De novo genes and the "no new information" argument

[tas8831]

Right now, it looks in His favor.

Only to the scientifically illiterate.

 

[tas8831]

Yes, but the miracles are there whether we think they can be explained or not.

Fallacy of begging the question.

The Innocence Project was a miracle to those who were directly affected and had no hope initially

I guess if the concept of "miracle" is reduced to people checking things... Pretty low bar.

, which as an explainable case is still back to the same old question… was the miracle a result of God using science as an instrument to accomplish it, or was the miracle a result of science only?

Seeing as how there is no reason - at all - to think God had anything to do with this, the miracles are no there. Where was God when those testifying were lying or mistaken? What possible lesson was there in letting these folks be falsely convicted that requires miracles?
Did you watch the video? A nice deconstruction of how the religious spin yarns to make miracles appear real. Sad.

 

[inquiring mind]

Seeing as how there is no reason - at all - to think God had anything to do with this, the miracles are no there. Where was God when those testifying were lying or mistaken? What possible lesson was there in letting these folks be falsely convicted that requires miracles?
Did you watch the video? A nice deconstruction of how the religious spin yarns to make miracles appear real. Sad.

Miracles are in the eye of the beholder… they believe what they know.

 

[tas8831]

Miracles are in the eye of the beholder… they believe what they know.

It would appear that those that consider events to be miracles don't know much. It also appears that there are those that either via coercion or dishonesty, will embellish and contrive to make events look miraculous when they are not. The default for whether or not to believe in a miracle is not to.

 

[tas8831]

First:
Simply because a mutation provides an adaptive benefit to the organism does not mean a new gene or regulatory system was formed.

Why is that a necessity?

If it takes at least seven mutations to transform a functional gene into a different gene

When was this decided?

, then it would require far more mutations to truly evolve a de novo gene.

Mere assertion.

The time needed to transform a functional gene into a different gene far exceeds the evolutionary timescale.

Another unsupported mere assertion.

How long would it take and by what mechanism would it be possible to transform things like calcite and quartz (dust of the ground) into, say, stearate or phenylalanine?

 

[inquiring mind]

It would appear that those that consider events to be miracles don't know much. It also appears that there are those that either via coercion or dishonesty, will embellish and contrive to make events look miraculous when they are not. The default for whether or not to believe in a miracle is not to.

Maybe so... until you're a beholder, then don't be a fool (not addressing you personally).

 

[tas8831]

While we’re on the topic…

Ye shall keep my statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind: thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed: neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woollen come upon thee.

New King James Version
‘You shall keep My statutes. You shall not let your livestock breed with another kind. You shall not sow your field with mixed seed. Nor shall a garment of mixed linen and wool come upon you.

New American Standard Bible
‘You are to keep My statutes. You shall not cross-breed two kinds of your cattle; you shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed, nor wear a garment of two kinds of material mixed together.

How many kinds of cattle are there? It appears “kind” now means subspecies or breed.

That ark gets more and more crowded....

 

[tas8831]

Maybe so... until you're a beholder, then don't be a fool (not addressing you personally).

Nothing to behold.

Speculate was adopted into English in the late 16th century from Latin speculatus, the past participle of the verb speculari, which means "to spy out" or "to examine." Speculari, in turn, derives from specula, meaning "lookout post," and ultimately from the Latin verb specere, meaning "to look (at)." Other conspicuous descendants of specere are inspect and suspect. Some less obvious descendants are the words despise, species, specimen, and as you may have speculated, conspicuous.

 

[inquiring mind]

That ark gets more and more crowded....

Maybe AV was right... some form of the tardis booth concept.

 

[Frank Robert]

Maybe AV was right... some form of the tardis booth concept.

DNA would have been much more efficient space wise. Side benefits, no feeding, no feces to clean up and the smell of clean air.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Maybe AV was right... some form of the tardis booth concept.

Speaking of AV where is he? I am hoping that his absence is due to a ban and not due to bad health. Strange that wishing for a ban could be wishing the best for someone.

 

[inquiring mind]

Speaking of AV where is he? I am hoping that his absence is due to a ban and not due to bad health. Strange that wishing for a ban could be wishing the best for someone.

I have no idea... I've not been posting much myself of late.

 

[pitabread]

Speaking of AV where is he? I am hoping that his absence is due to a ban and not due to bad health. Strange that wishing for a ban could be wishing the best for someone.

Speaking of missing folks, I notice Speedwell hasn't been around either. I checked his profile and it says it is no longer available, so was he banned?

 

[pitabread]

Maybe AV was right... some form of the tardis booth concept.

And flying in space, since Earth would have been entirely uninhabitable during the purported global flood.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Miracles are in the eye of the beholder… they believe what they know.

I understood miracles to be seemingly impossible events; i.e. events that contravene the laws of physics.

If they're just events that individuals feel have some special significance, that puts them on a par with coincidences, surprises, the unexpected, and superstitions. Now we need a word to describe seemingly impossible events...

 

[inquiring mind]

.

 

[Job 33:6]

I understood miracles to be seemingly impossible events; i.e. events that contravene the laws of physics.

If they're just events that individuals feel have some special significance, that puts them on a par with coincidences, surprises, the unexpected, and superstitions. Now we need a word to describe seemingly impossible events...

I think there ought to be a third option for an event that occurs not in contradiction with physics. But is still abnormal and seemingly impossible due to a limited understanding of the limits in which physics may operate.

This being an event that if witnessed, we might guess that it defied physics based on our current understanding of physics, and we may call it a miracle, but in actuality, the event occured in conformance with physics in ways that we have yet to understand.

What if there was a way in which someone could actually come back from the dead for example. Though maybe the conditions have to be just right. Right in ways that we currently couldn't clearly define.

 

[Ophiolite]

I think there ought to be a third option for an event that occurs not in contradiction with physics. But is still abnormal and seemingly impossible due to a limited understanding of the limits in which physics may operate.

This being an event that if witnessed, we might guess that it defied physics based on our current understanding of physics, and we may call it a miracle, but in actuality, the event occured in conformance with physics in ways that we have yet to understand.

What if there was a way in which someone could actually come back from the dead for example. Though maybe the conditions have to be just right. Right in ways that we currently couldn't clearly define.

Ought we not to have a significant number of such events on record, with reliable evidence for the circumstances surrounding them, before we bother to introduce a new word?

 

[Job 33:6]

Ought we not to have a significant number of such events on record, with reliable evidence for the circumstances surrounding them, before we bother to introduce a new word?

Whether we make a new word for this kind of event or not wouldn't hold any weight over whether it had occurred or not. I just think that it's worth considering this third option in discussions of miracles. Rather than the discussion only being about things that contradict physics and things that are known and observed a million times. There is the third option of things that don't contradict physics yet are unknown because they do not occur regularly.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

I think there ought to be a third option for an event that occurs not in contradiction with physics. But is still abnormal and seemingly impossible due to a limited understanding of the limits in which physics may operate.

This being an event that if witnessed, we might guess that it defied physics based on our current understanding of physics, and we may call it a miracle, but in actuality, the event occured in conformance with physics in ways that we have yet to understand.

The physics underlying everyday human-scale events is fully understood at a basic level; protons, neutrons, and electrons, electromagnetism and gravity are the only relevant components. This puts fundamental constraints on what can happen - it doesn't mean we understand all the complicated stuff that they can combine to produce, but we know there's no way that, for example, true telepathy, telekinesis, or ESP, can occur. It also means some other things you probably wouldn't accept, like no life after death.

IOW, for practical purposes, if it can't be done with electromagnetism and or gravity, it can't be done - the whole regime has been thoroughly explored in places like Fermilab and the LHC - if there were other physical particles or forces relevant to everyday life we'd have found them - unless quantum field theory is not just incomplete but completely wrong - and empirically, we know it isn't. Details available if you want to know more.

What if there was a way in which someone could actually come back from the dead for example. Though maybe the conditions have to be just right. Right in ways that we currently couldn't clearly define.

That depends how you define 'dead'. People come back from clinical death all the time; there are differing definitions of it, but it's generally the cessation of heartbeat and breathing. If you define 'dead' as the permanent cessation of life, you can't 'come back' from the dead by definition ¯\_(ツ)_/¯