Ohh, the characteristically insightful scientific ramblings of a computer programmer. I wonder if he'll ever have anything more than rhetoric, incredulity, and bad manners.
Upvote
0
-
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.
So Darwin was wrong after all
- Thread starter choccy
- Start date
Ohh, the characteristically insightful scientific ramblings of a computer programmer. I wonder if he'll ever have anything more than rhetoric, incredulity, and bad manners.
Well, if he does I have yet to see any evidence at all for it. This forum needs an ignore function.
Choccy
Upvote
0
Originally posted by Jerry Smith
Yes, I think so. When he turns one hundred he'll also have a third set of teeth.
LOL! Too funny. At last something good came out of one of Nick's posts.
Choccy
Upvote
0
If you believe evolution, say-so should be more than enough for you. Why raise your standards, now?
Upvote
0
seebs
God Made Me A Skeptic
- Apr 9, 2002
- 31,917
- 1,530
- 20
- Faith
- Seeker
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Well, some of them are fairly dogmatic no matter what. I think it's worth distinguishing between attacking belief in God, and attacking belief that young-earth creationism is scientifically supported.
Upvote
0
Nick, ya gotta quit pronouncing pr like f or those clerks will keep sending you back to either the photo department or to the cartoon video department......
Upvote
0
Christian Soldier
QUESTION EVOLUTION
- Aug 1, 2002
- 1,524
- 55
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Constitution
"So, did I have a point here? Well, yeah I did actually. We often here from creationists that scientists (or at least the evil ones who believe in evolution) are so dogmatic that they cannot allow themself to doubt a single thing Darwin ever said. Here's proof that they do. And when the data shows that Darwin was wrong, scientists conclude that Darwin was wrong. Does anyone really think they wouldn't do the same with the teory of evolution if the data showed it to be wrong?"---choccy
Please name all of the prominent Creationists who claim that:
1. Scientists who believe in evolution are evil.
2. Evolutionist scientists are "so dogmatic that they cannot allow themself to doubt a single thing Darwin ever said."
Your strawman argument is meaningless.
Please name all of the prominent Creationists who claim that:
1. Scientists who believe in evolution are evil.
2. Evolutionist scientists are "so dogmatic that they cannot allow themself to doubt a single thing Darwin ever said."
Your strawman argument is meaningless.
Upvote
0
That is more of a problem in the apologetics forum. AFAICT, no one in C/E is attacked for simply being a believer and/or a person of faith. I do see evolutionists attacked as being godless, but I don't see anything in the manner of the opposite strategy.
Upvote
0
I think this version rings closer to the truth:
The only way you can deny that one evolved into another is through --- you guessed it --- IGNORANCE. That's the formula for creationism. Take any two species, ignore the remarkable homologies between the two, add a little argument from the Bible, and you have creationism. How scientific.
Upvote
0
Stormy
Senior Contributor
If random mutations were the creator of this world you would not see what you find. Chaos would be the best we could hope for on Earth.
In reality though⦠Life would have never begun.
You are so wrong about the believer's view of the origination of life.
We do not ignore the remarkable similarities. To the contrary!!
But rather... Common design screams same Intelligent Designer!
All that you see and do not understand shouts to you!!
God!
Seek and ye shall find!
God loves you!
Jeremiah 29:13 You will seek me and find me when you seek me with all your heart. 14 I will be found by you," declares the LORD
Upvote
0
Stormy, do you think the gene that causes Sickle-cell Anemia is caused by random mutation or by design? It does have a benefit for people who live in Malaria infested countries. On the other hand, it has little benefit when their descendents live in countries with no malaria, but it does cause harm. Can you explain?
Upvote
0
common design does not explain the majority of homologous regions in human and chimpanzee DNA
Upvote
0
Really? Why, then are a bat's wings made from the same bones as a mouse's leg and foot?
Would it be "intelligent" if we designed car doors and airplane wings the same way?
Upvote
0
Stormy - another one I'd like to know whether is designed or resulted from random mutations: malarial drug resistance.
Chloroquine was a drug used to treat malarial infections until the late 1950's, when malaria viruses became resistant to it.
Is this resistance designed, or did it result from random mutations?
http://www.sciencenews.org/sn_arc97/11_29_97/fob1.htm
is an article by people who think it was the latter. I'd like to know what you think, though...
Chloroquine was a drug used to treat malarial infections until the late 1950's, when malaria viruses became resistant to it.
Is this resistance designed, or did it result from random mutations?
http://www.sciencenews.org/sn_arc97/11_29_97/fob1.htm
is an article by people who think it was the latter. I'd like to know what you think, though...
Upvote
0
Stormy
Senior Contributor
Jerryâs Answer
First I would like to express my dismay in the accusation that Christians believe that science and God cannot be compatible. That is not trueâ¦but science must be kept in its proper perspective and it must not be allowed to become a god to man. For science merely explains how God's universe works or operates. Knowledge acquired by science can in no way replace the innate knowledge of the Truth that is God. Even though science cannot prove the existence of God, the evidence from science points to an intelligent power as the ultimate Source of the universe's origin and existence. The disorder in the universe can be explained as the result of chance, but the order that we find in the universe, especially the high degree of order that we find in life, can only be logically explained as the result of design and intelligence. Science is not a tool for explaining away the existence of God as many of you may think, but, rather, science affirms God's existence and mighty power. The marvelous ability of all living things to reproduce themselves after their kind is one of the most distinctive properties of life. This reproductive ability depends in part on a vast collection of precise genetic instructions, called genes (about 100,000 in humans) that reside in every cell of each living organism. It is believed that these genes provide the instructions necessary for not only the assembly and function of each cell, but also for all the organs and even the entire body! A complete set of these instructions is stored in the chromosomes, inside the nucleus of the cell.
The survival of every living species depends on its ability to pass on its precious genetic instructions, from generation to generation, without significant alteration.
If a species is to survive, the frequent duplication of its genetic instructions must occur with great precision. There are, in fact, several error-checking mechanisms in living cells that help to ensure the accuracy of their gene duplication. But even if copy errors are avoided, errors can still occur when the cell is not dividing or reproducing. These errors that creep into the genetic instructions of a cell are mutations.
There are several kinds of chemicals, viruses, and radiations that are known to cause mutations. Ultraviolet light from the sun, for example, can cause mutations in our skin, resulting in a benign form of skin cancer called basal cell carcinoma. Cancer is so closely associated with mutations that the terms carcinogenic (cancer-causing) and mutagenic (mutation-causing) are essentially synonymous.
None the less, evolutionists insist that some mutations are beneficial and lead to the gradual improvement of a species!
Chance mutations amount to random changes in the highly complex and integrated genetic instructions of the cell. Such changes would be no more likely to improve a living cell (or organism) than would a random interchange of connections in a television set be likely to improve the picture. Although some mutations have no noticeable effect, many are harmful and even fatal. Mutations are so harmful, in fact, that the very survival of all living organisms (from bacteria to man) depends on a complex biochemical mechanism in each cell that identifies mutations as they occur -- and repairs them! This marvelous mutation repair mechanism involves an integrated sequence of special enzymes that actually cut out the erroneous (mutant) parts of each gene, and then splice in correct patches. The whole field of "genetic engineering" is based on the discovery, and use, of these naturally occurring "cutting" and "splicing" enzymes.
The importance of mutation repair to human life can be appreciated by examining what happens when it doesn't work properly. There is a human disease called xeroderma pigmentosum, which results from a single defect (itself a mutation) in the complex mutation repair process. This is a hereditary disease, in which the skin and other tissues react in a hypersensitive way to any form of radiant energy. When people suffering from this disorder are exposed to sunlight or x-rays, for example, they develop progressive degenerative changes (more mutations), which lead to cancer, including the often-fatal malignant melanoma.
Still many evolutionists will point to this random mutation of cells as the basis of the formation and diversity of all life. We (humans) are to believe that we are the products of a long series of biological accidents rather than creatures created in the image of God.
But biological accidents (mutations) are not up to the task that faulty evolutionists views claim for them. You ask me questions about a proposed "beneficial" mutation. You must have been reading an evolutionistâs textbook. Because ironically, the mutation that you speak of that causes sickle cell anemia is the primary textbook example of a "good" mutation.
As you stated this mutation of blood hemoglobin is considered "good" because people who have it (and survive it!) are more resistant to the disease malaria. The symptoms of this "good" mutation include: acute attacks of abdominal and joint pain, ulcers on the legs, defective red blood cells, and severe anemia -- often leading to death.
If this is a âgoodâ mutation â¦we can only imagine what the "bad" mutations are like!
In time, man will learn... that random genetic mutations caused by radiation and other environmental forces are not the creator of all that we know as life!
Instead as you have already showed by your example of the sickle cell.
If they are not controlled and conquered by man and medicine they will do just the opposite!
They would cause death and eventual destruction or extinction of a species!
For what may appear to be the answer instead becomes the problem!
So now you may ask.
Why would God allow us to be faced with a body that is so susceptible to harm?
It is becauseâ¦
We live in a natural world created by God. We do not live in a perfect world. Life carries risk and God has allowed that each one of us be susceptible to these risks.
Our life carries with it no guarantee. We are given today⦠but no one is promised a tomorrow!
We are a people governed by the tick of our own clocks. This is how God intended.
But you must understandâ¦
It is not so we would fear death⦠but rather that we would value life!!
Now if I were to continue, I would have to speak about the soul that survives death.
Instead I will now end my post with an Atheist who will not allow himself to acknowledge Truth.
May God Bless Us All!
First I would like to express my dismay in the accusation that Christians believe that science and God cannot be compatible. That is not trueâ¦but science must be kept in its proper perspective and it must not be allowed to become a god to man. For science merely explains how God's universe works or operates. Knowledge acquired by science can in no way replace the innate knowledge of the Truth that is God. Even though science cannot prove the existence of God, the evidence from science points to an intelligent power as the ultimate Source of the universe's origin and existence. The disorder in the universe can be explained as the result of chance, but the order that we find in the universe, especially the high degree of order that we find in life, can only be logically explained as the result of design and intelligence. Science is not a tool for explaining away the existence of God as many of you may think, but, rather, science affirms God's existence and mighty power. The marvelous ability of all living things to reproduce themselves after their kind is one of the most distinctive properties of life. This reproductive ability depends in part on a vast collection of precise genetic instructions, called genes (about 100,000 in humans) that reside in every cell of each living organism. It is believed that these genes provide the instructions necessary for not only the assembly and function of each cell, but also for all the organs and even the entire body! A complete set of these instructions is stored in the chromosomes, inside the nucleus of the cell.
The survival of every living species depends on its ability to pass on its precious genetic instructions, from generation to generation, without significant alteration.
If a species is to survive, the frequent duplication of its genetic instructions must occur with great precision. There are, in fact, several error-checking mechanisms in living cells that help to ensure the accuracy of their gene duplication. But even if copy errors are avoided, errors can still occur when the cell is not dividing or reproducing. These errors that creep into the genetic instructions of a cell are mutations.
There are several kinds of chemicals, viruses, and radiations that are known to cause mutations. Ultraviolet light from the sun, for example, can cause mutations in our skin, resulting in a benign form of skin cancer called basal cell carcinoma. Cancer is so closely associated with mutations that the terms carcinogenic (cancer-causing) and mutagenic (mutation-causing) are essentially synonymous.
None the less, evolutionists insist that some mutations are beneficial and lead to the gradual improvement of a species!
Chance mutations amount to random changes in the highly complex and integrated genetic instructions of the cell. Such changes would be no more likely to improve a living cell (or organism) than would a random interchange of connections in a television set be likely to improve the picture. Although some mutations have no noticeable effect, many are harmful and even fatal. Mutations are so harmful, in fact, that the very survival of all living organisms (from bacteria to man) depends on a complex biochemical mechanism in each cell that identifies mutations as they occur -- and repairs them! This marvelous mutation repair mechanism involves an integrated sequence of special enzymes that actually cut out the erroneous (mutant) parts of each gene, and then splice in correct patches. The whole field of "genetic engineering" is based on the discovery, and use, of these naturally occurring "cutting" and "splicing" enzymes.
The importance of mutation repair to human life can be appreciated by examining what happens when it doesn't work properly. There is a human disease called xeroderma pigmentosum, which results from a single defect (itself a mutation) in the complex mutation repair process. This is a hereditary disease, in which the skin and other tissues react in a hypersensitive way to any form of radiant energy. When people suffering from this disorder are exposed to sunlight or x-rays, for example, they develop progressive degenerative changes (more mutations), which lead to cancer, including the often-fatal malignant melanoma.
Still many evolutionists will point to this random mutation of cells as the basis of the formation and diversity of all life. We (humans) are to believe that we are the products of a long series of biological accidents rather than creatures created in the image of God.
But biological accidents (mutations) are not up to the task that faulty evolutionists views claim for them. You ask me questions about a proposed "beneficial" mutation. You must have been reading an evolutionistâs textbook. Because ironically, the mutation that you speak of that causes sickle cell anemia is the primary textbook example of a "good" mutation.
As you stated this mutation of blood hemoglobin is considered "good" because people who have it (and survive it!) are more resistant to the disease malaria. The symptoms of this "good" mutation include: acute attacks of abdominal and joint pain, ulcers on the legs, defective red blood cells, and severe anemia -- often leading to death.
If this is a âgoodâ mutation â¦we can only imagine what the "bad" mutations are like!
In time, man will learn... that random genetic mutations caused by radiation and other environmental forces are not the creator of all that we know as life!
Instead as you have already showed by your example of the sickle cell.
If they are not controlled and conquered by man and medicine they will do just the opposite!
They would cause death and eventual destruction or extinction of a species!
For what may appear to be the answer instead becomes the problem!
So now you may ask.
Why would God allow us to be faced with a body that is so susceptible to harm?
It is becauseâ¦
We live in a natural world created by God. We do not live in a perfect world. Life carries risk and God has allowed that each one of us be susceptible to these risks.
Our life carries with it no guarantee. We are given today⦠but no one is promised a tomorrow!
We are a people governed by the tick of our own clocks. This is how God intended.
But you must understandâ¦
It is not so we would fear death⦠but rather that we would value life!!
Now if I were to continue, I would have to speak about the soul that survives death.
Instead I will now end my post with an Atheist who will not allow himself to acknowledge Truth.
May God Bless Us All!
Upvote
0
Stormy,
This mutation only causes disease when one is homozygous for it. When heterozygous, the mutation brings the benefit without causing the harm.
I'm not sure, I understand there is a new gene being passed around that brings resistance to malaria without also bringing anemia.
The reason I chose that particular example is that it has both a benecial effect and a harmful effect. If I had pointed out one that was purely harmful, you might have said that it was obviously a mutation - because it is harmful.
If I had pointed out one that was purely beneficial (in modern humans), then you could have said that it was obviously designed - because it is beneficial.
The benefits of the sickle-cell trait have outweighed the harm they cause in the last few hundred years in malaria infested regions.
But I guess my main point is that you said before that evolutionary changes were the result of "design", not random mutation, yet the first one I picked out to discuss was one that you felt was a product of random mutation. I think you were correct. Can you identify a genetic change that was designed?
My second example was a mutation in the malaria virus. It is very harmful to humans because it defeats our medicine that we use to treat malaria... But it is too complex to have evolved by "chance". Was it designed? Or can complex changes like this occur by random mutation?
You are not usually so insulting. I don't know if I want to keep up our friendly conversation when you say things like this. Maybe you should think about what you are accusing me of.
This mutation only causes disease when one is homozygous for it. When heterozygous, the mutation brings the benefit without causing the harm.
I'm not sure, I understand there is a new gene being passed around that brings resistance to malaria without also bringing anemia.
The reason I chose that particular example is that it has both a benecial effect and a harmful effect. If I had pointed out one that was purely harmful, you might have said that it was obviously a mutation - because it is harmful.
If I had pointed out one that was purely beneficial (in modern humans), then you could have said that it was obviously designed - because it is beneficial.
The benefits of the sickle-cell trait have outweighed the harm they cause in the last few hundred years in malaria infested regions.
But I guess my main point is that you said before that evolutionary changes were the result of "design", not random mutation, yet the first one I picked out to discuss was one that you felt was a product of random mutation. I think you were correct. Can you identify a genetic change that was designed?
My second example was a mutation in the malaria virus. It is very harmful to humans because it defeats our medicine that we use to treat malaria... But it is too complex to have evolved by "chance". Was it designed? Or can complex changes like this occur by random mutation?
You are not usually so insulting. I don't know if I want to keep up our friendly conversation when you say things like this. Maybe you should think about what you are accusing me of.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
- Locked
