Where did I ever say that we are in a chapter in any Biology book? I am citing peer reviewed primary research papers which is the gold standard in biology.
Upvote
0
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.
You seem to be confused, all I am asking is what Chapter we are on in the Biology book.
I do not care about peer reviewed anything. I want to know what is in the text book. I want to know what is required reading to get a degree.
All I am asking for is what Chapter we are on in the Biology book. What is required reading about Evolution in order to get a degree. What has passed all the peer review to find its way into the text books.You keep making blanket statements, with no evidence to support them.
I have lots of college biology text books. All I am asking is what chapter is this information in. College text books are pretty much a dime a dozen. But they are required reading to get a degree to go out and earn a living. No matter what people's opinion is about them.If you want to know what is in text books, then go get a text book. I am discussing the science.
If it is a gold standard then it should be in the text book. Where is it in the Biology Text Book. What chapter are we talking about?I am citing peer reviewed primary research papers which is the gold standard in biology.
All I am asking for is what Chapter we are on in the Biology book. What is required reading about Evolution in order to get a degree. What has passed all the peer review to find its way into the text books.
I have lots of college biology text books. All I am asking is what chapter is this information in. College text books are pretty much a dime a dozen. But they are required reading to get a degree to go out and earn a living. No matter what people's opinion is about them.
All I am asking for is what Chapter we are on in the Biology book. What is required reading about Evolution in order to get a degree. What has passed all the peer review to find its way into the text books.
I have lots of college biology text books. All I am asking is what chapter is this information in. College text books are pretty much a dime a dozen. But they are required reading to get a degree to go out and earn a living. No matter what people's opinion is about them.
If it is a gold standard then it should be in the text book.
So we are on the same page, could you tell me what chapter you are referring to in the Biology book so I can look it up and see what your talking about. I do not want a random reference on the internet, I want something that has found it's way into the text books. Right now I need to see what your talking about that mutations are the driving force behind evolution. From what I understand the retro virus are just markers and now shown to be a cause of evolution.
I am not the one introducing satan into the debate.We are not talking about apologetics, we are talking about why the theory of evolution has a lot of nonsense in it.
Natural mutations and ERVs are not the same thing.
Satan is not an important part of it. The point is that the world we live in, all of creation is in a fallen state and evolution does not take any of that into consideration. We are all looking at the same evidence. The question is, how do we interpret or understand the evidence that we are looking at. Science is telling us that our DNA is filled with mistakes, errors, mutations and now virus. For a creationist that is indication that creation is in a fallen state and in need of repair, redemption and restoration.I am not the one introducing satan into the debate.
Satan is not an important part of it. The point is that the world we live in, all of creation is in a fallen state and evolution does not take any of that into consideration. We are all looking at the same evidence. The question is, how do we interpret or understand the evidence that we are looking at. Science is telling us that our DNA is filled with mistakes, errors, mutations and now virus. For a creationist that is indication that creation is in a fallen state and in need of repair, redemption and restoration.
Satan is not an important part of it. The point is that the world we live in, all of creation is in a fallen state and evolution does not take any of that into consideration.
We are all looking at the same evidence. The question is, how do we interpret or understand the evidence that we are looking at. Science is telling us that our DNA is filled with mistakes, errors, mutations and now virus. For a creationist that is indication that creation is in a fallen state and in need of repair, redemption and restoration.
Ok listen as long as we are here lets look at this: "Recent studies have shown that human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and murine leukemia virus (MLV) favor integration near different chromosomal features. HIV preferentially targets active genes, while MLV prefers integration near start sites of gene transcription" http://journals.plos.org/plospathogens/article?id=10.1371/journal.ppat.0020060 If the virus favor integration at a targeted site then what is to keep a retrovirus from inserting itself at the same place in two different species. Textbook 101 stuff I know, but I was just wondering what the answer is for this.ERV's can be classed as mutations, either as an insertion mutation during the initial insertion of the viral genome or as a recombination mutation in the case of solo LTR's. A mutation is a permanent change in the DNA sequence of a genome, and ERV's certainly fit that bill.
R U talkin to me or are you talking to yourself? The evidence your presenting shows we live in a fallen world in need of repair and redemption. This does not look like evidence for evolution to me. I understand that the virus is just a marker and not used as an agent for evolution. But that is because they are still depending on the controversial mutation theory as an cause.Well, you could start by addressing the evidence that has been presented.
There is only one college Biology book. Anyways, never mind I found it. Actually the whole section on evolution is surprising a small part of the book. The chapter is called: "The Molecular Processes that Underlie Evolution". I am beginning to think that people are making much ado out of nothing.Natural mutations and ERVs are not the same thing.
Which biology book? There isn't a single book for any scientific discipline.
There is only one college Biology book. Anyways, never mind I found it. Actually the whole section on evolution is surprising a small part of the book. The chapter is called: "The Molecular Processes that Underlie Evolution". I am beginning to think that people are making much ado out of nothing.
Ok, I was just wondering because it looks like your either ignoring the evidence or having a twisted understanding of the evidence to support your own illusions, delusions or preconceived notions.You.
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?