Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,905 Year: 4,162/9,624 Month: 1,033/974 Week: 360/286 Day: 3/13 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Defence of Intelligent Design
Trixie
Member (Idle past 3735 days)
Posts: 1011
From: Edinburgh
Joined: 01-03-2004


Message 154 of 208 (80690)
01-25-2004 4:44 PM
Reply to: Message 153 by johnfolton
01-25-2004 3:59 PM


Think!!!!!
If you admit that micro-evolution exists, then consider this. Supposing a wee fly undergoes an event of micro-evolution, then a couple of generations later one of his offspring goes through another micro-evolution event. Continue this for thousands of generations and consider how many individual micro-evolution events have occurred. May they not all add up to what you consider macro-evolution? Nobody has ever seen it, not because it doesn't happen, but because it takes so long for it to happen that no-one who was around to see the original will be around to see the progress. Is this so difficult to grasp?
Consider this. Syphilis, when it was first introduced to Europe caused a very severe illness which was usually fatal within 10 days. Now, the bug causing it can't live outside the human body so when the host died, it died too. Since the people who caught it were so ill and died so rapidly they didn't get a chance to pass it on. So without changes to the bug, syphilis would have died out in Europe. That didn't happen because those strains of the bug which were slightly different ie less able to cause the disease, had more chance of being passed on because their host wasn't feeling as bad and was more likely to take part in rumpy-pumpy. Continue that for a few hundred years and we now have syphilis which bears no resemblance to the original disease. Now the infected person gets a painless sore at the place of infection which heals. Then a while later they get some ulcers on mucous membranes which heal. For some that's it, for others they develop general paralysis of the insane and gummata in various organs, aneurisms in the aorta etc and they eventually pop their clogs maybe thirty years after the initial infection.
If you compare the two lots of symptoms side by side and don't take into account the time involved, you'd be hardpressed to see that they were caused by the same organism or that they were the same disease. We know that they were because the changes were GRADUAL. Mark that word GRADUAL!!! Each change increased the life expectancy of the individual a tiny bit and decreased the severity of the symptoms. Does this help? Probably not, methinks. Ho hum!!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 153 by johnfolton, posted 01-25-2004 3:59 PM johnfolton has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 159 by bran_sept88, posted 01-25-2004 6:41 PM Trixie has not replied

Trixie
Member (Idle past 3735 days)
Posts: 1011
From: Edinburgh
Joined: 01-03-2004


Message 186 of 208 (80885)
01-26-2004 3:23 PM
Reply to: Message 180 by johnfolton
01-26-2004 11:43 AM


Dear oh dear!
You're still banging your big drum about Walt's theory, even though he has to contradict himself to make his theory work. Can you really see no problem with this? Are you really happy to take the word of someone who either thinks granite isn't rock or has the face to claim that conventional theory of mountain formation won't work because rocks don't bend AND THEN PROPOSES AN ALTERNATIVE THEORY THAT REQUIRES THESE NON-BENDY ROCKS TO BEND? Can you really not see a problem here?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 180 by johnfolton, posted 01-26-2004 11:43 AM johnfolton has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024