A question from a Christian

originally posted by: Margana
a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

originally posted by: puzzlesphere
In science there is no differentiation between macro and micro-evolution... they are the same thing.

If you admit that "microevolution" happens, then, end of argument.
______________________

There are examples of bacteria and some larger scale organisms that have specifically changed genus through 1000's of generations. This is what creationists call microevolution... they are wrong... they ask for an example of one species "changing" into another, and it has been shown multiple times with multiple species up to some small insects... then the goalposts get moved and they ask for "bigger" (macro) examples.

If recorded history keeps going for another few thousand years, then larger examples will be shown in time, in a natural progression that has been under analysis for hundreds of years already, which is why evolution is the only theory to hold water to date (god did it isn't scientific)... basically ever more examples will be shown as time affords us the ability to see long span generational changes across increasingly long lived and complex creatures... including humans.

As such, the definitions of micro and macro-evolution keep sliding... which is why there is no differentiation in science, because inaccurate definitions can't be relied upon.

Evolution happens... accept it, or remain ignorant.

I agree with this user and would like to see you & OptimusSubprime address it. Contrary to claims by creationists, macro and microevolution describe fundamentally identical processes on different time scales

Watch BBC: Planet Earth. You can see how different animals have evolved to be able to survive in their environment.

Show me a genetic pathway then? You are speculating. There is no evidence that shows variance within species over long periods of time will produce a new organism entirely. If you have some of that evidence please share it.

originally posted by: UNIT76
a reply to: Margana

i'm wondering,
..if those galaxies & whatevers harbor no actual life..
..can they really be said to be evolving?

as the weird pope-looking alien said in the 5th element movie, "time not important, only life important"
all the time in the world can happen..
forever.. and ever..
..and those galaxies can change & alter all they want
it still wont mean anything

..it's all about *life*

 

God has apparently dealt with the evolutionist crowd before

Jeremiah 2:26+
…26"As the thief is shamed when he is discovered, So the house of Israel is shamed; They, their kings, their princes And their priests and their prophets, 27Who say to a tree, 'You are my father,' And to a stone, 'You gave me birth.' For they have turned their back to Me, And not their face; But in the time of their trouble they will say, 'Arise and save us.' 28"But where are your gods Which you made for yourself? Let them arise, if they can save you In the time of your trouble; For according to the number of your cities Are your gods, O Judah.…

Why is "life" needed in order for any change to happen in the universe? I used quotes because you are obviously talking about a specific type of life & I'm not sure if your definition of life and mine are the same.

What does that quote have to do with evolution? No one is saying that man evolved from a tree or a rock. "but where are your gods which you made for yourself?" Evolution isn't a God so that doesn't work in this case. Also, just because I believe in evolution, doesn't mean I don't believe that a higher power created the universe and then evolution was the natural process that took place after.

a reply to: [post=18034072]mOjOm[/


If Apes(BTW Chimps Gorillas Bonobos and Humans are all classified as apes) have a common ancestor then they should all be inter-fertile just as dogs and wolves are inter-fertile. However, Only CHimps can reproduce with chimps and only gorillas with gorillas and so on and if they do reproduce it would most likely be sterile

originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb

originally posted by: Margana
a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

originally posted by: puzzlesphere
In science there is no differentiation between macro and micro-evolution... they are the same thing.

If you admit that "microevolution" happens, then, end of argument.
______________________

There are examples of bacteria and some larger scale organisms that have specifically changed genus through 1000's of generations. This is what creationists call microevolution... they are wrong... they ask for an example of one species "changing" into another, and it has been shown multiple times with multiple species up to some small insects... then the goalposts get moved and they ask for "bigger" (macro) examples.

If recorded history keeps going for another few thousand years, then larger examples will be shown in time, in a natural progression that has been under analysis for hundreds of years already, which is why evolution is the only theory to hold water to date (god did it isn't scientific)... basically ever more examples will be shown as time affords us the ability to see long span generational changes across increasingly long lived and complex creatures... including humans.

As such, the definitions of micro and macro-evolution keep sliding... which is why there is no differentiation in science, because inaccurate definitions can't be relied upon.

Evolution happens... accept it, or remain ignorant.

I agree with this user and would like to see you & OptimusSubprime address it. Contrary to claims by creationists, macro and microevolution describe fundamentally identical processes on different time scales

Watch BBC: Planet Earth. You can see how different animals have evolved to be able to survive in their environment.

Show me a genetic pathway then? You are speculating. There is no evidence that shows variance within species over long periods of time will produce a new organism entirely. If you have some of that evidence please share it.

I don't know why I'm doing the research for you, guess it's the only way you'd ever look at any articles like this.

The evolution of molecular genetic pathways and networks.

The evolutionary dynamics of evolvability in a gene network model.

Long-term evolution is surprisingly predictable in lattice proteins.

Evolution of microbes and viruses: a paradigm shift in evolutionary biology?

a reply to: Margana

"Why do you not understand what I am saying?" (John 8:43)



a house only exists because someone constructs it.
the universe is like a house.
but let's have it your way then, and have the house evolve from nothing, and for no purpose

O_o

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

My main question is can anyone give me a genetic pathway through which an Ape can evolve into a human, or a genetic pathway for the mesonychid to evolve into a whale?

An entire book has been written on the subject, showing how single-celled organisms evolved into human beings. Unfortunately, it was written by the Devil, so you will not even touch it, let alone read it.

The Ancestor's Tale

originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb
a reply to: [post=18034072]mOjOm[/


If Apes(BTW Chimps Gorillas Bonobos and Humans are all classified as apes) have a common ancestor then they should all be inter-fertile just as dogs and wolves are inter-fertile. However, Only CHimps can reproduce with chimps and only gorillas with gorillas and so on and if they do reproduce it would most likely be sterile

Well, then maybe you have your example of Macro Evolution then.

With the DNA being 90 something percent the same, I'd say sequence out the rest and in it you'll find the code for mating and what is changed that disallows them to mate with each other.

I know you're all hung up on this Macro Evolution thing, but think about it. How much longer do you thing it would really take until you couldn't breed a chihuahua and a Great Dane if you kept both breeds Isolated??? We've bred them to where they are in a very short time for Evolutionary time making it even easier. Isolated long enough with some environmental change now and then and they'd evolve so you can't breed them anymore.

originally posted by: UNIT76
a reply to: Margana

"Why do you not understand what I am saying?" (John 8:43)

 

 

 

a house only exists because someone constructs it.
the universe is like a house.
but let's have it your way then, and have the house evolve from nothing, and for no purpose

O_o

I didn't say that the universe evolved from nothing, I said a higher being created everything & evolution is the natural process that has taken place since then.

Who said there is no purpose? Just because you think there is no purpose for the evolution of a planet because a type of life doesn't exist on it doesn't make it so. As far as you know there is no life on the Sun so by your logic there is no purpose in our Suns evolution.

Typical close minded religious view. Which is funny because one would think that if you believe in God than anything and everything has a purpose. How silly of you to think you know the purpose of all of God's creations. Who are you to question the purpose of something the all knowing and all powerful God created?

((I'm overplaying it a bit because your being silly & I grow tired of it. Remember, I do believe in a higher power. I just don't believe in the dogmatic teaching of religion.))

a reply to: mOjOm

you'll find the code for mating and what is changed that disallows them to mate with each other.

as a hobbyist computer programmer, i've come to appreciate why other programmers structure their programs the way they do, also- not all programmers think alike, and you don't know where & how they've potentially nested those variables in other scripts & functions, so what you change in one place ends up making CRITICAL ERRORS elsewhere.. maybe only another programmer can understand that?

i might LOOK at other peoples code (and then incorporate what i learnt into my own programming) but i never hacked something someone else made and tried to claim it was my own, that seems like something a real loser would do..
and it's funny, because when we read the fine print in this world
it invariably says something like "you shall not modify, reverse-engineer or tinker with this product in any way- failure to comply by these laws may result in blah blah blah"

...why don't these same people simply respect God's product and leave it alone?
/shrug

a reply to: Margana

no.

it's about *life* (...remember?)

you don't seem to follow this because your version of God doesn't require morals..

..as for that sun (neither of us can say for sure if it is alive or not) but what we can agree on- if it wasn't there none of us would even be here, would we? on account of how we like, need the sun so we can be alive an' stuff



oh, the irony

Who are you to question the purpose of something the all knowing and all powerful God created?

...why don't these same people simply respect God's product and leave it alone?

a reply to: UNIT76

I don't know, maybe you should ask them. I don't BioHack DNA myself. That was just my own theory used for an example, not exactly a Scientific Proposal or anything.

But to answer your question again. It might also have something to do with Not all of them attribute such things to God so they don't worry about God getting upset over them playing with the fabric of Life and the Universe.

For those who do believe in God and still do it, perhaps they may even consider that since we were made in the image of God, that it's one of our Purposes for Being Here in the First Place.

But that's just my random opinion on the subject. Who knows for sure???

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

Explain the mechanism that stops genetic mutations from accumulation too much, i.e. what stops "micro" from a culminating to "macro".

Explain an experiment we can devise to observe this.

State the useful testable predictions this hypothesis makes.

Put your money where your mouth us for a change.

a reply to: GetHyped

Oh come on now... They have a one size fits all for any question.... God did it...

a reply to: UNIT76
God supports opensource projects.

Humans are not propriety software.

a reply to: Margana

LOL classic...

stars for you...

a reply to: Margana

People have been brain washed, literally since birth to believe what they were taught in church was the be all end all TRUTH! Then they were taught that anything that makes you question or doubt the validity of the bible ( in put any religious text) is obviously a trick by the devil. Making sure anyone who ever disproved Christianity was considered an agent of satan.

I'm like the rest of y'all who try to point out how ridiculous and destructive it is to deny logic and science just to stick their head in the sand with your spiritual comfort food.


We control the fate of humanity. Not Bronze Age mythes and a invisible republican.

Look at how destructive and effective the attack on evolution has been. Sure, only like 25% of Christians buy into all the creationism mumbo jumbo. But that's a lot of people to be brainwashed with lies in the age of free information.

Here's a thought. If religion had bought into evolution. Twisting the bible around it instead of trying to twist nature into the bible. Would there be any climate change deniers? I think the intelligent desighn farce set the stage for rejecting all science.... Rejecting all science...as they heat up there breakfast in a MICROWAVE and drive to work in a CAR!

originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb

originally posted by: Margana
a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

originally posted by: puzzlesphere
In science there is no differentiation between macro and micro-evolution... they are the same thing.

If you admit that "microevolution" happens, then, end of argument.
______________________

There are examples of bacteria and some larger scale organisms that have specifically changed genus through 1000's of generations. This is what creationists call microevolution... they are wrong... they ask for an example of one species "changing" into another, and it has been shown multiple times with multiple species up to some small insects... then the goalposts get moved and they ask for "bigger" (macro) examples.

If recorded history keeps going for another few thousand years, then larger examples will be shown in time, in a natural progression that has been under analysis for hundreds of years already, which is why evolution is the only theory to hold water to date (god did it isn't scientific)... basically ever more examples will be shown as time affords us the ability to see long span generational changes across increasingly long lived and complex creatures... including humans.

As such, the definitions of micro and macro-evolution keep sliding... which is why there is no differentiation in science, because inaccurate definitions can't be relied upon.

Evolution happens... accept it, or remain ignorant.

I agree with this user and would like to see you & OptimusSubprime address it. Contrary to claims by creationists, macro and microevolution describe fundamentally identical processes on different time scales

Watch BBC: Planet Earth. You can see how different animals have evolved to be able to survive in their environment.

Show me a genetic pathway then? You are speculating. There is no evidence that shows variance within species over long periods of time will produce a new organism entirely. If you have some of that evidence please share it.

I don't understand how you can put yourself in a position to judge evidence when you come to us asking for clarification on evolution. If anything, you've already made it clear your comprehension is lacking. So are you here to listen, or to argue?

nvm