The Problem With Evolution- Part 1, Ape to Man Ridiculousness

[teddyv]

42 minutes ago, FJK said:

Maybe someone should find that catalyst and prove that living matter can be created from non living matter through natural means?

But I doubt that is something that will ever be done.

That is what researchers are attempting to do. Self-replicating molecules is at least one  piece of evidence of the possibility. Finding the exact pathway is unlikely since the starting conditions are not know with any real certainty.

[RV_Wizard]

17 hours ago, FJK said:

Maybe someone should find that catalyst and prove that living matter can be created from non living matter through natural means?

The theory is that under certain conditions amino acids can be combined to create a protein.  This require an environment with no oxygen, which is why the evo's are now saying the original earth was devoid of oxygen.  Each protein cab be either left handed or right handed.  The simplest living cell requires 200 left handed proteins.  A single right handed protein prevents life.  Ever flip a coin 200 times and have it land on the same side every time?

It's not just the Bible that says life cannot come from non-life without supernatural causation, science confirms it.  There are NO scientifically valid explanations for the origination of anything from nothingness.

[TrueFollowerOfChrist]

It seems ironic to me that scientists ( intelligence ) are trying to prove life could be created without intelligence. Has anyone else seen a strange contradiction there? Also funny that science has not yet shown that life can come from non life, yet it's taught as fact in school textbooks. Indoctrination?

[Starise]

14 hours ago, TrueFollowerOfChrist said:

It seems ironic to me that scientists ( intelligence ) are trying to prove life could be created without intelligence. Has anyone else seen a strange contradiction there? Also funny that science has not yet shown that life can come from non life, yet it's taught as fact in school textbooks. Indoctrination?

Life without intelligence...I did know a few people. 

Never mind

[Starise]

22 minutes ago, Starise said:

Life without intelligence...I did know a few people. 

Never mind

 

14 hours ago, TrueFollowerOfChrist said:

It seems ironic to me that scientists ( intelligence ) are trying to prove life could be created without intelligence. Has anyone else seen a strange contradiction there? Also funny that science has not yet shown that life can come from non life, yet it's taught as fact in school textbooks. Indoctrination?

I agree. It is ironic.

[TrueFollowerOfChrist]

On 9/30/2023 at 4:51 AM, RV_Wizard said:

The theory is that under certain conditions amino acids can be combined to create a protein.  This require an environment with no oxygen, which is why the evo's are now saying the original earth was devoid of oxygen.  Each protein cab be either left handed or right handed.  The simplest living cell requires 200 left handed proteins.  A single right handed protein prevents life.  Ever flip a coin 200 times and have it land on the same side every time?

It's not just the Bible that says life cannot come from non-life without supernatural causation, science confirms it.  There are NO scientifically valid explanations for the origination of anything from nothingness.

I think the main reason people, and even some Christians believe in evolution is because they haven't been shown how immensely complex life really is. The evolution mantra is simply nothing + time equals life. When one really studies the intricacies of the absolute impossibility of life being here by chance, it leaves you amazed. Also, I think the Churches are negligent in their duty by not informing people about this. The biggest myth is that all scientists believe in evolution. There was actually a paper  called "dissent from Darwin" written some years ago by over 100 scientists ( it is now online as a website ) , people with PhD's in biology, cosmology, geology, etc, who say they do not believe in evolution and there is no real evidence to support the theory. Lastly, I personally highly recommend people watch the documentary " The Case For A Creator " by Lee Strobel. It can at this time be viewed for free on Tubi. God Bless.

[RV_Wizard]

7 hours ago, TrueFollowerOfChrist said:

I think the main reason people, and even some Christians believe in evolution is because they haven't been shown how immensely complex life really is.

I've had people tell me that the likelihood of a Ferrari assembling itself in my garage was actually greater than zero and over enough time it would become a mathematical certainty.  I've had people tell me that if you drop enough bowling balls off a building one of them will fly away like a balloon.  The lengths people will go to to defend their evolutionist religion is astounding.

[The Barbarian]

You do realize that once a sequence isn't functional, it will inevitably become changed by mutations, right?    Why is that a surprise?

On 9/29/2023 at 6:52 AM, Tristen said:

This is an oversimplistic view of what can happen to genes.

It can happen to any DNA, genes or not.  Thought you knew.   So yes, mutations can affect telomeres.   A number of disorders can result from such mutations.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3463808/

If they no longer function at telomeres (such as in a fusion event), the mutation generally aren't harmful, and so can accumulate.  Which explains why they look like the wreckage of telomeres, rather than funtional telomeres.

On 9/29/2023 at 6:52 AM, Tristen said:

Secondly, define for me what you mean by “birds” and define what you mean by “dinosaurs”.

If those definitions are the same, then they can be “classified” the same.

I'm asking if you can think of any characteristic by which we could put them into separate classes.   Apparently, you can't.

You're apparently unhappy with the scientific method

On 9/29/2023 at 6:52 AM, Tristen said:

I would be unhappy with any version of the “Scientific Method” that prohibited me from thinking for myself, and/or prohibits me from disagreeing with how one party interprets the facts.

So you're thinking of  YE creationism?  

If that’s what you think constitutes the scientific method, then definitely count me out.

I get that you don't agree with Dr. Wise on paleontology

On 9/29/2023 at 6:52 AM, Tristen said:

It seems that I might disagree with the good doctor regarding how to interpret Darwin’s lamentation over a lack of what he called “finely graded organic chains” of fossils.

Well, Dr. Wise is a paleontologist, and is familiar with a large number of such "finely graded organic chains of fossils."   He calls them "series" and claims that they are "very good evidence for macroevolutionary theory."    And I can see why you disagree with him on paleontology.

I'm sure you can see why his call on this is more persuasive than yours.

On 9/29/2023 at 6:52 AM, Tristen said:

And I only respect the opinions of those who can see through the technically irrational Expertise fallacy, and prefer to consider arguments.

He knows what he's talking about.    If I have a tax question, I go to my accountant, not my doctor.    Go figure.

There are two fallacies about experts; the first is that experts know everything.   The second is that everyone's opinion has the same value.  - Robert Heinlein

You committed the second fallacy.

ABSTRACT

We have identified two allelic genomic cosmids from human chromosome 2, c8.1 and c29B, each containing two inverted arrays of the vertebrate telomeric

repeat in a head-to-head arrangement, 5'(TTAGGG),,-(CCCTAA),,3'. Sequences fln g this telomeric repeat are characteristic of present-day human pretelomeres. BAL-31

nuclease experiments with yeast artificial chromosome clones of human telomeres and fluorescence in situ hybridization reveal that sequences flanking these inverted repeats hybridize both to band 2q13 and to different, but overlapping, subsets of

human chromosome ends. We conclude that the locus cloned in cosmids c8.1 and c29B is the relic of an ancient telomere-telomere fusion and marks the point at which two ancestral ape chromosomes fused to give rise to human chromosome 2.

Notice that they just didn't blindly go fishing for evidence of fusions.    They were looking because other evidence indicated that there must have been a fusion of two ape chromosomes.   And when they looked, the evidence was there.   

On 9/29/2023 at 6:52 AM, Tristen said:

No one is questioning that they concluded the site to be a “telomere-telomere fusion”.

Or that they looked there to test a prediction that there would be the sort of remains they found.    And the prediction was verified.    That's how hypotheses become theories.  

On 9/29/2023 at 6:52 AM, Tristen said:

“Very good evidence” is a subjective analysis – and therefore more useless bluster.

In this case, the opinion of a highly-qualified paleontologist who, as a YE creationist, is not very comfortable with his findings, but is too honest to hide them.   To suggest that Dr. Wise's admission is "bluster" is clearly wrong and an injustice to Dr. Wise.

The large number of transitional series noted by Dr. Wise is indeed very good evidence for macroevolutionary theory but even more impressive, we only see transitionals where they were predicted.

On 9/29/2023 at 6:52 AM, Tristen said:

This is yet more empty bluster. When examined, the examples we discussed in another thread were actually outside of the "predicted" range – even though the “predictions” were absurdly generous.

Well, let's look at those again.    There's a reason that we don't see feathers on mammals, bones in crustaceans, and so on, even though the creationist notion of "common design" would suggest bats (for example) should have feathers.   There's a reason that DNA sorts out according to evolutionary expectations, but not creationist ones.    Show us these exceptions.

 

[Starise]

On 10/4/2023 at 11:26 AM, The Barbarian said:

You do realize that once a sequence isn't functional, it will inevitably become changed by mutations, right?    Why is that a surprise?

It can happen to any DNA, genes or not.  Thought you knew.   So yes, mutations can affect telomeres.   A number of disorders can result from such mutations.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3463808/

If they no longer function at telomeres (such as in a fusion event), the mutation generally aren't harmful, and so can accumulate.  Which explains why they look like the wreckage of telomeres, rather than funtional telomeres.

I'm asking if you can think of any characteristic by which we could put them into separate classes.   Apparently, you can't.

You're apparently unhappy with the scientific method

So you're thinking of  YE creationism?  

If that’s what you think constitutes the scientific method, then definitely count me out.

I get that you don't agree with Dr. Wise on paleontology

Well, Dr. Wise is a paleontologist, and is familiar with a large number of such "finely graded organic chains of fossils."   He calls them "series" and claims that they are "very good evidence for macroevolutionary theory."    And I can see why you disagree with him on paleontology.

I'm sure you can see why his call on this is more persuasive than yours.

He knows what he's talking about.    If I have a tax question, I go to my accountant, not my doctor.    Go figure.

There are two fallacies about experts; the first is that experts know everything.   The second is that everyone's opinion has the same value.  - Robert Heinlein

You committed the second fallacy.

ABSTRACT

We have identified two allelic genomic cosmids from human chromosome 2, c8.1 and c29B, each containing two inverted arrays of the vertebrate telomeric

repeat in a head-to-head arrangement, 5'(TTAGGG),,-(CCCTAA),,3'. Sequences fln g this telomeric repeat are characteristic of present-day human pretelomeres. BAL-31

nuclease experiments with yeast artificial chromosome clones of human telomeres and fluorescence in situ hybridization reveal that sequences flanking these inverted repeats hybridize both to band 2q13 and to different, but overlapping, subsets of

human chromosome ends. We conclude that the locus cloned in cosmids c8.1 and c29B is the relic of an ancient telomere-telomere fusion and marks the point at which two ancestral ape chromosomes fused to give rise to human chromosome 2.

Notice that they just didn't blindly go fishing for evidence of fusions.    They were looking because other evidence indicated that there must have been a fusion of two ape chromosomes.   And when they looked, the evidence was there.   

Or that they looked there to test a prediction that there would be the sort of remains they found.    And the prediction was verified.    That's how hypotheses become theories.  

In this case, the opinion of a highly-qualified paleontologist who, as a YE creationist, is not very comfortable with his findings, but is too honest to hide them.   To suggest that Dr. Wise's admission is "bluster" is clearly wrong and an injustice to Dr. Wise.

The large number of transitional series noted by Dr. Wise is indeed very good evidence for macroevolutionary theory but even more impressive, we only see transitionals where they were predicted.

Well, let's look at those again.    There's a reason that we don't see feathers on mammals, bones in crustaceans, and so on, even though the creationist notion of "common design" would suggest bats (for example) should have feathers.   There's a reason that DNA sorts out according to evolutionary expectations, but not creationist ones.    Show us these exceptions.

 

So what's your end game here @The Barbarian ?

Either we all came from a central creator or we didn't. The other option is frankly absurd to me.

[Buzzard3]

On 9/23/2023 at 2:33 PM, BeyondET said:

A flat worm holds the information in stem cells throughout it's entire body for a complete new flat worm. A little sliver cut off isn't dead it grows into an adult flat worm. With eyes and a brain,

Wow, that's amazing.