Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 109 (8738 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 04-27-2017 5:10 AM
390 online now:
Dredge, Faith, PaulK, Tangle, vimesey (5 members, 385 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Jayhawker Soule
Post Volume:
Total: 805,448 Year: 10,054/21,208 Month: 3,141/2,674 Week: 557/961 Day: 19/151 Hour: 1/0

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
181920
21
2223Next
Author Topic:   The fossile record conclusively disproves evolution
Percy
Member
Posts: 15561
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.3


(1)
Message 301 of 342 (719223)
02-12-2014 9:48 AM
Reply to: Message 295 by Eliyahu
02-12-2014 7:37 AM


Re: Fossils support evolution
Eliyahu writes:

So what you are saying is: Mutations make new species with totally different attributes.

No, I didn't say that nor anything like that. We weren't even talking about speciation. You had claimed the only differences between parents and offspring are due to recombination, completely forgetting about mutation.

But given that you did mention speciation, you can't possibly be unaware that you're characterizing it incorrectly, because people have defined it for you. Speciation only requires that the new population be largely unable to mate with the original population. If you'd paused to think about this for a moment you would have immediately realized that new species don't have "totally different attributes" from the original species. For example, there are probably 20 or 30 different species of chipmunk, none of which have "totally different attributes."

The only problem is: Mutations cannot do that. The DNA is like a very long, very complicated code. When you start throwing monkey wrenches in the code, which is what mutations do, then you ruin the code, and not make it any better.

Mutations fall into three categories, neutral, deleterious and beneficial, but you knew this already, right? You're just playing dumb again.

Here are some expert opinions on the subject:

We already know how unreliable your quotes are, and anyway, they don't really fit the context, do they. Which is what happens when you're incapable of composing effective responses on your own and so must rely on cut-n-pasting whatever quotes you can find that you think might be applicable.

By the way, your last quote appears to be not an expert but an IDist. He cites Behe, Dembski, Meyer and Remine, and his paper, though giving the external appearance of having been published in a journal, is apparently available nowhere but at his own personal website, not even at Research Signpost, the supposed publisher.

--Percy

Edited by Percy, : Change font size of subtitle, and the subtitle itself.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 295 by Eliyahu, posted 02-12-2014 7:37 AM Eliyahu has not yet responded

    
Taq
Member
Posts: 6079
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 302 of 342 (719236)
02-12-2014 11:23 AM
Reply to: Message 288 by Eliyahu
02-12-2014 1:46 AM


Re: Fossils and life demonstrate evolution
Wrong. When there is a limited number of bases, then there is a limited number of ways in which you can recombine them.

Sure, but that is a very big number. In the case of the 3 billion base human genome, that would be 4 to the 3 billionth power.

And HOW do you think they evolve??

The major mechanisms are random mutation, natural selection, and speciation. Both gradualism and PE are the result of those same mechanisms.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 288 by Eliyahu, posted 02-12-2014 1:46 AM Eliyahu has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 6079
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.7


(2)
Message 303 of 342 (719237)
02-12-2014 11:27 AM
Reply to: Message 295 by Eliyahu
02-12-2014 7:37 AM


Re: Fossils disprove evolution
Bs'd

So what you are saying is: Mutations make new species with totally different attributes.

If you had actually studied "Origins of Species" as you seemed to imply earlier in the thread, you would have known that evolution is descent with modification. New species are modified versions of what came before them, not something totally different. Our arms are modified mammal limbs, which are modified reptile limbs, and those reptile limbs are modified fish fins. All modifications, not something entirely new.

Mutations cannot do that. The DNA is like a very long, very complicated code. When you start throwing monkey wrenches in the code, which is what mutations do, then you ruin the code, and not make it any better.

If you take the chimp genome and add 40 million mutations along with recombination events, you get the human genome. Reality shows that you are wrong.

Here are some expert opinions on the subject:

Macroevolution is when one population splits into two and starts to accumulate different point mutations and indels. Every difference seen between the human and chimp genome is consistent with point mutations, recombination, and indel events.

Edited by Admin, : Fix subtitle font size.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 295 by Eliyahu, posted 02-12-2014 7:37 AM Eliyahu has not yet responded

  
edge
Member
Posts: 3732
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 304 of 342 (719238)
02-12-2014 11:56 AM
Reply to: Message 289 by Eliyahu
02-12-2014 6:47 AM


Re: Fossils disprove evolution
Yes.

"The Eldredge-Gould concept of punctuated equilibria has gained wide acceptance among paleontologists. It attempts to account for the following paradox: Within continuously sampled lineages, one rarely finds the gradual morphological trends predicted by Darwinian evolution; rather, change occurs with the sudden appearance of new, well-differentiated species. Eldredge and Gould equate such appearances with speciation, although the details of these events are not preserved. .... The punctuated equilibrium model has been widely accepted, not because it has a compelling theoretical basis but because it appears to resolve a dilemma. Apart from the obvious sampling problems inherent to the observations that stimulated the model, and apart from its intrinsic circularity (one could argue that speciation can occur only when phyletic change is rapid, not vice versa), the model is more ad hoc explanation than theory, and it rests on shaky ground."

Ricklefs, Robert E., "Paleontologists Confronting Macroevolution," Science, vol. 199, 1978, p. 59


That's odd. I don't see the words 'total lack of evolution' anywhere in your piece.

Please try again.

Edited by edge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 289 by Eliyahu, posted 02-12-2014 6:47 AM Eliyahu has not yet responded

  
edge
Member
Posts: 3732
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 305 of 342 (719239)
02-12-2014 11:59 AM
Reply to: Message 290 by Eliyahu
02-12-2014 6:53 AM


Re: Fossils disprove evolution
For sure not in the fossil record, and that's the point of this discussion.

The fossil record shows ample evidence for the evolution of fossils and fossil communities through time. That is why we don't see elephants in the Cambrian, etc.

I say it is more in line with the evidence.

What evidence is that?

You actually have evidence for magic?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 290 by Eliyahu, posted 02-12-2014 6:53 AM Eliyahu has not yet responded

  
edge
Member
Posts: 3732
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


(2)
Message 306 of 342 (719240)
02-12-2014 12:03 PM
Reply to: Message 291 by Eliyahu
02-12-2014 6:55 AM


Re: Fossils disprove evolution
My story is: God created them.

Kinda lacks a few details, eh?

If you wrote news articles, you'e be looking for a new job.

Okay, so, you have this 'god', who has superhero powers. What evidence do you have for God? How does he/she/it create life? Is there some kind of magic wand? When and where did God create life?

I have more questions if you like.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 291 by Eliyahu, posted 02-12-2014 6:55 AM Eliyahu has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 314 by Eliyahu, posted 02-20-2014 6:40 AM edge has not yet responded

  
edge
Member
Posts: 3732
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 307 of 342 (719241)
02-12-2014 12:10 PM
Reply to: Message 292 by Eliyahu
02-12-2014 6:59 AM


Re: Fossils disprove evolution
There we have it: When they agree with the ET the layers are correct, if they don't; they are inverted.

Is that what Percy wrote?

You seem to have a fairly casual attitude toward quoting people.

With this kind of "science" you can proof about everything.

What clue do you have about geology? And you think that magic is more scientific than stratigraphy and structural geology?

I mean really, is 'goddidit' more explanatory?

Edited by edge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 292 by Eliyahu, posted 02-12-2014 6:59 AM Eliyahu has not yet responded

  
edge
Member
Posts: 3732
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 308 of 342 (719242)
02-12-2014 12:12 PM
Reply to: Message 293 by Eliyahu
02-12-2014 7:05 AM


Re: Fossils disprove evolution
If nobody can tell me how new attributes are formed, then it is a kind of useless trying to learn about it....

In your case, yes, it's pretty much useless.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 293 by Eliyahu, posted 02-12-2014 7:05 AM Eliyahu has not yet responded

  
edge
Member
Posts: 3732
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 309 of 342 (719244)
02-12-2014 12:16 PM
Reply to: Message 294 by Eliyahu
02-12-2014 7:22 AM


Re: Fossils disprove evolution
I can go on like this for a while, but I assume you got the picture by now: The fossil record shows STASIS and sudden appearance of new fully formed species, and not evolution.

Except that this does not conform to the bible, and actually IS evolution by modern definition.

I'm not sure you can catch up with us in this century or not, but please desist from redefinition of things you don't understand.

Edited by edge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 294 by Eliyahu, posted 02-12-2014 7:22 AM Eliyahu has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 6079
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.7


(1)
Message 310 of 342 (719254)
02-12-2014 3:34 PM
Reply to: Message 296 by mike the wiz
02-12-2014 8:01 AM


Re: Fossils disprove evolution
There is no direct logically sound argument that shows this, they can only claim that this type of, "evolution" leads to macro-evolution, by pointing to tenuous inductions of fragmentary historical evidence. As you say, mutations are not largely favourable and the accumulation of them leads to error catastrophe.

http://creation.com/...rgument-some-mutations-are-beneficial

Can you show us one difference between the chimp and human genome that could not be produced by a microevolutionary event?

Macroevolution is nothing more than the accumulation of DIFFERENT microevolutionary events in divergent lineages. Macroevolution is just microevolution plus genetic isolation.

Also, I have yet to see any peer reviewed papers to back your other claims.

So there are qualified scientists that are telling us we don't have to conflate adaptation with macro evolution, we are quite reasonable to deny the claim that it leads to that.

Trying to confuse everyone with semantic tricks, are we?

For pocket mice, we can track the adaptation of these mice to black lava fields, from the production of the beneficial mutation to the spread of that mutation in different populations.

http://www.pnas.org/content/100/9/5268.long

That is evolution.

Edited by Admin, : Fix subtitle font size.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 296 by mike the wiz, posted 02-12-2014 8:01 AM mike the wiz has not yet responded

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 3427
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 4.9


(3)
Message 311 of 342 (719366)
02-13-2014 4:49 PM
Reply to: Message 296 by mike the wiz
02-12-2014 8:01 AM


Quiesce The Screams
Mike, you and Eliyahu can scream as loud, large and ugly as you want but that will not change the fact that you are wrong.

There is no direct logically sound argument that shows this, they can only claim that this type of, "evolution" leads to macro-evolution, by pointing to tenuous inductions of fragmentary historical evidence. As you say, mutations are not largely favourable and the accumulation of them leads to error catastrophe.

Given a population of, say, a million individuals each having 10+- mutations different than their parents (not allele differences but actual genetic sequence mutations) adding 10,000,000 mutations to the population-wide genome each generation, you really are going to sit here and tell us that after 100,000 generations you have determined there cannot be any major changes?

You are the one defying sound logic, Mike.

From your source:

quote:
On the contrary, biology has catalogued many traits produced by point mutations (changes at precise positions in an organisms DNA)bacterial resistance to antibiotics, for example.

This is a serious misstatement of the creationist argument. The issue is not new traits, but new genetic information.


Riiight. And arranging all the notes in a different way may make different sounds but will not produce any new music.

Bullshit!

quote:
These abnormal limbs are not functional, but their existence demonstrates that genetic mistakes can produce complex structures, which natural selection can then test for possible uses.

Amazingnatural selection can test for possible uses of non-functional (i.e., useless!) limbs in the wrong place. Such deformities would be active hindrances to survival.


Yeah, like having grown some pseudo-legs where the fins were supposed to be. Obviously useless ... unless ...

Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 296 by mike the wiz, posted 02-12-2014 8:01 AM mike the wiz has not yet responded

  
tsig
Member (Idle past 291 days)
Posts: 738
From: USA
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 312 of 342 (719564)
02-15-2014 5:28 AM
Reply to: Message 63 by RAZD
02-03-2014 12:54 PM


Re: The fossil record conclusively demonstrates evolution in many ways
I repeat: It is perfectly valid to claim that a citation has been taken out of context As long as you can back it up with a reasoned argument. If you have nothing more to contribute than hurling unsubstantiated accusations of quote mining please go back to high school and shoot spitballs and do all the other things that immature adolescents do.

How immature!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by RAZD, posted 02-03-2014 12:54 PM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

    
tsig
Member (Idle past 291 days)
Posts: 738
From: USA
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 313 of 342 (719565)
02-15-2014 5:32 AM
Reply to: Message 69 by Dr Adequate
02-03-2014 1:18 PM


Re: The fossile record conclusively disproves evolution
That is not basically true, that's a lie. The fossil record shows that new species pop up suddenly, without any connection to supposed ancestors.

No evolution to be seen.

Does god create new species then?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by Dr Adequate, posted 02-03-2014 1:18 PM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

    
Eliyahu
Member (Idle past 189 days)
Posts: 286
From: Judah
Joined: 07-23-2013


Message 314 of 342 (720074)
02-20-2014 6:40 AM
Reply to: Message 306 by edge
02-12-2014 12:03 PM


Re: Fossils disprove evolution
Okay, so, you have this 'god', who has superhero powers. What evidence do you have for God? How does he/she/it create life? Is there some kind of magic wand? When and where did God create life?

I have more questions if you like.

Bs'd

I can come up with MANY questions that evo's cannot answer.

The point however, remains, that the fossil record is in agreement with creation, and rebuffs evolution.



"Those who believe that the geological record is in any degree perfect, will undoubtedly at once reject my theory."

Darwin

This message is a reply to:
 Message 306 by edge, posted 02-12-2014 12:03 PM edge has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 315 by frako, posted 02-20-2014 7:16 AM Eliyahu has not yet responded
 Message 316 by Pressie, posted 02-20-2014 7:17 AM Eliyahu has not yet responded
 Message 317 by Percy, posted 02-20-2014 9:26 AM Eliyahu has responded
 Message 318 by ringo, posted 02-20-2014 11:32 AM Eliyahu has not yet responded
 Message 319 by Taq, posted 02-20-2014 11:58 AM Eliyahu has not yet responded
 Message 320 by AZPaul3, posted 02-21-2014 9:22 PM Eliyahu has not yet responded

    
frako
Member
Posts: 2683
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010
Member Rating: 2.1


Message 315 of 342 (720077)
02-20-2014 7:16 AM
Reply to: Message 314 by Eliyahu
02-20-2014 6:40 AM


Re: Fossils disprove evolution
So what you are saying every few million years god creates a completely new species. why dont we just wait for got to start creating new ones and see, till then we use the model that works.

Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand

What are the Christians gonna do to me ..... Forgive me, good luck with that.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 314 by Eliyahu, posted 02-20-2014 6:40 AM Eliyahu has not yet responded

    
RewPrev1
...
181920
21
2223Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017