Evolution in pieces.

quote:

---

well then im not born. Im trying to say that there is absolutely no chance of it happening. and the reason im alive is because god has a plan for me and im blessed to be one of his children and u are too. like it or not

---

The reason that you're alive is that your parents had sex. It has nothing to do with an invisible friend in the sky.------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

quote:

---

i dont have any parents they both died 4 months ago.

---

But you had parents. They had unprotected sex, and that's why you exist. It has nothing to do with a (formerly) Caananite deity.

quote:

---

and god isnt my friend hes my savior, the alpha,omega, beginning and end king of kings lord of lords, shepard, master, savior, lord above all, the great I am, messiah, holy of holys, holy spirit, lamb of god, jesus,jehova, The glorious one, beloved one, he is above all, knows all and loves all. And he sent hes one and only begotten son to die bye our hands. He took all our sins and died on the cross. beaten, tortured, flogged and finally crucified. hes not my imaginary friend in the sky. my lord loves me and all of you that dont belive. and when i die im going to heaven.

---

Do you have any reference for this apart from the transcribed millenia-old oral traditions and legends of a particular nomadic desert shepherd tribe, assembled and ironed out in committee (sometimes through voting), then usurped by followers someone who doesn't exist in contemporary records, and reassembled by yet another committee and yet more voting?Mm.... committee-developed religion... I can just picture that now. "I think this text is holy!" "Well, I don't think it's holy at all. But this text! This is holy!" "But that one says the opposite of mine, you blasphemer!". That must have been a fun weekend.

quote:

---

I hope you find christ too

---

I didn't even know he was lost.Can't you even keep track of your own savior?------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

quote:

---

give me evidence that there isn't god.

---

"Give me evidence that there isn't an all-powerful invisible pink unicorn ruling the universe."------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

quote:

---

my savior isn't lost. u are. for all are lost until the shepard finds them. My parents loved me, god loves me and i hope you open your eyes to the light.

---

I don't doubt that your parents loved you. And I know you would love to believe in God - we all would. But wanting something to be real doesn't make it real.------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

quote:

---

The bacteria's tail motor has over 40 parts in it. Now if your saying that life originated from a single cell organism then how did it get the tail? Natural selection says that a species changes by small changes. If natural selection does occur then it would only get 1 or 2 parts. But that wouldn't do much good. even if it got the tail. Because it needs all 40 to work. But with out it next it would dissapear because it inhibits movement.

---

If you took a million people and reverted them to pre-civilization savagery, and gave them the goal of building a computer chip, could they do it? Of course not...right away, at least. However, the people will probably want to hunt for food, and will develop weapons. Developing tools will help them develop weapons. They'll find that their wood and metalworking skills allow them to be better in combat - they will take advantage of a skill that developed for a different purpose, and put it to a different use. They'll then find it advantageous to get better at metalworking and tools. Some people will end up accidentally or purposefully running into the properties of chemistry; others will learn how to harness energy for production. Each step plays on the advantages of others, until eventually you have an atomic-age civilization with computer chips.The same holds true with a bacterium. One step plays on the next; even if the original use of the original parts wasn't at all related to locomotion, their initial purposes can be used for other uses. For example, you could have a surface receptor protein; a new mutation creates a protein that encourages the surface protein to stab outwards and damage an attacking cell. It might eventually serve to function more like a syringe. On top of that, any change that increases the length or maneuverability of the syringe is an advantage. However, at this point, the "syringe"'s motion actually has gotten to the point where it moves the cell slightly. Natural selection takes over from there.Just a sample possible evolutionary route.

quote:

---

Well even if that is correct then you still believe that it just happend with absoulutly no disign?? Purely chance

---

It's biased chance, because only the ones that do well survive to reproduce. Bad genes get passed on at a much lower rate than good ones,and so good genes "fixate" into the population.

quote:

---

and furthermore almost all mutations are harmful. And your saying that all those mutations happend and didn't miss once?

---

They probably missed millions of times. The misses died out; only the successes lived on.To read/discuss more about genetic fixation, and a demostration of the fact that it works, visit here.------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

quote:

---

Hi crashfrog. I read the SA article. Nowhere does it say that humans couldn't do a better job.

---

Actually, the chip took advantage of all sorts of things that humans have never used before - in fact, it took advantage of things that are normally considered a "problem" by humans. It did a truly incredible job.

quote:

---

However humans did design the components used, the program that was run and the super-computers that ran it. By what mechanism would a mutaion be directed?

---

Theistic evolution. Duh.The people simply created the "universe" that it runs in - they didn't tell it how to change or anything of the sort. The changes are random. Humans, however, *did* "design" the "universe" that it exists in.If you believe in theistic evolution, you're halfway there.

quote:

---

Ever notice that as with all mutations a bacteria is still a bacteria

---

Nope - we've seen bacteria become colonial organisms.

quote:

---

a virus is still a virus, yeast is still yeast, a fruit fly is still a fruit fly etc., etc., etc.

---

I don't know much about virii and yeast, but it's obvious that you've never read anything about HOX gene studies in drosophila.Heck, why don't we just look at something a big while we're at it, such as pigeons?------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

quote:

---

Not theistic evolution- Design. Theistic evolution is in contrast with the current theory.

---

Wrong. Your argument was for theistic evolution, because it describes an evolutionary process, where the process was started by a designer.

quote:

---

If you would allow theistic evolution into the classroom you are half-way there.

---

Theistic evolution is allowed in the classroom. Evolutionary theory doesn't cover origins.

quote:

---

Any evidence that those colonies became such via random mutations culled by NS?

---

Well, we've seen a single celled organism become colonial - what more do you need?

quote:

---

But anyway even those colonies still reproduce single-celled organisms.

---

Yes. As I've stated several times, they alternate between living as single celled and multicellular, which makes them an intermediary form.

quote:

---

Most, if not all, colonies become so as a defensive/ survival mechanism.

---

Yep! Welcome to the wonderful world of evolution, John!

quote:

---

HOX genes? I wonder if evolutionists will ever tell us how those evolved.

---

They already have. It's a receptor protein feedback loop with mitosis. Chemically altering when mitosis is stimuated is no challenge at all, and something that can easily occur naturally. Receptor proteins mutate readily as well. Transcriptases can be enabled and disabled easily, and can mutate, as can what activates them. What more do you need?

quote:

---

Pidgeons are still pidgeons....

---

Join in the thread, then, and explain how morphological changes as dramatic as that can occur, but how there's supposedly some sort of barrier elsewhere that prevents evolution from going further. I'm still awaiting whether you are of the opinion that a change in the number of chromosomes is possible.------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

quote:

---

Descent by modification is only that when looked at through evolutionary glasses. When you can show us that mutations/ NS can lead to upright walking please let us know.

---

Many smaller primates are bipedal on the ground. Have you ever watched a spider monkey walk?Besides, what sort of barrier is there that you think prevents gradualistic change from switching from a quadroped pelvis to a biped? I can give you tons of intermediates, past and present.

quote:

---

Life overcomes boundaries? Is that why there is a tree-line on mountatins?

---

Evolution is not a God - it is subject to the limitation of physics (notice that plants *do* continue to grow higher up, they just can't be in the "tree" shape).------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."[This message has been edited by Rei, 12-16-2003]

quote:

---

I thought we were allegedly closer related to chimps than monkeys? This doesn't help your case.

---

It's an example of how common bipedality is.

quote:

---

It is not up to me to provide a barrier. It is up to you to provide POSITIVE evidence to support your case.

---

Wrong. You see, given the absense of a barrier, unless you don't believe that advantageous mutations fixate, evolution is guaranteed.

quote:

---

Provide the intermediates...

---

Chimpanzees are partway between bipeds and quadropeds; they can walk on two legs, but tire easily and need to return to four.Please indicate whether you want another intermediary possibility which is less bipedal or more bipedal than chimpanzees (or let me know when you've had enough examples).

quote:

---

quote:

---

They already have. It's a receptor protein feedback loop with mitosis. Chemically altering when mitosis is stimuated is no challenge at all, and something that can easily occur naturally. Receptor proteins mutate readily as well. Transcriptases can be enabled and disabled easily, and can mutate, as can what activates them. What more do you need?

---

​

That doesn't tell me how HOX genes originated.

---

Yes it does. Receptor proteins and mitosis-related transcripases. Please read better.

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

Most, if not all, colonies become so as a defensive/ survival mechanism.

---

​

Yep! Welcome to the wonderful world of evolution, John!

---

​

Well if that was all the theory was about we wouldn't be having this chat. I can easily use the above as evidence for design.

---

No. You can't use it for either, because it is predicted by both (well, actually, such adaptation didn't use to be predicted by creationists, but they've pretty much been forced to accept it, so now it suddenly becomes predicted by them also).

quote:

---

When I start alternating between single and multi-cellular I will believe your assertion.

---

You don't know anything about the TOE, do you? That's probably the worst straw man I have ever had the misfortune to encounter on this board.Don't take that as a compliment; you should be ashamed by it.------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

Past or present?There are lots of intermediates in the present. The past for homonids is more fragmentary, but we have skeletons like Sahelanthropus tchadensis which shares a number of characteristics with habitual bipeds, such as the position of the nuchal crest (the bone that allows the nuchal muscle in the back of the neck to attach to the skull); however, the foramen magnum (the hole that the spinal cord leaves through) is positioned in the back of the skull instead of the base, indicating to an extent life as a quadraped. In short, it shares characteristics of both.A good example of species that alternate in the present day are chimpanzees and bonobos. I can give a number of other examples that are either more or less inclined to upright walking - your call as to which you would like to see.------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

Unfortunately, we don't have the pelvises for many of the older hominids, just the skulls and some leg bones; however, you can learn a lot from them as well. For example, the angle that the skull is mounted to the spine and how the muscles attach to it are strong indicators to how the body carried its head - perpendicular or parallel to the spine. S. tchadensis's skull clearly shows a mix of features, as I talked about above. In next more recent species, O. tugenesis, we have a femur that indicates that it was likely that this species spent most of its time upright. So the main turning point seems to be around tchadensis.Personally, I'm eagerly awaiting the next batch of fossil finds from the time period of tchadensis and earlier; there's been so much progress recently in this previously fossil-limited time period, I'm excited to see what we find next. I hope it will help clear up some of the current questions (the exact degree of bipedality, whether it's a sister species or a direct ancestor, etc).------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

quote:

---

One more time- Creationists since the time of Linne understood change occurred. Saying anything to the contrary is a blatant misrepresentation of reality.

---

Evidence this, please - you keep asserting it.

quote:

---

Bipeadlism is common- just look at birds.

---

Your point? I was demonstrating that species of all degrees of dependence on two and four legs exist, and that there is no barrier for gradualism. We didn't evolve from *any* species alive today.

quote:

---

Chimps do not walk upright, which is different from walking on two legs. They can do it, but you are treading close to Lamarkism if you think this acquired trait can be inherited.

---

We didn't descend from chimps - you don't seem to be getting the point. The point here is that there is no barrier between being a biped and being a quadraped. Apparently you think that chimpanzees are too toward being a quadraped. Ok then, next species: Spider monkeys. (I'll keep going along the gradualistic path if you want)

quote:

---

Again on limits- we observe limits in all facets of life. If you want us to believe life is immune from limitations you need to provide the evidence.

---

What???You're trying to claim that there *is* a limit here, but then saying that it's my job to prove that it's not there. What you're doing is the equivalent of me stating that I have a pet pink unicorn, you asking for some sort of evidence, and me stating that it is your job to prove that I don't have a pet pink unicorn.If you think there is a barrier, state what it is. If you can't even postulate a single possible barrier, I'm not going to help you do it, because I see no barrier. It's unfair to ask someone to prove a negative.------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."