Thank the designer for sickle cell trait.

[Danhalen]

If protection from malaria is afforded for those who only inherit one set of the gene for the sickle cell trait, but all offspring who inherit two sets of the gene die (in excruciating pain), how intelligent can the designer be?

 

[JohnR7]

how intelligent can the designer be?

Pretty intelligent if He is able to rescue, save, heal and deliver us from sin.

 

[Danhalen]

Pretty intelligent if He is able to rescue, save, heal and deliver us from sin.

So why would he design a gene that kills, in a horrifying way, one quarter of all the offspring from a heterozygous couple? That seems counter-productive to the propogation of a species, and not so intelligent.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Pretty intelligent if He is able to rescue, save, heal and deliver us from sin.

He couldn't even rescue, save, heal, or deliver us from malaria without botching the job. You're going to trust the Designer with the sin problem?

 

[MrGoodBytes]

Pretty intelligent if He is able to rescue, save, heal and deliver us from sin.

Thank you, Lord, for protecting us from all the things you created.

 

[RealityCheck]

Pretty intelligent if He is able to rescue, save, heal and deliver us from sin.

Not really. God is the one who reputedly defined what sin is, so there's really no miracle in the same God "saving" someone from sin.

 

[Schroeder]

If protection from malaria is afforded for those who only inherit one set of the gene for the sickle cell trait, but all offspring who inherit two sets of the gene die (in excruciating pain), how intelligent can the designer be?

so why may i ask is this spoke of as a benificial mutation. It helps the one who has half it to live Or at least be immune to malaria and maybe live longer BUT it will kill off a portion of its offspring if they are unlucky enough to get both sets of the gene. makes since to me. SO i think they may wish to quit useing it as such a great example of the theory and how it could help. SO in fact its not truely a benificial mutation because it does in NO WAY help in the survivel of the species(so to speak without being racial). As for your design the bible does speak of the FALL and we do things we shouldnt which will cause problems. ALL of life is under free will.

 

[HouseApe]

so why may i ask is this spoke of as a benificial mutation. It helps the one who has half it to live Or at least be immune to malaria and maybe live longer BUT it will kill off a portion of its offspring if they are unlucky enough to get both sets of the gene. makes since to me. SO i think they may wish to quit useing it as such a great example of the theory and how it could help. SO in fact its not truely a benificial mutation because it does in NO WAY help in the survivel of the species(so to speak without being racial). As for your design the bible does speak of the FALL and we do things we shouldnt which will cause problems. ALL of life is under free will.

I think it is a question of how intelligent God could be if that's the best solution He could come up with. Obviously He could have just not created the malaria in the first place, amongst a vast array of other options.

 

[HouseApe]

Pretty intelligent if He is able to rescue, save, heal and deliver us from sin.

But He can't do that for all of us, only those who believe certain things. Otherwise people wouldn't be sent to Hell.

 

[kingreaper]

Umm, Schroeder, imagine a society with 100,000, one of whom had sickle cell trait.

Malaria comes along, killing 10,000 people. The guy with sickle cell trait is immune.

Is sickle cell trait not an advantage in this situation? There's no danger of homozygous sickle cells, because only one person has it, their children can be either heterozygous or lacking the trait.


When it first occurred as a mutation in africa, this was the situation the person with sickle cell mutation would be in. Thus, it is a beneficial mutation.

Sickle cell is no longer beneficial, because it is a self-harming allele (the more beings have it, the less beneficial it is) that has reached equilibrium.

 

[FishFace]

so why may i ask is this spoke of as a benificial mutation.

Because, if you get heterozygous, then it protects you from malaria.
This is a brilliant illustration of evolution, because it shows precisely how evolution is blind. Evolution doesn't "think" to itself - "I know what'll be beneficial - a mutation that does xyz." A mutation arises that happens to do xyz. So when a mutation that is beneficial in the first instance, but is sometimes harmful crops up, it is no surprise for evolution scientists. In fact, we'd be pretty darn surprised if it seemed that evolution showed any forward planning.

 

[lemmings]

But He can't do that for all of us, only those who believe certain things. Otherwise people wouldn't be sent to Hell.

That would be a pretty easy to win converts. I am sure that if there were a large difference between Christian health and non-Christian health quality, everyone would be a Christian by now just to avoid the flu. And with everyone a Christian funie, no one will sin solving that problem.

If only he rewarded those Christians during the Plague for their devotion with something other than a painful death.

 

[Schroeder]

Because, if you get heterozygous, then it protects you from malaria.
This is a brilliant illustration of evolution, because it shows precisely how evolution is blind. Evolution doesn't "think" to itself - "I know what'll be beneficial - a mutation that does xyz." A mutation arises that happens to do xyz. So when a mutation that is beneficial in the first instance, but is sometimes harmful crops up, it is no surprise for evolution scientists. In fact, we'd be pretty darn surprised if it seemed that evolution showed any forward planning.

yet it may kill off your offspring which i thought was what evolution theory was all about reproducing and PASSING on your benificial mutation, thats hard to do when it kills your offspring. And it doesnt change you in any way either. SO if they are lucky and only get half the gene they may not get malaria, even though this doesnt make them live longer really. All the rest of your post is just handwaving not really proving anything.

 

[Schroeder]

I think it is a question of how intelligent God could be if that's the best solution He could come up with. Obviously He could have just not created the malaria in the first place, amongst a vast array of other options.

why do you keep inserting that GOd created everything. He didnt create malaria any more then he created sin or death or happiness or health ect ect. We choose such things. IF he did as you keep suggesting create everything, and we do not have a choose of it it is not freewill. death and disease come from our sins and free chose. HOw often do you see species of animals dieing from heart disease and lung cancer ect ect.

 

[RealityCheck]

why do you keep inserting that GOd created everything. He didnt create malaria any more then he created sin or death or happiness or health ect ect. We choose such things. IF he did as you keep suggesting create everything, and we do not have a choose of it it is not freewill. death and disease come from our sins and free chose. HOw often do you see species of animals dieing from heart disease and lung cancer ect ect.

Whoa, now wait a minute. How can something exist if God did not create it? Please explain. Is not God the God of everything?

 

[Schroeder]

Umm, Schroeder, imagine a society with 100,000, one of whom had sickle cell trait.

Malaria comes along, killing 10,000 people. The guy with sickle cell trait is immune.

Is sickle cell trait not an advantage in this situation? There's no danger of homozygous sickle cells, because only one person has it, their children can be either heterozygous or lacking the trait.


When it first occurred as a mutation in africa, this was the situation the person with sickle cell mutation would be in. Thus, it is a beneficial mutation.

Sickle cell is no longer beneficial, because it is a self-harming allele (the more beings have it, the less beneficial it is) that has reached equilibrium.

It really doesnt matter because again it doesnt in now way show the theory in action. if you are refering it as a benificail mutation in regards to the theory and how it will change or help it change into something else its not there. Because it wont. I am more saying HOW is it showing the theory. NOt whether or not it is benificial. SO in regard to the theory i dont see it has a benificial mutation because it in no way helps in changing or advancing the species into another species. ALl you say is that it may help it survive longer.

 

[crawfish]

Perhaps your perspective is wrong. Nature has been designed so that certain bad/unsanitary behaviors cause bad mutations, but God has provided so that "good" mutations can occur to offset those.

I'm one who believes God set the thing in motion and has since only touched it when He has a specific purpose (miracle). All else occurs via natural law.

 

[Edx]

why do you keep inserting that GOd created everything. He didnt create malaria any more then he created sin or death or happiness or health ect ect.

So who created it?

We choose such things.

If we get sick, its because we choose to get sick?

IF he did as you keep suggesting create everything,

So if god didnt create it, who did create it? And if something else created it that God didnt create, then is God really all powerfull? If God didnt create it, but his creations can somehow "bring it into the world", then is this not like a malfunction and defective design? After all, I suppose you are blaming maleria on "sin" again.

and we do not have a choose of it it is not freewill. death and disease come from our sins and free chose.

Now you're catching on.

HOw often do you see species of animals dieing from heart disease and lung cancer ect ect.

Ask a vet? Are you actually suggesting animals DONT get heart disease or lung cancer?

 

[RealityCheck]

yet it may kill off your offspring which i thought was what evolution theory was all about reproducing and PASSING on your benificial mutation, thats hard to do when it kills your offspring. And it doesnt change you in any way either. SO if they are lucky and only get half the gene they may not get malaria, even though this doesnt make them live longer really. All the rest of your post is just handwaving not really proving anything.

No, you simply pass on your genes, beneficial or not.

1) If sickle cell anemia kills you before you reproduce, then your genetics don't get passed on.

2) if you do reproduce before it kills you, then your traits will be passed on, more than likely.

Why doesn't sickle cell anemia disappear? Because of number 2 - plenty of people with the sickle cell trait reproduce before the trait ends up killing them.

 

[Schroeder]

Whoa, now wait a minute. How can something exist if God did not create it? Please explain. Is not God the God of everything?

Only in your mind SO that you can accuse him of making evil or bad things so you can deny his presence. Did GOd create building or T.V's ect. no but according to you if does. Or do you speak biologically. even then we can create things biological as well. SIN was not around in the begining when we made the choice to disobey God SIN entered and thus the world became fallen or would become fallen as time went on when we do not heed his warnings. Again most of what you all speak about is mostly dealling with MAN and not beast.