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

  • How?

    Mutuations are happening all the time in replicating cells. This is proven by genetic analysis of multicellular life and by cell cultures. It is proven that small changes may lead to advantages, advantages lead to increased survivability or increased fertility, more small changes equal more advantages, and so on, over millions of years. Not all mutations give advantages, many are bad. You may have a replicating cell mutate into a cancerous cell that wipes out your liver. If a beneficial mutation happens to a germinal cell then it is passed on to subsequent progeny which then undergo more mutations. Therefore, mutations are additive. Over millions of years it adds up for those living things that survive and reproduce. All of this is mapped out in DNA, supported by evidence from geology, and study of living things.
    True, mutuations are happening all the time in replicating cells. I agree.

    But your problem is you have fallen back onto the coloring book version.

    OK, lets say for the sake of the argument a mutation that enhances a particular trait such that a benefit to an organism occurs. Lets start there.

    What are the chances that a second beneficial mutation will occur in the organisms progeny that will enhance the same trait in a beneficial way? You know, add to the first mutation.

    Now we all know it would require a lot of beneficial mutations for a trait to develop. One or two trait changes won't turn a fin into a leg...or evolve the echo-location of a dolphin.

    So, the evos tell me beneficial mutations are rare. Extremely rare. I also understand the genome of an organism are quite large. Humans have something like 2.5 billion 3 billion base pairs.

    Here's where you evos typically go coloring book on us creationist...you acted as if it's easy. Happens all the time when you said "If a beneficial mutation happens to a germinal cell then it is passed on to subsequent progeny which then undergo more mutations. Therefore, mutations are additive." More mutations...just like that...occurring in just the right place of billions of possible places for a BENEFICIAL mutation occur and enhance the developing trait.

    But heck, thrown in deep time and your problem is solved. Right. You used over millions of years in your coloring book description. Can you show how this is possible? Certainly your link didn't show how it is possible.

    When you look deeper you'll discover more problems. For instance the odds of a harmful mutation or even a neutral mutation occuring to a trait in the organisms progeny will effect the trait long before a a second mutation occurs which has the ability to enhance the trait so that it leads to increased survivability or increased fertility...stopping or destroying the trait.

    Now just imagine what it would take to evolve a land animal into a dolphin....all the required changes to all the systems and organs..appendages......beating the odds over and over again.

    Some traits are required to work in harmony with another trait...now you need two beneficial mutations to occur in just the right place of the DNA at just the right time.

    Imagine the changes required to change a particular organism into a "new" organism that is now classified as a different which is now classified as a different genus, family or order.

    So docphin, can you show us how evolutionism works? Can you show how mutations add up?

    There's more but you first have to get over these hurdles.







  • #2
    Originally posted by CrowCross View Post
    True, mutuations are happening all the time in replicating cells. I agree.

    But your problem is you have fallen back onto the coloring book version.
    You mean kind of like "Goddidit"!

    ...

    But heck, thrown in deep time and your problem is solved. Right. You used over millions of years in your coloring book description. Can you show how this is possible? Certainly your link didn't show how it is possible.
    There is a problem here. We know that evolution happens. We also know that the theory of evolution is the only theory that explains the known data. We also know that there are several mechanisms for evolution, mutations being but one of them. There are indeed things we don't know about evolution, but we do know that YEC fails as an explanation of the data.

    I suggest that you attempt to make YEC work somehow rather than simply attacking the theory of evolution. AFAICS, you really have nothing to replace the theory of evolution.

    When you look deeper you'll discover more problems. For instance the odds of a harmful mutation or even a neutral mutation occuring to a trait in the organisms progeny will effect the trait long before a a second mutation occurs which has the ability to enhance the trait so that it leads to increased survivability or increased fertility...stopping or destroying the trait.
    I am not a biologist and I cannot answer all of your detailed questions. No one is going to answer your questions to your satisfaction.

    Ever.

    However, I think it's great that we are continuing to learn about life on earth. Embracing YEC is the opposite of learning.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by CrowCross View Post

      True, mutuations are happening all the time in replicating cells. I agree.

      But your problem is you have fallen back onto the coloring book version.

      OK, lets say for the sake of the argument a mutation that enhances a particular trait such that a benefit to an organism occurs. Lets start there.

      What are the chances that a second beneficial mutation will occur in the organisms progeny that will enhance the same trait in a beneficial way? You know, add to the first mutation.

      Now we all know it would require a lot of beneficial mutations for a trait to develop. One or two trait changes won't turn a fin into a leg...or evolve the echo-location of a dolphin.

      So, the evos tell me beneficial mutations are rare. Extremely rare. I also understand the genome of an organism are quite large. Humans have something like 2.5 billion 3 billion base pairs.

      Here's where you evos typically go coloring book on us creationist...you acted as if it's easy. Happens all the time when you said "If a beneficial mutation happens to a germinal cell then it is passed on to subsequent progeny which then undergo more mutations. Therefore, mutations are additive." More mutations...just like that...occurring in just the right place of billions of possible places for a BENEFICIAL mutation occur and enhance the developing trait.

      But heck, thrown in deep time and your problem is solved. Right. You used over millions of years in your coloring book description. Can you show how this is possible? Certainly your link didn't show how it is possible.

      When you look deeper you'll discover more problems. For instance the odds of a harmful mutation or even a neutral mutation occuring to a trait in the organisms progeny will effect the trait long before a a second mutation occurs which has the ability to enhance the trait so that it leads to increased survivability or increased fertility...stopping or destroying the trait.

      Now just imagine what it would take to evolve a land animal into a dolphin....all the required changes to all the systems and organs..appendages......beating the odds over and over again.

      Some traits are required to work in harmony with another trait...now you need two beneficial mutations to occur in just the right place of the DNA at just the right time.

      Imagine the changes required to change a particular organism into a "new" organism that is now classified as a different which is now classified as a different genus, family or order.

      So docphin, can you show us how evolutionism works? Can you show how mutations add up?

      There's more but you first have to get over these hurdles.





      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.

      With all the conflicting religious beliefs in the world, they can’t all be right. But they can all be wrong.
      Herb Silverman.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by barchan View Post
        You mean kind of like "Goddidit"!


        There is a problem here. We know that evolution happens.
        vs dumb luck did it.

        Are you proud of being restricted to speculation?

        Comment


        • #5
          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.
          Last edited by Mod10; 02-09-19, 09:04 AM. Reason: flag; image violation
          We shall not injure God by remaining ignorant of Him, but shall deprive ourselves of His friendship.

          Comment


          • #6
            More speculation.

            Why would a single designer which is GOD know how to build joints?

            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.

            EDITED

            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!

            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.
            So you have no fossils with actual hind legs? Since you have not had the serious anatomy and physiology classes, you fall for speculation.

            You haven't studied radioulnar pronation and treated subluxation. Fossil thumpers can talk big about bones and have nothing on soft tissue, muscles tendons and ligaments.


            EvoStory fundamentalism.
            Last edited by Mod10; 02-09-19, 09:04 AM.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Nouveau View Post
              More speculation.
              Why would a single designer which is GOD know how to build joints?

              So you have no fossils with actual hind legs? Since you have not had the serious anatomy and physiology classes, you fall for speculation.

              You haven't studied radioulnar pronation and treated subluxation. Fossil thumpers can talk big about bones and have nothing on soft tissue, muscles tendons and ligaments.

              EvoStory fundamentalism.
              Still waiting for your evidence of talking snakes and a human instantly forming from mud. In the meantime, here is More evidence that whales evolved from a land mammal. For religious fundies who don’t know what “evidence” is (since you never have any),—it is tangible, real, observable, peer-reviewed, data supporting a conclusion, for instance, that biological diversity is due to evolution.

              Gene Study Shows Whales Are Kin to Hippos

              Main Content

              A study published in the latest issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences shows that the whale and the hippo are each other's closest living relatives. The genetic analysis was conducted by Masato Nikaido and Norihiro Okada of the Tokyo Institute of Technology, and by Alejandro P. Rooney in the Institute of Molecular Evolutionary Genetics at Penn State.

              Rooney says, "We knew from previous work that whales were closely related to even-toed hoofed mammals, but the studies had been inconclusive or unreliable regarding exactly where they fit in the family tree of this group of mammals." This new study, like previous ones, found that animals such as the hippo, camel, pig, giraffe, sheep, and cow do share many segments of DNA with whales, porpoises, and dolphins, indicating that at some point they all had a common ancestor. However, DNA segments found only in whales and hippos indicate that they have a common ancestor that is not part of the evolutionary history of the other animals. "Ours is the first study to provide reliable confirmation that hippos are the sister-group to whales," says Rooney. Whales and hippos share several adaptations to life in an aquatic environment, including oil-producing skin glands, the lack of hair, and the use of underwater vocalizations for communication.

              The study by Nikaido, Rooney, and Okada compared gene sequences from several species of whales and dolphins to the hippopotamus and other hoofed mammals by using a totally new approach: analysis of short interspersed element (SINE) and long interspersed element (LINE) insertion events. These genetic markers are mobile DNA elements that "jump" around the chromosomal DNA of a species. Rooney expects that this method will provide researchers with a new, highly robust way to look at the relationships among living things. "We know that carnivores form a unique group that includes all animals with modified teeth for ripping and tearing flesh, such as cats, dogs, hyenas, mongooses, otters, weasels, and bears, but we have no idea what the closest relative of this group is. I expect that this new method will answer that question," says Rooney. "This method might also be applied to solve the question of relationships in the family tree of birds, which is very problematic."
              https://science.psu.edu/news-and-eve...oney9-1999.htm


              We shall not injure God by remaining ignorant of Him, but shall deprive ourselves of His friendship.

              Comment


              • #8
                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!

                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.
                n>Is that a joke? Surely it is a joke. "... not much difference... "? Are you kidding? That's got to be the funniest evol claim here in a long time... and there have been lots of funny evol claims! Since there's "... not much difference... " the next time someone needs a hand transplant just chop off a whale flipper and get a needle and thread. Soon the patient can continue to practice for her next piano concert! Then she can also join the Olympic swim team, wow can she REALLY swim!

                Originally posted by docphin View Post
                ... humerus ...
                lol

                n>It is becoming increasingly apparent why you turned gnostic and hang out with the bunch you like.
                .
                Mouser Larry Roy: "yippee ki yay"
                “... see the loonies in their cages… are they not witty… how much amusement they afford… ours is a human world, theirs is a bestial world… " Bedlam

                Comment


                • #9
                  Parrot papers

                  Originally posted by docphin View Post
                  Still waiting for your evidence of talking snakes and a human instantly forming from mud. In the meantime, here is More evidence that whales evolved from a land mammal. For religious fundies who don’t know what “evidence” is (since you never have any),—it is tangible, real, observable, peer-reviewed, data supporting a conclusion, for instance, that biological diversity is due to evolution.

                  Gene Study Shows Whales Are Kin to Hippos

                  Main Content

                  A study published in the latest issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences shows that the whale and the hippo are each other's closest living relatives. The genetic analysis was conducted by Masato Nikaido and Norihiro Okada of the Tokyo Institute of Technology, and by Alejandro P. Rooney in the Institute of Molecular Evolutionary Genetics at Penn State.

                  Rooney says, "We knew from previous work that whales were closely related to even-toed hoofed mammals, but the studies had been inconclusive or unreliable regarding exactly where they fit in the family tree of this group of mammals." This new study, like previous ones, found that animals such as the hippo, camel, pig, giraffe, sheep, and cow do share many segments of DNA with whales, porpoises, and dolphins, indicating that at some point they all had a common ancestor. However, DNA segments found only in whales and hippos indicate that they have a common ancestor that is not part of the evolutionary history of the other animals. "Ours is the first study to provide reliable confirmation that hippos are the sister-group to whales," says Rooney. Whales and hippos share several adaptations to life in an aquatic environment, including oil-producing skin glands, the lack of hair, and the use of underwater vocalizations for communication.

                  The study by Nikaido, Rooney, and Okada compared gene sequences from several species of whales and dolphins to the hippopotamus and other hoofed mammals by using a totally new approach: analysis of short interspersed element (SINE) and long interspersed element (LINE) insertion events. These genetic markers are mobile DNA elements that "jump" around the chromosomal DNA of a species. Rooney expects that this method will provide researchers with a new, highly robust way to look at the relationships among living things. "We know that carnivores form a unique group that includes all animals with modified teeth for ripping and tearing flesh, such as cats, dogs, hyenas, mongooses, otters, weasels, and bears, but we have no idea what the closest relative of this group is. I expect that this new method will answer that question," says Rooney. "This method might also be applied to solve the question of relationships in the family tree of birds, which is very problematic."
                  https://science.psu.edu/news-and-eve...oney9-1999.htm


                  God doesn't believe you, why should I?

                  Why are these evo science groupies stuck with cut and pastes of parrot papers?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by docphin View Post
                    Still waiting for your evidence of talking snakes and a human instantly forming from mud. In the meantime, here is More evidence that whales evolved from a land mammal. For religious fundies who don’t know what “evidence” is (since you never have any),—it is tangible, real, observable, peer-reviewed, data supporting a conclusion, for instance, that biological diversity is due to evolution.
                    Gene Study Shows Whales Are Kin to Hippos
                    Main Content
                    A study published in the latest issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences shows that the whale and the hippo are each other's closest living relatives. The genetic analysis was conducted by Masato Nikaido and Norihiro Okada of the Tokyo Institute of Technology, and by Alejandro P. Rooney in the Institute of Molecular Evolutionary Genetics at Penn State.
                    Rooney says, "We knew from previous work that whales were closely related to even-toed hoofed mammals, but the studies had been inconclusive or unreliable regarding exactly where they fit in the family tree of this group of mammals." This new study, like previous ones, found that animals such as the hippo, camel, pig, giraffe, sheep, and cow do share many segments of DNA with whales, porpoises, and dolphins, indicating that at some point they all had a common ancestor. However, DNA segments found only in whales and hippos indicate that they have a common ancestor that is not part of the evolutionary history of the other animals. "Ours is the first study to provide reliable confirmation that hippos are the sister-group to whales," says Rooney. Whales and hippos share several adaptations to life in an aquatic environment, including oil-producing skin glands, the lack of hair, and the use of underwater vocalizations for communication.
                    The study by Nikaido, Rooney, and Okada compared gene sequences from several species of whales and dolphins to the hippopotamus and other hoofed mammals by using a totally new approach: analysis of short interspersed element (SINE) and long interspersed element (LINE) insertion events. These genetic markers are mobile DNA elements that "jump" around the chromosomal DNA of a species. Rooney expects that this method will provide researchers with a new, highly robust way to look at the relationships among living things. "We know that carnivores form a unique group that includes all animals with modified teeth for ripping and tearing flesh, such as cats, dogs, hyenas, mongooses, otters, weasels, and bears, but we have no idea what the closest relative of this group is. I expect that this new method will answer that question," says Rooney. "This method might also be applied to solve the question of relationships in the family tree of birds, which is very problematic."
                    [URL="https://science.psu.edu/news-and-events/1999-news/Rooney9-1999.htm"]https://science.psu.edu/news-and-eve...oney9-1999.htm
                    n>Oh. Now it's hippos, eh? wow. Maybe Darwin was confused?

                    Darwin: “… It has been asked by the opponents of such views as I hold, how, for instance, a land carnivorous animal could have been converted into one with aquatic habits… In North America the black bear was seen by Hearne swimming for hours with widely open mouth, thus catching, like a whale, insects in the water. Even in so extreme a case as this, if the supply of insects were constant, and if better adapted competitors did not already exist in the country, I can see no difficulty in a race of bears being rendered, by natural selection, more and more aquatic in their structure and habits, with larger and larger mouths, till a creature was produced as monstrous as a whale… “
                    Ch 6. Paragraph 28, On the Origin of Species. First Edition. https://www.gutenberg.org/files/1228/1228-h/1228-h.htm

                    n>Or maybe the hippo is somewhere between the American Black Bear and whale-like monsters that also have flippers not much different than human hands? So, according to your gnostic evol, did the bear or hippo produce humans and then humans make whales, and thus the flippers not much different than human hands? Or is it first bears, then whales then humans then hippos? Or is it hippos then humans then whales then bears? Or gnosticism makes evol-jokes and then the evol-jokes produce laughs?

                    .
                    Mouser Larry Roy: "yippee ki yay"
                    “... see the loonies in their cages… are they not witty… how much amusement they afford… ours is a human world, theirs is a bestial world… " Bedlam

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Nouveau View Post
                      Parrot papers

                      Why are these evo science groupies stuck with cut and pastes of parrot papers?
                      LOL!

                      Originally posted by Nouveau View Post
                      I am a scientist.
                      Originally posted by Nouveau View Post
                      I have advanced degrees in 5 different fields.
                      Originally posted by Nouveau View Post
                      As a scientist in several fields
                      Originally posted by Nouveau View Post
                      I am published in several science fields.
                      Sure sounds like a published scientist, doesn't he?


                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by CrowCross View Post
                        True, mutuations are happening all the time in replicating cells. I agree.

                        But your problem is you have fallen back onto the coloring book version.

                        OK, lets say for the sake of the argument a mutation that enhances a particular trait such that a benefit to an organism occurs. Lets start there.

                        What are the chances that a second beneficial mutation will occur in the organisms progeny that will enhance the same trait in a beneficial way? You know, add to the first mutation.

                        Now we all know it would require a lot of beneficial mutations for a trait to develop. One or two trait changes won't turn a fin into a leg...or evolve the echo-location of a dolphin.

                        So, the evos tell me beneficial mutations are rare. Extremely rare. I also understand the genome of an organism are quite large. Humans have something like 2.5 billion 3 billion base pairs.

                        Here's where you evos typically go coloring book on us creationist...you acted as if it's easy. Happens all the time when you said "If a beneficial mutation happens to a germinal cell then it is passed on to subsequent progeny which then undergo more mutations. Therefore, mutations are additive." More mutations...just like that...occurring in just the right place of billions of possible places for a BENEFICIAL mutation occur and enhance the developing trait.

                        But heck, thrown in deep time and your problem is solved. Right. You used over millions of years in your coloring book description. Can you show how this is possible? Certainly your link didn't show how it is possible.

                        When you look deeper you'll discover more problems. For instance the odds of a harmful mutation or even a neutral mutation occuring to a trait in the organisms progeny will effect the trait long before a a second mutation occurs which has the ability to enhance the trait so that it leads to increased survivability or increased fertility...stopping or destroying the trait.

                        Now just imagine what it would take to evolve a land animal into a dolphin....all the required changes to all the systems and organs..appendages......beating the odds over and over again.

                        Some traits are required to work in harmony with another trait...now you need two beneficial mutations to occur in just the right place of the DNA at just the right time.

                        Imagine the changes required to change a particular organism into a "new" organism that is now classified as a different which is now classified as a different genus, family or order.

                        So docphin, can you show us how evolutionism works? Can you show how mutations add up?

                        There's more but you first have to get over these hurdles.
                        This has been answered for you so many times already.

                        Firstly, a beneficial trait will be selected for, eventually becoming fixed cross the population. 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).

                        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.

                        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.
                        Few may hear Galileo’s song calling... His heresy feeds us all.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by barchan View Post
                          AFAICS, you really have nothing to replace the theory of evolution.
                          Instant creation of animals under all their respective genera within the space of three days.

                          So if evolution can explain the diversity of life on earth, so can creationism.

                          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.

                          When creationists don't, then the gloves come on and the wolves in sheeps' clothing are exposed.

                          Youtube posters, like Aron Ra for instance, can hardly post without resorting to cussing and ridicule.

                          But he's certainly not alone.
                          THE BIBLE SAYS IT, THAT SETTLES IT.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by CrowCross View Post
                            OK, lets say for the sake of the argument a mutation that enhances a particular trait such that a benefit to an organism occurs. Lets start there.
                            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.

                            What are the chances that a second beneficial mutation will occur in the organisms progeny that will enhance the same trait in a beneficial way? You know, add to the first mutation.
                            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.

                            Now we all know it would require a lot of beneficial mutations for a trait to develop. One or two trait changes won't turn a fin into a leg...or evolve the echo-location of a dolphin.
                            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.

                            So, the evos tell me beneficial mutations are rare. Extremely rare. I also understand the genome of an organism are quite large. Humans have something like 2.5 billion 3 billion base pairs.
                            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.

                            Mutations are a lot more common than you seem to think and the same mutation will occur more than once over the whole population.
                            The ultimate truth is that there is no ultimate truth.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by barchan View Post
                              You mean kind of like "Goddidit"!


                              There is a problem here. We know that evolution happens. We also know that the theory of evolution is the only theory that explains the known data. We also know that there are several mechanisms for evolution, mutations being but one of them. There are indeed things we don't know about evolution, but we do know that YEC fails as an explanation of the data.

                              I suggest that you attempt to make YEC work somehow rather than simply attacking the theory of evolution. AFAICS, you really have nothing to replace the theory of evolution.


                              I am not a biologist and I cannot answer all of your detailed questions. No one is going to answer your questions to your satisfaction.

                              Ever.

                              However, I think it's great that we are continuing to learn about life on earth. Embracing YEC is the opposite of learning.
                              OK barchan, you said a lot...but didn't explain how..I guess I'll just have to take your word on it.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X