|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,913 Year: 4,170/9,624 Month: 1,041/974 Week: 368/286 Day: 11/13 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: PROOF against evolution | |||||||||||||||||||||||
mark24 Member (Idle past 5225 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: |
Buz,
The real point is that evolution, ie RM&NS isn't random, the mutations might be, but the functional product is honed by NS. Consider Hall 1982. He effectively destroyed the lac operon in a bacteria (a functional complex of several genes that facilitate the metabolisation of lactose), only to see a new lactase enzyme, a new protease (aiding movement of lactose into the cell), & an expression control system evolve under lab conditions.
"Information theory teaches us that neither random nor repetitive structures carry high levels of information." This directly contradicts above claim, or at the very least shows that you have misunderstood it. Adaptive evolution contains a component that isn't random, meaning high infomation content can occur naturally in DNA, & indeed, Hall showed it. Unless you think that complex function of the genes involved isn't a "high level of information", of course. Mark ------------------Occam's razor is not for shaving with.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
mark24 Member (Idle past 5225 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: |
Buz,
So how can something which supposedly functions in and of itself, void of intelligence and information naturally program itself to hone a random process? What? It observably DOES. It really isn't that hard, Buz. Something is simply more "successful" than something else, & ends up in all members of a population by dint of it's success. I would reasonably expect something a bit more than pot luck if an intelligence was involved, but that's is exactly what it is, pot luck, as to whether a mutation occurs at a particular loci that positively affects the fitness of the progeny, or not. You're just moving the goalposts/changing the subject. The point is that your quote in post 20 is either, 1/ misunderstood by you, or 2/ is wrong, & observably so. Information content can, & has, been observed to increase in DNA (Hall 1982). It depends on your definition of information, of course, but any increase in function can reasonably be equated to increased information, wouldn't you say? Hall showed that this did indeed occur, & that RM&NS was responsible. Furthermore, he did it over 20 years ago. You mean to tell me AiG didn't inform you of this groundbreaking work? Mark ------------------Occam's razor is not for shaving with. [This message has been edited by mark24, 07-06-2003] [This message has been edited by mark24, 07-06-2003]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
mark24 Member (Idle past 5225 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: |
Buz,
How is this information repetitive? Mutations culled by NS increase information. If you are claiming that the genome wasn't "created" this way, then please provide evidence. Mark ------------------Occam's razor is not for shaving with.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
mark24 Member (Idle past 5225 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: |
k.kslick,
Ok? So? 98% similiar? how about God made it that way! How about that the above is a logically invalid argument! Untestable. Mark
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
mark24 Member (Idle past 5225 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: |
TheNewGuy03
Entropy applies to OPEN systems as well; it is simply forced to decrease because energy usage is modified to do so. Yes it does, but if everything is going from order to disorder, why can plants photosynthesise? Answer that & you'll see the creationist anti-evolution 2LOT argument for what it is. Mark
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
mark24 Member (Idle past 5225 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: |
TNG3,
I was looking at the current human population trend. As we know, the earth's population is rapidly approaching 7 billion. Only 50 years ago, the population was only 2 billion. Before this, the population rose at a fairly constant rate. If the trend was traced back to 4500 BC, then the population of the world would be nearly zero. If humans were around for even a million years, then the world would be truly overpopulated. Someone (legitimate) get back to me, on this. Nonsense. This assumes that all that are born survive & breed. A mere 200 years ago saw appalling infant mortality in all cultures. The population growth we are experiencing now is a VERY recent phenomenon. Making the same assumptions for any given species of bacteria would mean we would be a kilometer deep in them if the earth was only 4,500 years old & they all survived to breed without any recource limitations. Extrapolating backwards the earth began a few years ago using the same logic. In fact, if you will arrive at a different date for every species you look at. The truth is, that for long periods of time there was no net population growth, even population reduction, just like any other species you care to mention. Mark There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
mark24 Member (Idle past 5225 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: |
TNG,
People die now...it isn't showing on the chart. People died before they reached adulthood much more than they do now, in any culture. If a couple only have two children survive to breed out of ten, then the population remains the same. If all ten die at 70 after having children, then the population explodes. Mark There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
mark24 Member (Idle past 5225 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: |
yxifix,
In fact, it is very simple and very logical as I showed you a clear proof how the information is created... A logical error in your argument is that you don't know that the genetic code wasn't naturally formed. Ergo, your premise is insufficient to conclude intelligence was required to form the genetic code. Mark This message has been edited by mark24, 08-11-2004 04:55 PM There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
mark24 Member (Idle past 5225 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: |
yxifix,
At Nosy's request I've responded in an approprate thread, here. Mark There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
mark24 Member (Idle past 5225 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: |
yxifix,
At Nosy's request I've responded in an approprate thread, here. Mark There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
mark24 Member (Idle past 5225 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: |
yfifix,
I'm saving whole discussion. Send it to ANY website that deals with logic. It could be a case study. Mark There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
mark24 Member (Idle past 5225 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: |
lol
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
mark24 Member (Idle past 5225 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: |
yxifix,
You have to show evidence for your premise. Why, you don't? Pasteurs demolition of Spontaneous generation isn't relevant evidence that the genetic code/information could not appear naturally. I point this out here. You failed to address any of the relevant points, I go to the trouble of listing the unaddressed points along with exactly what you need to do to directly address them, & you fucked that up, too (messages 245-247). In short, your Pasteur "evidence" has been rebutted, & you have failed to address any of the points. Your "premise" that Pasteur's work is a proof against information appearing naturally is in tatters. Mark There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
mark24 Member (Idle past 5225 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: |
You've just repeated the same old bollocks again.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
mark24 Member (Idle past 5225 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: |
yxifix,
Read all of this response, please, before replying. Leave it a couple of hours & think about what I've written, please do not immediately respond without thoroughly digesting the implications of what I have written. Pasteur showed that something that was supposed to act all the time, didn't. You have failed to provide a valid test that something that happened once in 4,500,000,000 years didn't. Why? Because the time & physical scales of Pasteurs "proof" is relevant to his experiment. Nothing you have shown meets this criteria. I might have placed a football in the Sahara Desert. What would you need to do in order to PROOVE that I didn't? 1/ search a small area for 5 minutes? Or; 2/ Search the entire desert. If you don't conduct a test of relevant proportions you show nothing. In order to PROVE something you must have 100% knowledge of all instances of what ever it is you are talking about. Clearly you don't posess this information, which makes your argument analogous to the football/scenario. This is why your following "proofs", aren't proofs at all. You do NOT possess 100% knowledge of what occurs today, let alone what occurred in a primeval sea 3.5bn years ago.
quote: You have not scoured the earths entire history, & studied every molecular interaction that occurred in order to have PROVEN anything. GET IT!!!!!????? By claiming otherwise you are essentially searching the desert for a nanosecond for a football, don't find it, then claim it is PROVEN that it doesn't exist. As I've said countless times before, this is an argument of the form; because it isn't proven to be true, it is false. An argument from ignorance. Your argument is of this form, therefore it is an argument from ignorance, & therefore it is logically invalid. Sorry, you're only against the rest of the world on this one, not me. Mark There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024