Ignoring The Evidence : Why Are You Not An Evolutionist?

[toLiJC]

That doesn't make sense.

what is senseless in the words that i wrote?!

Blessings

 

[stevevw]

It isn't. You are citing science you don't understand. For example, HGT between bacteria and complex eukaryotes is so rare that it can be ignored. The overwhelming phylogenetic signal comes from vertical inheritance.

Thats what some keep saying. Yet scientists keep finding more and more events of HGT. Look at the many examples of unrelated animals that have large sections of the same genes. HGT is only one process that allows creatures to gain new genetic info. There is also evidence that existing genetic material can be tapped into to all creatures to change and adapt. There is endosymbiosis and cross breeding as well. Between them all they account for a lot of changes. The evidence out there doesn't line up with evolution through adaptations. Darwinian evolution cannot account for the types of changes and results that are being found.

Fungi borrowed bacterial gene again and again
There are a few examples of gene swapping between eukaryotes — the domain of life that includes fungi, plants and animals — and even from bacteria to eukaryotes (see 'Bacterial gene helps coffee beetle get its fix'). But such events, known as horizontal gene transfer, were thought to be rare. But Daniel Muller, a microbial ecologist at the University of Lyons in France, and his colleagues have cast doubt on that assumption after studying bacteria in the soil around the roots of plants. They found that the bacterial gene acdS, used to promote the growth of plant roots, was also present in several types of fungus. Their work is published today in Proceedings of the Royal Society
Can't get enough
Muller and his colleagues scanned the genomes of 149 eukaryotes, and found acdS-like genes in 65 of them.
After analysing the organisms' genetic family trees, the researchers determined that the most likely explanation was that three different kinds of bacterium had donated the gene to the fungi and oomycetes in a total of 15 different horizontal-gene-transfer events.
http://www.nature.com/news/fungi-borrowed-bacterial-gene-again-and-again-1.15496
So 65 out of 149 is quite a high rate (around 50%) of HGT. The fact is most of theses features are very complex and are beyond the capabilities of mutations and natural selection to create them. Using existing genetic material by being able to tap into other creatures and the environments they live in to get new genes makes more sense

Only 30% of human genes are more similar to gorillas than chimps. This is an expected outcome of incomplete lineage sorting. Overall, the chimp genome has more in common with the human genome than the gorilla genome.

Yes this along with other reasons like convergent evolution are used to explain away the incongruence in the tree of life and common ancestry. But it happens way to much and not just with ape to humans. distantly related animals to humans are said to have more similarities to humans . This goes for a lot of the tree of life which shows a lot of incongruence.
Study Reports a Whopping "23% of Our Genome" Contradicts Standard Human-Ape Evolutionary Phylogeny
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2011/06/study_reports_a_whopping_23_of047041.html
Mapping Human Genetic Ancestry
http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/24/10/2266.full.pdf+html

Since they share a common ancestor we would expect them to share genes.

Yes but when more distant animals are closer than immediate relatives in large sections of their genes that contradicts the tree and common decent.

Pick one and I will discuss it.

Phylogeny: Rewriting evolution
Tiny molecules called microRNAs are tearing apart traditional ideas about the animal family tree.
“I've looked at thousands of microRNA genes, and I can't find a single example that would support the traditional tree,”
http://www.nature.com/news/phylogeny-rewriting-evolution-1.10885
Resolving Difficult Phylogenetic Questions: Why More Sequences Are Not Enough
The studies, which deal with the early diversification of animals, produced highly incongruent (Box 2) findings despite the use of considerable sequence data (see Figure 1). Clearly, merely adding more sequences is not enough to resolve the inconsistencies.
http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1000602
Phylogenetic Classification and the Universal Tree
More challenging is evidence that most archaeal and bacterial genomes (and the inferred ancestral eukaryotic nuclear genome) contain genes from multiple sources. If “chimerism” or “lateral gene transfer” cannot be dismissed as trivial in extent or limited to special categories of genes, then no hierarchical universal classification can be taken as natural. Molecular phylogeneticists will have failed to find the “true tree,” not because their methods are inadequate or because they have chosen the wrong genes, but because the history of life cannot properly be represented as a tree.
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/284/5423/2124.abstract

 

[Loudmouth]

Thats what some keep saying. Yet scientists keep finding more and more events of HGT.

That doesn't contradict what I have said. They do keep finding examples of these rare events, but they remain extremely rare.

To use an example, I claim that the overwhelming majority of buffalo are brown. You claim that this is wrong because they keep finding white buffalo. Do you see how your claim does not refute my claim?

Look at the many examples of unrelated animals that have large sections of the same genes.

They aren't unrelated. Also, it is the SEQUENCE of those genes that is used to form phylogenies.

This is what I mean. You don't understand the science.

HGT is only one process that allows creatures to gain new genetic info. There is also evidence that existing genetic material can be tapped into to all creatures to change and adapt. There is endosymbiosis and cross breeding as well. Between them all they account for a lot of changes. The evidence out there doesn't line up with evolution through adaptations. Darwinian evolution cannot account for the types of changes and results that are being found.

Fungi borrowed bacterial gene again and again
There are a few examples of gene swapping between eukaryotes — the domain of life that includes fungi, plants and animals — and even from bacteria to eukaryotes (see 'Bacterial gene helps coffee beetle get its fix'). But such events, known as horizontal gene transfer, were thought to be rare. But Daniel Muller, a microbial ecologist at the University of Lyons in France, and his colleagues have cast doubt on that assumption after studying bacteria in the soil around the roots of plants. They found that the bacterial gene acdS, used to promote the growth of plant roots, was also present in several types of fungus. Their work is published today in Proceedings of the Royal Society

One gene out of how many? How many genes does this species of fungi have? How many of those genes were inherited vertically?

How can you say that HGT is not rare when you can only find one gene transferred by HGT and tens of thousands that were transmitted vertically?

We will focus on this one paper and see if you can come up with an answer.

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

what is senseless in the words that i wrote?!

Blessings

I did not write 'senseless' did I?

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

Hi,

Well I am an evolutionist until it can be proven that it was not done that way. Now, a 100 to maybe 200 years ago, there was not the huge amount of evidence there is today, then I would have listened and waited.

Even with accepting the evidence, and seeing if that negates anything that I have researched, and proven, I still allow, just like Einstein did, that work to be shown to be in error, if any of the data points are shown to be in error.

So far, that is a heavily established theory, and if it is ever overthrown, it will be interesting to see what does it. Presently, as it is the established science, and religion and science are not allowed to mix still, (Against all my wishes. I want Philosohy to have science in it also, etc. and vice versa.), there is and can be no conflict with God and Evolution.

LOVE,

I like the way the way you're thinking.

I began interviewing 'evolutionists' about five years ago and two years prior to that attempting to engage those who are not. If the experience has taught me anything, the only people worth asking about the subject are those who have studied it. It's clear that most of the deniers of evolution and evolution by natural selection do so because they're misinformed and very often driven by a religious agenda and not actual science.

 

[toLiJC]

I did not write 'senseless' did I?

i thought you mean my words are senseless when you said "that doesn't make sense"

Blessings

 

[Hammster]

MOD HAT ON



Moved from Physical and Life Sciences.


MOD HAT OFF

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

i thought you mean my words are senseless when you said "that doesn't make sense"

Blessings

That remains to be seen.

Would you explain what you meant by what you wrote.

Thanks.

 

[toLiJC]

That remains to be seen.

Would you explain what you meant by what you wrote.

Thanks.

what's the matter?!, why do you continue talking about it?!, here are again those your words:

That doesn't make sense.

here is also the direct link to that your post: Ignoring The Evidence : Why Are You Not An Evolutionist?

what's the problem with this that you again mention it i don't know

Blessings

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

what's the matter?!, why do you continue talking about it?!, here are again those your words:


here is also the direct link to that your post: Ignoring The Evidence : Why Are You Not An Evolutionist?

what's the problem with this that you again mention it i don't know

Blessings

Your comment is not senseless, it just does not make sense. Would you please explain yourself?

In simple terms: How does your reply relate to my opening post? Would you please explain yourself?

Thank you.

 

[toLiJC]

Your comment is not senseless, it just does not make sense. Would you please explain yourself?

In simple terms: How does your reply relate to my opening post? Would you please explain yourself?

Thank you.

ok, now i explain briefly:

if God let/made there be a long evolution for each soul/besouled being before acquiring abundant and eternal life, then He would be kind of unrighteous, because He would thus make each of them remain without abundant and eternal life for a long time, and then they would have proof that He is unrighteous for making them wait too long to receive/have abundant and eternal life...

Blessings

 

[TLK Valentine]

ok, now i explain briefly:

if God let/made there be a long evolution for each soul/besouled being before acquiring abundant and eternal life, then He would be kind of unrighteous, because He would thus make each of them remain without abundant and eternal life for a long time, and then they would have proof that He is unrighteous for making them wait too long to receive/have abundant and eternal life...

Blessings

So how is that any different from the extended lapse between the fall of humanity and Jesus' sacrifice?

 

[toLiJC]

So how is that any different from the extended lapse between the fall of humanity and Jesus' sacrifice?

without judging/dooming any person i should be quite direct so that the explanation can rather be brief than otherwise (so that there can be no many posts in (the) future), there have been some people that hurry to ask (too many) questions instead of hurrying to find the right answer(s), but in that day the Lord will just say to the bad spiritual servants: why haven't you worked for overall salvation in your Heavenly Father?!, and then everyone will know what the real cause of the ensuing complications has been for all the millennia of the world under sin so that no one of the sinners will be able to justify itself

as i said (it) above so i say (it) again, i do not judge/doom any person by thus speaking, i am just straight with you, otherwise i would boggle

Blessings

 

[TLK Valentine]

without judging/dooming any person i should be quite direct so that the explanation can rather be brief than otherwise (so that there can be no many posts in (the) future), there have been some people that hurry to ask (too many) questions instead of hurrying to find the right answer(s), but in that day the Lord will just say to the bad spiritual servants: why haven't you worked for overall salvation in your Heavenly Father?!, and then everyone will know what the real cause of the ensuing complications has been for all the millennia of the world under sin so that no one of the sinners will be able to justify itself

as i said (it) above so i say (it) again, i do not judge/doom any person by thus speaking, i am just straight with you, otherwise i would boggle

Blessings

You realize, of course, that's there's nothing even remotely resembling an answer anywhere in that word salad...

 

[toLiJC]

You realize, of course, that's there's nothing even remotely resembling an answer anywhere in that word salad...

you asked me a question and i answered you your question, now i again say, the cause of all prolonged time under sin is not a biological or another mega-annums-long evolution, but the lack of enough righteous spiritual servants to participate in/contribute to the mission of overall salvation in the true Lord God

Matthew 9:35-38 "Jesus went about all the cities and villages, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing every sickness and every disease among the people. But when he saw the multitudes, he was moved with compassion on them, because they fainted, and were scattered abroad, as sheep having no shepherd. Then saith he unto his disciples, The harvest truly is plenteous, but the labourers are few; Pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that he will send forth labourers into his harvest.",

Luke 10:1-3 "After these things the LORD appointed other seventy also, and sent them two and two before his face into every city and place, whither he himself would come. Therefore said he unto them, The harvest truly is great, but the labourers are few: pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that he would send forth labourers into his harvest. Go your ways: behold, I send you forth as lambs among wolves."

Blessings

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

ok, now i explain briefly:

if God let/made there be a long evolution for each soul/besouled being before acquiring abundant and eternal life, then He would be kind of unrighteous, because He would thus make each of them remain without abundant and eternal life for a long time, and then they would have proof that He is unrighteous for making them wait too long to receive/have abundant and eternal life...

Blessings

Very interesting! Of course the whole gospel story is pregnant with problems such as this, because what we're dealing with are uneducated prophets, kings, priests, messiahs, apostles and disciples who did not have the benefit of reading Charles Darwin.

 

[justlookinla]

Very interesting! Of course the whole gospel story is pregnant with problems such as this, because what we're dealing with are uneducated prophets, kings, priests, messiahs, apostles and disciples who did not have the benefit of reading Charles Darwin.

Even folks who read Charles Darwin found many of his view were based on nothing but guesses and suppositions. The latest rage is Neo-Darwinism. Next is Neo-Neo-Darwinism?

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

Even folks who read Charles Darwin found many of his view were based on nothing but guesses and suppositions. The latest rage is Neo-Darwinism. Next is Neo-Neo-Darwinism?

Whereas the science affirms Darwin's work, it's certainly hasn't helped foster the notion that Jesus or Paul were scientifically valid.

 

[AV1611VET]

In legal proceedings the object is to present evidence and in the case of Evolution the evidence in favor of it is already piled to the ceiling.

Then it's time for the Judge to sentence it, isn't it?

lewiscalledhimmaster]So let's try this in reverse: Why Are You Not An Evolutionist?

Because I believe the Bible.

And the Bible says ...

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

Then it's time for the Judge to sentence it, isn't it?
Because I believe the Bible.

And the Bible says ...

In September 2005, Ken Miller, a Brown University biologist, took the witness stand during a lawsuit known as Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District.
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/l...ales-and-lampreys-a-guest-post-by-ken-miller/

Ever the optimist, Part 2 of Luskin’s end-of-year project is to salvage Of Pandas and People, the creationist-turned-ID textbook that was at the heart of the Dover trial.
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2009/01/03/ken-millers-guest-post-part-two/

Now he’s revealed his hand in Part 3 of the series. It’s now apparent that his employers at the Discovery Institute are kicking off a attempt to show that Judge John E. Jones III got it wrong, and the Dover case was wrongly decided.
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2009/01/04/ken-millers-final-guest-post-looking-forward/

It's books are silent. It's authors all dead.