Announcement

Collapse

Message to all users:

https://carm.org/forum-rules

Super Member Subscription
https://carm.org/carm-super-members-banner-ad-signup

As most of you are aware, we had a crash to forums and were down for over two days a while back. We did have to do an upgrade to the vbulletin software to fix the forums and that has created changes, VB no longer provide the hybrid or threaded forums. There are some issues/changes to the forums we are not able to fix or change. Also note the link address change, please let friends and posters know of the changed link to the forums. For now this is the only link available, https://forums.carm.org/vb5/ but if clicking on forum on carm.org homepage it will now send you to this link. (edited to add https: now working.

Again, we are working through some of the posting and viewing issues to learn how to post with the changes, you will have to check and test the different features, icons that have changed. You may also want to go to profile settings,since many of the notifications, information in profile, also to update/edit your avatar by clicking on avatar space, pull down arrow next to login for user settings.

Edit to add "How to read forums, to make it easier."
Pull down arrow next to login name upper right select profile, or user settings when page opens to profile,select link in tab that says Account. Then select/choose options, go down to Conversation Detail Options, Select Display mode Posts, NOT Activity, that selection of Posts will make the pages of discussions go to last post on last page rather than out of order that happens if you choose activity threads. Then be sure to go to bottom and select SAVE Changes in your profile options. You can then follow discussions by going through the pages, to the last page having latest responses. Then click on the other links Privacy, Notifications, to select viewing options,the forums get easier if you open all the tabs or links in your profile, user settings and select options. To join Super Member, pull down arrow next to login name, select User Settings and then click on tab/link at top that says Subscriptions.

Thank you for your patience and God Bless.

Diane S
https://carm.org/forum-rules
See more
See less

How?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by aussiedave View Post
    Just another fancy version of personal incredulity.
    I don't know what you have against coloring books - especially when you center your whole life around an old book of myths and legends.
    Yet another evo speaks up...and doesn't explain how.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by docphin View Post
      There is not much difference between a human hand and a whale flipper. The evidence from anatomy and DNA analysis supports that whales evolved from land mammals and I already gave you a plausible explanation how it happened in another OP. Sorry that you prefer your religious, unwavering, literalism of scripture (aka religious fundamentalism) over the truth. For that reason no one can help you, not when you choose to remain ignorant.

      http://www.ftexploring.com/askdrg/askdrgalapagos3.html
      The skeleton of a whale consists of a skull, a backbone, a rib cage, and a collection of bones that are part of the flipper, but correspond closely to the bones in the human arm and hand. There is a scapula (shoulder blade), humerus (upper arm bone), ulna and radius (fore arm bones), and a collection of metacarpals (wrist bones) and phalanges (fingers) that correspond to the hand. Look at the drawing below of the bones inside a whale flipper. Isn't that interesting? It really looks like a hand in there!

      EDITED


      Somewhere down toward the end of the whale, floating in the body, not attached to other bones, are a few little bones, that scientists believe are all that's left of what used to be hind legs.
      There is not much difference between a human hand and a whale flipper....then you went on.

      You still didn't explain how...you so far are number 3.

      Perhaps you were presenting evidence pertaining to a common creator?

      Just the other day Lenny Lego came home from school and his Grandfather found Lenny sitting in a chair with a puzzled look on his face.
      Grand Pa Lego wondering what was wrong with his Grandson came over and sat beside Lenny and asked "Why the perplexed look Lenny?"
      In which Lenny replied back with uncertainty, well in school today our science teacher told us that we evolved from a common block ancestor.
      Lenny continued with, and that the pictures he showed of extinct Lego animals proved it. My teacher told us that the similarities of the Lego animals all but proved we’re all related. He said that because we have the same type of interconnecting blocks which when snapped together form similar feet, bodies and arms prove we are all descendents of an original Lego organism.
      Lenny then sat back and after a few seconds looked at his Grand Pa and continued with, and it all seems to make sense to me. Besides the pictures my teacher had models of them all lined up in a row. Each Lego animal had the same type of feet. Each Lego animal had the same square blocky head, each lego block has the same plug and socket for joining the blocks together... just like us Grand Pa.
      Grand Pa Lego then took a deep breath to explain to Lenny the truth behind the evolution of Lego people when Lenny blurted out with "Grand Pa, where did we come from? Why do we have similar parts? Does this prove we evolved from a common Lego block?"
      In which Grand Pa Lego replied back with, Lenny, we know the history of the first Lego man. He was created fully formed and complete although Lenny, some will present the argument or a similar argument to us like your science teacher did. The reason why we have such similar body parts is because our Creator used the same style of building blocks. What works for us works for the Lego cow and the lego fish. No matter what is build from the Lego blocks, they will always be similar. The so-called evolution story is just an attempt to strip our creator of the glory of his work and the magnificent ability to put together his building blocks to serve a useful purpose. Remember Lego legs should be similar Lenny, whether the building blocks are used for a man, ape, cow, dinosaur, bird, or alligator. The only difference would be the need for a slightly different arrangement of the building blocks to better suite the Lego animal for their particular environment or lifestyle
      Lenny then smiled as the realization of the truth settled into his block shaped brain. A common creator would use common building blocks when He created life.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by noemail001 View Post


        n>It is becoming increasingly apparent why you turned gnostic and hang out with the bunch you like.
        .
        Gnostic evolutionism...interesting concept.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Spacemonkey View Post
          This has been answered for you so many times already.

          Firstly, a beneficial trait will be selected for, eventually becoming fixed cross the population.
          Perhaps if the mutation is big enough...otherwise it will be lost in the noise. Fixed in a population?

          Originally posted by Spacemonkey View Post
          So the odds of the second beneficial mutation (for the same trait) occurring in an individual possessing the first mutation increases and eventually becomes a certainty over time. Secondly, the second mutation might occur in an individual lacking the first, and yet the two may be combined as the two mutations each spread across the population. The first individual to inherit both beneficial mutations (i.e. one from each parent) will then have an advantage over all other individuals (having one, the other, or neither mutation).
          Odds may increase..OK, but that would be like you buyinh a lottery ticket...sure you're odds may go up....but hardley meausrable. Basically non detectable.

          Originally posted by Spacemonkey View Post
          It is also not the case that an organism with the first mutation will have only one offspring, who in turn will have only one offspring, etc. so that if any deleterious mutation occurs before the next beneficial one (affecting the same trait) that the progress from the first mutation will be lost. Rather, the individual with the beneficial mutation can have a great many descendants, multiplying exponentially, such that any later negative mutations will simply kill off those affected individuals, without killing the entire sub-population carrying the first beneficial trait. That way many carriers of the first mutation remain in play to receive a second beneficial mutation whenever it eventually occurs.
          The same would then apply to each with the trait. Remember it still requires that second..then third..then fourth..then fifth-------->

          Originally posted by Spacemonkey View Post
          Individuals also don't have to wait around hoping for the second mutation to hit the exact right spot. Mutations are happening all the time, all over the genome. Wherever they occur, they will be selected for if beneficial and selected against if deleterious. Nothing prevents a random mutation from eventually affecting the same trait as the first, so when it does happen it will be selected for and added to the first, given that the first has already been selected for and has therefore propagated throughout the population.

          And that is how mutations add up, despite these spurious objections which have been answered for you many times over.
          You still presented the coloring book version. I'll have to consider you as number 4.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by rossum View Post

            We also need to be aware that the same mutation may happen elsewhere in the population. There will be more then one individual with that particular mutation, unless the population is very small.
            So, an extremely rare second beneficial mutation...as an example....is going to cause the DNA to code in a specific wat to cause a protein to fold precisely like a previous mutation did..

            Is this what you are saying?



            Originally posted by rossum View Post
            That depends on how many progeny the organism has and how many progeny all the other organisms with the same mutation have. For sexually reproducing species, then the second mutation can arise independently, and then pair up with the first mutation in offspring when the two mate.
            And this is going to occur over and over many many time in an organisms progeny? So far you have presented coloring book speculation.

            How will it pair up? Will a squirrel from the east coast take a bus to the west coast and find another squirrel?



            Originally posted by rossum View Post
            That depends on the trait. There are beneficial traits which arise from a single mutation, such as Apo-AI Milano. Even where a trait arises from many mutations, there are possible single mutations which give a small improvement. The development of eyes is a good example; we have examples of everything from a simple light sensitive spot in protozoa to a bird's eyes.
            There is no proven path for eye evolution...only speculation. They say the trilobites has very complex eyes.....and they are supposed to be from some of the earliest fossils.

            Imagine a freckled faced kid 4 billion years from now...hundreds of eyes on their face.



            Originally posted by rossum View Post
            The human population is 7 billion. The average human has about 75 mutations. That means that over the whole population there are 75 x 7e9 = 5.25e11 mutations. There are 3 billion base pairs in the human genome. Hence, on average, each base pair will be mutated in 5.25e11 / 3e9 = 175 people.
            The average human has about 75 mutations.

            How many of the 75 are beneficial?
            How many of the 75 are beneficial?
            How many of the 75 are beneficial?
            How many of the 75 are beneficial?
            How many of the 75 are beneficial?
            How many of the 75 are beneficial?
            How many of the 75 are beneficial?

            Originally posted by rossum View Post
            Mutations are a lot more common than you seem to think and the same mutation will occur more than once over the whole population.
            Yes I know, mutations that cause cancer are very common....but I still fail to see your point.

            Nice try but I will consider you as number 5.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by CrowCross View Post
              Perhaps if the mutation is big enough...otherwise it will be lost in the noise. Fixed in a population?

              Odds may increase..OK, but that would be like you buyinh a lottery ticket...sure you're odds may go up....but hardley meausrable. Basically non detectable.

              The same would then apply to each with the trait. Remember it still requires that second..then third..then fourth..then fifth-------->

              You still presented the coloring book version. I'll have to consider you as number 4.
              You haven't made any attempt to engage with - or apparently even read - my explanation. Go back and try again.
              Few may hear Galileo’s song calling... His heresy feeds us all.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Spacemonkey View Post
                You haven't made any attempt to engage with - or apparently even read - my explanation. Go back and try again.
                Then apparently to you I replied on the same level you did to my post....You haven't made any attempt to engage.

                I don't plan on engaging in some sort of banter with you.

                Lets start here.."Firstly, a beneficial trait will be selected for, eventually becoming fixed cross the population." Can you prove that to be true?

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by CrowCross View Post
                  OK barchan, you said a lot...but didn't explain how..I guess I'll just have to take your word on it.
                  As I said, you will never be satisfied. I do not expect you to take my word for anything. Your mind is closed to facts.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by CrowCross View Post
                    Then apparently to you I replied on the same level you did to my post....You haven't made any attempt to engage.

                    I don't plan on engaging in some sort of banter with you.

                    Lets start here.."Firstly, a beneficial trait will be selected for, eventually becoming fixed cross the population." Can you prove that to be true?
                    Prove it to you?

                    Of course not. That's a silly notion.

                    But here we go with the "prove it" demands ...

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by barchan View Post
                      As I said, you will never be satisfied. I do not expect you to take my word for anything. Your mind is closed to facts.
                      I'm sorry your coloring book version doesn't satisfy me like it satisfies you.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by barchan View Post
                        Prove it to you?

                        Of course not. That's a silly notion.

                        But here we go with the "prove it" demands ...
                        I have no problem with a trait becoming fixed within a population...I can point to a blind cave....Now, I do have a problem with a series of so-called beneficial traits adding up and becoming fixed. My OP presented some of those problems. I simply asked for some proof...but you seem to be more interested in banter than presenting science to support your coloring book claims.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by AV1611VET View Post
                          Instant creation of animals under all their respective genera within the space of three days.
                          That does not comport with the evidence.

                          So if evolution can explain the diversity of life on earth, so can creationism.
                          Certainly, if you are not constrained by the evidence. Sorry, but I have to live in a world where reality is dictated by known data.

                          The difference is: evolution draws links between the genera, invoking deep time to do so, then calls it "evidence" and expects creationists to agree with them.
                          See above. Science is the recognition of evidence. Religion is the denial of evidence. You seem to prefer the latter. It's not a matter of it being "called evidence".

                          What we see actually IS evidence and it is denied by the anti-science crowd.

                          When creationists don't, then the gloves come on and the wolves in sheeps' clothing are exposed.
                          I don't get your analogy here.

                          Youtube posters, like Aron Ra for instance, can hardly post without resorting to cussing and ridicule.
                          Sometimes ridicule is all that's left when dealing with unreasonable people. And if you read YEC posts around here, it's pretty clear the the science side has no corner on the market of ridicule.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by CrowCross View Post
                            I have no problem with a trait becoming fixed within a population...
                            So, where do you draw the boundary, at two mutations, or three, or more?

                            I can point to a blind cave....Now, I do have a problem with a series of so-called beneficial traits adding up and becoming fixed. My OP presented some of those problems. I simply asked for some proof...but you seem to be more interested in banter than presenting science to support your coloring book claims.
                            I have told you several times that I do not pretend to be a biologist. However, I can point out that deep time does exist and that there are several mechanisms for mutation.

                            And what do you have?

                            Nothing, other than demands for 'proof'.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by barchan View Post
                              That does not comport with the evidence.


                              Life evolving...adding information to DNA doesn't comport with the evidence...hense the need for the coloring book definition.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by CrowCross View Post
                                Life evolving...adding information to DNA doesn't comport with the evidence...
                                So, you are saying that life has not changed over the last few billion years?

                                What evidence are you talking about?

                                ... hense the need for the coloring book definition.
                                You mean like the "Goddidit" coloring book version?

                                The theory of evolution does everything it is supposed to do and all you can do is dismiss the evidence?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X