Evolution Lesson

[xianghua]

the problem is not only with the number of mutations, but also with the sequence space and with the chance that a functional sequence will exist in the DNA in the first place. for example: what is the chance that nature will produce a milk that even an intelligent designer(human)cant made?


by the way: according to evolution fly and mosquito split off about 250 my ago. fly generation is about one month. so even if one generation means only 1 new mutation (and not about 100 like human) we will need only about 10^8 month to change his entire genome. or about less than 10^7 years. so fly and mosquito are suppose to be different in about their entire genomes (actually 75%). far from reality. so maybe most of the mutations in the coding regions arent neutral. just maybe.

 

[Loudmouth]

the problem is not only with the number of mutations, but also with the sequence space and with the chance that a functional sequence will exist in the DNA in the first place. for example: what is the chance that nature will produce a milk that even an intelligent designer(human)cant made?

The common ancestor of chimps and humans already had thousands of functional proteins, so that isn't a problem.

by the way: according to evolution fly and mosquito split off about 250 my ago. fly generation is about one month. so even if one generation means only 1 new mutation (and not about 100 like human) we will need only about 10^8 month to change his entire genome. or about less than 10^7 years. so fly and mosquito are suppose to be different in about their entire genomes (actually 75%). far from reality. so maybe most of the mutations in the coding regions arent neutral. just maybe.

Reference?

 

[xianghua]

Reference?[/QUOTE]

reference to what part? its a simple calculation.

 

[Loudmouth]

reference to what part? its a simple calculation.

I am asking for a reference for the calculation.

 

[xianghua]

I am asking for a reference for the calculation.

what part do you think its wrong?

 

[Loudmouth]

what part do you think its wrong?

Which part can you show to be right?

 

[xianghua]

Which part can you show to be right?

mutation rate in human:

Human mutation rate revealed : Nature News

fly generation and phylogeny can be found here:

Fly - Wikipedia

 

[Loudmouth]

mutation rate in human:

Human mutation rate revealed : Nature News

fly generation and phylogeny can be found here:

Fly - Wikipedia

Where are the calculations?

 

[pitabread]

All main technologies we have and use are almost centuries old.

Phone (1880s), computer (1940s), cars/planes (around 1900s), electricity (1880s), most medicine we commonly use (before 1940s).

Oh, the irony of posting this on the modern Internet.

 

[Ophiolite]

We also have no idea how evolution works for that matter. Nothing that has been tried in lab experiments works, and they've been at it over 100 years.

Anyhow, it all ties together. That is how the universe went from hundreds of millions of years old to billions of years, when they found that evolution within the old time frame was impossible. The problem it's impossible within any time frame, and more time just makes things worse.

Repeated assertions such as you are making here, pale into insignificance in the face of hundreds of thousands of peer reviewed articles by tens of thousands of researchers, many of them Christians. How strange they should all conspire to promote what you claim is a lie. On the face of it I would have to conclude you are deceiving yourself.

 

[pat34lee]

Demonstrably untrue. The majority of mutations are neutral, and even if the proportions were different then the advantageous would be even more favored. The recent study of a nylon eating bacteria shows the development of a new trait from a mutation which was advantageous and spread through a population.

What is the mechanism you are proposing for preventing mutations from stabilizing in a population?

Untrue again. The fossil and radiometric evidence shows millions of years for large scale transitions, and with an average 40 mutations per individual that leaves plenty of potential diversity to create the species we see today.

One trait in how many years?

Sex for most. You know that the only mutations that pass on are those in the gametes?

What makes you think only 40 mutations per individual is even close to enough for evolution?

 

[pat34lee]

Repeated assertions such as you are making here, pale into insignificance in the face of hundreds of thousands of peer reviewed articles by tens of thousands of researchers, many of them Christians. How strange they should all conspire to promote what you claim is a lie. On the face of it I would have to conclude you are deceiving yourself.

Or Satan is deceiving the world. Why would that be?

 

[pat34lee]

You can't waltz in here as a creationist talking about evolution, let alone thermodynamics. This is a thread for creationists to politely ask questions about evolution, and get polite responses in return. Frame your posts as questions.

So, someone remembers waltzing, or at least the name. Question it is, then.

How much of evolution has actually been observed? Not adaptation (limited within kinds like bird claws and bills), not degeneration (loss of function or appendages), but evolution.

 

[Ophiolite]

Or Satan is deceiving the world. Why would that be?

So, on the one hand there is this vast body of evidence, built up painstakingly by sincere, intelligent, hard working researchers, many of whom are Christian, many of whom have been moved to work in the fields of biology, palaeontology and genetics by their faith in God. And on the same hand there is my own personal experience, wherein I have examined first hand a small portion of that evidence and found it to accurately reflect what the experts said it would.

On the other hand I have a claim from a smaller group of sincere, intelligent individuals, who offer no evidence, present circular arguments and declare - contrary to the views of the majority of their brethren - that it is all a massive conspiracy sponsored by the devil.

Logic, science and faith all tell me very clearly which of these views holds water.

 

[pat34lee]

So, on the one hand there is this vast body of evidence, built up painstakingly by sincere, intelligent, hard working researchers, many of whom are Christian,

On the other hand I have a claim from a smaller group of sincere, intelligent individuals, who offer no evidence, present circular arguments and declare - contrary to the views of the majority of their brethren - that it is all a massive conspiracy sponsored by the devil.

Logic, science and faith all tell me very clearly which of these views holds water.

Yet you dismiss any evidence against your favored theory, because it is the same evidence used for it. You choose which side to believe, and Satan is a master manipulator.

What if I told you that all the stuff going on in the world now, from fissures to earthquakes to sinkholes to dying animals is all part of the same thing? By the way, did you know about all the mass animal die-offs worldwide? There are list pages going back to 2011.
Mass Animal Deaths 2017 - Updated List of Worldwide Die Offs

 

[Shemjaza]

One trait in how many years?

Sex for most. You know that the only mutations that pass on are those in the gametes?

What makes you think only 40 mutations per individual is even close to enough for evolution?

40 mutations multiplied by (at least) many thousands of births per generation multiplied by many thousands of generations. It adds up to some pretty large numbers.

 

[xianghua]

40 mutations multiplied by (at least) many thousands of births per generation multiplied by many thousands of generations. It adds up to some pretty large numbers.

not large at all actually. a tipical small protein have a sequence space of about 20^100 possibilities. so even a bilion years is actually very little.

 

[Shemjaza]

not large at all actually. a tipical small protein have a sequence space of about 20^100 possibilities. so even a bilion years is actually very little.

But considerably larger than the measureable differences between living organisms on Earth, which is the point.

 

[Ophiolite]

Yet you dismiss any evidence against your favored theory, because it is the same evidence used for it.

I thought those claiming supernatural powers were in thrall to the devil? And yet you say you know what I do. You say you know I dismiss any evidence against my favoured theory. How do you manage that?

More seriously, I would advise you to withdraw that accusation. It would be nice if the withdrawal was accompanied by an apology. I won't be reporting you on this occasion, but please do not let it happen again.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Or Satan is deceiving the world. Why would that be?

Presumably to make Christianity look foolish. You are talking about how creationist "science" is the devil's work aren't you?

-CryptoLutheran