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.
The only people that 'see design' in genomes are non-biologists with a previous dedication to creationism.
I have very little interest in a response from you if it's not an answer to the question I've asked.
However, God is not limited in this way, and He could presumably have made different living things with proteins made out of a different set of amino acids, and genetic material made out of different pyrimidines and different purines.
The fact that all living things are made out of the same set of organic molecules is therefore slightly more consistent with the hypothesis that all living things are related by common descent from a small number of common ancestors
He said "appearance" not actuality, and he did not make that comment as propaganda statement for an ugly right-wing political agenda like ID proponents do.so prof dawkins isnt biologist since he said this?: "“Biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose”
so prof dawkins isnt biologist since he said this?: "“Biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose”
Most tissues do look alike, I guess.
The only time I've heard someone use the word molecule in relation to a cell is in reference to its organelles (which are made of molecules). Still, nobody looks at your arm and says 'what a great assembly of cells'. Same with the cell.
Such questions are just clever diversions from the topic. Here's what you should be asking,
What is the origin of the first life form, the "cell"?
Watch the video then ask yourself, "Do I really expect the uninitiated to believe this came about through "common descent" and "natural selection"?
And done.Such questions are just clever diversions from the topic. Here's what you should be asking,
What is the origin of the first life form, the "cell"?
Watch the video then ask yourself, "Do I really expect the uninitiated to believe this came about through "common descent" and "natural selection"?
so prof dawkins isnt biologist since he said this?: "“Biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose”
So precious that creationists rely so heavily on videos.
By "uninitiated", I suppose you mean "under-informed" or "uneducated."
Such folk do have a tendency to be anti-science.
So precious that creationists rely so heavily on videos.
By "uninitiated", I suppose you mean "under-informed" or "uneducated."
Such folk do have a tendency to be anti-science.
Such questions are just clever diversions from the topic. Here's what you should be asking,
What is the origin of the first life form, the "cell"?
so if you will see a car made of wood or special materials you will not conclude design then?
From earlier protocells, which were formed from lipids creating various types of membrane structures. Which were in turn formed from various naturally occurring molecules, which were in turn formed from simpler molecules.
How long did it take for the first self-replicating cell to be 'formed', based on what is known about cell division?
The qualifier (second part of the question) is irrelevant.
The earliest simple life that we can definitively identify as life - in the form of stromatolite fossils laid down by algae-like creatures is about 3.65 billion years old.
There is less definitive, but still robust, evidence that life is at least 3.77 billion years old - Evidence for early life in Earth’s oldest hydrothermal vent precipitates - White Rose Research Online - and may be as old as 4.282 billion years old. These results come from fossils of microtubials, which are similar to those found laid down by extant microorganisms around modern hydrothermal vents.
Given that all the evidence points to the formation of the earth about 4.54 billion years ago, and the formation of oceans about 4.3 to 4.4 billion years ago, this suggests that life could have come into existence is as little as 100 million to 200 million years after the formation of the oceans.
With certainly, basic life - specalised microbial autolithotrophs and chemotrophs - was around within the first 800 million years of the existence of earth.
Self-replicating cells are definitely older than this. How much older - 100, 200 or 500 million years - is hard to tell.
So, in answer to your question: At the most 800 million years, but plausibly no more than 200 million years.
My question wasn't when these cells appeared but how long it took for them to develop the ability to self-replicate from the time they became 'living' things.
The video, which was not produced by creationists, illustrates the utter impossibility of evolution (although, as a biology teaching tool, I'm certain it is also used to support evolution).
Calling those who reject evolution as anti-science is like calling someone anti-food because they don't like rutabaga (no one likes rutabaga).
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?