It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
And that's exactly what happened to the Greenish Warbler which biologist think originated in the southern Himalayas.
Genetic engineering, also called genetic modification, is the direct human manipulation of an organism's genome using modern DNA technology. It involves the introduction of foreign DNA or synthetic genes into the organism of interest. The introduction of new DNA does not require the use of classical genetic methods, however traditional breeding methods are typically used for the propagation of recombinant organisms. An organism that is generated through the introduction of recombinant DNA is considered to be a genetically modified organism.en.wikipedia.org...
Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
And the warbler is not the only example. There are the pole-ringing Larus gulls
Originally posted by confreak
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
Creationism and Evolution do not oppose each other. You are selecting certain segment of creationism and using evolution to discredit all of creationism.
Evolution means change, and everything changes,
you leave your shoes in rain for a month and it will change color, that doesn't prove Atheism, rather it proves determinism.
Originally posted by blamethegreys
I think naturalists often forget there are many species of creationists as well
Sure there are literal 7000 year / fixed species believers, but they are the minority imo.
There are so many of us in the grey area, where "absolute proof" such as this ring species theory means nothing to the balance of our belief.
I for one am keenly aware of the power of Charles Darwin's theories; I absolutely believe that all life on our planet, humans included, are subject to the law of natural selection. We are here on earth and subject to all the natural challenges any other species face. If we can't adapt to a new condition we die, and those who could live.
As for humanity...I haven't formed a solid opinion yet. The evidence we see points to the evolution of species.
Could I believe in our own evolution? God breathing "life" into Adam and Eve at some point on that evolutionary ladder? I think I could, perhaps.
I lean more towards the concept that we were placed here at some point. Much further back that 7000 years ago, but that whole idea is for another thread.
We are very similar to primates...excuse me, we are primates.
I feel in my gut that life on other planets doesn't fall too far from the evolutionary tree we see here on earth.
DNA is DNA, and the combinations and successful lines wouldn't be too wildly different from what we have experienced.
So as a creationist, why would my concept of God's DNA (or humans) be some markedly different strain from that of the natural world? If I believe that we are created in the image of an advanced primate, why wouldn't our blueprint look strikingly similar to other primates?
I can (and do) believe in a God that didn't "POOF!" everything into existence. I believe in a God that orchestrated a very complex, beautiful and intricately balanced universe. A universe built upon physics and math and chemistry. A genuine, real system, not a false backdrop painted in a day.
Originally posted by painterdude
reply to post by blamethegreys
When a machine is said to be "irreducibly complex", the meaning is that all of the parts need to be functioning and in place, or it cannot function.
This is true for man made machines, your body, even bacterium.
Common sense points to a creator in this case, not an orchestrator.
Originally posted by painterdude
post removed by staff