|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The Great Creationist Fossil Failure | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9515 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.8 |
Mindspawn writes: My main dispute with evolutionary theory is the ability for two species with a common ancestor to then ADD unique active coding genes to the genome that can add fitness to that species Ok.
After 15 years of analysis and experimentation the gene mutation that was responsible for the change in colour of the peppered moth from white to black has been found. This is a really important conformation of the theory of evolution - it demonstrates not only the process of natural selection but also the role of beneficial, random, genetic mutation. The colour change wasn't simply the result of gene plasticity, the actual mutation that occurred in an individual has been located and dated (1819 +/- 10). The date puts it exactly where you would expect it - the height of the industrial revolution when everything was soot stained and black. Famous peppered moth's dark secret revealed - BBC News
Evolution by mutation and selection confirmed. Welcome to the real world, happy to have you.Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. "Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mindspawn Member (Idle past 2690 days) Posts: 1015 Joined: |
Yeah for sure, I can confirm more examples. The duffy gene, whereby through natural selection humans with the duffy gene have become more common in areas vulnerable to malaria. Yes mutations occur, and they can add to fitness. You will find many mutations that add fitness are actually a REDUCTION in the number of active coding genes, not a gain. There are examples where a previously inactive gene becomes re-activated via mutation, this also is not a gain, its merely a re-activation of a non-unique gene that already existed and used to be active in the "kind".
My dispute is with the GENE ADDING process whereby say a human is claimed to have a net gain of unique coding genes over time. compared to the alleged LUCA. Evolutionists do not focus on this, because the claims are not matched by evidence/observation. However this process is central to evolution because most organisms are found to have MORE unique active coding genes than what the original LUCA would have had. The alternative that the original LUCA had the most active genes is just another form of creationism, so unfortunately you evolutionists are stuck with believing in a process that does not exist. The idea that a bacteria-type common ancestor with 1000 genes can evolve into something with 2000 genes or more is fantasy. A theory with no evidence. And so nearly every organism remains unexplained from an evolutionist perspective.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
This one is funny.
mindspawn writes: mindspawn doesn't realise that the difficulty in placing fossils as being either human-apes or non-human apes actually is excellent evidence for human evolution? I never said that. I can dispute a sequence based upon ALL the known facts about that sequence. Not skulls. I never said I can look at just a skull and make a conclusion. No-one is giving me any claimed sequence.Normally a sequence will have one or two anomalies in it, for example it may look good for cranial capacity, but then suddenly you see the hip/shoulder ratio has a huge backward jump, showing that a unique unrelated species has been inserted into the claimed sequence. I'll use a creationist word. Proved. mindspawn 'proved' that we have intermediates between non-human apes and human apes as they can't easily be classified as modern apes or modern humans. Those are somewhere inbetween. mindspawn unknowingly 'proved' human evolution to all of us.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mindspawn Member (Idle past 2690 days) Posts: 1015 Joined: |
I don't think it's always clear. In the past I have had to do a bit of research.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mindspawn Member (Idle past 2690 days) Posts: 1015 Joined: |
Haha I like your deductive reasoning, but it's not like that. Outwardly humans and other apes do have similarities compared to other mammals. There can be confusion. Especially if the fossil is not complete. Two similar species outwardly just does not prove evolution.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
Ah great. Could you direct us to the research you've done on those fossils you excavated and also where you published that researchin some peer-reviewed scientific journal?
Let's just give you a little hint. Reading stuff on fossils on some creationist website is not research. Quoting what someone said is not research in the natural sciences. Provide your data. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mindspawn Member (Idle past 2690 days) Posts: 1015 Joined: |
Yes human DNA is different to other apes DNA. That kinda has been proved. They say slight differences, but when you are looking at 3 billion base pairs, a few percent makes a huge difference.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17828 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
Let's be honest. We have genuine anatomical intermediates. Creationism gives us no reason to expect that, evolution requires them. This is evidence for evolution.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17828 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: So is chimpanzee's DNA. Do try thinking about your arguments, please.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
mindswawn writes: The diffence is that evolutionary theory can explain those differences scientifically. Poofing things into existence can't.
Yes human DNA is different to other apes DNA. That kinda has been proved. They say slight differences, but when you are looking at 3 billion base pairs, a few percent makes a huge difference.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9515 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.8 |
Right, so you confirm that genetic mutation plus selection combine to cause the evolution of species.
Job done then.Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. "Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
midspawn writes: Really? Who said that? Creationists? I think that you're not telling the truth here. My dispute is with the GENE ADDING process whereby say a human is claimed to have a net gain of unique coding genes over time. Humans have unique genes. So do Chimps. So do Swedish Elk. So do some Amoebas. Some of those organisms have more genes than humans do. Have you been reading too much creationist propaganda instead of scientific sources? Have you been told lies you believe without checking the original sources? mindspawn, YEC's always tell untruths. That's all they have. He-he-he. As a side note, could you provide me with the difference in number of 'unique coding genes' between, say, modern humans and Chimps? That would be interesting to hear the answer from you. How do you measure the number of 'unique coding genes'? Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 424 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined:
|
mindspawn has gotten all of you to take the bait and head down the rabbit hole. Creationists are good about that.
mindspawn made a claim that the Biblical flood was at the P/T boundary. The Bible says that there were humans and mammals and reptiles and birds before the flood. That means there MUST be evidence of those critters below the P/T boundary if that was when the flood happened and not just those critters killed in the flood but all the other mammals and reptiles and birds and trees and flowering plants that lived and died between creation and the flood. There has to be some evidence. The Bible also said that those critters did not just live in the highlands or Siberia so claiming the evidence is buried under the Siberian Traps is simply silly or makes the Bible a bunch of lies. When is mindspawn going to produce ANY evidence to support his assertion or will he simply continue to palm the pea, cheat the rubes, dance the Gish Gallop like all Creationists from the beginning of Creationism?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2136 days) Posts: 6117 Joined:
|
I do understand that. I would guess that it is the adaptation of the original kind into new breeds as one radiates out from Siberia that would be the evidence of where the original location was. But all of the early "ape-man" fossils are in Africa. Later they spread to Java, China, and other places. None have been found in Siberia. The pattern is clearly radiating out from Africa.Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge. Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein In the name of diversity, college student demands to be kept in ignorance of the culture that made diversity a value--StultisTheFool It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1 "Multiculturalism" demands that the US be tolerant of everything except its own past, culture, traditions, and identity.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2136 days) Posts: 6117 Joined:
|
Haha I'm not trained. In some cases I cannot tell the difference.
But yet you are willing to tell experts, who not only are trained but have studied this field most of their adult lives, that they are wrong. Typical creation "science" at work.Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge. Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein In the name of diversity, college student demands to be kept in ignorance of the culture that made diversity a value--StultisTheFool It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1 "Multiculturalism" demands that the US be tolerant of everything except its own past, culture, traditions, and identity.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024