The Evolution of Predators?

[Tolworth John]

Yes.

Dr. John Sanford is a plant geneticist and inventor who conducted research at Cornell University for more than 25 years.
"mutations are occurring at an alarmingly high rate in our genome and that the vast majority of all mutations are either harmful or “nearly-neutral” (meaning a loss for the organism or having no discernible fitness gain)." and
" Sanford concludes that the frequency and generally harmful or neutral nature of mutations prevents them from being useful to any scheme of random evolution."
from, Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of the Genome.
A genetic scientist disagres with you.

 

[loveofourlord]

Dr. John Sanford is a plant geneticist and inventor who conducted research at Cornell University for more than 25 years.
"mutations are occurring at an alarmingly high rate in our genome and that the vast majority of all mutations are either harmful or “nearly-neutral” (meaning a loss for the organism or having no discernible fitness gain)." and
" Sanford concludes that the frequency and generally harmful or neutral nature of mutations prevents them from being useful to any scheme of random evolution."
from, Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of the Genome.
A genetic scientist disagres with you.

great nice cherry picking, how about the other 99% that think he's wrong?

how about the fact that he's just flat out wrong in how mutations work, most mutations are neutral, those that are harmful don't allow the animal to be born let alone survive to breeding, and will be out competed by others, so in general most mutations will be weeded out by natural selection.

You have dozens of mutations that are not repersented in your parents, by the logick of guys like sanford you should be dead, since most of those dozens would be deadly. This is why you guys are laughed at, you guys take the word of one guy without even understanding how evolution works. You quote a guy that doesn't seem to even understand genetics yet he's a plant geneticist? Tell me why he should be treated like anything but a shill for the discovery institute.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

This has me wondering just what species was considered to be the first predator. Just when did herbivores begin to evolve into carnivores?

Depends how you define herbivore and carnivore. There were almost certainly predatory prokaryotes 3.5 billion years ago. By that I mean prokaryotes that consumed other prokaryotes.

As Creationists we believe that at a point in time: "The wolf and the lamb will feed together, and the lion will eat straw like the ox, and dust will be the serpent's food. They will neither harm nor destroy on all my holy mountain," says the LORD." Isaiah 65:25

When God restores Creation the species will not longer hunt, eat and devour themselves.

Or that passage is allegorical.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Or that passage is allegorical.

No more allegorical than the story of Adam and Eve. Although one is past and the other story is future.

 

[PsychoSarah]

This has me wondering just what species was considered to be the first predator. Just when did herbivores begin to evolve into carnivores?

Actually, that's not quite what happened. Organisms which consumed material in the environment (since simple sugars, amino acids, etc. were present in the environment without being encased inside cells) were first, then some of those began preying upon each other, while others began to utilize light in their metabolism but had sulfur compounds as their waste product, not oxygen (those came much later).

In any case, some carnivores evolved from herbivores, and some herbivores evolved from carnivores, and organisms that could be interpreted clearly as either show up around the same time in the fossil record, so it isn't possible to say which came first, and plenty of organisms could have this distinction debated.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Actually, that's not quite what happened. Organisms which consumed material in the environment (since simple sugars, amino acids, etc. were present in the environment without being encased inside cells) were first, then some of those began preying upon each other, while others began to utilize light in their metabolism but had sulfur compounds as their waste product, not oxygen (those came much later).

In any case, some carnivores evolved from herbivores, and some herbivores evolved from carnivores, and organisms that could be interpreted clearly as either show up around the same time in the fossil record, so it isn't possible to say which came first, and plenty of organisms could have this distinction debated.

Creation is in a fallen condition and in need of redemption and restoration. The question is when did all of this take place. We know that Adam and Eve played a part when Eve gave into the temptation of the snake to rebell against God.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Creation is in a fallen condition and in need of redemption and restoration. The question is when did all of this take place. We know that Adam and Eve played a part when Eve gave into the temptation of the snake to rebell against God.

So says the Christian to the atheist, whom believes none of that.

 

[joshua 1 9]

So says the Christian to the atheist, whom believes none of that.

Of course they believe some of it. In the end the atheists believe they are going to be destroyed just like the Bible says. I have not met one atheist that believes in eternal life. Psalm 37:37 Mark the blameless man, and behold the upright; For the man of peace will have a posterity. 38 But transgressors will be altogether destroyed; The posterity of the wicked will be cut off.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Of course they believe some of it. In the end the atheists believe they are going to be destroyed just like the Bible says.

Just like it? No, the bible says atheists will go to hell, and later thrown into the lake of fire during the end times. I think my existence will end the moment my brain ceases to have any activity.

I have not met one atheist that believes in eternal life.

I used to (as I used to believe in ghosts). I've met one or two atheists that believe in an afterlife, and one that believed in reincarnation. Being an atheist just means a lack of belief in deities, not a lack of belief in an afterlife. I will grant you that it is relatively uncommon for atheists to believe in an afterlife, but the number that do isn't 0.

Psalm 37:37 Mark the blameless man, and behold the upright; For the man of peace will have a posterity. 38 But transgressors will be altogether destroyed; The posterity of the wicked will be cut off.

Posterity are the future generations. Hardly fair that an atheist's Christian son or daughter would be likewise punished for their parent's lack of faith, or even criminal behavior.

Also, plenty of "men of peace" have left behind nothing. The Black Death didn't discriminate between Christian and non-Christian.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Just like it? No, the bible says atheists will go to hell, and later thrown into the lake of fire during the end times. I think my existence will end the moment my brain ceases to have any activity.

The lake of fire is at the end of the 1,000 year reign of Christ. So sinners have a long time before they see the second death.

Hardly fair

You think that God is not fair? Then you do not know God. He is absolute fairness and justice.

 

[joshua 1 9]

So says the Christian to the atheist, whom believes none of that.

Believe what you want. I can only give an account of what I believe.