|
Author
|
Topic: Extent of Mutational Capability
|
Pressie
Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: 06-18-2010
|
|
Message 79 of 279 (793202)
10-24-2016 5:56 AM
|
Reply to: Message 77 by Coyote
10-23-2016 11:21 PM
|
|
Coyote writes: Any definition creationists come up with for "kind," which makes the "cat kind" and the "dog kind" come out the way they want, also makes the "ape kind" work as well, an idea which most of them absolutely reject! Not only that, hyenas are fatal to that "definition" of "kind". In the end, the creationist definition of "kind" is: hey, look mommy, a doggie! Then pointing towards a hyena...
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 77 by Coyote, posted 10-23-2016 11:21 PM | | Coyote has not replied |
|
Pressie
Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: 06-18-2010
|
Re: Greg, Please Don't Give Up Yet!
Gregory Rogers writes: ....although, by now I certainly have my answer, at least from a Darwinist perspective.... What the heck is a Darwinist perspective on DNA? Did you make it up?
|
Pressie
Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: 06-18-2010
|
Re: Proposition: Another Angle
Yada, Yada, Yada. Word salads. All the emprical, verifiable evidence from all over the world show that the first form of life as we know it were some forms of prokaryotes.
|
Pressie
Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: 06-18-2010
|
|
|
Message 118 of 279 (793337)
10-26-2016 6:04 AM
|
Reply to: Message 117 by Taq
10-25-2016 4:53 PM
|
|
Re: Clades
Taq writes: The question I often ask in return is how do they know that 5% of the modern human genome is made up of Neanderthal DNA?... Great explanation. I'd like to add that not all humans have Neanderthal DNA. Remains of Neanderthal genomes are found in Europeans and East Asians for example, but people of Sub-Sahara African ancestry don't have those genes. Scientists Identify Neanderthal Genes in Modern Human DNA | Anthropology | Sci-News.com First part:
In two new studies, genetic researchers have shown that about 20 percent of the Neanderthal genome survives in modern humans of non-African ancestry and identified exactly which areas of the human genome retain segments of Neanderthal DNA. So, they know exactly where to look for remains of the Neanderthal genome in humans. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 117 by Taq, posted 10-25-2016 4:53 PM | | Taq has not replied |
|
Pressie
Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: 06-18-2010
(1)
| |
| |
| |
mike the whizz writes: I've always thought of this question as being the wrong way around. We must go from knowledge and facts firstly. Known facts ...comes from intelligent design. Actually, the known facts are that all forms of design came from naturally occurring phenomena. Humans designed bridges and buildings. And computers. Beavers designed beaver dams. Bees designed bee hives, etc. All designs so far came from natural phenomena. None came from Spooks. Those are the known facts. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
|
Pressie
Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: 06-18-2010
|
This one was funny.
mike the wizz writes: So factually speaking, only intelligent designers have the ability to design designed things, according to 100% knowledge. I guess he is referring to the Wright brothers who designed the Airbus A380...all by themselves. And the Wright brothers were supposed to be Spooks. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 145 by CRR, posted 10-31-2016 9:15 PM | | Pressie has replied |
|
Pressie
Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: 06-18-2010
|
|
|
Message 147 of 279 (793525)
11-01-2016 2:46 AM
|
Reply to: Message 145 by CRR
10-31-2016 9:15 PM
|
|
They were not Spooks. They were naturally occurring phenomena.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 145 by CRR, posted 10-31-2016 9:15 PM | | CRR has not replied |
|
Pressie
Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: 06-18-2010
|
(1)
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Message 149 of 279 (793527)
11-01-2016 5:15 AM
|
Reply to: Message 148 by CRR
11-01-2016 3:51 AM
|
|
CRR writes: Seriously? This is basic stuff. It's why Lenski is using bacteria and not elephants for his experiment. It is serious. It's basic. Show your maths.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 148 by CRR, posted 11-01-2016 3:51 AM | | CRR has not replied |
|
Pressie
Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: 06-18-2010
|
|
|
Message 160 of 279 (793567)
11-02-2016 8:16 AM
|
Reply to: Message 155 by Taq
11-01-2016 10:57 AM
|
|
Taq writes: A daddy airplane and a mommy airplane do not get together and make baby airplanes. It is this difference between life and airplanes that makes the analogy meaningless. Apparantly some huge adult airplanes did bump into each other at Tenerive some time ago. Both those planes were intoxicated by fog. They never produced babies, though. They both just got burnt and hundreds of people lost their lives. Blame the Wright Brothers for that! The Wright brothers were bad, bad, bad for inventing planes... therefore plane travel is false and huge planes can't fly.... Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 155 by Taq, posted 11-01-2016 10:57 AM | | Taq has not replied |
|
Pressie
Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: 06-18-2010
|
(1)
| |
| |
| |
Gregory Rogers writes: The vestigial limb is cited as proof of this. Wow, wow wow. This is crazy. Do you define 'vestigial' as it has always been used in science or the creationist strawman of it? Then the word "proof". That's not science. You know that creationists make up their own meaning of words and then pretend that their meaning is used in science? Maybe you should start reading some science instead of creationist non-science propaganda? Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
|
Pressie
Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: 06-18-2010
|
This one is just as funny.
Gregory Rogers writes: The best way to test this is, I would say, to examine the limb itself Ah, great. When are you off to dig out the bones you, yourself found? Publish your findings in some relevant scientific journal, etc? Are you going off? Please provide us with the info, we all are very, very interested.
|
Pressie
Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: 06-18-2010
|
|
|
Message 181 of 279 (793655)
11-03-2016 5:40 AM
|
Reply to: Message 171 by CRR
11-02-2016 7:57 PM
|
|
Re: The Maths
CRR writes: It's known as Haldane's Dilemma. Then you provide a reference to an Electrical Engineer writing something somewhere about mutations. Lots and lots of words and formulaes and nothing else. No maths done. From there:
Also, this paper focuses on single substitutions (non-overlapping in time). Multiple substitutions (overlapping in time) are an advanced topic to be covered in another paper. Until the basics are covered, we need to leave out genetic complexities, like sexual reproduction and diploidy. What? He writes a paper only dealing with point mutations in organisms having kids asexually and diploidy? Then goes on about humans and chimps? Colour me unimpressed. To me ReMine seems to be a bit of a loon. He missed all those other forms of mutations we know of and discovered since 1957. So, CRR, could you show us the maths? Not a reference. The maths supporting your claims.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 171 by CRR, posted 11-02-2016 7:57 PM | | CRR has not replied |
|
Pressie
Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: 06-18-2010
|
(1)
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Message 190 of 279 (793696)
11-04-2016 9:23 AM
|
Reply to: Message 189 by Coyote
11-03-2016 10:56 AM
|
|
Re: The Maths
Yes, Coyote, for some reason YEC's think that nobody knows about nonsense YEC's write? Even me, as a non-genetisist could pick up that ReMine wrote nonsense. Hey, CRR, show us the maths. YEC's really are delusional. What bothers me is that they think that all people are as delusional as they are. CRR, show us the maths. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 189 by Coyote, posted 11-03-2016 10:56 AM | | Coyote has seen this message but not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 191 by RAZD, posted 11-04-2016 3:43 PM | | Pressie has not replied | | | Message 194 by CRR, posted 11-07-2016 2:42 AM | | Pressie has replied |
|
Pressie
Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: 06-18-2010
|
Re: The Maths
It seems as if CRR is not ever going to to the basic maths he was talking about. I think that he/she didn't tell the truth. CRR, like all those creationists, seems to be a bit scared when having to confront people who actually know what's going on. Hey, CRR, please present the maths supporting your claim. Do the sums. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
|
Pressie
Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: 06-18-2010
|
|
|
Message 198 of 279 (793925)
11-07-2016 6:18 AM
|
Reply to: Message 194 by CRR
11-07-2016 2:42 AM
|
|
Re: The Maths
This one was funny.
CRR writes: Who has refuted ReMine's paper? No one that I know of. Well, maybe he has to start presenting his paper in some relevant peer-reviewed journal...without that it's like presenting a "paper" on Noddy in TJ. Do the maths for us, CRR. Here. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 194 by CRR, posted 11-07-2016 2:42 AM | | CRR has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 200 by CRR, posted 11-12-2016 2:09 AM | | Pressie has replied |
|
™ Version 4.2