Problems with evolution? Submit your questions.

New functionality. Lets take the dino to bird example. You would have to have mutations that increased the information in the genome and tell the dino how to change from making scales to making feathers, body plan, bone structure, lung design. This doesnt occur and without the preconcived notion that it must have occured there is no evidence for it. I mean the fossile evidence interpetation is more art than science.Mutations do not add new functional info. It would take millions of these fictional mutations to turn a "simple cell" into a human.

Agreed mutations can and do occure. However you can shake up the scrabble board as often as you like and you will never get a Shakespeare.

nice to here a evolutionist admit the vast difference in the genetic code between the chimps and us chumps.mutations lead to loss of function. wingless beatles etc. they can be advantagious but are inverably in the opposite direction of your theory.Try your examle from before in reverse. Take two poodles add and a bunch of genereations and I'll even through in an intellegence in the breader and see if you can ever get back to the wolf.once the genetic information is lost it is gone chance and time will never bring it back.

Nice chatting with u all. Got to run back to real life. maple trees to tap. I got to hurry though before they change into pines just wouldnt taste the same.

What, I thought this was an open site for debate. what makes me a troll. I think the evidence points to design you do not. I enjoy this type of debate that is why I am here. challenging myself to look up new information and see how it fits my beliefs.name calling shows your true collors my friend. Alot of scared people on this site. to bad have your debates amongst yourself.

I admit that certain evidence is consistant with common ancestor, such as DNA. This however is also consistant with a common designer.Curiously I think if we did find some organism that used a different system than dna I don’t think you all would abandon your Darwinist ideas. Once again it is not falsifiable because it is dogma not science.

So once again it was "highly unexpectd" but since it happened we just chalked it up to well now we know that evo can do this "life will find a way"

As if all scientists agree with Darwinian evolution.

ATP Synthase and the Bacterial flagellum are indeed motors. Unless your definition requires a man to make it in order for it to be a motor.The only reason they are badly analogous is because they are far superior to anything modern science and engineering could create.

So if you know the end game the phrase that you want you can get there. However this is not how selection works. Only traits that give that generation a breeding advantage will be selected. This does not explain how sight or flight or micro motors or proteins can come into existence the first time.You’re not saying that evolution new that it wanted to create the compound eye before there was such a thing?Every famous mutation such as herbicide and antibiotic resistance once examined at the molecular level has been shown to involve information loss.

There is plenty of evidence consistent with a designer. Much we would agree upon, Homology, DNA etc. It’s really more a world view question than evidence based; I mean we all look at the same fossils and draw different inferences.From my personal point of view design is self evident. There cannot be a code without a code maker. Creation is evidence of a creator. You find an arrow head in the desert you know it had a maker even if you know nothing else of the maker.

Antibiotic Phenotype Providing Resistance
Actinonin Loss of enzyme activity
Ampicillin SOS response halting cell division
Azithromycin Loss of a regulatory protein
Chloramphenicol Reduced formation of a porin or a regulatory protein
Ciprofloxacin Loss of a porin or loss of a regulatory protein
Erythromycin Reduced affinity to 23S rRNA or loss of a regulatory protein
Fluoroquinolones Loss of affinity to gyrase
Imioenem Reduced formation of a porin
Kanamycin Reduced formation of a transport protein
Nalidixic Acid Loss or inactivation of a regulatory protein
Rifampin Loss of affinity to RNA polymerase
Streptomycin Reduced affinity to 16S rRNA or reduction of transport activity
Tetracycline Reduced formation of a porin or a regulatory protein
Zittermicin A Loss of proton motive forceNot sure how to add tables here.Edited by havoc, : No reason given.

No you did not. This study as it is laid out by you shows a previously winged insect losing that info and regaining it. This is possible and not evolution.You need to show novel info being created.

If you hang your hat on Shannon theory of info you are deluding yourself. Its not the number of letters present it’s the order. Its specified complexity. If a cell once had the ability to regulate say the production of a certain protein and now it doesn’t this is loss of information, Even if the mutation added to the total bits available.

Blind cave fish can regain sight, I think there must still be the information in the genome that can sometimes be manifest. The information already exists.