tas8831
Well-Known Member
- May 5, 2017
- 5,611
- 3,999
- 56
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Married
A treasure trove of silliness...
Evidence please.
You know that we have ways of getting rid of damaging mutations, right?
Also remember that recent experimental evidence has shown that beneficial mutations are much more common than previously thought.
It is so awesome - and hilarious - when a creationist is so desperate to prop up their personal pet notions that they will unwittingly undercut a MAJOR premise of the greater creationist movement! Thanks!
But wait - he does it again!
Those mutations that creationists tell us are due to God's CURSE upon humanity for all time!
So I am having trouble with this - God curses all humanity to extinction via mutation (how nice!), but He also created a few genetic mechanisms to correct those same mutations.
Seems a little.... Schizoid...And cruel.
But thanks for undercutting 2 creationist canards in one post!
Are you claiming to be unaware that the human genome is less functional over time because of damaging mutations?
Evidence please.
You know that we have ways of getting rid of damaging mutations, right?
See above.Or are you claiming almost all mutations that are not neutral are not damaging?
Also remember that recent experimental evidence has shown that beneficial mutations are much more common than previously thought.
You mean Middle Eastern mating with Middle Eastern creates Asian and African and Nordic?And yet this is just hypothesis, not actual observational data.
New Research Suggests at Least 75% of The Human Genome Is Junk DNA After All
"The rationale for Graur's model is based on the way mutations creep into DNA, and how as a species we weed these mutations out for the benefit of all.
These kinds of genetic variants, called deleterious mutations, appear in our genome over time, subtly shifting or reordering the four chemical bases that make up DNA – adenine, cytosine, guanine and thymine – in parts of our genetic code.
When mutations take place in junk DNA, they're considered neutral – since that genetic code doesn't do anything, anyway – but when mutations occur to our functional, defining DNA, they can often be harmful and even ultimately lethal, as they mess up the instructions that code for healthy tissue and biological processes.
On that basis, it's better for our evolutionary prospects if less of our DNA is functional, because less of it is then exposed to the risk of mutation and the increased chances of early death it invites."
But you want the exact opposite to be true, and to increase the chances of survival, when fact dictates the opposite. The more mutations occur over time, the more chances the species will die out due to damaging mutations.
It is so awesome - and hilarious - when a creationist is so desperate to prop up their personal pet notions that they will unwittingly undercut a MAJOR premise of the greater creationist movement! Thanks!
But wait - he does it again!
Hmm, a built in correction routine to repair those mutations you want to be the cause of everything. Imagine that.
Those mutations that creationists tell us are due to God's CURSE upon humanity for all time!
So I am having trouble with this - God curses all humanity to extinction via mutation (how nice!), but He also created a few genetic mechanisms to correct those same mutations.
Seems a little.... Schizoid...And cruel.
But thanks for undercutting 2 creationist canards in one post!
Upvote
0