Problems with evolution? Submit your questions.

If mutagens didn't restore the ability of bacteria to synthesize histidine - and remember, we didn't do anything else to the bacteria besides expose them to a mutagen - then what did?Did it happen by magic?

You are lying to me about my own opinions. How do you think that's going to work out? That was a bizarre non sequitur.

What evolutionary purpose does laughter serve? Have the actual physical functions that trigger laughter been discovered?

Some things such as laughter might have a cultural component as well.

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

Also, what evolutionary purpose does having a porus(sp?) skin serve?

Your pores are for sweating through. I'm fairly sure. This cools you down in hot weather as the sweat evaporates.

I've always thought - and this is just a guess - that, like sex feeling really good makes you want to do more of it and in turn continue the human race, so too does laughter make conversations enjoyable and helps promote dialogue between people. If sitting around a campfire and talking only included boring, or angry, or pointless conversations, then there would be no fun, or good feeling, in sitting around conversing.But conversing is how we also spread information. Critical information. So we need to talk. Maybe laughter from dialogue helped us want to talk.- Oni

Skin like ours allowed our ancestors to run down faster prey who lacked the ability to regulate their body heat through perspiration.I don't know if that's the only explanation, but it seems sufficient.

---

Have you ever been to an American wedding? Where's the vodka? Where's the marinated herring?!
-Gogol Bordello

"A funny thing happened to me on the way to the cave the other day...." Bad things that almost happened can be funny and serve as cautionary tales at the same time.

---

Life is like a Hot Wheels car. Sometimes it goes behind the couch and you can't find it.

A fact within, I agree.

I agree with you as well, we should follow where the evidence points.

Micro evolution yes. My specific point is that mutation in documented experiments such as these do not point to gradual increased complexity, or indroduction of new information (genetically speaking). although physical attributes did change, they affected the family negatively, and used existing information.

I'm at work, and responding on my iPhone, so you will have to excuse my short reply.My secret for measuring information is genetic complexity.
"I thought you had already admitted that" I completely agree with genetic difference in dog species. I still want
a reference to support your claim."In this case, it's both. I have long experience of reading creationist literature."This is STILL an opinion. Two people can read the same literature and come to separate conclusions about the findings."And if creationists asserting stuff, without evidence, without references, about experiments they didn't do, was in any way a substitute for evidence, then creationism would be on a much firmer footing than it actually is."My experiment is documented. I'm not required to preform any experiments i use to defend an opinion. If this were the case, this foru
Would be very quiet.

* sighs *And how do you measure genetic complexity? And in this particular case one of them will be flat-out wrong. That would be you. There is nothing whatsoever which "documents" the claims you have made about the fruit fly experiments. There are false assertions by creationists, of course, but that is not documentation for creationist claims, those are just the claims.

Then your specific point is wrong. Obviously a new allele is new information. This is because DNA contains information, and because new things are new.