Joe G
Posts: 12011
Joined: July 2007
|
| Quote (OgreMkV @ June 22 2015,17:09) | | Quote (Joe G @ June 22 2015,15:23) | | Quote (OgreMkV @ June 22 2015,14:57) | | Quote (Joe G @ June 22 2015,11:14) | | Quote (OgreMkV @ June 21 2015,19:08) | | Quote (Richardthughes @ June 20 2015,09:52) | | Quote | 6
Virgil Cain
June 20, 2015 at 6:49 am
It looks like the E coli engineered themselves to accompany the new gene. James Shapiro and Lee Spetner must be smiling. |
Chubs lets the designer out of the bag: E Coli. |
As usual, chubs says whatever he thinks will get himself out of his current losing argument without considering the ramifications.
Well, then who (or what) designed E. coli?
The evolutionary relationships between the two bacteria Escherichia coli and Haemophilus influenzae and their putative last common ancestor
Published in 1998. Surely, someone as well read as Joey would know about that one. Oh yeah, I forgot, he has a reading problem. Poor guy. |
Well, Kevin, you don't have a mechanism capable of producing a living organism, so you lose, again. Bacteria evolving into bacteria doesn't help you.
Also there wasn't any losing argument and you don't know anything about ramifications. If you did then you would understand the ramifications of evolutionism. |
So please provide the detailed mechanisms of how E. coli designed itself new traits.
With peer-reviewed references to said mechanisms.
Sufficient to show that you really are following the actual science, not just what you wish was true. |
Kevin, your position is void of details you imbecile. If you had something then ID would be a non-starter. But you have nothing but whining. It suits you. |
So, you don't have a mechanism. You don't have any evidence that what you say is true.
All you have is what is a truly pathetic and obvious attempt at deflection. Which you have been using for half a decade (at least).
You can't even answer the same question that you're asking. So sad. |
Kevin, Design is a mechanism. "Built-in responses to environmental cues" is another.
That said design is a top-down approach, moron. That means first you determine if it exists and only then do you try to find out who, how, why, etc. We still don't have the details as to how Stonehenge was built. And the best we can say as to the "who" is "humans".
OTOH your position is a bottom-up approach that says it has a step-by-step process for producing the evidence we observe.
That means I don't have to answer the same questions as they only pertain to your position's claims. Nice to see that you don't understand how science works.
--------------
"Facts are Stupid"- Timothy Horton aka Occam's Afterbirth
"Genetic mutations aren't mistakes"-ID and Timothy Horton
Whales do not have tails. Water turns to ice via a molecular code- Acartia bogart, TARD
YEC is more coherent than materialism and it's bastard child, evolutionism
|
