-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
"Some specific proportions in the bodies of many animals (including humans) and parts of the shells of mollusks are often claimed to be in the golden ratio. There is a large variation in the real measures of these elements in specific individuals, however, and the proportion in question is often significantly different from the golden ratio." (Wikipedia) The Golden Ratio is in nature, RuthHannah, a fiction. There is no evidence here for God.
2
The word of God is infinite...He is very wise
if you took 64 gigabyte SD cards and stacked them up to be the same size of the
great pyramind of Gizza
which is a Yottabyte of data
and then encoded that onto DNA
it would fit in a cube smaller than your cell phone..
Evolution is insane to even think those chips could assemble and program themselves.
Whenever someone speaks of Evolution we need to say
get them behind me satan
if you took 64 gigabyte SD cards and stacked them up to be the same size of the
great pyramind of Gizza
which is a Yottabyte of data
and then encoded that onto DNA
it would fit in a cube smaller than your cell phone..
Evolution is insane to even think those chips could assemble and program themselves.
Whenever someone speaks of Evolution we need to say
get them behind me satan
2
it is not physically possible to even make one insulin molecule from chemical reactions
It has to come from a living cell it cannot happen randomly
Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
Gen 1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
Gen 1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
Gen 1:4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.
Gen 1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
Gen 1:6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
Gen 1:7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.
Gen 1:8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.
Gen 1:9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.
Gen 1:10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.
Gen 1:11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.
Gen 1:12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
Gen 1:13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.
Gen 1:14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:
Gen 1:15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.
Gen 1:16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.
Gen 1:17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,
Gen 1:18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.
Gen 1:19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.
Gen 1:20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.
Gen 1:21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
Gen 1:22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.
Gen 1:23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.
Gen 1:24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.
Gen 1:25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
Gen 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
Gen 1:28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.
Gen 1:29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.
Gen 1:30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.
Gen 1:31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.
Gen 2:1 Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.
Gen 2:2 And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.
Gen 2:3 And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.
Gen 2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,
Gen 2:5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.
Gen 2:6 But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.
Gen 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
Gen 2:8 And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed.
Gen 2:9 And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.
It has to come from a living cell it cannot happen randomly
Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
Gen 1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
Gen 1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
Gen 1:4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.
Gen 1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
Gen 1:6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
Gen 1:7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.
Gen 1:8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.
Gen 1:9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.
Gen 1:10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.
Gen 1:11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.
Gen 1:12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
Gen 1:13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.
Gen 1:14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:
Gen 1:15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.
Gen 1:16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.
Gen 1:17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,
Gen 1:18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.
Gen 1:19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.
Gen 1:20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.
Gen 1:21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
Gen 1:22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.
Gen 1:23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.
Gen 1:24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.
Gen 1:25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
Gen 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
Gen 1:28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.
Gen 1:29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.
Gen 1:30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.
Gen 1:31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.
Gen 2:1 Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.
Gen 2:2 And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.
Gen 2:3 And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.
Gen 2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,
Gen 2:5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.
Gen 2:6 But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.
Gen 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
Gen 2:8 And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed.
Gen 2:9 And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.
YouTube - The Missing Link: Ida (darwinius masillae) - Our Common Ancestor?
A totally amazing scientific discovery.
The beauty of nature and evolution has always amazed me
A totally amazing scientific discovery.
The beauty of nature and evolution has always amazed me
Experts protested that Ida wasn't even a close relative. And now a new analysis supports their reaction.
In fact, Ida is as far removed from the monkey-ape-human ancestry as a primate could be, says Erik Seiffert of Stony Brook University in New York.
He and his colleagues compared 360 specific anatomical features of 117 living and extinct primate species to draw up a family tree. They report the results in Thursday's issue of the journal Nature.
Ida is a skeleton of a 47 million-year-old cat-sized creature found in Germany. It starred in a book, "The Link: Uncovering Our Earliest Ancestor."
Ida represents a previously unknown primate species called Darwinius. The scientists who formally announced the finding said they weren't claiming Darwinius was a direct ancestor of monkeys, apes and humans. But they did argue that it belongs in the same major evolutionary grouping, and that it showed what an actual ancestor of that era might have looked like.
The new analysis says Darwinius does not belong in the same primate category as monkeys, apes and humans. Instead, the analysis concluded, it falls into the other major grouping, which includes lemurs.
Experts agreed.
"This is a rigorous analysis based on many features," said Eric Sargis, an anthropology professor at Yale. He said he'd found the argument of the Darwinius researchers unconvincing, so the new result came as no surprise.
In fact, it confirms what most scientists think, said David Begun, a paleoanthropologist at the University of Toronto.
Jorn Hurum of the Natural History Museum in Oslo, Norway, an author of the Ida paper, said he welcomed the new analysis.
'Missing Link' Primate Fossil Debunked : Discovery News : Discovery News
Hi Zone, I always wondered myself why the Pepper Moth was so frequently sighted as an example of evolution. So I read the article you linked to and now I understand. It turns out that the dark pepper moths were unknown until 1811. Their rise in the population was gradual and brought on by natural selection.
“Although a majority of light-coloured moths initially continued to be produced, most of them didn't survive, while the dark-coloured moths flourished. As a result, over the course of many generations of moths, the allele frequency gradually shifted towards the dominant allele, as more and more dark-bodied moths survived to reproduce. By the mid-19th century, the number of dark-coloured moths had risen noticeably, and by 1895, the percentage of dark-coloured moths in the Manchester peppered moth population was reported at 98%, a dramatic change (by almost 1000%) from the original frequency.”
Note also that “Evolution is defined as "a change in the frequency of an allele within a gene pool"”. So by definition, this is evolution at work. According to the article a single moth with the darker morph had be found in 1811, but not till 1848 did a second individual turn up; this one in Manchester. By 1895 the darker variety had increased in the Manchester region to represent 98% of the population. This dramatic shift in the allele population is a prime example of natural selection at work and natural selection is the backbone of evolution.
Your error is in thinking that only the rise of a new species heralds evolution. Micro-evolution, which you accept, and macro-evolution are different sides of the same coin. It is through micro-evolution that macro-evolution occurs.
“Although a majority of light-coloured moths initially continued to be produced, most of them didn't survive, while the dark-coloured moths flourished. As a result, over the course of many generations of moths, the allele frequency gradually shifted towards the dominant allele, as more and more dark-bodied moths survived to reproduce. By the mid-19th century, the number of dark-coloured moths had risen noticeably, and by 1895, the percentage of dark-coloured moths in the Manchester peppered moth population was reported at 98%, a dramatic change (by almost 1000%) from the original frequency.”
Note also that “Evolution is defined as "a change in the frequency of an allele within a gene pool"”. So by definition, this is evolution at work. According to the article a single moth with the darker morph had be found in 1811, but not till 1848 did a second individual turn up; this one in Manchester. By 1895 the darker variety had increased in the Manchester region to represent 98% of the population. This dramatic shift in the allele population is a prime example of natural selection at work and natural selection is the backbone of evolution.
Your error is in thinking that only the rise of a new species heralds evolution. Micro-evolution, which you accept, and macro-evolution are different sides of the same coin. It is through micro-evolution that macro-evolution occurs.
its funny i see people bring up lightning strikes creating life in pools of simple cells. I just saw the formation of a human heart and it starts just like that. simple electrical sparks flying in cells and shazzamm a heart beggins to form. It's the most amazing thing and yet science can't say how the sparks start. yet, it's as if their theory of our mud puppy ancestors starting this very way could be proved by this first signs of human life. amazing and God works in mysterious ways to keep us from being know it alls. What fun would it be if there was no mystery?
H
Evolution is a fact. Deal with it how you wish.
It is like the wind has to blow from somewhere.
And here is a reason for leaves rotting.
We are here so abiogenesis/creation happened.
Natural Selection is a very very very good theory that
has never been overturned. Macro Evolution is organismic evolution viewed on
a different time scale. They are the same process.
A good example of evolution happening in front of your nose (for those who can
bring themselves to look that far) is drug resistance in Bacteria. Since they divide every
20min or so when things are good, Evolution happens fast in bugs and you can see the process in action.
If you were a juror on a rape case and the court had DNA evidence linking the crime to the suspect,
the Judge would be expecting a guilty verdict. DNA evidence is some of the most powerful court
evidence available. The odds of an inaccurate test at around 350,000,000 to one.
Science uses even more sophisticated techniques to see what evolved from what and when.
The accuracy the same but this time the DNA of 100,000 species have been compared and this
provides irrefutable evidence of evolutionary processes over deep time.(billions of years).
If you accept DNA testing as accurate you will have a serious conflict trying to disprove a fact
like evolution. All you can do is attack the underlying current theory with Bible Physics, creation
myth, and miracles.
The reason why Christians cannot accept what is in front of them is....
That without creation of Adam and Eve from scratch there is no place or reason for Biblical Sin.
Evolution has no time for sin. Everything biological has an antecedent and Sin has none.
There is a very real need for Christians to believe in Sin firstly at the expense of logic and reason
because there is no other way of being saved (getting eternal life for ones self). It serves the
same purpose as a way of cheating death so that our upcoming demise no longer represents a problem for
believers. (at least in their outer minds).
And man needs this knowledge or he would not be able to function with much sanity.
How is it that you can accept everyday science in cellphones we use. Scientists know they work on
photons and they know everything about those. The radius of an orbiting hydrogen electron is
known to within a few parts in a thousand billion. They can measure sub molecular events at a
discrimination of 10^-21 of a second. That is .000,000,000,000,000,000,001 seconds.
The philosophers that wrote the bible did not even have a 10x optical lens to form their
cosmology around.
What a ridiculous position for a mature reflective mind to hold.,
thinking Bible science (imagination) usurps Logic and Reason!
Happy to discuss...
Rev Hydrogen
It is like the wind has to blow from somewhere.
And here is a reason for leaves rotting.
We are here so abiogenesis/creation happened.
Natural Selection is a very very very good theory that
has never been overturned. Macro Evolution is organismic evolution viewed on
a different time scale. They are the same process.
A good example of evolution happening in front of your nose (for those who can
bring themselves to look that far) is drug resistance in Bacteria. Since they divide every
20min or so when things are good, Evolution happens fast in bugs and you can see the process in action.
If you were a juror on a rape case and the court had DNA evidence linking the crime to the suspect,
the Judge would be expecting a guilty verdict. DNA evidence is some of the most powerful court
evidence available. The odds of an inaccurate test at around 350,000,000 to one.
Science uses even more sophisticated techniques to see what evolved from what and when.
The accuracy the same but this time the DNA of 100,000 species have been compared and this
provides irrefutable evidence of evolutionary processes over deep time.(billions of years).
If you accept DNA testing as accurate you will have a serious conflict trying to disprove a fact
like evolution. All you can do is attack the underlying current theory with Bible Physics, creation
myth, and miracles.
The reason why Christians cannot accept what is in front of them is....
That without creation of Adam and Eve from scratch there is no place or reason for Biblical Sin.
Evolution has no time for sin. Everything biological has an antecedent and Sin has none.
There is a very real need for Christians to believe in Sin firstly at the expense of logic and reason
because there is no other way of being saved (getting eternal life for ones self). It serves the
same purpose as a way of cheating death so that our upcoming demise no longer represents a problem for
believers. (at least in their outer minds).
And man needs this knowledge or he would not be able to function with much sanity.
How is it that you can accept everyday science in cellphones we use. Scientists know they work on
photons and they know everything about those. The radius of an orbiting hydrogen electron is
known to within a few parts in a thousand billion. They can measure sub molecular events at a
discrimination of 10^-21 of a second. That is .000,000,000,000,000,000,001 seconds.
The philosophers that wrote the bible did not even have a 10x optical lens to form their
cosmology around.
What a ridiculous position for a mature reflective mind to hold.,
thinking Bible science (imagination) usurps Logic and Reason!
Happy to discuss...
Rev Hydrogen
Heh when I was an atheist I believed in evolution. I have to say in trying to argue for evolution I could do nothing to prove it at all. In fact the more you look into evolution the more you find out that it is complete fraud which can only be supported by unprovable theories, half-truths, and outright scams.
Very intriguing a goodly monk named Gregor Mendel pretty much put the final nail in the coffin of Darwin's great science fiction.
However here is something to ponder. Evolution is paradoxically provable and disprovable. You can show one type of creature turn into another type of creature. These are the Hybrids. Only problem with the hybrids is they are almost always sterile or can only mate with one of their parent species in which case the offspring will be the same type of hybrid or will actually revert back to the parent species. (That is to say unless Human or other Intelligent Being does not interfere.)
Very curious how this might support one of the Bible's most outlandish claims, being the Interventionism of the Fallen Angels upon our gene pool and possibly that of the other creatures on Earth.
Even more curious, as we now are developping a growing understanding of Genetics we can see that our very genes prevent one creature from evolving into another creature even with mutation. We can also now properly lay to rest Darwin's finches as being the same species of finch, but that through genetic drift and genetic isolation they interbred creating and retaining limited distinct features and that indeed such creatures can even be re-introduced to their larger gene pool seamlessly. This might even prove Noah's Ark Theory as all animals would have common Matriarchs and Patriarchs. This would suppose that their variations would not be as diverse in his time as they are today after such species spread and became genetically isolated.
Furthermore even with mutation no species evolves into another. Especially not due to mutation. Even at the micro-level where say flu virus mutates drug-resistance, it still remains a flu virus. Even more awesome is this mutation can even be bred out of a species given enough time.
Just some theorizing. Good old Evolution Debate probably won't go away though for as long as people are indoctrinated into it and it is big business though. Sure is interesting stuff though no doubt no matter what side of the coin you're on!
Very intriguing a goodly monk named Gregor Mendel pretty much put the final nail in the coffin of Darwin's great science fiction.
However here is something to ponder. Evolution is paradoxically provable and disprovable. You can show one type of creature turn into another type of creature. These are the Hybrids. Only problem with the hybrids is they are almost always sterile or can only mate with one of their parent species in which case the offspring will be the same type of hybrid or will actually revert back to the parent species. (That is to say unless Human or other Intelligent Being does not interfere.)
Very curious how this might support one of the Bible's most outlandish claims, being the Interventionism of the Fallen Angels upon our gene pool and possibly that of the other creatures on Earth.
Even more curious, as we now are developping a growing understanding of Genetics we can see that our very genes prevent one creature from evolving into another creature even with mutation. We can also now properly lay to rest Darwin's finches as being the same species of finch, but that through genetic drift and genetic isolation they interbred creating and retaining limited distinct features and that indeed such creatures can even be re-introduced to their larger gene pool seamlessly. This might even prove Noah's Ark Theory as all animals would have common Matriarchs and Patriarchs. This would suppose that their variations would not be as diverse in his time as they are today after such species spread and became genetically isolated.
Furthermore even with mutation no species evolves into another. Especially not due to mutation. Even at the micro-level where say flu virus mutates drug-resistance, it still remains a flu virus. Even more awesome is this mutation can even be bred out of a species given enough time.
Just some theorizing. Good old Evolution Debate probably won't go away though for as long as people are indoctrinated into it and it is big business though. Sure is interesting stuff though no doubt no matter what side of the coin you're on!
Last edited:
H
Thanks!,
Think that you are holding 2 conflicting beliefs here.
IE Can appreciate a DNA test but CANNOT appreciate similar testing in peer reviewed
molecular evolution studies.
And there are a few ways someone can genuinely exhibit this and stay sane.
1.They are bluffing everyone. (good acting)
2.They are programmed (hypnotised) by trance. (to see both a true).
3.They are auto programmed not to "go there" thus avoiding the conflict.
My speciality is molecular evolution and it is through this context that
I can unravel the puzzle that is life.
All truth stems from objective truth. (the disclosure must be consistent with the cosmology).
Briefly this is how organismic/ macroevolution evolution works.
The DNA is a survival machine. Ancient genes in Sulphur Bacteria are almost unchanged after
3.5 billion years, a quarter of the age of the universe.
Along the way new organisms with different and novel genes appeared in their millions.
this is due to DNA exploiting the environment better when the opportunity presents.
The DNA is a junk synthesiser. It will copy a template as best it can with the materials thrown at the
weaving loom (within limits).
These mutations that will enter the gene pool as organisms must be occurring on the sex gametes in higher animals.
The DNA does not know if it has made something useful or not , by not being a perfect process.
Most point mutations have absolutely no effect on the resulting organism. All the genes still encode all the proteins
required for life.
Now and then a build up of base point mutations will result in the encoded protein having a different property
e.g. by being folded differently. Horse haemoglobin differs in some 63 base pairs to human haemoglobin but is identical
in its physical properties.
Once a viable NOVEL gene is present in a viable organism THEN and only then does the Process of Natural selection
begin. In a harsh environment the selective pressure for evolution is strongest.
EG In a patient taking antibiotics the drug resistant ones will flourish, the others mostly wiped out.
The viable new genes providing a better fit to the environment for the DNA survival machine.
Think of ourselves as Current top Junk.
But while the process of mutation is random it is clocklike and we can see how often it happens.
expressed in Base hair mutations/per codon/per million years. It is a straight line graph like a
isotope decaying. We do not know which atom will decay but we can expect this many over this time.
So while the process is somewhat random the result is aANYTHING BUT.
Hawking "Our cosmology was determined by the BB."
The BB let to cosmogenesis, geogenesis, abiogenesis and now we have psychogenesis happening.
All set in motion by what the BB achieved- The separation of nothing into matter and antimatter.
The separation of charge in matter and antimatter. Giving an asymmetry to everything.
and the whole lot given angular momentum as everything vibrates and swirls in space one way or the other
so that all the energy and matter add up to..... nothing.
Not to say there is not a God though. Just not the same thing in my mind as in yours.
Think that you are holding 2 conflicting beliefs here.
IE Can appreciate a DNA test but CANNOT appreciate similar testing in peer reviewed
molecular evolution studies.
And there are a few ways someone can genuinely exhibit this and stay sane.
1.They are bluffing everyone. (good acting)
2.They are programmed (hypnotised) by trance. (to see both a true).
3.They are auto programmed not to "go there" thus avoiding the conflict.
My speciality is molecular evolution and it is through this context that
I can unravel the puzzle that is life.
All truth stems from objective truth. (the disclosure must be consistent with the cosmology).
Briefly this is how organismic/ macroevolution evolution works.
The DNA is a survival machine. Ancient genes in Sulphur Bacteria are almost unchanged after
3.5 billion years, a quarter of the age of the universe.
Along the way new organisms with different and novel genes appeared in their millions.
this is due to DNA exploiting the environment better when the opportunity presents.
The DNA is a junk synthesiser. It will copy a template as best it can with the materials thrown at the
weaving loom (within limits).
These mutations that will enter the gene pool as organisms must be occurring on the sex gametes in higher animals.
The DNA does not know if it has made something useful or not , by not being a perfect process.
Most point mutations have absolutely no effect on the resulting organism. All the genes still encode all the proteins
required for life.
Now and then a build up of base point mutations will result in the encoded protein having a different property
e.g. by being folded differently. Horse haemoglobin differs in some 63 base pairs to human haemoglobin but is identical
in its physical properties.
Once a viable NOVEL gene is present in a viable organism THEN and only then does the Process of Natural selection
begin. In a harsh environment the selective pressure for evolution is strongest.
EG In a patient taking antibiotics the drug resistant ones will flourish, the others mostly wiped out.
The viable new genes providing a better fit to the environment for the DNA survival machine.
Think of ourselves as Current top Junk.
But while the process of mutation is random it is clocklike and we can see how often it happens.
expressed in Base hair mutations/per codon/per million years. It is a straight line graph like a
isotope decaying. We do not know which atom will decay but we can expect this many over this time.
So while the process is somewhat random the result is aANYTHING BUT.
Hawking "Our cosmology was determined by the BB."
The BB let to cosmogenesis, geogenesis, abiogenesis and now we have psychogenesis happening.
All set in motion by what the BB achieved- The separation of nothing into matter and antimatter.
The separation of charge in matter and antimatter. Giving an asymmetry to everything.
and the whole lot given angular momentum as everything vibrates and swirls in space one way or the other
so that all the energy and matter add up to..... nothing.
Not to say there is not a God though. Just not the same thing in my mind as in yours.
Point is there must be an energy source and in experiments introducing electrical shocks (fake lightening) creates many of the essential amino acids that living cells are composed of, but no one yet knows how, or where, the first life formed. Some have even hypothesized that the deep thermal vents would have provided a consistent energy source. If so then we can do away with the lightening.
There is no such thing as the spark of life. In our cells mitochondria provide the necessary energy source. Also, there is nothing special about the heart. It is a muscle.
You are correct. If there was no mystery that would mean we already understood everything. There would be no thrill of discovery.
There is no such thing as the spark of life. In our cells mitochondria provide the necessary energy source. Also, there is nothing special about the heart. It is a muscle.
You are correct. If there was no mystery that would mean we already understood everything. There would be no thrill of discovery.
Spoken like someone who has never understood evolution. When did you become an atheist? What doubts brought you back to God. Had ever been religious before becoming an atheist? If you have already discussed this perhaps you could redirect me.
Whoa there Tex! Where did you get the notion that Mendel's work disproves evolution? This is news to me. I am very familiar with Mendel's research as it is standard study in university biology courses. Can you explain in your own words why you think this?
You clearly have no understanding of how biologists say evolution works. New species do not form from hybridizing. Where did you get this idea? From what your saying it sounds to me as if you have only ever read creationist materials on evolution. Your sources are feeding you erroneous information. This is not what evolutionists believe. May I recommend you read, Evolution: What the Fossils Say and Why It Matters, Donald Prothero. You have absorbed a lot of misinformation. This will help sort you out.
Wow! You haven’t read anything on genetics other than that provided creationists, have you? Take a look at Francis Collins, The Language of God. Collins explains that genetics proves the case for evolution. You also need to understand that he is one of America’s leading geneticists. He headed up the very successful Human Genome Project.
You are right, it is interesting, but you need to look at more than one side of the debate. You keep raising a lot of issues that you wouldn’t bother with if you were more familiar with what evolutionists actually believe.
Whoa there Tex! Where did you get the notion that Mendel's work disproves evolution? This is news to me. I am very familiar with Mendel's research as it is standard study in university biology courses. Can you explain in your own words why you think this?
You clearly have no understanding of how biologists say evolution works. New species do not form from hybridizing. Where did you get this idea? From what your saying it sounds to me as if you have only ever read creationist materials on evolution. Your sources are feeding you erroneous information. This is not what evolutionists believe. May I recommend you read, Evolution: What the Fossils Say and Why It Matters, Donald Prothero. You have absorbed a lot of misinformation. This will help sort you out.
Wow! You haven’t read anything on genetics other than that provided creationists, have you? Take a look at Francis Collins, The Language of God. Collins explains that genetics proves the case for evolution. You also need to understand that he is one of America’s leading geneticists. He headed up the very successful Human Genome Project.
You are right, it is interesting, but you need to look at more than one side of the debate. You keep raising a lot of issues that you wouldn’t bother with if you were more familiar with what evolutionists actually believe.