RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (18) < ... 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 >   
  Topic: AFDave Wants You to Prove Evolution to Him< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
afdave



Posts: 1621
Joined: April 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 27 2006,09:53   

Quote
Even I knew that anti-biotic resistance in bacteria was proof of micro-evolution, not macro-evolution.


Very good, Mr. Carlson.  And how does macroevolution happen, you may ask?  By microevolution happening over millions of years according to the Evos.

Just look in any World Book under the "Evolution" article (or other popular works on Evolution) and you will see how the truth about bacteria adapting (microevolution) fits into the very large Fairy Tale of the development of all life on earth.  

Only a moron or a dishonest person could miss it.

Bacterial adaptation offers the evolutionist no mechanism for the development of complex life on earth.

Do you understand now?

--------------
A DILEMMA FOR THE COMMITTED NATURALIST
A Hi-tech alien spaceship lands on earth ... DESIGNED.
A Hi-tech alien rotary motor found in a cell ... NOT DESIGNED.
http://afdave.wordpress.com/....ess.com

  
jeannot



Posts: 1201
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 27 2006,10:16   

Quote (afdave @ May 27 2006,14:53)
Quote
Even I knew that anti-biotic resistance in bacteria was proof of micro-evolution, not macro-evolution.


Very good, Mr. Carlson.  And how does macroevolution happen, you may ask?  By microevolution happening over millions of years according to the Evos.

True, resistant bacterias are an evidence of micro-evolution. Good point Dave. And evidence of micro-evolution is not an evidence that micro-evo explains macro-evo. We're making progress.

Now, what about the evidence for macro-evolution listed at talkorigins?
So far, your response to the GULO case was :
- it's the result of chance (well, 1 chance in a gazillon to the power of 2 is always a chance :))
- it's a divine message conveyed by errors in a pseudogene.  :D

Who's talking about fairy tales, Dave?
Shall we examine another evidence for marcoevolution, so that you could tell your children a new story tonight?

  
Faid



Posts: 1143
Joined: Mar. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 27 2006,10:28   

dave, dave, dave...

check out the following two statements:

A --> B

A  =  B

Are they identical, or different? and  why?

If, you're having trouble, check your kids' schoolbooks.

--------------
A look into DAVE HAWKINS' sense of honesty:

"The truth is that ALL mutations REDUCE information"

"...mutations can add information to a genome.  And remember, I have never said that this is not possible."

  
Russell



Posts: 1082
Joined: April 2005

(Permalink) Posted: May 27 2006,10:30   

Quote
And how does macroevolution happen, you may ask?  By microevolution happening over millions of years according to the Evos.
I'm not so sure all "evos" would agree with this. In fact, I'm pretty sure they wouldn't. You certainly have these smallish mutations - small deletions, insertions, point mutations - and I've never seen anyone define a limit to how much such mutations can accomplish over millions of years. But you also have huge, abrupt changes - like whole genome duplication, chromosome fission/fusion, and, of course, endosymbiosis.

In a sense it's just "micro-evolution writ large", in that it still boils down to random changes in the genetic code + selection, but the scale of the mutation might be rather different.

In the case of bacterial antibiotic resistance, of course, you have the phenomena of plasmid exchange, phage transduction, and transposition. There's plenty of evidence that such phenomena have also played a part in our own genomic history.

--------------
Must... not... scratch... mosquito bite.

  
afdave



Posts: 1621
Joined: April 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 27 2006,11:25   

Quote
And evidence of micro-evolution is not an evidence that micro-evo explains macro-evo.


Oh really?  Then what is the mechanism for macroevolution if not microevolution over millions of years?

Maybe what Russell suggests?  This is an interesting one ...
Quote
But you also have huge, abrupt changes - like whole genome duplication, chromosome fission/fusion, and, of course, endosymbiosis.


Hmmm ... huge, abrupt changes you say?  Whole genome duplication!  Wow!  Can you give some examples of this happening today?  In fact, can you give examples of ANY of these abrupt changes?

Or is this YOUR fairy tale?  Why is your fairy tale better than mine?

Quote
A --> B

A  =  B

Are they identical, or different? and  why?


Faid, what is your point?

--------------
A DILEMMA FOR THE COMMITTED NATURALIST
A Hi-tech alien spaceship lands on earth ... DESIGNED.
A Hi-tech alien rotary motor found in a cell ... NOT DESIGNED.
http://afdave.wordpress.com/....ess.com

  
jeannot



Posts: 1201
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 27 2006,11:29   

Quote (afdave @ May 27 2006,16:25)
Quote
And evidence of micro-evolution is not an evidence that micro-evo explains macro-evo.


Oh really?  Then what is the mechanism for macroevolution if not microevolution over millions of years?

Dave, read again the sentence you juste quoted. Do it several times.

  
jeannot



Posts: 1201
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 27 2006,11:35   

Quote (afdave @ May 27 2006,16:25)
Hmmm ... huge, abrupt changes you say?  Whole genome duplication!  Wow!  Can you give some examples of this happening today?  In fact, can you give examples of ANY of these abrupt changes?

Ohohoh.

Dave is about to meet another big disillusion.  :)

But I'll let Russell shoot him down.

  
Faid



Posts: 1143
Joined: Mar. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 27 2006,12:14   

Quote
Faid, what is your point?

Oh, I dunno- maybe what you are demonstrating by not answering?


Jeannot:
 
Quote
Dave is about to meet another big disillusion.  

I doubt it. After the chromosome fusion thing, dave has raised his mental shields to the maximum: Nothing comes through. His response will probably be something between "that don't count" and "la la la I ain't listening- look at the silly ape picture".

--------------
A look into DAVE HAWKINS' sense of honesty:

"The truth is that ALL mutations REDUCE information"

"...mutations can add information to a genome.  And remember, I have never said that this is not possible."

  
Russell



Posts: 1082
Joined: April 2005

(Permalink) Posted: May 27 2006,12:30   

Quote
In fact, can you give examples of ANY of these abrupt changes?
yes.

--------------
Must... not... scratch... mosquito bite.

  
carlsonjok



Posts: 3326
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 27 2006,12:50   

Quote (afdave @ May 27 2006,14:53)
         
Quote
Even I knew that anti-biotic resistance in bacteria was proof of micro-evolution, not macro-evolution.

Very good, Mr. Carlson.  And how does macroevolution happen, you may ask?  By microevolution happening over millions of years according to the Evos.

Just look in any World Book under the "Evolution" article (or other popular works on Evolution) and you will see how the truth about bacteria adapting (microevolution) fits into the very large Fairy Tale of the development of all life on earth.

Only a moron or a dishonest person could miss it.


See, here is the thing.  You and me, we're not scientists, we're engineers. Sure, we had to take chemistry and physics in college.  But don't kid yourself.  What we took what amounts to the remedial, short-bus versions.  As engineers, we are glorified mechanics.  So, if I have an interest in a topic outside of my area of expertise, I am humble enough to seek out people who have devoted their life to the subject, I listen to them and I try to understand.  

I think I'm a reasonably intelligent person.  But, I don't make an idol of my intellect and suppose that I know better than those that make a subject their life's business.  

 
Quote

Do you understand now?


All too well, my man, all too well. May I be so presumptuous to make a suggestion?  I referenced before the book "A Short History of Nearly Everything" by Bill Bryson.  If you are truly interested in understanding the practice of science (frankly, it isn't clear to me that you are), buy it and read it.  It takes you on a jolly good tour through cosmology, physics, archaelogy, paleontology, mathematics, and biology.  And, best of all, it is written to be understood by wrench-turners like us.  It is especially interesting in the sections devoted to the process of aging the earth and plate tectonics.  Did you know that many of the early contributors to these sciences were ministers and priests?

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
jeannot



Posts: 1201
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 27 2006,12:53   

Quote (Faid @ May 27 2006,17:14)
dave has raised his mental shields to the maximum: Nothing comes through.

The comparison between Dave and the black knight guarding the bridge in 'Monty Python and the holy Grail' was accurate. "None shall pass!"
:p

  
deadman_932



Posts: 3094
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 27 2006,13:52   

HAH, I find this really amusing, Dave. I just glanced at this thread for the first time.

I HAVE NEVER POSTED ON THIS THREAD BEFORE.

But Dave, YOU decided that you were going to address my post on your "Creator God Hypothesis " thread ----- HERE??????

THAT I POSTED TWO DAYS AGO???

You little weasel, you couldn't even address my post on the same thread that it was placed on? You chose this thread....that you KNOW I have never posted on, and tried to make claims about the veracity of my post?

Let me quote the full passage of "Kevin Anderson, Ph.D's ."  article in question...
Quote
resistance resulting from horizontal gene transfer merely provides a mechanism for transferring pre-existing resistance genes. Horizontal transfer does not provide a mechanism for the origin of those genes. Spontaneous mutation does provide a potential genetic mechanism for the origin of these genes, but such an origin has never been demonstrated
 this is available here

NOw, there are only two possibilities here, Dave. One is that your "Kevin Anderson" is saying that mutations cannot account for a gene like the dihydrofolate reductase gene of P. falciparum...but look at what he SAYS, DaveTARD...he is saying
RESISTANCE GENES...

GENES THAT HAVE GAINED RESISTANCE

NOTE THAT THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ORIGINS OF THE UNALTERED GENES DAVETARD, IT HAS TO DO WITH RESISTANCE GENES. YOU DUMBSHIT

Now, in your little post ON THIS THREAD, which addresses MY POST ON ANOTHER THREAD... you ask:
Quote
Did I say it was "research"? Did I say this guy performed all the relevant experiments himself to support his conclusions?  


Well, yes, Dave, you sure as #### suggested it by saying on your Creator God Thread that :  
Quote
AF Dave finds a very recent (2005) scholarly article by a real scientist who "you know ... really wears a lab coat and does experiments" (there Eric, are you happy?). Here's the title and source for the article ...


Here, you ask aboutthis article ("Effect of rpoB Mutations Conferring Rifampin Resistance on Fitness of Mycobacterium tuberculosis" Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, April 2004, p. 1289-1294, Vol. 48, No. 4) and boldly  ( and stupidly) say "prove it" when the article says:
Quote
mutations that [do]alter target molecules may also be partly or fully ameliorated by compensatory mutations without loss of resistance. Such compensatory evolution has been observed in vitro, in experimental animals, and in clinical situations. Thus, the occurrence of cost-free mutations and compensatory evolution suggests that antibiotic-resistant bacteria will not disappear as a result of restricted use of antibiotics  


Well, Okay, DaveTard:

IN VITRO

Björkman, J., D. Hughes, and D. I. Andersson. 1998. Virulence of antibiotic-resistant Salmonella typhimurium. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 95:3949-3953 " avirulent-resistant mutants rapidly accumulated various types of compensatory mutations that restored virulence without concomitant loss of resistance...compensatory mutations could increase the fitness of resistant bacteria and allow them to persist and compete successfully with sensitive strains even in an antibiotic-free environment. "

P. Sander, B. Springer, T. Prammananan, A. Sturmfels, M. Kappler, M. Pletschette, and E. C. Bottger (2002).Fitness Cost of Chromosomal Drug Resistance-Conferring Mutations.  Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 46: 1204-1211

"We found that the chromosomal drug resistance mutations studied often had only a small fitness cost; compensatory mutations were not involved in low-cost or no-cost resistance mutations. "

IN ANIMALS

Schrag, S. J., V. Perrot, and B. R. Levin. 1997. Adaptation to the fitness costs of antibiotic resistance in Escherichia coli. Proc. R. Soc. London B 264:1287-1291.

"While fitness costs have been demonstrated for bacteria and viruses resistant to some chemotherapeutic agents, these costs are anticipated to decline during subsequent evolution. This has recently been observed in pathogens as diverse as HIV and Escherichia coli. Here we present evidence that these gentic adaptations to the costs of resistance can virtually preclude resistant lineages from reverting to sensitivity.
in experimental animals"

Björkman, J., I. Nagaev, O. G. Berg, D. Hughes, and D. I. Andersson. 2000. Effects of environment on compensatory mutations to ameliorate costs of antibiotic resistance. Science 287:1479-1482

A. I. Nilsson, A. Zorzet, A. Kanth, S. Dahlstrom, O. G. Berg, and D. I. Andersson (2006). Reducing the fitness cost of antibiotic resistance by amplification of initiator tRNA genes. (on rifampin resistance)

"Conclusions: The fitness impact imposed on E. coli 345-2 RifC by carriage of antibiotic resistance elements was generally low or non-existent, suggesting that once established, resistance may be difficult to eliminate through reduction in prescribing alone."

N. Luo, S. Pereira, O. Sahin, J. Lin, S. Huang, L. Michel, and Q. Zhang (2005).
PNAS 102: 541-546. Enhanced in vivo fitness of fluoroquinolone-resistant Campylobacter jejuni in the absence of antibiotic selection pressure.

"The prolonged colonization in chickens did not result in loss of the FQ resistance and the resistance-conferring point mutation (C257-> T) in the gyrA gene. Strikingly, when coinoculated into chickens, the FQ-resistant Campylobacter isolates outcompeted the majority of the FQ-susceptible strains"

CLINICAL SITUATIONS

Prouzet-Mauléon,Valérie, M. Abid Hussain, Hervé Lamouliatte, Farhana Kauser, Francis Mégraud, and Niyaz Ahmed. 2005. Pathogen Evolution In Vivo: Genome Dynamics of Two Isolates Obtained 9 Years Apart from a Duodenal Ulcer Patient Infected with a Single Helicobacter pylori Strain. Journal of Clinical Microbiology, p. 4237-4241, Vol. 43, No. 8

"Microevolution, however, was observed in the cagA gene and its right junction, the vacA m1 allele, and a member of the plasticity region cluster (JHP926). These results suggest that H. pylori has a great ability to survive and reemerge as a microevolved strain "

Nagaev, I., J. Björkman, D. I. Andersson, and D. Hughes. 2001. Biological cost and compensatory evolution in fusidic acid-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Mol. Microbiol. 40:433-439.

"observation suggests that fitness-compensatory mutations may be an important aspect of the evolution of antibiotic resistance in the clinical environment, and may contribute to a stabilization of the resistant bacteria present in a bacterial population."


You're a cowardly litle Chickenshit that can't even respond to my posts on the same thread that they were posted on and you're a complete idiot for trying to imply any lack of support for what I did post there.

Notice that I addressed fully and completely each one of your stupid-ass "objections" DaveTard, maybe some day you can grow the balls to do the same in response.

--------------
AtBC Award for Thoroughness in the Face of Creationism

  
deadman_932



Posts: 3094
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 27 2006,14:10   

Just in case I didn't make this clear enough for your tiny brain to grasp, DAVE, I'm going to spell it out in terms even microcephalics like yourself MIGHT be able to grasp:
1. Take genes like the  dihydrofolate reductase (Pf-dhfr) and dihydropteroate synthase (Pf-dhps) genes of P. falciparum. THESE are genes native , unaltered at that moment.

2. Drugs are developed that act upon those genes, disrupting them and their ability to deal with, oh, say FOLATES.

3. THOSE GENES MUTATE...RESULTING IN...RESISTANCE GENES. GENES THAT CAN RESIST  Sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine

Your "boy" Kevin Anderson, PhD...mentions what in his post, DAVETARD? WHY, he mentions "Spontaneous mutation does provide a potential genetic mechanism for the origin of these genes, but such an origin has never been demonstrated"  but of WHAT GENES? RESISTANCE GENES.

Contrary to what your boy said...here's what the article *I* cited said: "Sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP) is the second-line treatment for Plasmodium falciparum malaria in Sri Lanka. Resistance to SP is caused by point mutations in the dihydrofolate reductase (Pf-dhfr) and dihydropteroate synthase (Pf-dhps) genes of P. falciparum"

--------------
AtBC Award for Thoroughness in the Face of Creationism

  
Renier



Posts: 276
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 27 2006,14:32   

Quote
Hmmm ... huge, abrupt changes you say?  Whole genome duplication!  Wow!  Can you give some examples of this happening today?  In fact, can you give examples of ANY of these abrupt changes?


Flowering plants Dave. But then, I am sure, you would not believe a word any scientist say.

  
deadman_932



Posts: 3094
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 27 2006,14:59   

I'm thinking I might not have made myself simple enough for y0u to grasp, DaveTard2, so here:

Different genetic mutations yield different types of resistance:

1.Some mutations enable the bacteria to produce enzymes that inactivate antibiotics.

2. Some mutations eliminate/alter the cell target that the antibiotic attacks -- As in the example I gave about the dihydrofolate reductase (Pf-dhfr) and dihydropteroate synthase (Pf-dhps) genes of  P. falciparum. A point mutation in each enables them to now resist the drug... hence they are resistance genes at that stage.

3. Some close up the entry ports that allow antibiotics into the cell.

4. I'm sure there are others

So, DaveTard2, when "Kevin Anderson, PhD says:    
Quote
resistance resulting from horizontal gene transfer merely provides a mechanism for transferring pre-existing resistance genes. Horizontal transfer does not provide a mechanism for the origin of those genes. Spontaneous mutation does provide a potential genetic mechanism for the origin of these genes, but such an origin has never been demonstrated


and I give you a citation for a study that DOES show the precise mutational origins of...RESISTANCE GENES...you  cannot say that I am misreading "Kevin Anderson, PhD"

--------------
AtBC Award for Thoroughness in the Face of Creationism

  
argystokes



Posts: 766
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 27 2006,15:17   

Quote

4. I'm sure there are others


Some allow the bacterium to pump the drug out of the cell.

--------------
"Why waste time learning, when ignorance is instantaneous?" -Calvin

  
Chris Hyland



Posts: 705
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 27 2006,22:59   

Quote
Hmmm ... huge, abrupt changes you say?  Whole genome duplication!  Wow!  Can you give some examples of this happening today?  In fact, can you give examples of ANY of these abrupt changes?
Dave, are you kidding? Iv'e even mentioned this a couple of times on these threads. It is a major source of new information, and is observable today. Interstingly, we can often see genome duplication events coinciding with extictions (in the organisms that survived), because it creates a great potential for phenotypic novelty, which presumably is useful in these cases.

  
afdave



Posts: 1621
Joined: April 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 28 2006,01:41   

EVOLUTIONISTS DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THEIR OWN ARGUMENTS ARE

I quoted Dr. Anderson's article showing that Resistant Bacteria provide no mechanism for macroevolutionary change as is often claimed by evolutionists.
   
Quote
Summary
Resistance to antibiotics and other antimicrobials is often claimed to be a clear demonstration of “evolution in a Petri dish.”  However, analysis of the genetic events causing this resistance reveals that they are not consistent with the genetic events necessary for evolution (defined as common “descent with modification”).  Rather, resistance resulting from horizontal gene transfer merely provides a mechanism for transferring pre-existing resistance genes.  Horizontal transfer does not provide a mechanism for the origin of those genes.  Spontaneous mutation does provide a potential genetic mechanism for the origin of these genes, but such an origin has never been demonstrated.  Instead, all known examples of antibiotic resistance via mutation are inconsistent with the genetic requirements of evolution.  These mutations result in the loss of pre-existing cellular systems/activities, such as porins and other transport systems, regulatory systems, enzyme activity, and protein binding.  Antibiotic resistance may also impart some decrease of “relative fitness” (severe in a few cases), although for many mutants this is compensated by reversion.  The real biological cost, though, is loss of pre-existing systems and activities.  Such losses are never compensated, unless resistance is lost, and cannot validly be offered as examples of true evolutionary change.

Now you can read the rest of the article if you like  HERE.

Many here on this thread said in effect "no evolutionist would cite bacterial resistance as an evidence for macroevolution" ... here's some examples ...

Jeannot ...    
Quote
And evidence of micro-evolution is not an evidence that micro-evo explains macro-evo.
Eric Murphy ...    
Quote
How could bacterial resistance possibly lend support to macroevolutionary theory, when it's not even an example of macroevolution?
Ved ...    
Quote
Dave, you referred to "macroevolution" as "[eyes appearing where there were no eyes before, and wings appearing where there were no wings before]"
How the F is bacteria developing anti-biotic resistance anywhere near this ballpark???

Oh playing stupid are we?  Well, hop on over to the "Favorite Proof Site for Everything Evolutionary" -- Talk Origins and what do you find?

Talk Origins definition of the terms "macroevolution" and "microevolution."  
Quote
29+ Evidences for Macroevolution
The Scientific Case for Common Descent
Version 2.87

Copyright © 1999-2006 by Douglas Theobald, Ph.D.
[Last Update: March 29, 2006]
Permission is granted to copy and print these pages in total for non-profit personal, educational, research, or critical purposes.

Introduction
volution, the overarching concept that unifies the biological sciences, in fact embraces a plurality of theories and hypotheses. In evolutionary debates one is apt to hear evolution roughly parceled between the terms "microevolution" and "macroevolution". Microevolution, or change beneath the species level, may be thought of as relatively small scale change in the functional and genetic constituencies of populations of organisms. That this occurs and has been observed is generally undisputed by critics of evolution. What is vigorously challenged, however, is macroevolution. Macroevolution is evolution on the "grand scale" resulting in the origin of higher taxa. In evolutionary theory it thus entails common ancestry, descent with modification, speciation, the genealogical relatedness of all life, transformation of species, and large scale functional and structural changes of populations through time, all at or above the species level (Freeman and Herron 2004; Futuyma 1998; Ridley 1993). http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/


So there you have it quite clear.  These are the definitions I have always heard and I have always used them in this sense.

Now that these definitions have been established, Dr. Theobald goes on to offer 29+ Evidences for Macroevolution, one of which is ... drum roll ... Bacterial Resistance!

Talk Origins ...    
Quote
29+ Evidences for Macroevolution
Part 5: Change and Mutability
...
Prediction 5.3: Functional change
One of the major differences between organisms is their capacity for various functions. The ability to occupy one niche over another is invariably due to differing functions. Thus, functional change must be extremely important for macroscopic macroevolutionary change.
...
Bacteria have acquired resistance to viruses (Luria and Delbruck 1943) and to antibiotics (Lederberg and Lederberg 1952). http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section5.html


IT DOESN'T GET MUCH PLAINER THAN THAT, FOLKS.  I'M NOT SURE IF THE FOLKS ON THIS THREAD ARE JUST IGNORANT, CONFUSED OR PLAYING OBFUSCATION GAMES.  THE FACT IS ... EVOLUTIONISTS DESPERATELY NEED GENETIC MECHANISMS TO SUPPORT THEIR MACROEVOLUTIONARY THEORY.

THEY SAY THAT FUNCTIONAL CHANGE IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT FOR MACROSCOPIC MACROEVOLUTIONARY CHANGE, AND THEY CITE RESISTANT BACTERIA AS AN INSTANCE OF THIS.

DR. ANDERSON'S ARTICLE DEMOLISHES THIS SUPPOSED INSTANCE OF SUPPORT

If a scientist with similar qualifications to Dr. Anderson would like to refute Dr. Anderson, let him do so and post it at Talk Origins.

(Deadman, I cannot tell if your rebuttals have any merit or not.  I would have to defer to an expert.  I would suggest that you ask Talk Origins to write a formal rebuttal of Dr. Anderson's paper.  Then Dr. Anderson would have the opportunity to counter this rebuttal ... and so on.)

Faid ...    
Quote
I doubt it. After the chromosome fusion thing, dave has raised his mental shields to the maximum: Nothing comes through.

Faid-- I was talking to a Dr. last night and she said (as you have said), that chromosomal fusion is quite common.  She of course mentioned Downs syndrome and she also mentioned other instances of fusion.  

My question is this ... Are you familiar with the other instances?  Are they all harmful as well?  (like Downs)

Carlson ...    
Quote
As engineers, we are glorified mechanics.
Speak for yourself, please.  I am an electrical engineer and this means I design things which very much resemble biological systems.  I am also a retired business owner and now write content for children's educational materials (creationist stuff).  As a business owner, I used the work of scientists to create wealth.  As a content creator, I will also be using the work of scientists (both Evo and Creo) to teach kids the truth about origins.  You are very naive if you think you are too dumb to understand how scientists operate.  You do not need an advanced science degree to understand both the good things scientists do and the errors that they make.  My approach is to analyze the writings of scientists with advanced degrees on both sides of the Creation/Evolution debate.  Scientists on both sides often write papers that are easily understandable by "amateur scientists" such as you and I.  Even the "original research" technical papers are often accessible to laymen.  Don't sell yourself short.

--------------
A DILEMMA FOR THE COMMITTED NATURALIST
A Hi-tech alien spaceship lands on earth ... DESIGNED.
A Hi-tech alien rotary motor found in a cell ... NOT DESIGNED.
http://afdave.wordpress.com/....ess.com

  
jeannot



Posts: 1201
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 28 2006,01:53   

Quote
THEY SAY THAT FUNCTIONAL CHANGE IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT FOR MACROSCOPIC MACROEVOLUTIONARY CHANGE, AND THEY CITE RESISTANT BACTERIA AS AN INSTANCE OF THIS.

True (about functional change).
 
Quote
DR. ANDERSON'S ARTICLE DEMOLISHES THIS SUPPOSED INSTANCE OF SUPPORT

Wrong.
As others have tried to make you understand, arguing on some supposed 'losses of function' is just masturbation (like Dumbski's conservation of infomation). Find a book where it is stated that a loss of function (even if it were objective) can't be qualified as an evolutionary change.
Same thing regarding his alleged tradeoffs involved in resistance. Resistant bacteria a more efficient than non-resistant bacteria in their environment, with antibiotics. They may be less efficient in their previous environment, but who gives a sh*t ?
d*mned, in the jungle we are less efficient than chimps. Big deal.
???

  
afdave



Posts: 1621
Joined: April 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 28 2006,02:06   

Carlson...
Quote
Even I knew that anti-biotic resistance in bacteria was proof of micro-evolution, not macro-evolution.
Forgot about you, Carlson, when I was quoting evolutionists that don't know their own arguments.   Be careful throwing that 'proof' word around here.  You'll get slammed ...

(Oh, wait, never mind ... you won't get slammed no matter what you say because you are an Evo, not a Creo ... I almost forgot Rule#1: Creos get slammed for everything they say, no matter how factual.  Evos don't get slammed for anything they say, no matter how un-factual.)

--------------
A DILEMMA FOR THE COMMITTED NATURALIST
A Hi-tech alien spaceship lands on earth ... DESIGNED.
A Hi-tech alien rotary motor found in a cell ... NOT DESIGNED.
http://afdave.wordpress.com/....ess.com

  
k.e



Posts: 1948
Joined: Mar. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 28 2006,02:50   

Hey D/2 .....geez you still digging that hole?
What did JC say about throwing pearls to swine?
Or are you not a Christian?

There was a REASON he said that ...do you know why?

BTW when DO YOU expect the Lord to show up?
A rough estimate would be fine.
You know some would say that your version of H3LL, waiting for goddot (or the inevitable democratic president), is no different where you are now.


A boy was watching his father, a pastor, write a sermon. How do you know what to say?" he asked.

"Why, God tells me."

"Oh, then why do you keep crossing things out?"


http://www.godisajoke.com/2006....y-poker

This is old but its interesting that the Preacher washes his kids mouth with soap if they step out of line, I wonder if D/2 has a similar regime?

ABC AIRS ATHEIST-PREACHER "WIFE SWAP" SHOW

--------------
The conservative has but little to fear from the man whose reason is the servant of his passions, but let him beware of him in whom reason has become the greatest and most terrible of the passions.These are the wreckers of outworn empires and civilisations, doubters, disintegrators, deicides.Haldane

   
k.e



Posts: 1948
Joined: Mar. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 28 2006,03:06   

Just as a matter of interest D/2 why are you rabbiting on about 'millions of years'.

You have stated that the Bible is inerrant and that time only began 6000 years ago so why do creationsts talk about mys when they didn't exist? Or do you conceed creationists don't agee that time began 6000 years ago?

I'm begining to think you don't believe creationism, does your family know about this?

--------------
The conservative has but little to fear from the man whose reason is the servant of his passions, but let him beware of him in whom reason has become the greatest and most terrible of the passions.These are the wreckers of outworn empires and civilisations, doubters, disintegrators, deicides.Haldane

   
k.e



Posts: 1948
Joined: Mar. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 28 2006,03:10   

D/2 do you apply the term  "non-Christian" to refer to mainline and liberal Christian groups as well as Muslims, Hindus, followers of Aboriginal and Neo-Pagan religions etc ?
If so why?

--------------
The conservative has but little to fear from the man whose reason is the servant of his passions, but let him beware of him in whom reason has become the greatest and most terrible of the passions.These are the wreckers of outworn empires and civilisations, doubters, disintegrators, deicides.Haldane

   
k.e



Posts: 1948
Joined: Mar. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 28 2006,03:15   

D/2 what Christian denominations do you regard as having strayed from the teachings of Jesus and of the Bible.?

--------------
The conservative has but little to fear from the man whose reason is the servant of his passions, but let him beware of him in whom reason has become the greatest and most terrible of the passions.These are the wreckers of outworn empires and civilisations, doubters, disintegrators, deicides.Haldane

   
Russell



Posts: 1082
Joined: April 2005

(Permalink) Posted: May 28 2006,04:23   

Quote
EVOLUTIONISTS DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THEIR OWN ARGUMENTS ARE
Here's a news flash for you dave.

Since we "evos" don't  recognize a sharp boundary between "micro-" and "macro-" evolution, it's not terribly surprising that this, that or the other piece of evidence is this side or that of that fuzzy boundary, according to this, that or the other "evolutionist".

There's no particular reason why we should all agree on some arbitrarily defined boundary.

Quote
I am an electrical engineer and this means I design things which very much resemble biological systems.
[guffaw]
I sing in the shower, which means I create music pretty much the same as Beethoven. Never mind. Yours was much funnier.

--------------
Must... not... scratch... mosquito bite.

  
k.e



Posts: 1948
Joined: Mar. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 28 2006,04:46   

D/2 I suppose this is the sort of inerrancy you agree with

16 Biblical ways to aquire a wife

Find an attractive prisoner of war, bring her home, shave her head, trim her nails, and give her new clothes. Then she's yours. -- Deuterononmy (Deuteronomy 21:11-13)

Find a prostitute and marry her. -- Hosea (Hosea 1:1-3)

Find a man with seven daughters, and impress him by watering his flock. -- Moses (Exodus 2:16-21)

Purchase a piece of property, and get a woman as part of the deal. -- Boaz (Ruth 4:5-10)

Go to a party and hide. When the women come out to dance, grab one and carry her off to be your wife. -- Benjaminites (Judges 21:19-25)

Have God create a wife for you while you sleep. Note: this will cost you a rib. -- Adam (Genesis 2:19-24)

Agree to work seven years in exchange for a woman's hand in marriage. Get tricked into marrying the wrong woman. Then work another seven years for the woman you wanted to marry in the first place. That's right. Fourteen years of toil for a woman. -- Jacob (Genesis 29:15-30)

Cut off 200 foreskins off of your future father-in-law's enemies and get his daughter for a wife. -- David (1Samuel 18:27)

Even if no one is out there, just wander around a bit and you'll definitely find someone. (It's all relative of course.) -- Cain (Genesis 4:16-17)

Become the emperor of a huge nation and hold a beauty contest. -- Xerxes or Ahasuerus (Esther 2:3-4)

When you see someone you like, go home and tell your parents, "I have seen a ...woman; now get her for me." If your parents question your decision, simply say, "Get her for me. She's the one for me." -- Samson (Judges 14:1-3)

Kill any husband and take HIS wife. (Prepare to lose four sons though). -- David (2 Samuel 11)

Wait for your brother to die. Take his widow. (It's not just a good idea, it's the law). -- Onan and Boaz (Deuteronomy or Leviticus, example in Ruth)

Don't be so picky. Make up for quality with quantity. -- Solomon (1 Kings 11:1-3)

A wife?...NOT!!! -- Paul (1Corinthians 7:32-35)

Become sinless, and die in atonement for others, and you can marry a whole bunch of people. -- Jesus (Revelation 15?)

--------------
The conservative has but little to fear from the man whose reason is the servant of his passions, but let him beware of him in whom reason has become the greatest and most terrible of the passions.These are the wreckers of outworn empires and civilisations, doubters, disintegrators, deicides.Haldane

   
carlsonjok



Posts: 3326
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 28 2006,05:18   

Quote (afdave @ May 28 2006,06:41)
       
Quote
As engineers, we are glorified mechanics.
Speak for yourself, please.  I am an electrical engineer and this means I design things which very much resemble biological systems.

I seem to recall a while back you were asked for some exposition in an area where you have expertise.  Perhaps this should have come up then?  A discussion of what you have designed and how they are analogous to biological systems might serve to give us some insight into where you are coming from.
       
Quote
 As a business owner, I used the work of scientists to create wealth.

Hydroponic tomatoes and phone cards?  Okay. I'll bite.  Discuss.
       
Quote
You are very naive if you think you are too dumb to understand how scientists operate.  You do not need an advanced science degree to understand both the good things scientists do and the errors that they make.  My approach is to analyze the writings of scientists with advanced degrees on both sides of the Creation/Evolution debate.  Scientists on both sides often write papers that are easily understandable by "amateur scientists" such as you and I.  Even the "original research" technical papers are often accessible to laymen.  Don't sell yourself short.

I don't sell myself short. But, I know what I know and I know what I don't know.  And in areas where I do not have expertise or knowledge, I don't presume to lecture those that have made that area their life's work.  To assume that because I have may have mastered one subject that I am equally knowledgeable and erudite on all topics is arrogant. It elevates the intellect to the level of a god.  And I am pretty sure that there are injunctions against that.

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
MidnightVoice



Posts: 380
Joined: Aug. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: May 28 2006,08:40   

Quote (afdave @ May 28 2006,06:41)
My approach is to analyze the writings of scientists with advanced degrees on both sides of the Creation/Evolution debate.  

Ooops - Logical Fallacy Alert!!

There are only scientists on one side of this particular debate.  The other side consists of religous "experts" and nutcases. :D

--------------
If I fly the coop some time
And take nothing but a grip
With the few good books that really count
It's a necessary trip

I'll be gone with the girl in the gold silk jacket
The girl with the pearl-driller's hands

  
Caledonian



Posts: 48
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 28 2006,11:30   

Biological systems are far more complex, sophisticated, and elegant than anything human electrical engineers are capable of producing through any process of conscious design.

Variation and selection, when acting upon electronic designs, are capable of producing functional structures that utilize noise interactions that human engineers spend their time trying to minimize, as it's too difficult to produce designs that can take advantage of them.  The experiment has been performed with reprogrammable chip structures, and the resulting chips can do things that current applied electronics theory doesn't fully understand.

Nature is smarter than we are, afdave.  It is certainly smarter than *you*.

  
normdoering



Posts: 287
Joined: July 2005

(Permalink) Posted: May 28 2006,11:40   

Quote (Caledonian @ May 28 2006,16:30)
Nature is smarter than we are, afdave.  It is certainly smarter than *you*.

Orgel’s Second Rule: “Evolution is cleverer than you are.”

And it's smarter for good reason, its resources are greater than the three pounds of jello-like stuff that make up the human brain.

  
  517 replies since April 17 2006,14:08 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (18) < ... 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]