Bible and science?

[nolidad]

So far, not working. The vast majority of Chinese still can't process lactose. Innate adaptation would work in one generation. Evolution takes generations to work.


And as they consume more milk- that protein will turn on, just like in my former lactose intolerant daughter who is now lactase persistent! She couldn't even eat pizza without getting sick. Now- she can drink glasses of whole milk without so much as a burp!

I have been in china- dairy products are almost non existent in the rural areas.

Also It can take years for someone who has had the protein turned off to have it turned on again. But if you continue a baby on lactose after weaning- it will stay lactose persistent! That is the simple fact.
It does not take generations to turn back on the lactase proteins. It does take time. And as China consumes more dairy- they will develop much higher % of lactose tolerant people in the same generation, if the people can get past the illnesses that go with lactose intolerance and continue on with consuming dairy.



Europeans, for example are generally immune to lactose intolerance. There has been a huge increase in the number of people of European descent in the world.

Because they continued to consume lactose! No need for the protein to turn off!



They just tend to evolve again, when the environment changes. That's been documented time, and time again. You were fooled by people who know no more than you do.

Some return to their "normal" state, most don't! The energy required to turn them immune ot their "disease" rendered them reproductively stunted!



Nope. See above. Notice that Chinese kids are not becoming more lactose-tolerant as they get older. Chinese are drinking more milk but it generally disagrees with them. The government is working hard to convince Chinese that it's a good thing. Seems weird, but there it is

 

[The Barbarian]

Barbarian observes:
So far, not working. The vast majority of Chinese still can't process lactose. Innate adaptation would work in one generation. Evolution takes generations to work.

And as they consume more milk- that protein will turn on,

As you just learned, that's not the case. Even after decades of milk consumption, most Chinese children over the age of toddlers, are lactose intolerant.

Another study found that while only 38.5% of Chinese children ages 3-5 years old were lactase-deficient, 87% of those in the 7-8 year and 11-13 year old groups were.
China is the third-largest milk producing country, even though most Asians are lactose-intolerant

I have been in china- dairy products are almost non existent in the rural areas.

Milk is now widely available in China.

Europeans, for example are generally immune to lactose intolerance. There has been a huge increase in the number of people of European descent in the world.

Because they continued to consume lactose!

Because they have evolved the ability to produce lactase into adulthood. There are specific mutations that permit this to happen:

From:
Clin Exp Gastroenterol. 2012; 5: 113–121.
Enattah et al6 devised a brilliant strategy using polymorphic microsatellite markers flanking LCT, encompassing a region of 47 kb, in a haplotype linkage analysis of nine Finnish families with hypolactasia. Two variants were associated with lactase persistence. A polymorph variant, LCT-13910C>T, in intron 13 of the MCM6 gene that is 13,910 bp from the initiation codon of LCT, demonstrated a complete association, while the LCT-22018G>A variant in intron 9 of MCM6 gene upstream of the LCT locus 22,018 bp was strongly, but not completely, associated.1,2,6 The functional role of MCM6 in vertebrates is unknown, but it has been implicated in “licensing” DNA replication during the cell cycle.1 This association was confirmed in a study of DNA collected from subjects of Finnish, South Korean, Italian, German, French, or white or African North American descent.1,6

In subjects of European descent, the LCT-13910C>T variant completely associated with the lactase-persistence phenotype and presented different allelic frequencies in countries within Europe, Oceania, Asia, and the Americas

Barbarian, regarding microbes that evolve to fit unusual environments:
They just tend to evolve again, when the environment changes. That's been documented time, and time again. You were fooled by people who know no more than you do.

Some return to their "normal" state, most don't!

And natural selection leaves the population almost entirely "normal" in a short time.

 

[nolidad]

Barbarian observes:
So far, not working. The vast majority of Chinese still can't process lactose. Innate adaptation would work in one generation. Evolution takes generations to work.




As you just learned, that's not the case. Even after decades of milk consumption, most Chinese children over the age of toddlers, are lactose intolerant.

Another study found that while only 38.5% of Chinese children ages 3-5 years old were lactase-deficient, 87% of those in the 7-8 year and 11-13 year old groups were.
China is the third-largest milk producing country, even though most Asians are lactose-intolerant



Milk is now widely available in China.

Europeans, for example are generally immune to lactose intolerance. There has been a huge increase in the number of people of European descent in the world.



Because they have evolved the ability to produce lactase into adulthood. There are specific mutations that permit this to happen:

From:
Clin Exp Gastroenterol. 2012; 5: 113–121.
Enattah et al6 devised a brilliant strategy using polymorphic microsatellite markers flanking LCT, encompassing a region of 47 kb, in a haplotype linkage analysis of nine Finnish families with hypolactasia. Two variants were associated with lactase persistence. A polymorph variant, LCT-13910C>T, in intron 13 of the MCM6 gene that is 13,910 bp from the initiation codon of LCT, demonstrated a complete association, while the LCT-22018G>A variant in intron 9 of MCM6 gene upstream of the LCT locus 22,018 bp was strongly, but not completely, associated.1,2,6 The functional role of MCM6 in vertebrates is unknown, but it has been implicated in “licensing” DNA replication during the cell cycle.1 This association was confirmed in a study of DNA collected from subjects of Finnish, South Korean, Italian, German, French, or white or African North American descent.1,6

In subjects of European descent, the LCT-13910C>T variant completely associated with the lactase-persistence phenotype and presented different allelic frequencies in countries within Europe, Oceania, Asia, and the Americas

Barbarian, regarding microbes that evolve to fit unusual environments:
They just tend to evolve again, when the environment changes. That's been documented time, and time again. You were fooled by people who know no more than you do.



And natural selection leaves the population almost entirely "normal" in a short time.

Well let those chinese kids keep drinking milk after weaning and then get back to me! It could very well be that lactase persistence becomes recessive after generations of non dairy consumption as was the case of china!

I doubt rural areas a re awash with milk.

I also doubt that parents would continue to pour milk down kids mouths if they are vomiting, getting diarrhea, stomach cramps etc.etc.

Yes they can discover what is going on but I find it too convenient that in dairy rich areas- we have lactase persistence and in dairy poor areas we have lactase intolerance. Science my discover which alleles and protein switches etc. sre involved but they ccannot tell the why! And trhe why may be a ssimple as that children kept consuming milk in dairy countries, thus the proteins stayed on.

Well not according to microbiologists, and pathologists etc. These "super bugs" die off once the antibiotic or antiviral enviornment is gone! But even if we call this evolution by natural selection- it is still teh same virus or bacteria! It hasn't moved up the ladder to becoming something else.

And that is what big E evolution is all about!

 

[nolidad]

In almost every case, they evolve to fit the new environment. You see, "fitness" only counts in terms of the environment.



China is now conducting that experiment on a huge scale.
Imported milk has also boosted dairy imports in China | Chinese importers | DCCC

So far, not working. The vast majority of Chinese still can't process lactose. Innate adaptation would work in one generation. Evolution takes generations to work.

If some fish had to evolve to fit the new enviornment- why didn't the rest of the fish evolve also?

If raptorsd evolverd into birds because of a change in enviornment- why didn't other species of raptors evolve into birds? why not other reptiles?

 

[The Barbarian]

If some fish had to evolve to fit the new enviornment- why didn't the rest of the fish evolve also?

They did. When an environment changes, it might not affect every fish. Or it might affect them all. In any case, some will be resistant enough to survive and reproduce, and they will comprise the new population in the environment.

If raptorsd evolverd into birds because of a change in enviornment- why didn't other species of raptors evolve into birds?

Because the niche of cursorial predator was still open. Smaller predator dinosaurs were open to gliding and flying since they already had most avian characteristics.

why not other reptiles?

Not warm-blooded, not bipedal, lacking feathers, lacking an avian-style respiratory system.

Stuff like that.

 

[nolidad]

They did. When an environment changes, it might not affect every fish. Or it might affect them all. In any case, some will be resistant enough to survive and reproduce, and they will comprise the new population in the environment.



Because the niche of cursorial predator was still open. Smaller predator dinosaurs were open to gliding and flying since they already had most avian characteristics.



Not warm-blooded, not bipedal, lacking feathers, lacking an avian-style respiratory system.

Stuff like that.

And what were the changes that caused one class of fish to leave the ocean while the rest did not????


So glad you were there all those pretend millions of years ago to inform us!

It could affect or maybe not! That is a hoot!

Raptors were not warm blooded, they did not have feathers and they did not have an avian respiratory system- world renowned evolutionary ornithologist Feduccia has reported on this long ago!

and nature and natural selection have no ability to know what type of predator is open or not! They are concepts not thinking things. There were many bipedal predators- why did raptor need a development for wings, amongst the numerousd other changes required for it to go from reptile to bird!

 

[The Barbarian]

Well let those chinese kids keep drinking milk after weaning and then get back to me!

They did. Couple of decades. As you see, they still don't process lactose as they get older. They lack the mutation that keeps lactase production going after infancy. Already showed you why:

Two variants were associated with lactase persistence. A polymorph variant, LCT-13910C>T, in intron 13 of the MCM6 gene that is 13,910 bp from the initiation codon of LCT, demonstrated a complete association, while the LCT-22018G>A variant in intron 9 of MCM6 gene upstream of the LCT locus 22,018 bp was strongly, but not completely, associated.1,2,6 The functional role of MCM6 in vertebrates is unknown, but it has been implicated in “licensing” DNA replication during the cell cycle.1 This association was confirmed in a study of DNA collected from subjects of Finnish, South Korean, Italian, German, French, or white or African North American descent.1,6

In subjects of European descent, the LCT-13910C>T variant completely associated with the lactase-persistence phenotype and presented different allelic frequencies in countries within Europe, Oceania, Asia, and the Americas

It could very well be that lactase persistence becomes recessive after generations of non dairy consumption as was the case of china!

Nope. As you just learned, it's about a specific mutation that few Chinese have.

I doubt rural areas a re awash with milk.

It's now available everywhere in China; the government is pushing it. And the vast majority of Chinese live in urban areas now. And as you learned, after a couple of decades, no increase in lactose tolerance.

Yes they can discover what is going on but I find it too convenient that in dairy rich areas- we have lactase persistence and in dairy poor areas we have lactase intolerance.

You have it backwards. Populations that are lactose tolearant developed dairying. Those that aren't, didn't. Some populations, like the Mongols, figured out how to process milk to remove most of the lactose. Others just ignored milk. Chinese are pushing a rope here.

Science my discover which alleles and protein switches etc. sre involved but they ccannot tell the why!

Mutations just happen. There is no "why." Some are just random errors. Some are due to external influence like radiation or chemicals. Some of them, like the LCT-13910C>T allele, happen to be useful. Those tend it increase in the population.

And trhe why may be a ssimple as that children kept consuming milk in dairy countries, thus the proteins stayed on.

No, that's wrong. As you now realize, it's due to a mutation that continues lactase production into adulthood.

Well not according to microbiologists, and pathologists etc.

I have a degree in microbiology. I know what microbiologists say. Guess how I know you don't have a degree in microbiology.

These "super bugs" die off once the antibiotic or antiviral enviornment is gone!

No, that's wrong. Drug-resistant forms of Staphylococcus, for example, are often found on normal skin flora of people not taking antibiotics.

But even if we call this evolution by natural selection- it is still teh same virus or bacteria!

Yes, most evolution is like that. Macroevolution has also been observed, and as many your fellow YE creationists admit, even new genera and families can evolve by Darwinian evolution. Some of them, like Kurt Wise openly admit that the fossil record is "very good evidence for macroevolutionary theory."

And that is what big E evolution is all about!

Nope. You've been fooled by people who know no more than you do. Look up Darwin's five points, and learn about it. You'll be much less vulnerable, once you actually learn what it is you hate so much.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

I have heard people argue that the Bible and science contradicts, e.g. along the lines of claiming that there are many species of a certain type of animal (I am not saying I believe the Bible and science contradicts, I am just saying this is what some people claim) "contrary" to Noah's ark?

What are your thoughts on this?

In every country, for /through/ all history, "people argue" that the Bible and <science, history, education, psycolgists, doctors, poltics, landlords, stock market, bollywood, entertainment industry, most occupations of men >
contradicts ....
"people claim" what is false is true, and what is true is false, ever since Adam and Chavah (Eve).....

We can (if God permits) choose to believe God, or believe people who claim God contradicts whatever they believe.

 

[The Barbarian]

And what were the changes that caused one class of fish to leave the ocean while the rest did not????

Wasn't the ocean. However, we do see that happening to other fish, today. There are fish today that leave salt water, and walk on land, even climb trees. There happens to be a niche open, and some of them evolved to fill it.

Raptors were not warm blooded,

You were misled, once again. Technically, the birdlike dinosaurs were mesotherms, capable of regulating their temperatures when active, and lowering their temperatures when inactive, somewhat like monotreme mammals today:
The work stakes out a rare middle ground in the long-running debate over whether dinosaurs were ‘cold-blooded’ ectotherms, which use the environment to adjust their internal temperature, or ‘warm-blooded’ endotherms, which regulate their body temperature from within. “There’s a third way,” says John Grady, a biologist at the University of New Mexico in Albuquerque.


Today, that middle ground is occupied by animals including tuna, lamnid sharks and leatherback turtles. Studying how those creatures control their body heat might help to reveal how dinosaurs did it millions of years ago, Grady says. Mesotherms burn energy from within to regulate their body heat, but not to a constant temperature as a mammal or bird would do. Tuna, for instance, stay up to 20 °C warmer than the surrounding water, except when they dive deep into colder waters, when their metabolic rate can also plunge.
Dinosaurs neither warm-blooded nor cold-blooded

Primitive mammals are mesotherms:

Here's another interesting fact about echidnas: they're not warm-blooded! At least, they're not warm-blooded in the sense of most mammals. But they're not cold-blooded either. In fact, they're classified as mesotherms. Mesothermic animals are rather rare today, but, by a more layman definition, are animals rather in between warm and cold-blooded.

they did not have feathers

Finding of quill knobs on fossilized velociraptor bone demonstrates that even large dinosaurs were feathered and may have descended from animals capable of flight. Scientists have known for years that many dinosaurs had feathers. Now the presence of feathers has been documented in velociraptor, one of the most iconic of dinosaurs and a close relative of birds.
Velociraptor Had Feathers

and they did not have an avian respiratory system

Birds evolved from dinosaurs, most paleontologists agree. But there are big questions about just how similar the large dinosaurs really were to today's eagles and hawks.


Experts still argue whether dinosaurs were hot-blooded, agile and active like the cunning predators in "Jurassic Park" or, as scientists at U.C. Berkeley phrase the old conventional view, "sluggish and stupid."


A new study finds an important bird trait embedded in dinosaur bones that argues for the more nimble view.


Big meat-eating dinosaurs had a complex system of air sacs similar to the setup in today's birds, according to an investigation led by Patrick O'Connor of Ohio University. The lungs of theropod dinosaurs -- carnivores that walked on two legs and had bird-like feet -- likely pumped air into hollow sacs in their skeletons, as is the case in birds.


"What was once formally considered unique to birds was present in some form in the ancestors of birds," O'Connor said.
Dinosaurs Breathed Like Birds

world renowned evolutionary ornithologist Feduccia has reported on this long ago!

Discoveries in the last quarter-century have not been kind to Al Feduccia's ideas. Even most ornithologists don't accept his ideas now.

There were many bipedal predators- why did raptor need a development for wings, amongst the numerousd other changes required for it to go from reptile to bird!

The movement of the upper limbs in bipedal predators aided balance. The same muscles and movements in birds permit flight. Like so many other things, evolution used what was already there.

 

[The Barbarian]

n every country, for /through/ all history, "people argue" that the Bible and <science, history, education, psycolgists, doctors, poltics, landlords, stock market, bollywood, entertainment industry, most occupations of men >
contradicts ....

...contradicts what some men interpret God's word to be. Sometimes, men revise God's word to promote man-made ideas like flat Earth or YE creationism, because God's word as it is, doesn't support those new ideas.

 

[nolidad]

es, most evolution is like that. Macroevolution has also been observed, and as many your fellow YE creationists admit, even new genera and families can evolve by Darwinian evolution. Some of them, like Kurt Wise openly admit that the fossil record is "very good evidence for macroevolutionary theory."

Well I doubt it- all we have is fossils and the opinion of evolutionists as to the meaning of the fossils.


"And trhe why may be a ssimple as that children kept consuming milk in dairy countries, thus the proteins stayed on.
No, that's wrong. As you now realize, it's due to a mutation that continues lactase production into adulthood."

Or it simply means that people who keep drinking milk have everything they need keep working. They cannot determine what happened in the middle ages. They postulate backwards. You should know that


"Wasn't the ocean. However, we do see that happening to other fish, today. There are fish today that leave salt water, and walk on land, even climb trees. There happens to be a niche open, and some of them evolved to fill it."

And what would that niche be?

You give anthropomorphic qualities to supposed selective pressures. and as far as science can tell- these fish have been this way since they were first discovered.


"Experts still argue whether dinosaurs were hot-blooded, agile and active like the cunning predators in "Jurassic Park" or, as scientists at U.C. Berkeley phrase the old conventional view, "sluggish and stupid.""

that is sad then. for scales are for cold blooded creatures. They are exothermic regulators.
Warm blooded are endo thermic and have some insulating factor to trap heat!

More later.

 

[nolidad]

...contradicts what some men interpret God's word to be. Sometimes, men revise God's word to promote man-made ideas like flat Earth or YE creationism, because God's word as it is, doesn't support those new ideas.

Well I agree with you that Flat earthism was never biblical.

But young earth creation is the biblical standard! There is simply no warrant to think of billions of years.

 

[The Barbarian]

But young earth creation is the biblical standard!

No. It's a modern revision of scripture, no older than the last century. In the early years of the 20th century, most creationists were old Earth creationists. In the 19th century, the creationist Baptist Charles Spurgeon wrote:
"But if you will look in the first chapter of Genesis, you will see there more particularly set forth that peculiar operation of power upon the universe which was put forth by the Holy Spirit; you will then discover what was his special work. In Ge 1:2, we read, “And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.” We do not know how remote the period of the creation of this globe may be—certainly many millions of years before the time of Adam. Our planet has passed through various stages of existence, and different kinds of creatures have lived on its surface, all of which have been fashioned by God"
Sermon No. 30 The Power of the Holy Ghost

There is simply no warrant to think of billions of years.

Nothing in Genesis rules out billions of years. Nor has thousands of years ever been Christian orthodoxy.

 

[dad]

Nothing in Genesis rules out billions of years. Nor has thousands of years ever been Christian orthodoxy.

Nothing in Genesis talks about billions of years. As for Christian orthodoxy, it can take a hike with the Pharisees.

 

[The Barbarian]

Nothing in Genesis talks about billions of years.

Nothing in Genesis talks about protons, either. If you try to make His word to us about the mechanics of creation, you have totally ignored what He's telling you.

As for Christian orthodoxy, it can take a hike with the Pharisees.

Christians are used to hearing that kind of talk from Pharisees. "I'm holier than thou" didn't play so well with Jesus. I'd suggest getting right with Him.

 

[dad]

Nothing in Genesis talks about protons, either. If you try to make His word to us about the mechanics of creation, you have totally ignored what He's telling you.

.

So because there are small parts of light..you think that means we can insert billions of years to fit your conception of what needs to be fitted. Ok.
Total imagination and bible butchery.

 

[The Barbarian]

Barbarian observes:
Nothing in Genesis talks about protons, either. If you try to make His word to us about the mechanics of creation, you have totally ignored what He's telling you.

So because there are small parts of light..you think that means we can insert billions of years to fit your conception of what needs to be fitted.

Because the evidence overwhelmingly points to the universe arising in a sudden expansion billions of years ago, and all evidence since points to the same conclusion.

On the other hand, since you don't like that conclusion, you've tried to adjust scripture to fit your own desires.

Total imagination and bible butchery.

That's what you're doing. Why not just let it be God's way?

 

[dad]

Barbarian observes:
Nothing in Genesis talks about protons, either. If you try to make His word to us about the mechanics of creation, you have totally ignored what He's telling you.



Because the evidence overwhelmingly points to the universe arising in a sudden expansion billions of years ago, and all evidence since points to the same conclusion.

On the other hand, since you don't like that conclusion, you've tried to adjust scripture to fit your own desires.



That's what you're doing. Why not just let it be God's way?

Nothing in the bible talks of tooth fairies either, does that mean you can insert them where you feel a need!?

On the other hand, the bible does talk about mornings and evenings and a cool of the day. Are we supposed to assume that when Jesus walked in the garden in the cool of the day that really meant billions of years!?

Ge 3:8 - And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden.

So maybe the garden was not really a garden, the day was not really a day, trees were not reeaaalllly trees etc etc as YOU decide to insert your imagination in there.

 

[The Barbarian]

Barbarian observes:
Nothing in Genesis talks about protons, either. If you try to make His word to us about the mechanics of creation, you have totally ignored what He's telling you.

Nothing in the bible talks of tooth fairies either,

The difference is, we have evidence for protons and billions of years, but not for tooth fairies or your new re-interpretation of Genesis.

On the other hand, the bible does talk about mornings and evenings

As you learned, Christians knew that they weren't literal days, since it's absurd to imagine mornings and evenings with no Sun to have them.

and a cool of the day.

Just not during the initial creation. Notice this:

(after the initial creation)
Ge 3:8 - And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden.

Again, you're changing what God said, to make it acceptable to you. Why not just let it be God's way?

 

[dad]

Barbarian observes:
Nothing in Genesis talks about protons, either. If you try to make His word to us about the mechanics of creation, you have totally ignored what He's telling you.



The difference is, we have evidence for protons and billions of years, but not for tooth fairies or your new re-interpretation of Genesis.



As you learned, Christians knew that they weren't literal days, since it's absurd to imagine mornings and evenings with no Sun to have them.



Just not during the initial creation. Notice this:

(after the initial creation)
Ge 3:8 - And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden.

Again, you're changing what God said, to make it acceptable to you. Why not just let it be God's way?

So the cool of the day in creation week creation was was really billions of cool years. Got it. A morning was not realllly a morning nor an evening an evening, but some hundreds of millions of billions of years long. Got it.

Were men really men or trees really trees? Keep us posted.