Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 78 (8905 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 04-20-2019 6:14 PM
24 online now:
JonF, PaulK, Tangle, Tanypteryx, xongsmith (5 members, 19 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 849,919 Year: 4,956/19,786 Month: 1,078/873 Week: 434/376 Day: 65/46 Hour: 3/10


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
2324
25
2627
...
51NextFF
Author Topic:   Problems with evolution? Submit your questions.
Vacate
Member (Idle past 2706 days)
Posts: 565
Joined: 10-01-2006


Message 361 of 752 (580460)
09-09-2010 7:35 AM
Reply to: Message 359 by frako
09-09-2010 7:12 AM


Re: What's the problem?
E. coli digesting citrates

11 left


This message is a reply to:
 Message 359 by frako, posted 09-09-2010 7:12 AM frako has not yet responded

frako
Member
Posts: 2813
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010


Message 362 of 752 (580461)
09-09-2010 7:37 AM
Reply to: Message 360 by Huntard
09-09-2010 7:27 AM


Re: What's the problem?
The world's largest DNA scan for familial autism has uncovered new genetic changes in autistic children that are often not present in their parents. Identified in less than 1 percent of the population, these rare variants occur nearly 20 percent more in autistic children.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/...ases/2010/06/100609131637.htm

10 left

Edited by frako, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 360 by Huntard, posted 09-09-2010 7:27 AM Huntard has not yet responded

  
Nij
Member (Idle past 2995 days)
Posts: 239
From: New Zealand
Joined: 08-20-2010


Message 363 of 752 (580463)
09-09-2010 8:06 AM
Reply to: Message 358 by Huntard
09-09-2010 7:03 AM


Re: What's the problem?
The old classic: bacteria developing the ability to metabolise nylon dimers.

Linky-slinky.

9 left.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 358 by Huntard, posted 09-09-2010 7:03 AM Huntard has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 365 by Taq, posted 09-09-2010 12:02 PM Nij has not yet responded

jar
Member
Posts: 30935
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 364 of 752 (580471)
09-09-2010 8:40 AM
Reply to: Message 348 by dennis780
09-09-2010 12:03 AM


Re: Claims
If he has no living decendants, this would support the theory of a flood, since all of mankind today would have been decendants of Noah. If a global flood did happen (though this is not currently the subject of debate), the levels of pollen would have changed dramatically, as well as altering any other samples used to give him his supposed age.

First, there was no Biblical Flood. That has been totally refuted. Even Oetzi's existence refutes the flood. Think. He was found in a glacier. If he had died thousands of years before the flood, then somehow submerged in water for a frikken year and a half, just what would you expect to be left?

And even if true, how would the flood have altered anything related to him? The skins he wore. the pollen in him, the tools and arrows he had, the blood on him the shoes on his feet and grasses in the shoes, the herbs and shrooms in his tote bag, how exactly could some imagined flood change those things without leaving any traces of being in water for a year or more?

How do you run Oetzi through a flood and not separate him from the arrows, the axe, the pouch, his clothes, his shoes...

Though the number may be correct, I don't think it's fair to say they know for sure how old he was when he died. Global flood aside even, the levels of any natural substance changes over time, and no one could possibly know what those were over 5000 years ago.

Why? As we grow our bones and teeth change. It's possible to look at signs of wear, at which teeth are present, which bones have grown, things like skull fusing, and arrive at an approximate age.

In addition, we most certainly can tell what different levels of naturally occurring substances have been over time by looking at the evidence over time. Oetzi is a great example of evidence that tells us what the levels of substances were at the time he lived.

Oetzi is evidence.

The Biblical Flood is myth.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 348 by dennis780, posted 09-09-2010 12:03 AM dennis780 has not yet responded

Taq
Member
Posts: 7694
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.5


Message 365 of 752 (580491)
09-09-2010 12:02 PM
Reply to: Message 363 by Nij
09-09-2010 8:06 AM


Re: What's the problem?
The evolution of a new beta-galactosidase in E. coli

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12868605

8 left


This message is a reply to:
 Message 363 by Nij, posted 09-09-2010 8:06 AM Nij has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 373 by Huntard, posted 09-13-2010 8:39 AM Taq has not yet responded

dennis780
Member (Idle past 2882 days)
Posts: 288
From: Alberta
Joined: 05-11-2010


Message 366 of 752 (580984)
09-12-2010 7:09 PM
Reply to: Message 351 by Coyote
09-09-2010 12:14 AM


Re: Flood disproved by science
quote:
In my own archaeological research I tested a site recently that was dominated by a component we dated at about 5,600 years ago.

First, you mean: dated at 5,600 years old, not years ago, otherwise the date changes as time goes on.

Second, which method of dating did you use?

quote:
And we could tell a great deal about how the people who lived there were making their living.

Though I am sure that there were people there, the specfic forms of dating are what I am interested in.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 351 by Coyote, posted 09-09-2010 12:14 AM Coyote has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 367 by Coyote, posted 09-12-2010 7:14 PM dennis780 has responded

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 212 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 367 of 752 (580987)
09-12-2010 7:14 PM
Reply to: Message 366 by dennis780
09-12-2010 7:09 PM


Re: Flood disproved by science
...which method of dating did you use?

Radiocarbon dating, along with artifact typologies and stratigraphy. Also obsidian hydration, but that is nowhere near as accurate.


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 366 by dennis780, posted 09-12-2010 7:09 PM dennis780 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 378 by dennis780, posted 09-18-2010 1:42 PM Coyote has responded

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 368 of 752 (580994)
09-12-2010 8:49 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by subbie
06-22-2010 1:59 PM


Re: Genetic Information
subbie writes:

ICant writes:

where did all that information come from?

The new genetic material, assuming this is what you mean by "information," came from mutations.

Yea, ICant. Abiogenic life developed from premordal soup to simplest life which naturally increased simple genitic information which mutated additional information all the way from simplcity to all of the complex genetic information observed today in billions of life forms, void of any intelligent design. Truly amazing! :


BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by subbie, posted 06-22-2010 1:59 PM subbie has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 370 by crashfrog, posted 09-12-2010 9:02 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded
 Message 379 by dennis780, posted 09-18-2010 1:51 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 369 of 752 (580995)
09-12-2010 8:57 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by Percy
06-21-2010 8:17 AM


Re: Evolution Proven Wrong Again (Bump)
Percy writes:

Hasn't evolution been proven wrong again, as described in the July, 2010, issue of Scientific American? Apparently fully developed birds existed along side dinosaurs. How about that, no evolution from theropod dinosaurs of the late Cretaceous, and no post-extinction evolutionary radiation into suddenly empty ecological niches, fundamental claims of evolution.

I see no responses to this, Percy, so I'm bumping it up to see if there's any takers on.

Btw, all I could get up from your July 2010 link on this was an advertizement from the home page.


BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Percy, posted 06-21-2010 8:17 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 371 by jar, posted 09-12-2010 9:06 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded
 Message 372 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-12-2010 11:39 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded
 Message 374 by frako, posted 09-13-2010 9:11 AM Buzsaw has not yet responded

crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 370 of 752 (580996)
09-12-2010 9:02 PM
Reply to: Message 368 by Buzsaw
09-12-2010 8:49 PM


Re: Genetic Information
Abiogenic life developed from premordal soup to simplest life which naturally increased simple genitic information which mutated additional information all the way from simplcity to all of the complex genetic information observed today in billions of life forms, void of any intelligent design. Truly amazing!

It is, isn't it? Maybe you're getting a sense of the deep wonder and amazement those of us feel who have the privilege to study the biological sciences.

You could read all the works of Shakespeare in a semester. The Bible in a year. Two years and you could have the entire canon of Great Works under your belt.

Take a square meter of your lawn and you could spend a dozen lifetimes studying the biology, chemistry, and ecology of the myriad of species located therein - and God had nothing at all to do with any of it.

Yes, it's amazing!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 368 by Buzsaw, posted 09-12-2010 8:49 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 382 by dennis780, posted 09-18-2010 1:54 PM crashfrog has responded

jar
Member
Posts: 30935
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 371 of 752 (580997)
09-12-2010 9:06 PM
Reply to: Message 369 by Buzsaw
09-12-2010 8:57 PM


Re: Evolution Proven Wrong Again (Bump)
He was just danglin the worm in front of Swamp Donkey who as expected, did not even take a nibble. Peers Swamp Donkey jess didn't like the odds and so swam on off.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 369 by Buzsaw, posted 09-12-2010 8:57 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16093
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 9.1


Message 372 of 752 (581020)
09-12-2010 11:39 PM
Reply to: Message 369 by Buzsaw
09-12-2010 8:57 PM


Re: Evolution Proven Wrong Again (Bump)
I see no responses to this, Percy ...

That's 'cos he was joking. It's just another variant on the old "Why Are There Still Monkeys?" thing.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 369 by Buzsaw, posted 09-12-2010 8:57 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

Huntard
Member (Idle past 401 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 373 of 752 (581052)
09-13-2010 8:39 AM
Reply to: Message 365 by Taq
09-09-2010 12:02 PM


Re: What's the problem?
As Percy mentioned in Message 156 in the Is there any proof of beneficial mutations? thread:

The evolution of a lighter pelt in Deer Mice. Link

7 left.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 365 by Taq, posted 09-09-2010 12:02 PM Taq has not yet responded

  
frako
Member
Posts: 2813
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010


Message 374 of 752 (581054)
09-13-2010 9:11 AM
Reply to: Message 369 by Buzsaw
09-12-2010 8:57 PM


Re: Evolution Proven Wrong Again (Bump)
Percy writes:

Hasn't evolution been proven wrong again, as described in the July, 2010, issue of Scientific American? Apparently fully developed birds existed along side dinosaurs. How about that, no evolution from theropod dinosaurs of the late Cretaceous, and no post-extinction evolutionary radiation into suddenly empty ecological niches, fundamental claims of evolution.

il bite just give me the link to the actual article

observed today in billions of life forms, void of any intelligent design. Truly amazing! :

im guessing when this intelegent designer made the Proteus anguinus he forgot to take the eyes out when he coverd them whit tissue, and he thaught it would be fun to leave a remains of a tail in humans just to see if they can come up whit a silly argument like evolution to explain it.

Edited by frako, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 369 by Buzsaw, posted 09-12-2010 8:57 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 375 by Huntard, posted 09-13-2010 9:26 AM frako has responded
 Message 383 by dennis780, posted 09-18-2010 2:04 PM frako has not yet responded

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 401 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 375 of 752 (581056)
09-13-2010 9:26 AM
Reply to: Message 374 by frako
09-13-2010 9:11 AM


Re: Evolution Proven Wrong Again (Bump)
Here you go, you'll need a subscription to "Scientific American" to view the entire article, though.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 374 by frako, posted 09-13-2010 9:11 AM frako has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 376 by frako, posted 09-13-2010 9:36 AM Huntard has responded

  
RewPrev1
...
2324
25
2627
...
51NextFF
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019