|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,889 Year: 4,146/9,624 Month: 1,017/974 Week: 344/286 Day: 65/40 Hour: 1/5 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: TOE and the Reasons for Doubt | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Izanagi Member (Idle past 5245 days) Posts: 263 Joined: |
And why were these dragons always large, dangerous reptilian creatures, do you think?
Wrong. The Chinese dragon is wise, strong, and benevolent. It is not a force for destruction. For the Chinese, the dragon is at the top and the characteristics of a dragon are what people aspire to attain. The dragon is associated with the yang (male) while the Chinese Phoenix is associated with the yin (female). Hmm. Large, dangerous reptiles...that sounds familiar... Also, the Chinese dragon is generally depicted without wings. Edited by Izanagi, : No reason given. Edited by Izanagi, : No reason given. It's just some things you never get over. That's just the way it is. You go on through... best as you can. - Matthew Scott ---------------------------------------- This is very similar to the suggestion put forward by the Quirmian philosopher Ventre, who said, "Possibly the gods exist, and possibly they do not. So why not believe in them in any case? If it's all true you'll go to a lovely place when you die, and if it isn't then you've lost nothing, right?" When he died he woke up in a circle of gods holding nasty-looking sticks and one of them said, "We're going to show you what we think of Mr Clever Dick in these parts..." - Terry Pratchett, Hogfather ---------------------------------------- You know, I used to think it was awful that life was so unfair. Then I thought, wouldn't it be much worse if life were fair, and all the terrible things that happen to us come because we actually deserve them? So, now I take great comfort in the general hostility and unfairness of the universe. - Marcus Cole
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peepul Member (Idle past 5046 days) Posts: 206 Joined: |
quote: You may be aware, Percy, of recent research that shows that about 150 mutations occur per generation in human - your figure of 20 is very conservative.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Blue Jay Member (Idle past 2726 days) Posts: 2843 From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts Joined: |
Hi, Peepul.
Peepul writes: You may be aware, Percy, of recent research that shows that about 150 mutations occur per generation in human - your figure of 20 is very conservative. Can you supply some sources for this? I've been looking for this information. Thanks. -Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus) Darwin loves you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
SammyJean Member (Idle past 4101 days) Posts: 87 From: Fremont, CA, USA Joined: |
To me the second one looks more like a Rhino than a triceritops. I think it looks like this:
[thumb=300]http://i274.photobucket.com/albums/jj259/sammyjean1970/chameleon011.jpg[/thumb=300] Throw in enough peyote, and I could fancy riding on it's back and then making some art work about the trip. <!--B;)--><img src="http://www.evcforum.net/Images/Smilies/wink.gif" border=0><!--E-->
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
bluescat48 Member (Idle past 4218 days) Posts: 2347 From: United States Joined: |
Maybe if you fed it enough. Just goes to show that any old artifact can be just as confusing as some modern art.
There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002 Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969 Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Calypsis4 Member (Idle past 5242 days) Posts: 428 Joined: |
Beneficial mutations may be rare when compared to deleterious mutations, but they occur at a more than sufficient rate Not it won't. Here's why: genetic entropy. Example, the drosophila house fly has been taken through thousands of generations with many and different variations...within the fly family. For instance, in the experiment on flies, out of 3,000 identified mutations for Drosophila melanogaster, none of them produced a more successful fruit fly...& even more, estimates of the rate of all mutations are of the order of 10^8 to 10^9 per nucleotide that is, per ‘letter’ per generation. Maynard Smith, J., 1989. Evolutionary Genetics, Oxford University Press, New York, p.61. As far as the outcome of mutations they were able to produce things like this:
[thumb=300]http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h106/Martyrs5/mutant_fly.jpg[/thumb=300] and this:
[thumb=200]http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h106/Martyrs5/antp.jpg[/thumb=200] mutated antanae. But they could never produce anything like this:
[thumb=200]http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h106/Martyrs5/TJRA-Bee.jpg[/thumb=200] Neither nature nor even genetic engineering can produce such an effect. Had they proved that nature could do this or even if they could arrange the DNA code in drosophilas to produce such an organism there would be no debate over creation vs evolution. But the fact is they can't and nature won't cooperate.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
greyseal Member (Idle past 3890 days) Posts: 464 Joined: |
Beneficial mutations may be rare when compared to deleterious mutations, but they occur at a more than sufficient rate
Not it won't. Here's why: genetic entropy. What's genetic entropy? If it's a made-up creationist term without any kind of real work put behind it then it's worthless as a reason. I may as well yes: yes it will, here's why: genetic efervescence useful? No. Don't do that. Now, for the rest of what you said, you do realise the scale of what you're actually talking about, yes? 3000 generations of fruit flies is miniscule in human terms, it's even less of a mini-miniscule in evolutionary terms, which operates over thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands and even millions, tens of millions and hundreds of millions of years. Multiply those 3000 generations by 10^6 and you'd be getting somewhere. Already you can see changes - mutant antennae that turn BACK into legs. And you tell us that evolution can't happen? I don't get it. I mean of course, you'll pull out the old canard "no new information" as if it meant something (it's as empty as "genetic entropy"), you'll talk about innate capabilities as if the fact that a mutation turning off the legs-into-antenna gene (displaying that, in the past, the antennae WERE legs, and have therefore EVOLVED) were a mere coincidence, or somehow "god's plan". I just don't get it. Feel free to say "and you never will".
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 829 days) Posts: 3193 Joined: |
greyseal writes: What's genetic entropy? If it's a made-up creationist term without any kind of real work put behind it then it's worthless as a reason. I was wondering the same thing. Here is what I found:
In the thermodynamic study of genetic processes, genetic entropy is a term defined in 2005 by American plant genetics researcher John Sanford as the mutational entropy affects within large genomes that cannot be reversed by natural selection. [1] This, according to Sanford, makes the eventual extinction of such genomes inevitable. Due to the religious undertones used in Sanford's book, the term has since been taken up by the intelligent design and creation science movement. Now, that's not to take anything away from Mr. Sanford, but....he IS a creationist. But, the book is just that: a book. Not a peer reviewed journal.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Huntard Member (Idle past 2323 days) Posts: 2870 From: Limburg, The Netherlands Joined:
|
Calypsis4 writes:
House fly? Drosophila is not a house fly, Calypsis. It's a fruit fly. A house fly is Musca domestica. As you can see, no Drosophila in there. ...the drosophila house fly... And you're supposed to know better about biology the the experts? Here, some pictures, since you seem to like them so much: Drosophila: Musca domestica: I hunt for the truth I am the one Orgasmatron, the outstretched grasping handMy image is of agony, my servants rape the land Obsequious and arrogant, clandestine and vain Two thousand years of misery, of torture in my name Hypocrisy made paramount, paranoia the law My name is called religion, sadistic, sacred whore. -Lyrics by Lemmy Kilmister of Motorhead
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
greyseal Member (Idle past 3890 days) Posts: 464 Joined: |
Now, that's not to take anything away from Mr. Sanford, but....he IS a creationist. But, the book is just that: a book. Not a peer reviewed journal. Why am I not surprised? It's as worthless as "no new information", "kinds", "baraminology" and everything else like it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kaichos Man Member (Idle past 4516 days) Posts: 250 From: Tasmania, Australia Joined: |
That's right, Percy. And around three of those mutations are deleterious. So for every one of your "beneficial" mutations you will get 20,000 deleterious ones. It's not going to get you very far!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22502 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.9 |
Kaichos Man writes: That's right, Percy. And around three of those mutations are deleterious. So for every one of your "beneficial" mutations you will get 20,000 deleterious ones. It's not going to get you very far! Civilization and science have advanced in the face of mountains of bad ideas because we throw away the bad ideas and keep the good ones. Evolution works in the same way, throwing away the bad mutations and keeping the good ones. --Percy Edited by Percy, : Grammar.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22502 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.9 |
Hi Calypsis4,
In my example I assumed a ration of good to bad mutations of one in a million. You don't provide any details about the fruit fly (not house fly) experiments, but they seem consistent with my low occurence rate for beneficial mutations. The important point to keep in mind is that evolution discards bad mutations and keeps good ones, and that's why it works so successfully at producing adaptation. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kaichos Man Member (Idle past 4516 days) Posts: 250 From: Tasmania, Australia Joined: |
What's genetic entropy? If it's a made-up creationist term All terms are made up at some time, by somebody. In this case, it's a term coined by a respected Cornell University researcher to describe the process of genomes being inexorably strafed into nonsense by mutations. The same observed, documented process upon which Motoo Kimura based his Neutral Theory of Evolution. Don't like the term? Make up your own. Genetic Erosion? Genetic Atrophy? Genetic Scrambling?
Multiply those 3000 generations by 10^6 and you'd be getting somewhere. Already you can see changes - mutant antennae that turn BACK into legs. Three billion generations to achieve a back-muation? My word, you evolutionists are so easily pleased!
displaying that, in the past, the antennae WERE legs, and have therefore EVOLVED You are suggesting that some ancestor of D. Melanogaster had two legs growing out of its head. Reference, please.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kaichos Man Member (Idle past 4516 days) Posts: 250 From: Tasmania, Australia Joined: |
The important point to keep in mind is that evolution discards bad mutations and keeps good ones But it doesn't, Percy. Motoo Kimura showed that the vast majority of mutations are neutral, though his compatriot Ohno later revised that to Nearly Neutral. That means that apart from the odd lethal mutation, the copying errors simply accrue, gradually lowering the fitness of the organism until natural selection comes along and eliminates the most mutated. Out go those with 100 mutations, leaving those with 95. And as for these mythical "beneficial" mutations, you'll notice evolutionists are happy to include in their number back mutations (repairs to formerly deleterious mutations) and deleterious mutations causing an increase in fitness (e.g. flightless beetles). Beggars can't be choosers, as they say. "Often a cold shudder has run through me, and I have asked myself whether I may have not devoted myself to a fantasy." Charles Darwin
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024