Intelligent Design / Evolution

idscience · Mar 28, 2012

Blayz said:
Penicillin resistance: acquisition of the B-lactamase.
fluoriqunone resistance: improvements in efflux pumps.

You are not even wrong. Which is hardly surprising, since you know nothing about biology.

For those watching the thread, notice the ridiculing nature of this reply (#313) to my last post. I have not included the entire post but you can go back and read it if you wish. Notice the lack of any coherent response. This is typical through out theads that challange evolution hypothesis. When there is no intelligent rebut, there is always redicule and personal attack.

The one misleading reply was the one above. Bacteria have many ways of acquiring defense from antibiotics. As with the B-lactamase it can be acquired from other bacterium that has been destroyed then can uptake the naked DNA leading to homologous transformation. This can lead to coding for altered Penicillin binding proteins, defeating the Penicillins b-lactams. Another route is by conjugation, transfer of resistance plasmids from one bacterium from another.

b-lactamase predates Penicillin. Along with horizontal gene transfer there is no proof of any new evolution in your example.

"The
b-lactamases are ancient enzymes that were relatively rare until b-lactam antibiotics were introduced into medicine and agriculture half a century ago"

Palumbi SR: Humans as the worlds greatest evolutionary

force. Science 2001, 293:1786-1790.

Bacteria is argued now to not be included in the ToL because it is impossible to determine species. There is so much genetic change outside of mutation and selection branches are non existant.

Uprooting The Tree of Life
"In the most primitive life forms such as bacteria it was impossible to demonstrate any kind of linear evolution. The genetic codes of related and unrelated species showed routine mixing together of genetic material- either as a result of virus activity or cross species breeding."

iLogos · Mar 28, 2012

idscience said:
Dover, was a district court decision that has little impact on ID. If you remember Scopes was convicted too but I don't here many evolutions say it is invalid because of it. Judges make poor decisions all the time and there is plenty of comment on how poorly the case was handled

The next three links have nothing to do with the science, they are political positions

Hovind, is not an ID proponent and a strawman argument

Philip Johnson is a pioneer in showing the problems with evolution.

Dean Kenyon is an eminent professor who's book on chemical evolution was used as corriculum until he realized chemical evolution was untenable. It remains that to this day.

I would really recommend you not use wikipedia as your source information. They are notorious for inactuate postings and political bias. Something a little more scholarly would carry more weight.

Missing from your critique is any actual critique of what ID holds to.

DNA digital code language, along with the multi layers of regulatory networks all interacting and overlapping.
Specified complexity of information for which evolution has no answers
Irreducibly complex systems and structures that need multiple systems and components all working at the same time to be functional. Blind undriceted processes are unable to build these.

I could go on but I cannot post sources yet.

DNA was a real deal breaker for me. The complexity and accuracy of it is equal to a new found language more complex then any thing we can devise.

For me science only demonstrates how Great God is and how much ID we actually have all around us. I would hate to take the side of down playing all that, would require more faith then I have

idscience · Mar 28, 2012

iLogos said:
DNA was a real deal breaker for me. The complexity and accuracy of it is equal to a new found language more complex then any thing we can devise.

For me science only demonstrates how Great God is and how much ID we actually have all around us. I would hate to take the side of down playing all that, would require more faith then I have

Wow, a supporter, didn't think there were any here.

Blackwater Babe · Mar 28, 2012

so, ID evidence? Anyone?

iLogos · Mar 28, 2012

idscience said:
Wow, a supporter, didn't think there were any here.

lol, absolutely! Do you realize it requires MORE faith to be an atheist then it does to be a Christian? Amazing

But yea, I'm in to science big time and for me it only Glorifies God even more!

Don't get me started on the String Theory!

Elendur · Mar 28, 2012

Does it matter if god did it?

iLogos · Mar 28, 2012

Blackwater Babe said:
so, ID evidence? Anyone?

Already given, DNA. Even science refers to it as a "language" or "code"

Incariol · Mar 28, 2012

iLogos said:
Already given, DNA. Even science refers to it as a "language" or "code"

As a euphemism, done with the idea that nobody could be stupid enough to take them literally. I'm sure whoever coined the phrase is somewhat annoyed to be wrong on that.

JoeyArnold · Mar 28, 2012

I apologize for misquoting.

Incariol · Mar 28, 2012

JoeyArnold said:
I apologize for misquoting.

Thank you

iLogos · Mar 28, 2012

Incariol said:
As a euphemism, done with the idea that nobody could be stupid enough to take them literally. I'm sure whoever coined the phrase is somewhat annoyed to be wrong on that.

So you result to insults quick, must be why I see you making new friends all the time around here lol

Incariol · Mar 28, 2012

iLogos said:
So you result to insults quick, must be why I see you making new friends all the time around here lol

Insults? Rotfl wut?

idscience · Mar 28, 2012

Elendur said:
Does it matter if god did it?

No, only matters if he didn't do it.

Blayz · Mar 28, 2012

idscience said:
For those watching the thread, notice the ridiculing nature of this reply (#313) to my last post. I have not included the entire post but you can go back and read it if you wish. Notice the lack of any coherent response.

It was at least as coherent as the original post.

This is typical through out theads that challange evolution hypothesis.

No it is typical of threads that "challenge" evolution with vague generalities, arguments from emotion, and tired old PRATTs, produced by people with no understanding of biology.

The one misleading reply was the one above. Bacteria have many ways of acquiring defense from antibiotics. As with the B-lactamase it can be acquired from other bacterium that has been destroyed This can lead to coding for altered Penicillin binding proteins, defeating the Penicillins b-lactams. Another route is by conjugation, transfer of resistance plasmids from one bacterium from another.

b-lactamase predates Penicillin. Along with horizontal gene transfer there is no proof of any new evolution in your example.

Firstly, I was arguing against your "most mutation result in loss", not the concept of evolution, secondly, you don't have to remind us that you have no understanding of evolution, it's already very clear.

For the umpteenth time, you as a lay person do not get to define what evolution is, or is not, any more than I as an atheist get to define what Christianity is, or is not.

Blayz · Mar 28, 2012

iLogos said:
lol, absolutely! Do you realize it requires MORE faith to be an atheist then it does to be a Christian? Amazing

We are in agreement, I do indeed have more faith than you do.

Of course, my faith is an insignificant thing that I only think about when I come to this board, whereas it is the centre of your entire existence.

And I have more of it than you do, by your own words.

I think "sad" is more fitting than "amazing"

iLogos · Mar 28, 2012

Blayz said:
We are in agreement, I do indeed have more faith than you do.

Of course, my faith is an insignificant thing that I only think about when I come to this board, whereas it is the centre of your entire existence.

And I have more of it than you do, by your own words.

I think "sad" is more fitting than "amazing"

Well it is sad when you think about how hard you work to explain nothing and believe in it. But yea, I think it requires more faith to believe in nothing then God, but we better stop because I don't want to hijack the thread or derail it. You and I both know the direction this would lead. And it would not end up putting each other on our Christmas list

JoeyArnold · Mar 28, 2012

Matter decreases over time.

Elendur · Mar 28, 2012

JoeyArnold said:
Matter decreases over time.

What?

Can you expand on this a little more?

(Heh, unintended pun, I'm so keeping this one)

JoeyArnold · Mar 28, 2012

Energy decreases.

Elendur · Mar 28, 2012

JoeyArnold said:
Energy decreases.

Again, what?

Why write just one sentence? Please explain why you're writing this.

Intelligent Design / Evolution

Regular Member

Gal 5:16 So Walk In The Spirit!

Regular Member

Well-Known Member

Gal 5:16 So Walk In The Spirit!

Gamer and mathematician

Gal 5:16 So Walk In The Spirit!

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Gal 5:16 So Walk In The Spirit!

Newbie

Regular Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Gal 5:16 So Walk In The Spirit!

Well-Known Member

Gamer and mathematician

Well-Known Member

Gamer and mathematician

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency