Biblical Creationism Requires Evolution

Ichthus writes

quote:

---

Yes, but the genes didn't change to form that resistance.

---

Just so you didn't notice, my eyes just rolled after reading your replies.Consider the following experiment that you yourself could perform anyday anytime. Start out with a single bacterium and allow it to procreate into a colony in a petri dish. Since bacteria reproduce by mitosis, all the daughter cells are suppose to be identical to the bacterium that you started out with. You then apply antibiotics. What you will inevitably see is that there will be a few individuals who will survive this bacterial holocaust.Somewhere along the line, a mutation occured that allowed some bacteria to survive.Have you done lab work in this field? Have you written articles and published them for all to see proving that no beneficial mutation is possible? Have you performed experiments that have irrefutably proven that no beneficial mutation can ever occur?Believing in Christ is one thing. But to speak on his behalf words of ignorance or even downright lies... I'm not sure there's a word to describe it. I'm sure God would want us to educate ourselves first before speaking on His behalf and make all believers look like idiots. As the old saying goes, know your enemy first before confronting him on the battlefield. Specifically, know what weapons he will use. It's kinda pointless to show up on the battlefield with a sword and then find out your enemy has a machine gun.

tesla writes

quote:

---

evidence does show less intelligent forms of modern man with "apparently" stone tools well before the "modern" ape.

---

How do you explain the differences in the number of chromosomes between man and ape? Specifically, if ape descended from man, how come human chromosome 2 has 2 centromeres and 4 telomeres?If either of the two groups descended from the other, from the chromosome evidence wouldn't it make more sense that it was man who descended from apes?

evolution is adaption. adaption can go both up or down as far as intelligence goes, by choice of habits.do you know the chromosomes of "lucy"?if so, id like to see what they resemble, man...ape...or in between.also remember, there is no definitive link yet found to make anything about the relation of ape and man being a definite ascension of the same tree.Edited by tesla, : No reason given.

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

tesla writes

quote:

---

evolution is adaption. adaption can go both up or down as far as intelligence goes, by choice of habits.

---

The issue I'm pointing out is the number of chromosomes in apes versus humans. Not just the number, but also the apparent fusion of 2 chromosomes to form the human chromosome #2 we have today. Please don't try to change the subject.

quote:

---

do you know the chromosomes of "lucy"?

---

Nobody does. Again, I am talking about modern apes versus humans.Humans, compared to modern apes, have 1 less chromosome pair. Instead, we have chromosome #2 that has 2 centromeres and 4 telomeres. A regular chromosome has 2 telomeres, 1 at each end, and a centromere in the middle. Based on this, wouldn't it make more sense that, if one has to have descended from the other as you implied, humans descended from apes rather than vice versa?

quote:

---

also remember, there is no definitive link yet found to make anything about the relation of ape and man being a definite ascension of the same tree.

---

For now, I'm not talking about any other evidence of definitive link. My current goal is to try to get you to recognize the chromosomal implication and how it contradicts your hypothesis. I can't do that if you continue to dodge the issue.Edited by teen4christ, : No reason given.

how does chromosomes have anything to do with how evolution and adaption works?your trying to look at 2 objects of similar form then ask why they arnt identical?since when does chromosomes only add or subtract in evolution?explain to me why some people got pink eyes and white hairless skin? why do some people have hair all over their bodies and face? why do some people get cancer and some not?just because chromosomes are different in number, doesn't mean that it cannot have either been added or subtracted only,by way of evolution.it is just as logical that a chromosomes was lost, as a chromosome was added.

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

In two words? Nearly everything. You don't understand evolution. You don't understand even the most basic concepts of genetics. You have literally no idea what teen4christ is talking about.

---

When you know you're going to wake up in three days, dying is not a sacrifice. It's a painful inconvenience.

EXACTLY.but does he?you answere me then, is it not just as logical for a chromosome to be deleted via evolution, as it could have been added?do this for me?tell me the difference between dog chromosomes, and wolf?these numbers here seem to say that the racoon dog has less than dog or wolf, but that the wolf is the considered relative, or i completly didnt understand this text. honestly not much of this makes a whole lot of sense to me, but logically, evolution can move up or down by habits.Edited by tesla, : No reason given.

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

You gotta to be kidding me.http://EvC Forum: The Grand Canyon Paradox -->EvC Forum: The Grand Canyon ParadoxYou're repeating the same refuted crap in another thread. Hydroplate theory is total horse****. Running away from an thread where it was refuted does not make it valid again.

oops wasnt talkin to me *whistles and walks off*Edited by tesla, : No reason given.

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

Have you ever heard of Tolkein Ring Theory? It states that there was one ring to rule them all, but that it was lost and that it took a coalition of elves, hobbits and humans to save the world from Lord Sauron.Equal amounts of evidence support either theory: none.--Percy

You're right, an ape splitting off into seperate species of apes is evolution, but then again creationists don't have a problem with evolution in general. Creationists have a problem with macro and steller evolution. What you are talking about is micro-evolution, I'm not sure if that is the same thing as superevolution or not, because I have not heard of it, but creationists do believe that microevolution is correct because it can be observed.

It's called "Recombination". Do a wiki search & you'll get more results than you care to read, and nearly all of them are about the biological variety.Either some of these people aren't half as educated as they let on, or they're keeping mum. Granted, the topic's about taboo in high school biology classes; but anyone with college level biology should have some familiarity with it.If mutation was the cause of bacteria gaining resistance, what are the odds of that mutation cropping up? One in tens of billions, at least. But those experiments are readily repeatable. That's because recombination is the cause - not mutation, no way no how.That's why recombination's kept secret to the extent it's practical to do so. Nearly every textbook "example of mutation" is actually an instance of recombination. From peppered moths to the beak length on "Darwin's finches". About the only real mutations they ever talk about that actually mutations are irradiated bugs, and that's just not enough to sell their religion.Now why don't I explain it here in simple layman's terms? Because it's easier for you to look it up yourself, read past the spin (some authors try to put an evolutionist spin on it, just like they do with genetics) and learn what it is. If I were to explain it, I fully expect those who know more about this topic than myself and pretended not to have this knowledge would come out of the woodwork & try to nitpick my explanation. I'd be tempted to call them liars, as the term is accurate and applicable. So I choose to avoid temptation.Anyhow, there is some chance for those who want to have a better discussion. Learn what recombination is for yourself, but try not to waste too much time arguing about it. The bargain basement evolutionist will just repeat the spin or deny that recombination exists. None are prepared to deal with the facts: recombination is a marvelous design feature. And it makes it impossible for mutations to get any grip via "natural selection". Want a taller creature? Recombination can do it in one or two generations! Same for any trait. Mutation is too slow, even if it knew what it was looking for.For those who want to be lazy & not look it up, but still want to believe I'm wrong, please consider: Random mutations by definition aren't readily repeatable. You can't reverse them with selective breeding and bring them back any time you want. Your prized "mutation" examples are nearly all reversible and repeatable. 2 + 2 = ?

Wow! Just like the government's bombing of the World Trade Center!

---

Spare a thought for the stay-at-home voter;
His empty eyes gaze at strange beauty shows
And a parade of the gray suited grafters:
A choice of cancer or polio. -- The Rolling Stones

at what point was man an ape? why isn't it possible that it was man, who became a modern man, and man, who also became apes?you can call a man an ape tho..if you want, some men seem to have very similar ethics.

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

Thanks for letting us in on the secret. I guess you are waiting for a call from the Nobel Committee. Do you care if we pass this discovery on to the rest of the world's biologists, giving you due credit of course?

---

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty PythonYou can't build a Time Machine without Weird Optics -- S. Valley