|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Davidjay  Suspended Member (Idle past 2349 days) Posts: 1026 From: B.C Canada Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Debunking the Evolutionary God of 'Selection' | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tanypteryx Member Posts: 4409 From: Oregon, USA Joined: Member Rating: 5.4 |
Instincts are not from mutations, or from learned behaviours Correct. We all agree.
Mutations do not bring on learned behaviours... If you mean mutations do not "cause" learned behavior, then this is so obvious that we all agree.
and learned behaviours are not passed onto new generations of insects or humans. We all agree with this also. No one responding to you, is claiming any of the 3 things you just listed are passed on genetically or have anything to do with mutations.
DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT I JUST WROTE? NONE OF US CLAIM OR THINK ANYTHING LEARNED BY ANY ANIMALS, INCLUDING HUMANS, ARE PASSED ON GENETICALLY OR ARE RELATED TO MUTATIONS. GOT IT? Instincts are implanted in the original species. Now see, when you just make an unsupported declaration like this, you just demonstrate that you don't know what you are talking about. It is a completely pointless statement that undermines your credibility.
Birds do not learn to fly by the stars, nor do fish learn to smell their original rivers and streams, nor do the myriad of insticts and behaviours that define a KIND just happen to magically get into their DNA. We agree that NO MAGIC WAS INVOLVED. I repeat learned behaviour does not go into our genes, never has, never will. A species does not get more educated and brighter and more viable via mutations or supposed evolution. AND I REPEAT, WE AGREE THAT LEARNED BEHAVIOR IS NOT ADDED TO OUR GENES. Its just a theory in the minds of insect-ologists who have been in the fields way toooo long. I prefer "bugologist." There is no such thing as too much field time to a true bugologist.
Sexual genes are not influenced by what happens to a species or KIND in their lifetime and in their experiences while alive. I disagree, because the fate and longevity of sexual genes is directly affected by which organisms in a population survive and pass on more or fewer copies of their genes. Sexual genes are directly affected by whether the individuals carrying them are selected for or against. We call this natural selection.
Mother Nature does not select as if alive, beneficial mutations or beneficials behaviours........ its just too much pollen in the noses of those that have gotten too close to the god of evolution and selection Mother Nature is another odd imaginary mythical/god entity. The phenotypes carrying beneficial mutations or exhibiting beneficial behaviors may be able to avoid being eaten by living predators long enough to produce more offspring carrying those beneficial mutations and beneficial behaviors. We call this natural selection.
its just too much pollen in the noses of those that have gotten too close to the god of evolution and selection This communicates nothing except maybe that you got little educational benefit from your athletic scholarship.What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10033 Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
CRR writes: Or in other wordsSo if "A" is dogs, then all the descendants are still members of the "dog" kind. Yep. This is why biology has moved to cladistics, even if they have hung on to a few pieces of Linnaean taxonomy. In Linnaean taxonomy a branch of the tree breaks off and attaches elsewhere on the tree. For example, if we went back 20 million years we might consider a small group of species to be a Genus. After 20 million years we would consider them to be a Family with multiple Genera in that family. Since Linnaean taxonomy has Genera next to each other instead of evolving from one another this poses some serious problems since it requires a branch to break off and reattach lower down on the tree. Cladistics doesn't have this problem. So once a dog, always a dog. Through time, dogs may become more diverse and cover many species. Over an even longer time period, dogs may be as diverse and as widespread as mammals are now. Afterall, at one point in history the mammals would have comprised a single species in one small group of reptiles that happened to have more complex teeth.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1425 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
From another thread:
"The fossil record shows variations of all sorts of things but will time turn a dog kind into something that we would say is clearly not a dog? " Beretta, Message 7 If it looks like a dog, and walks like a dog ... but it walked the earth ~55 million years ago ... So what do you suppose this became (two different renderings of the same critter)? (note colors is probably not accurate and muscles might be somewhat different, but the skeletal structure and skull are from fossils). They ran in small groups, on padded feet, in a forest and grassland type environments. Any guesses? What limits on their evolution were imposed and how? Enjoy Edited by RAZD, : added second image for comparisonby our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆Zen☯Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10033 Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
Any guesses? What limits on their evolution were imposed and how? Equidae. The constraints put on their evolution are similar to other tetrapod lineages, such as constraints on basic body configurations established by embryonic development. For example, very similar structures will develop from the same pharyngeal arches. The head will be at one end, and the pooper at the other. Retina will be facing backwards. Forelimb is one bone, two bones, lots of little bones, and phalanges (from many to just one). Hindlimb is the same. And even those are constraints and not impossible to change. Some features will be much easier to change than others. For example, it is easier to change the length of the humerus than it is to have two humeruses. There are probably genetic constraints as well, as described by molecular clocks and population genetics. You can only change genomes so fast, afterall. At least those are the thoughts that come to my head when I hear "what limits on their evolution were imposed and how" . . .
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1425 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Equidae. ... Well done. So if this ...
Can evolve by simple microevolutionary steps (mutation and selection) into these ...
... all the while remaining in the Phenacodus clade ... (once a phenacodus always a phenacodus) ... Is that not macroevolution, complete with novel features (blood filled pad in the hoof acts as supplimentary heart, pumping blood up the leg as they run)? Enjoyby our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆Zen☯Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Davidjay  Suspended Member (Idle past 2349 days) Posts: 1026 From: B.C Canada Joined: |
Wow, evolutionists have finally spoken up and answered. They finally agree . that LEARNED BEHAVIOUR does not go into our genes..
NEWS ALERT...... LEARNED BEHAVIOUR does not go into our genes.. It takes so long for any of them to speak up and converse about their theory...... soooo very long. But there it is, and we will repeat this GIVEN and principle from basic genetics, that totally destroys evolutionary theory. Adaptions, instincts, behaviours all are given at conception, at creation and none of them are from what a species does in their life time. Environment does not, dictate mutations, and environment does not make new behaviours or give them new instincts or new knowledge at the birth of new generations. The God of Selection does not select beneficial mutations..... no learned behaviour passes on to the next generation. No behaviour changes because of magical mutations. Mystery solved, even though its straight forward genetics from Level 1 University studies. This thread can now be referred to in any and all other threads as a proven TRUTH and PRINCIPLE..... to determine other truths and principles.. The Lord is the GREAT SCIENTIST as He created SCIENCE and ALL LAWS and ALL MATTER and of course ALL LIFE. God is the Great Architect, Designer and Mathematician. Evolutioon is not mathematical and says there is no DESIGN but that all things came about by sheer LUCK. .
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Davidjay  Suspended Member (Idle past 2349 days) Posts: 1026 From: B.C Canada Joined: |
Here it is
AND I REPEAT, WE AGREE THAT LEARNED BEHAVIOR IS NOT ADDED TO OUR GENES. Correct. We all agree. Correct. We all agree. Mutations do not bring on learned behaviours... If you mean mutations do not "cause" learned behavior, then this is so obvious that we all agree. and learned behaviours are not passed onto new generations of insects or humans. We all agree with this also. No one responding to you, is claiming any of the 3 things you just listed are passed on genetically or have anything to do with mutations.
Tany admits that all of us agree including evolutionists, that learned behaviour does not pass into our genes. And He or She, I dont know his or her gender, puts it in CAPITAL LETTERS for emphasis.. The Lord is the GREAT SCIENTIST as He created SCIENCE and ALL LAWS and ALL MATTER and of course ALL LIFE. God is the Great Architect, Designer and Mathematician. Evolutioon is not mathematical and says there is no DESIGN but that all things came about by sheer LUCK. .
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 414 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
So we are over 100 posts into this thread with almost thirty posts from our resident troll Davidjay and still not a single post related to the topic of "Selection".
As usual Davidjay has posted nothing but word salad and irrelevancies.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Davidjay  Suspended Member (Idle past 2349 days) Posts: 1026 From: B.C Canada Joined: |
The debate seems to be over, as the conclusion and agreement have been made.
The opposition headed by Jay, fell asleep, and could only try to attack me, and attack the messenger rather than the message. Again proof that evolutionists can not discuss anything and hence must try to get subjective. Nevertheless, as mentioned no behaviour gets passed on genetically that was not there in the original creation. Instincts, behaviours, adaptions all came from the original, and mutation and mutations have never effected the original (unless it kills it, as with radiation etc..) Similarly as agreed upon, the environment does not induce so called beneficial mutations, and hence the evolutionists slection God has no beneficial mutations within an original to select from. Creation wins, evolution loses. The debate has been won...again. ATHRAEGWTT. The Lord is the GREAT SCIENTIST as He created SCIENCE and ALL LAWS and ALL MATTER and of course ALL LIFE. God is the Great Architect, Designer and Mathematician. Evolutioon is not mathematical and says there is no DESIGN but that all things came about by sheer LUCK. .
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10033 Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
Davidjay writes: Adaptions, instincts, behaviours all are given at conception, at creation and none of them are from what a species does in their life time. Adaptations and instincts are given at conception. You do realize that physical adaptations and instincts are not learned behavior, right?
Environment does not, dictate mutations, and environment does not make new behaviours or give them new instincts or new knowledge at the birth of new generations. However, the environment does determine which mutations and instincts are passed on. That is natural selection.
The God of Selection does not select beneficial mutations..... That would be true. No deity is involved. Natural selection is responsible for passing on beneficial mutations. It's about time that you realized that there is no God of selection, and that the process is entirely natural.
No behaviour changes because of magical mutations. That's correct. Changes in instinctual behavior is due to natural mutations, not magical ones.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10033 Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
Davidjay writes: Nevertheless, as mentioned no behaviour gets passed on genetically that was not there in the original creation. LEARNED behaviors do not get passed on. Instinctual behaviors do get passed on, as do physical adaptations.
and mutation and mutations have never effected the original (unless it kills it, as with radiation etc..) If mutations don't affect function, then how do you explain the differences in physical adaptations between chimps and humans? Why do we look different from each other if it isn't due to a difference in DNA sequence?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
bluegenes Member (Idle past 2497 days) Posts: 3119 From: U.K. Joined:
|
bluegenes writes:
bluegenes writes:
Davidjay in the O.P. writes:
You've now made 25 posts in this thread. So, when are you going to start "logically and systematically" debunking selection?
Evolutionists admit their so called mutations all come about at random, but they seem to have deified their natural selction of this so called beneficial mutations with a non random deity called "SELECTION'.So lets logically and systematically debunk this deity of theirs,.... Here's a paper for you.
Positive selection in mice quote: Now, give us your technical reasons why you think that the conclusions of these biologists are wrong. Support any claims you make with references to the relevant research. You've now made 26 posts in this thread. When are you going to start "logically and systematically" debunking selection? You've now made 27 posts in this thread. When are you going to start "logically and systematically" debunking selection? At the very least, try to show us that you understand what "selection" means in biology. There's nothing in your posts so far that suggests that you do.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1425 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
At the very least, try to show us that you understand what "selection" means in biology. There's nothing in your posts so far that suggests that you do. But if he did that he would no longer have to troll the post with spam and making false statements just to get a response. Enjoyby our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆Zen☯Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 414 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
So you make one more content free post and STILL have not addressed the topic which is " Debunking the Evolutionary God of 'Selection' ".
Do you ever plan on addressing the topic? Are you capable of even understanding what "addressing the topic" means?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
bluegenes Member (Idle past 2497 days) Posts: 3119 From: U.K. Joined:
|
RAZD writes: But if he did that he would no longer have to troll the post with spam and making false statements just to get a response I suggest everyone takes my approach. Show him some evidence for positive selection, linking to the research, and ask him to give a technical explanation of what's wrong with it:
Take your pick, folks Then ask, and ask, and ask.......
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024