|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 59 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,927 Year: 4,184/9,624 Month: 1,055/974 Week: 14/368 Day: 14/11 Hour: 2/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Junior Member (Idle past 5061 days) Posts: 1 From: Austin, TX, US Joined: |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Problems with evolution? Submit your questions. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dennis780 Member (Idle past 4807 days) Posts: 288 From: Alberta Joined: |
quote: Brown, we have already discussed the E. Coli experiments, and this is not an example of random mutation. The cell wall elongation it caused (among other things), which is detrimental in other environments--basically handicapped the bacteria, and their fitness level dropped. This is called ecological specialization, and is not support for random mutation.
quote: Humans would have been able to eat small rocks in the past (though it wouldn't have provided any nutritional value). The appendix provides a pouch off the main intestinal tract, in which cellulose can be trapped and be subjected to prolonged digestion. Though in humans, the appendix is shrinking, in the past it would have produced cellulose strong enough to eat raw meat, and quite easily digest small rocks.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dennis780 Member (Idle past 4807 days) Posts: 288 From: Alberta Joined: |
quote: High five!
quote: No. It's not about who has the most. More for me, more for me. Complexity of chemical arrangements is also a factor. As well, many organisms (including humans) have alot of 'junk' DNA that codes for nothing. This is also a factor (among other things).
quote: No, in this comment, I compare the chemical arrangements of nucleotides to words in a book. The doc and I are on this because I quoted a scientist earlier on that compared the information found in DNA to be different from that of specific chemical arrangements, much like the words in a book. If you want to jump into our posts, I'm diggity, but read back a bit so you are up to speed on whats going on.
quote: Yeeeess. And this genetic change comes at a cost to the organism, and also is not evidence for random mutation, but for antibiotic resistance. But there is genetic change, and new information is present. Dr. Adequate has a good point. Although I am not convinced the entire spectrum of organic life came from antibiotic resistance (HGT), it is still a valid point. Mooving on.
quote: HGT is not the explanation for random mutation, since this change is not random. As well, for HGT to explain the origin of life, we must believe that evolution created horizontal gene transfer, which in itself required various complex mechanisms, for which you would need to explain the origin of.
quote: Hey, you are the evolutionist. If it's HGT you want, go at it big rigger. Argue the point. No one here has offered any reasonable explanation to the origin of complex structures, HGT included. Thats your job. Mine is to make you look dumb....like right now. You only one here that is refusing to respond with any sort of intelligence. Even the new guys have scientific sources. If you want to voice opinions on my beliefs, send me a private message. This is a science driven thread, and if I state something that is unscientific, or not supported by evidence, feel free to respond.
quote: Everyone else, crashfrog, Dr. adequate, Abrown etc. all are giving me pressure because our VIEWPOINTS DIFFER. And that is perfectly logical. If your next message is you spewing random opinions on my beliefs, you can sleep at night knowing that it will be untouched.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dennis780 Member (Idle past 4807 days) Posts: 288 From: Alberta Joined: |
quote: By the ultimate sliver teaspoon. hahahha. During RNA translation, an incorrectly placed stop codon that prematurely terminates the message, errors during transcription, teaspoon taps frameshifts, intron removal errors, etc.
quote: No, because I never once claimed cloven hooved. I said split. Which is true. The third 'toe' was on the side, and shrank over time, while the two split toes remained functional.
quote: quote: Oh good, so disease, and harmful environments caused all of life. Thats nice. I don't suppose you have any evidence for this?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dennis780 Member (Idle past 4807 days) Posts: 288 From: Alberta Joined: |
quote: You know what is even funnier than that??? Using your websites to prove you wrong. HAHAhahahahhaha.
quote: quote: Handicapped - One who makes jokes for alternative viewpoints, but first does not check his/her own resources to see if he will look stupid. Handicapped.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dennis780 Member (Idle past 4807 days) Posts: 288 From: Alberta Joined: |
quote: As well as this one:
quote: quote: quote: Since animals have functional appendixes today, such as apes, the purpose of this organ can be clearly defined.
quote: Even I think thats funny.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dennis780 Member (Idle past 4807 days) Posts: 288 From: Alberta Joined: |
quote: You asked:
quote: And these are all examples. There are more. Don't be such a poopypants.
quote: This is nothing more than an obvious statement. If evolution is true, then of course information would be lost and gained over milliions of years. It would be unlikely to find anything else. It offers no relevance to our current subject, being origin of genetic chemical arrangements.
quote: Yet somehow you managed to figure out what I said. If I'm incoherant, and you can read what I am writing...
quote: No. Since Split can refer to other animals, including Rhino's and Camels, that have three toes, where as cloven cannot, as it only refers to animals with two.
quote: Well, we are back to square one now aren't we...I thought you had a point to make on HGT....
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dennis780 Member (Idle past 4807 days) Posts: 288 From: Alberta Joined: |
quote: Oops. I meant codons. Your right. I'm typing too fast. Thats okay. You're an evolutionist, you are used to mistakes...
quote: Dummy this please, no idea what your point is....
quote: You never seem to finish sentences. It's hard to read what your points are, but I think I got this one. Nucleotide content, coding densities, total functional DNA sequences, and complexity of sequences. Lets put this another way, since you obviously do not accept the above answer (don't bother, every evolutionist is the same, even though I quoted a scientist talking about the information content in codons and DNA in a previous post, I'll have a little fun with this). Which is more complex: Human, or an amoeba? AND why? And you cannot use any of the answers I provided, since you called them all wrong.
quote: Statistically, they are more likely drop out of school, commit crimes, and not go to college.
quote: HEIL HITLER. hahahaha
quote: All from your previous posts. I'm just saying, if you can't take it, don't dish it.
quote: I would have done adopted first, but its up to you I suppose...
quote: (speaking of nucleotide sequences) Okay, then where do Amino acids come from? Because now all of a sudden, they don't come from nucleotide sequences...you are re-inventing science, right before my eyes. I am not worthy. Anways, I haven't seen any real scientific responses in your post...I'll tell you the same thing I told Bluebird or whatever. If you want to critize my personal beliefs, write me a message. If something I wrote on here is scientifically incorrect, feel free to correct me, or offer a rebuttal. If you want to distort my evidences to make them incorrect, and offer no resources for any claim in regards to the current topic, then goodbye. You too will be able to sleep at night knowing that your next post will be untouched if you don't offer evidence to support your beliefs. If I am required to, so are you. Bye Timmy.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dennis780 Member (Idle past 4807 days) Posts: 288 From: Alberta Joined: |
quote: Yes, thats my point...is it not? Whats going on here.
quote: Since cellulose is found in raw foods, it shouldn't produce it, it should digest it. Thats my point.
quote: The appendix contains lymphoid tissue. Not cellulose. The cellulose comes from the raw foods.
quote: THATS WHAT I'M SAYING. I can't remember what point I wanted to make, because now you are agreeing with me. I'm lost.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dennis780 Member (Idle past 4807 days) Posts: 288 From: Alberta Joined: |
quote: *brushes shoulder*
quote: Where "incorrectness" and "damage" are assessed how? Thats how. I never claimed this was due to a loss. You asked me to give you examples of genetic damage and incorrect sequencing, and I did.
quote: Right, but if I use that terminology, you would have attacked my word choice, so I am required to use alternatives that prevent this.
quote: It is irrelevant, as I stated before, since both evolutionists and creationists agree that horse ancestors had split hooves. The means of this are trivial, since we are not debating this subject. You simply asked me about it, so I gave you the source for the information. I assumed it was because you didn't believe that this was true. A side note of our current discussion. Unless you want to change the topic?
quote: What? Which message was the point made in?? I can't find it. You left off after asking me if HGT constitutes new genetic information...and I said yes...expecting you to make some sort of association between HGT and genetic origins. Or was that the point?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dennis780 Member (Idle past 4807 days) Posts: 288 From: Alberta Joined: |
quote: Oh. Well I'm definitely wrong. And logically, proved myself handicapped. Ooops. HAHAHAHAHHA. It's wayyyy to early for this. I'm starting to have fun proving myself wrong.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dennis780 Member (Idle past 4807 days) Posts: 288 From: Alberta Joined: |
quote: Dammit, I'm never going to live this down now. It was an accident, it's freakin 4am where I am. I'm tired, and I have to poop.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dennis780 Member (Idle past 4807 days) Posts: 288 From: Alberta Joined: |
quote: Genetic loss would be any sequence of dna that has been changed in any way that renders chemically useless nucleotide arrangements. These are just examples of these, which is what I thought you wanted.
quote: I also said others. I was offering up examples of genetic loss...what is the problem? Do you need ALL causes of genetic loss to prove that genetic loss can happen? It's obvious that this does happen, and is a documented scientific fact. I'm not sure what you want exactly...
quote: Oh, well then mutation.
quote: I'm confused, are you saying that HGT is the source for the origin of new information? Or random mutation passed within families of specific organisms...because I already talked quite a bit about how HGT handicaps the organism in most cases... And can I have the link again for the experiments on clonal lines?? I want to read it again. Or was that the E. Coli experiment you quoted earlier?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dennis780 Member (Idle past 4807 days) Posts: 288 From: Alberta Joined: |
quote: No as I said before I agree with you that HGT can bring about new genetic information in an organism. But the information used must have a source. As well, when the selective conditions are removed, the genetic information (that was horizontally transferred) becomes redundant and is eventually discarded by the cells to enable them to survive among the faster-growing "wild-type" bacteria. Between the negative effects that usually occur, and the information being discarded (as well as the the source of information not having an explanation), HGT doesn't seem to be a plausible fit to origin of, or tool for, new complex chemical arrangements in DNA.
quote: We are agreeing too much...somethings wrong. I feel a trap. So then, are we not discussing the origin of new genetic material? What is the topic??
quote: In the example you gave:
quote: This does not conflict with the ID theory. The new pathway would still be based on existing pathway DNA. Generations over time did not "evolve" the permease pathway over time. It existed in the original cell.
quote: This example does not tell us whether the mutation was due to genetic loss or gain, so I really don't know how to comment.
quote: Existing information. I'm still unclear as to whether or not we are debating the origin of DNA or not...or if mutations can result in new information. Because I have already conceded that this is possible, but that HGT is not it, since it does not explain the origin of the information.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dennis780 Member (Idle past 4807 days) Posts: 288 From: Alberta Joined: |
quote: I'm typing you moron. My mouth IS shut.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dennis780 Member (Idle past 4807 days) Posts: 288 From: Alberta Joined: |
Bluejay,
I'll pick through and answer your logical questions. I don't take anything personally. Your message had no evidences to refute mine, just opinions. How do you expect me to respond to an opinion?
quote: Absolutely. Any genetic DNA rendering sequences of nucleotides that do not produce any useful substance cannot be counted as DNA that has specific and verifiable purpose, and therefore offers no increased overall useful information to the organism. This 'junk' DNA, cannot included in an organisms overall complexity, since it offers nothing to it.
quote: Well, you are bad at it, lol.
quote: Which I do, as explained above. I'm not a geneticist, so I would not know how it is measured. I do know that only specific nucleotide arrangements and codons produce useful information.
quote: hahaha, I'm not implying that HGT is how it 'all went down'. I'm arguing against the point...if you haven't noticed yet, read my response to the Doc. Which evidence was yours? I thought I was hitting them all, if I missed yours, repost the source please.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024