DOESN'T care about cancer?
-_- I don't think your commentary could have been directed at a worse atheist than myself when it comes to this topic. My degree is in Biomedical sciences and I went out of my way to take an advanced Cancer Biology course over the Virology course due to personal interests. If you think mutation doesn't have anything to do with cancer, you aren't even on a high school level of understanding cancer.
By the way, you still haven't actually said how you think cells become cancerous. I am waiting for your explanation, and I better not get more along the line of "you couldn't possibly get it" and "you should do your own research" from you in response. Because that's just insulting at this point. Do you even know what Src and p53 are and their relevance to cancer without looking them up? Heck, I'll stream all three episodes of "Cancer, the Emperor of all Maladies" with commentary from me during it just to present that I understand the topic, with additional information to show that I am not gaining the understanding just from the series itself. If that's what it takes to make more people understand cancer, then so be it.
Who wants to watch?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?