Understanding Evolution (2)

[justlookinla]

Sure, I can for complexity....a whale...an octopus....the Andromeda galaxy.....
You cannot show evidence that any of those had an intelligent designer....so, they must not have had one.

As for information: you cannot show that the human body has information in its construction....so it doesn't have to be addressed.

"DNA, or deoxyribonucleic acid, is the hereditary material in humans and almost all other organisms. Nearly every cell in a person’s body has the same DNA. Most DNA is located in the cell nucleus (where it is called nuclear DNA), but a small amount of DNA can also be found in the mitochondria (where it is called mitochondrial DNA or mtDNA).
The information in DNA is stored as a code made up of four chemical bases: adenine (A), guanine (G), cytosine (C), and thymine (T). Human DNA consists of about 3 billion bases, and more than 99 percent of those bases are the same in all people. The order, or sequence, of these bases determines the information available for building and maintaining an organism, similar to the way in which letters of the alphabet appear in a certain order to form words and sentences."​

What is DNA? - Genetics Home Reference

 

[Loudmouth]

"DNA, or deoxyribonucleic acid, is the hereditary material in humans and almost all other organisms. Nearly every cell in a person’s body has the same DNA. Most DNA is located in the cell nucleus (where it is called nuclear DNA), but a small amount of DNA can also be found in the mitochondria (where it is called mitochondrial DNA or mtDNA).
The information in DNA is stored as a code made up of four chemical bases: adenine (A), guanine (G), cytosine (C), and thymine (T). Human DNA consists of about 3 billion bases, and more than 99 percent of those bases are the same in all people. The order, or sequence, of these bases determines the information available for building and maintaining an organism, similar to the way in which letters of the alphabet appear in a certain order to form words and sentences."​

What is DNA? - Genetics Home Reference

DNA uses the same code that is used to make H2O. AGGTTCTTG is as much a code as 2H2 + O2 ----> 2H2O

 

[Loudmouth]

You don't see valves, chambers, power, inter-machine communication, information, sensors,ruggedness, inherent healing ability in human designs?

I don't see sexual reproduction, embryonic development, or a nested hierarchy in human designs. Those are all of the things that evidence evolution, and what indicates evolution over design.

 

[Loudmouth]

You don't have a single example of only naturalistic mechanisms producing the human machine from a single life form of long long ago.

I don't need such evidence since I have never claimed that only naturalistic mechanisms are in play. I see that you go back to your usual mantra when you can't deal with the evidence.

 

[Loudmouth]

Right, this means you can't do it.

I already have shown what evolution predicts in this specific case in several other threads. What does common design predict?

The usual game you play is to introduce ERVs which does not address the issue of only naturalistic mechanisms producing the incomprehensible complexity and variety of life we observe today, all from an alleged single life form of long long ago.

Why should I address an issue that doesn't exist? None of us hold that position.

Common design uses common building blocks to create complex and functional designs. That's seen throughout creation, over and over.

Those are just words. What does common design predict we should see in the evidence? Why do you keep claiming that common design will look just like evolution?

You have absolutely zero business suggesting that ERVs are evidence that only naturalistic mechanisms produced the human machine from an alleged single life form of long long ago. It's not.

I never suggested such a thing. Those are your words. I have consistently said that ERV's are evidence for common ancestry and evolution. Your addition of the word "only" is your problem.

 

[Loudmouth]

Here is the challenge that justlookinla keeps avoiding.

Let's see how well your theory works.

Both chimps and gorillas have a type of ERV called CERV's (aka PtERV's). This family of retroviral DNA is not found in humans.

Using "common design", should I find CERV insertions at the same locations in the gorilla and chimp genomes? Explain your answer.

When you are finished, I will give the predictions made by the theory of evolution, and why the theory makes those predictions.

If you can't make these predictions, then you can't claim common design.

 

[Euler]

Well, let's see, since you don't want to take personal responsibility for misquoting me we'll look at the human machine and see if it's simply a product of a random, mindless, meaningless, purposeless and goalless mechanism. Your rush to introduce ERVs, which has nothing to do with my original request...you know, the one you misquoted....has caused you to stumble headlong and fall into the pile of stinky guesses and suppositions of atheistic Darwinist creationism.

Now, for the facts.....

"There are 2.5 trillion (give or take) of red blood cells in your body at any moment. To maintain this number, about two and a half million new ones need to be produced every second by your bone marrow.That's like a new population of the city of Toronto every second."​

"Considering all the tissues and cells in your body, 25 million new cells are being produced each second. That's a little less than the population of Canada - every second"​

"Nerve Impulses travel at over 400 km/hr (249 mi/hr)".​

"Our heart beats around 100,00 times every day or about 30 million times in a year.​

"Our blood is on a 60,000-mile journey per day."​

"Our eyes can distinguish up to ten million colour surfaces and take in more information than the largest telescope known to man."​

"Our lungs inhale over two million litres of air every day, without even thinking. Their surface area is large enough to cover one side of a tennis court."​

"We give birth to over 200 billion red cells every day."​

" When we touch something, we send a message to our brain at 124 mph"​

"Our nose is our personal air-conditioning system: it warms cold air, cools hot air and filters impurities."​

"In one square inch of our hand we have nine feet of blood vessels, 600 pain sensors, 9000 nerve endings, 36 heat sensors and 75 pressure sensors."​

"The aorta, the largest artery in the body, is almost the diameter of a garden hose. Capillaries, on the other hand, are so small that it takes ten of them to equal the thickness of a human hair.​

"The heart pumps about 1 million barrels of blood during an average lifetime - that's enough to fill 2 oil super tankers"​

"The number of neurons present in the brain is approximately 100 billion which is about 15 times of the total human population on earth. This high number of neurons increases the processing ability of the brain."​

"During pregnancy, the fetal brain develops at an amazing rate. There are about 251,000 neurons added every single minute. In accordance with that, there could be nearly 1,000 – 10,000 synapses just for a single neuron. Cells will continue to develop for several years after birth. The region responsible for memory and learning, the hippocampus, will continue to add new cells throughout lifetime."​

This is just a small portion of the incomprehensible complexity of the human machine, we could go on and on with the facts. Now, if you have any evidence whatsoever that only a random, mindless, meaningless, and goalless naturalistic mechanism acting on a single life from from long long ago created that, please present it. And try not to change my request and actually quote me this time. Ok?

That's it!??

Your answer to the mathematically unchallengeable pattern of ERV insertions that we share with the other primates, is to SIMPLY CHANGE THE SUBJECT!!??

What a monumental failure! I honestly have never seen someone so blatantly run from a question!

Man up. Just admit you have NO ANSWER and that the best you can do is to mount a feeble Argument from Ignorance!

 

[justlookinla]

DNA uses the same code that is used to make H2O. AGGTTCTTG is as much a code as 2H2 + O2 ----> 2H2O

I disagree. DNA is not only code, it's information and instruction.

 

[justlookinla]

I don't see sexual reproduction, embryonic development, or a nested hierarchy in human designs. Those are all of the things that evidence evolution, and what indicates evolution over design.

You didn't answer. Once again, you don't see valves, chambers, power, inter-machine communication, information, sensors,ruggedness, inherent healing ability in human designs?

 

[justlookinla]

I don't need such evidence since I have never claimed that only naturalistic mechanisms are in play. I see that you go back to your usual mantra when you can't deal with the evidence.

What other mechanisms, other than naturalistic mechanisms, are in play for the creation of humanity from an alleged single life form of long long ago?

 

[justlookinla]

I already have shown what evolution predicts in this specific case in several other threads. What does common design predict?

Common design predicts common building blocks.

Why should I address an issue that doesn't exist? None of us hold that position.

All you have to do is reveal what, other than only naturalistic mechanisms, are responsible for the creation of humanity from an alleged single life form of long long ago.

Those are just words. What does common design predict we should see in the evidence? Why do you keep claiming that common design will look just like evolution?

I don't claim that common design will look like atheistic Darwinist creationism. Common design will have the elements of common building blocks to create complex and functional designs. Again, that's seen throughout creation, over and over.

I never suggested such a thing. Those are your words. I have consistently said that ERV's are evidence for common ancestry and evolution. Your addition of the word "only" is your problem.

You've constantly avoided revealing the impetus, other than only naturalistic mechanisms, which created humanity from an alleged single life form of long long ago. Why?

 

[justlookinla]

Here is the challenge that justlookinla keeps avoiding.

Let's see how well your theory works.

Both chimps and gorillas have a type of ERV called CERV's (aka PtERV's). This family of retroviral DNA is not found in humans.

Using "common design", should I find CERV insertions at the same locations in the gorilla and chimp genomes? Explain your answer.

When you are finished, I will give the predictions made by the theory of evolution, and why the theory makes those predictions.

If you can't make these predictions, then you can't claim common design.

Let's see how well atheistic Darwinist creationism works. First, there's absolutely no evidence that only naturalistic mechanisms are capable of producing the incomprehensible complexity and variety of life we observe today from an alleged single life form of long long ago. We can go on to point #2 once that's acknowledged.

 

[justlookinla]

That's it!??

Oh, I have more if you want it. None of them lend any credence that humanity is the product of only naturalistic mechanisms acting on an alleged single life form of long long ago.

Your answer to the mathematically unchallengeable pattern of ERV insertions that we share with the other primates, is to SIMPLY CHANGE THE SUBJECT!!??

What a monumental failure! I honestly have never seen someone so blatantly run from a question!

Man up. Just admit you have NO ANSWER and that the best you can do is to mount a feeble Argument from Ignorance!

Actually, you're the one who misquoted me, either purposely or ignorantly, and then attempted to introduce ERVs to change the subject.

Didn't work, did it?

 

[Smidlee]

Again, that is a creationist site. Please, stop getting your info from sources that directly benefit from presenting evolution inaccurately.

And it isn't a handful, it is hundreds if not thousands

This is a ID site not a creationist site. You need to visit there more often as you will learn your vision of evolution is inaccurately. I heard a few debates debates between ID and evolutionist where the evolutionist will admit their science accurate but they strongly disagree with ID and questioned their motives.
It's not just ID but the ENCODE researchers that Junk-DNA believers are up against. ENCORE isn't very supportive of the Junk-DNA myth.

http://www.discovery.org/multimedia...-origins-is-our-genome-full-of-junk-dna-pt-5/

"If these results are true there can be no evolution."

 

[Euler]

Oh, I have more if you want it. None of them lend any credence that humanity is the product of only naturalistic mechanisms acting on an alleged single life form of long long ago.



Actually, you're the one who misquoted me, either purposely or ignorantly, and then attempted to introduce ERVs to change the subject.

Didn't work, did it?

Oh yes, it worked quite perfectly thanks!

It drew out of you the absolutely asinine response of "common design", wherein you displayed how inept and uninformed you are in understanding what ERVs are and how they become to be inserted.

You then double up with a cowardly display of subject-changing and goalpost-shifting in a vain attempt to run from the question.

So thank you for once again displaying your dishonesty and lack of integrity for all to see.

 

[Euler]

And for those interested in an HONEST discussion about the many evidence trails for evolutionary processes, let me point out that the phenomena surrounding the appearance of ERVs in the genomes of primates and other animal groups provide overwhelming evidence for the past existence of common ancestors for all living things.

In fact, there are many in the field of biological research who observe that, even if we did not have the mountains of evidence provided by other streams, even if not one fossil had ever been unearthed, the evidence provided by ERVs would be by itself a slam-dunk justification for the theory of common ancestry.

 

[PsychoSarah]

This is a ID site not a creationist site. You need to visit there more often as you will learn your vision of evolution is inaccurately. I heard a few debates debates between ID and evolutionist where the evolutionist will admit their science accurate but they strongly disagree with ID and questioned their motives.
It's not just ID but the ENCODE researchers that Junk-DNA believers are up against. ENCORE isn't very supportive of the Junk-DNA myth.

http://www.discovery.org/multimedia...-origins-is-our-genome-full-of-junk-dna-pt-5/

"If these results are true there can be no evolution."

-_- that is most certainly a creationist site, and a really famous one at that

 

[dad]

And for those interested in an HONEST discussion about the many evidence trails for evolutionary processes, let me point out that the phenomena surrounding the appearance of ERVs in the genomes of primates and other animal groups provide overwhelming evidence for the past existence of common ancestors for all living things.

False. It shows that transfer of some things happened in a way it now doesn't. Whoopee do.

 

[Loudmouth]

I disagree. DNA is not only code, it's information and instruction.

H2O is also a code that has information and instructions just like DNA. Even more, each individual atom also has a code, information, and instructions. Here is a chart of that information:

Electron orbital position in an atom are codes in the same way that base positions in DNA polymers are codes.

 

[Loudmouth]

You didn't answer. Once again, you don't see valves, chambers, power, inter-machine communication, information, sensors,ruggedness, inherent healing ability in human designs?

The things that evidence evolution are not seen in human designs.