Page 2 of 8 [ 113 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 8  Next

Oldavid
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 May 2010
Age: 68
Gender: Male
Posts: 704
Location: Western Australia

03 May 2015, 4:50 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:
Huh...pretty sure evolution isn't even an invention, its more a way of explaining how life on this planet has developed, and it sure makes more sense than 'on the first day god made light', 'on the fifth day god made land/sky whatever the hell and that it was all put into a perfect garden where adam and eve screwed up and got kicked out and somehow birthed the entire human race....oh and according to most artwork they where white with light hair how did that happen? If the first humans originated in Africa and spread across the globe, it would then make sense the first humans may have been a little bit darker. Or does the adam and eve story just fit better with the false idea that the earth is only 6,000 years old because that does not leave enough time for the spreading about of humans and development of different physical traits due to environment.

Also what makes you think its only gullible, egotistical, miserables who are preyed upon by con artists? seems like you have a tendency to place blame on anyone anything bad happens to for somehow deserving it before you even know the details......granted I am sure those sorts of people get conned, but perfectly reasonable, kind, optimists also get conned.
"Evolution" certainly is an invention. Furthermore it's as impossible an invention as a bicycle without wheels. The Biblical description of events is not a science textbook... simply a statement that the whole caboodle is the product of power, intellect and will that is intelligible to all people of all times except all self-worshiping egomaniacs of all times.

Darwin-style "evolution" is demonstrably scientifically impossible. Creation by an intellect and power with the will to do so is not demonstrably scientifically impossible.

Miserable egomaniacs are gullible simply because they will seize on anything that makes them look good to themselves.



ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jun 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,265

03 May 2015, 5:42 pm

When you think about evolution and invention together - does one necessitate the other? Is there a relationship of some kind?



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 31,333
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

03 May 2015, 5:52 pm

Oldavid wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Huh...pretty sure evolution isn't even an invention, its more a way of explaining how life on this planet has developed, and it sure makes more sense than 'on the first day god made light', 'on the fifth day god made land/sky whatever the hell and that it was all put into a perfect garden where adam and eve screwed up and got kicked out and somehow birthed the entire human race....oh and according to most artwork they where white with light hair how did that happen? If the first humans originated in Africa and spread across the globe, it would then make sense the first humans may have been a little bit darker. Or does the adam and eve story just fit better with the false idea that the earth is only 6,000 years old because that does not leave enough time for the spreading about of humans and development of different physical traits due to environment.

Also what makes you think its only gullible, egotistical, miserables who are preyed upon by con artists? seems like you have a tendency to place blame on anyone anything bad happens to for somehow deserving it before you even know the details......granted I am sure those sorts of people get conned, but perfectly reasonable, kind, optimists also get conned.
"Evolution" certainly is an invention. Furthermore it's as impossible an invention as a bicycle without wheels. The Biblical description of events is not a science textbook... simply a statement that the whole caboodle is the product of power, intellect and will that is intelligible to all people of all times except all self-worshiping egomaniacs of all times.

Darwin-style "evolution" is demonstrably scientifically impossible. Creation by an intellect and power with the will to do so is not demonstrably scientifically impossible.

Miserable egomaniacs are gullible simply because they will seize on anything that makes them look good to themselves.


How is it an invention? do you figure humans where just here and invented themselves as well as all the other life/organisms on this planet and decided also which way things would develop and evolve? Its just something that occurs in nature...the term itself is an 'invention' but it just serves to describe something that already exists...regardless of humans. What is impossible about evolution exactly? I will not say humans have it all figured out down to every detail, and there are missing bits, but what is 'impossible' about simpler organisms developing into more complex organisms and then going through further changes based on the environment said organisms live in? To suggest the entire concept of evolution is impossible is quite frankly ridiculous and does not give you much to stand on. There more scientific evidence to suggest that then there is to suggest a personified deity molded and sculpted every living creature and breathed life into it and just set them in different places in the world hate to break it to you.

Also I did not ask why anyone was gullible I asked why you think only gullible people could be tricked by a con artist, that depends on how good the con-artist is. Also please do tell in what way an intelligent power creating the earth and all the creatures, plants and everything else more scientifically possible than the idea of more complex life developing from simpler life?


_________________
Fascism is a disease.


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 31,333
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

03 May 2015, 5:57 pm

To respond to an earlier post: But why would evolution create a ball point pen?....I suppose it should have skipped trees as well and just went straight to paper growing out of the ground, hell and why didn't evolution hell why didn't evolution just give us phones a few million years ago......


_________________
Fascism is a disease.


ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jun 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,265

03 May 2015, 6:14 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:
To respond to an earlier post: But why would evolution create a ball point pen?....I suppose it should have skipped trees as well and just went straight to paper growing out of the ground, hell and why didn't evolution hell why didn't evolution just give us phones a few million years ago......

This is a great post! :)

Just trying to figure out the fine line between where evolution ends and invention begins is difficult to do. Of course I know evolution involves genes and invention doesn't. It seems like invention begins where evolution leaves off. When I look at other species, seems like evolution hasn't helped them in terms of invention as much. Some here and there like birds and certain nest builders are able to create structures that aid their survival but nothing as extravagant as what humans do.

Birds are fortunate to be able to fly while fish can swim extraordinarily fast. Humans aren't so good at either of these by themselves so this inventive part of evolution takes over where nature appears incomplete.



naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,359
Location: temperate zone

03 May 2015, 8:58 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:
To respond to an earlier post: But why would evolution create a ball point pen?....I suppose it should have skipped trees as well and just went straight to paper growing out of the ground, hell and why didn't evolution hell why didn't evolution just give us phones a few million years ago......




Evolution would create ball point pens for the same reason that it would create wheels on animals.

That reason being -no reason at all. As evidenced by the fact animals dont have either wheels nor do they have ball point pens growing out of their paws.

BUT- after three billion years evolution did produce one species of animal that has a pension for invention. And that species produces novel things like wheeled vehicles and bic pens.



aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,076

03 May 2015, 9:57 pm

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
When you think about evolution and invention together - does one necessitate the other? Is there a relationship of some kind?


Yes, there IS A RELATIONSHIP between human classical evolution and human inventions.

There is classical evolution that occurs very slowly, and 'epigenetics'; where and when, greater potential of DNA is unpacked and expanded in potential, in just one lifetime, OR never unlocked and narrowed, in potential, depending on the challenges of the environment, and how one responds in either negative or positive adaptation.

And yes, human culture in all the colors it comes in from written language to collective intelligence, recorded as such, to all the material byproducts of culture, are examples of either negative or positive epigenetic measurable effects that exist as is, per human evolved existence, for now.

The problem in this type of evolution, per epigenetics, in one generation of living, is knowing if the change produced for adaption, is truly positive or negative.

While a person may escape their general anxiety watching TV; on the other hand, they may lose non-verbal intelligence in real flesh and blood communication, by rarely actually going through the flesh and blood PHYSICAL motions to enhance this type of intelligence, and of course, the same applies to all 'screen additions'.

Regulation of emotions and integration of senses does not happen, unless a person increases their physical intelligence, as a physical body moving through distance and space, AS THAT IS where emotions and senses exist in the human condition; yes, in the physical body.

TV takes one out of mindful awareness to a world directed by someone else and actors other than self in a play of life that is virtual reality input, instead of the output of developing mindful awareness in the physical intelligence of regulating emotions, integrating senses; and increasing cognitive executive functioning, additionally, through greater focus and short term working memory.

And of course, the other examples are myriad in either negative or positive effect and impact, ranging from screen addictions to free flow of processed sugary and fatty food TO THE destruction of the only home we have that is the environment of the earth, as whole.

Yes, all things culture are a byproduct of the classical evolution that through slow process leads to what we see as intelligent human beings, some 12 thousand years or so ago. Humans are the same in evolutionary terms to no significant difference, other than measurable bone density losses, among so-called civilized 'smarter human beings today' as compared to their ancestors 12 thousands years ago, and the people who still live a life of movement and challenge in physical intelligence, to equal that most important type of intelligence that humans are naturally evolved for. But as in all things nature; use or LOSE IT, DOES APPLY.

BETTER to be able to move freely with multi-directional legs, than have to use a cart with wheels at Walmart; but one often sees grossly overweight 30-year old or so adults, already relying on the cultural wheel that has replaced the common sense of a lifetime in healthy movement and a 'foraging diet' that does not often include 'all one can eat buffets'.

Humans, are naturally classically evolved for intermittent gratification. Instant gratification is most definitely an overall negative epigenetic byproduct of adaptation to change in just one lifetime; thanks or no thanks to abstract written language, collective intelligence, and back to the byproducts of that instant gratification, in real time, now.

Truly there is nothing new but a mix of what already is, as Nature, NOW.

The problem is, is it positive or negative in epigenetic impact.

Sometimes the greatest so-called luxuries of culture, can be tainted with metaphorical hemlock to the death of
negative epigenetic impact, over the course of a much shorter potential lifetime.

It's give or take; sanitation as the greatest epigenetic invention; and perhaps home entertainment as an early nail
in a coffin, per negative epigenetic change to the adaption of being lazy, instead of even living life as it IS CLASSICALLY
EVOLVED TO BE, IN MOVEMENT EVERYDAY; WITH NO SILLY ILLUSION OF A REST DAY GRANTED OVER THE NECESSITY FOR SURVIVAL, IN TERMS OF CLASSICAL EVOLUTION.

To understand how one is evolved by looking to nature and human nature, is the possibility have having a much greater life, in all ways that comes in for now. To not listen to the innate instinct and intuition that lives within one, before negative epigenetic influences in byproducts of human culture, drive one to an early death; is the potential of just that; a shorter life with lower quality of life, overall.

To make life easier with human wheels is also a potential shorter life, in ever being all one can be in much greater physical intelligence.

So it truly becomes a matter of be careful what one wishes for.

Sometimes the greatest dreams of now;

BECOMES the nightmares of tomorrow; when fully realized,
WHAT THOSE DREAMS TRULY ARE IN TERMS OF NEGATIVE
OR POSITIVE, OVERALL, HUMAN EPIGENETIC EFFECT, AND
IMPACT, IN JUST ONE LIFETIME,
NOW;

THAT TRULY IS WHAT
COUNTS ON A CASE-BY-CASE
BASIS; for those who still EVEN
HAVE THE ABILITY TO UNDERSTAND
THAT with A REFERENCE POINT OF
higher potential human intelligence;
particularly, imaginative and creative
PHYSICAL INTELLIGENCE, IN STEP
ONE OF EVEN LIVING 'LIVE', AT
THE BOTTOM OF THE hierarchy of
MASLOW'S PYRAMID OF HUMAN
BASIC INNATE NEEDS, MET OR NOT.


_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI

Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !

http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick


aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,076

03 May 2015, 10:22 pm

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
When you think about evolution and invention together - does one necessitate the other? Is there a relationship of some kind?


Note: edited post. Site went offline.



Yes, there IS A RELATIONSHIP between human classical evolution and human inventions.

There is classical evolution that occurs very slowly, and 'epigenetics'; where and when, greater potential of DNA is unpacked and expanded in potential, in just one lifetime, OR never unlocked and narrowed, in potential, depending on the challenges of the environment, and how one responds in either negative or positive adaptation.

And yes, human culture in all the colors it comes in from written language to collective intelligence, recorded as such, to all the material byproducts of culture, are examples of either negative or positive epigenetic measurable effects that exist as is, per human evolved existence, for now.

The problem in this type of evolution, per epigenetics, in one generation of living, is knowing if the change produced for adaption, is truly positive or negative.

While a person may escape their general anxiety watching TV; on the other hand, they may lose non-verbal intelligence in real flesh and blood communication, by rarely actually going through the flesh and blood PHYSICAL motions to enhance this type of intelligence, and of course, the same applies to all 'screen addictions'.

Regulation of emotions and integration of senses does not happen, unless a person increases their physical intelligence, as a physical body moving through distance and space, AS THAT IS where emotions and senses exist in the human condition; yes, in the physical body.

TV takes one out of mindful awareness to a world directed by someone else and actors other than self in a play of life that is virtual reality input, instead of the output of developing mindful awareness in the physical intelligence of regulating emotions, integrating senses; and increasing cognitive executive functioning, additionally, through greater focus and short term working memory.

And of course, the other examples are myriad, in either negative or positive effect and impact, ranging from screen addictions to free flow of processed sugary and fatty food, TO THE destruction of the only home we have that is the environment of the earth, as whole.

Yes, all things culture are a byproduct of the classical evolution that through slow process leads to what we see as intelligent human beings, some 12 thousand years or so ago. Humans are the same in evolutionary terms to no significant difference, other than measurable bone density losses, among so-called civilized 'smarter human beings today' as compared to their ancestors 12 thousands years ago, and the people who still live a life of movement and challenge in physical intelligence, to equal that most important type of intelligence that humans are naturally evolved for. But as in all things nature; use or LOSE IT, DOES APPLY.

BETTER to be able to move freely with multi-directional legs, than have to use a cart with wheels at Super Walmart; but one often sees grossly overweight 30-year old or so adults, already relying on the cultural wheel that has replaced the common sense of a lifetime; in healthy movement and a 'foraging diet' that does not often include 'all one can eat buffets'.

Humans, are naturally classically evolved for intermittent gratification. Instant gratification is most definitely an overall negative epigenetic byproduct of adaptation to change in just one lifetime; thanks or no thanks to abstract written language, collective intelligence, and back to the byproducts of that instant gratification, in real time, now.

Truly there is nothing new but a mix of what already is, as Nature, NOW.

The problem is, is it positive or negative in epigenetic effect and impact.

Sometimes the greatest so-called luxuries of culture, can be tainted with metaphorical hemlock to the death of
negative epigenetic impact, over the course of a much shorter potential lifetime.

It's give or take; sanitation as the greatest epigenetic invention; and perhaps home entertainment as an early nail
in a coffin, per negative epigenetic change to the adaption of being lazy, instead of even living life as it IS CLASSICALLY
EVOLVED TO BE, IN MOVEMENT EVERYDAY; WITH NO SILLY ILLUSION OF A REST DAY GRANTED OVER THE NECESSITY FOR SURVIVAL, IN TERMS OF CLASSICAL EVOLUTION.

To understand how one is evolved by looking to nature and human nature, is the possibility have having a much greater life, in all ways that comes in for now. To not listen to the innate instinct and intuition that lives within one, before negative epigenetic influences in byproducts of human culture, drive one to an early death; is the potential of just that; a shorter life with lower quality of life, overall.

To make life easier with human wheels is also a potential shorter life, in ever being all one can be in much greater physical intelligence.

So it truly becomes a matter of be careful what one wishes for.

Sometimes the greatest dreams of now;

BECOMES the nightmares of tomorrow; when fully realized,
WHAT THOSE DREAMS TRULY ARE IN TERMS OF NEGATIVE
OR POSITIVE, OVERALL, HUMAN EPIGENETIC EFFECT, AND
IMPACT, IN JUST ONE LIFETIME,
NOW;

THAT TRULY IS WHAT
COUNTS ON A CASE-BY-CASE
BASIS; for those who still EVEN
HAVE THE ABILITY TO UNDERSTAND
THAT with A REFERENCE POINT OF
higher potential human intelligence;
particularly, imaginative and creative
PHYSICAL INTELLIGENCE, IN STEP
ONE OF EVEN LIVING 'LIVE', AT
THE BOTTOM OF THE hierarchy of
MASLOW'S PYRAMID OF HUMAN
BASIC INNATE NEEDS, MET OR NOT.

And back to religious terms per new testament
text; THE VINE that is described in the NEW T,
per original Mesopotamia text, before translated
to Greek, means THE TREE OF LIFE; as opposed to
'The Tree of Knowledge' in OLD T TEXT; The Tree OF
LIFE IS what humans are classically evolved
for; whereas the Tree of
KNOWLEDGE are the
epigenetic changes
for adaptation
in one lifetime;
particularly
all the byproducts of culture;
again, ranging from
written human language
to frigging nuclear
bombs;

Yes, HUMAN BEING
culture can be a huge
and ever expanding
virus of human
epigenetic effect
and impact
THAT GOES
BOOM! POOF! DISASTER!

FOR all we know; there
may be another so-called
intelligent group of ET beings
who at this point in time are about
to do something we have no clue about
that will end or start the whole Universe
again like PRESTO; NOW, FOR THOSE
who think they know it all; IN potential,
they truly know little to nothing at all;

And truly screen addictions and all
one can eat buffets spells the
true intelligence of
what humans know
verseS what they
even frigging are,
as evolved
animals
NOW.

YES; TRULY 'WE' NEED TO
RE-EVOLVE THE HUMAN
BEING FIRST, WITH THE 'TREE
OF LIFE', AS NATURALLY CLASSICaLLY
EVOLVED; closer to innate instinctual
and intuitive ALLONE eyes of GOD OF
NATURE;
instead of
eyes of culture,
ALONE, IN A FAUX
'TREE OF KNOWLEDGE'.

So in other words, 'BEFORE THE
APPLE', IS THE TRUTH AND
LIGHT OF
HUMAN
BEING.


_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI

Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !

http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick


Oldavid
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 May 2010
Age: 68
Gender: Male
Posts: 704
Location: Western Australia

03 May 2015, 10:51 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:
How is it an invention? do you figure humans where just here and invented themselves as well as all the other life/organisms on this planet and decided also which way things would develop and evolve? Its just something that occurs in nature...the term itself is an 'invention' but it just serves to describe something that already exists...regardless of humans. What is impossible about evolution exactly? I will not say humans have it all figured out down to every detail, and there are missing bits, but what is 'impossible' about simpler organisms developing into more complex organisms and then going through further changes based on the environment said organisms live in? To suggest the entire concept of evolution is impossible is quite frankly ridiculous and does not give you much to stand on. There more scientific evidence to suggest that then there is to suggest a personified deity molded and sculpted every living creature and breathed life into it and just set them in different places in the world hate to break it to you.

Also I did not ask why anyone was gullible I asked why you think only gullible people could be tricked by a con artist, that depends on how good the con-artist is. Also please do tell in what way an intelligent power creating the earth and all the creatures, plants and everything else more scientifically possible than the idea of more complex life developing from simpler life?
It's the idea that is a pure speculative invention. The idea that Nothing turns itself into Everything for no reason and in direct contradiction to well known, easily demonstrable Natural Laws.
Quote:
but what is 'impossible' about simpler organisms developing into more complex organisms and then going through further changes based on the environment said organisms live in?
Exactly the same reason that a ball point pen or the Taj Mahal don't create themselves. Natural Laws will eventually destroy the pen and the Taj... not build them. The pen and the Taj were conceived by intellect and made by wills directing the power that fashioned them.
Quote:
Also please do tell in what way an intelligent power creating the earth and all the creatures, plants and everything else more scientifically possible than the idea of more complex life developing from simpler life?
That question is already answered above if you can spare the time to think about it. It has never been observed to happen and well known Natural Laws say that it can't happen.

The whole "evolution" thing is a great hoax sold by a massive marketing campaign.



The_Walrus
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 27 Jan 2010
Age: 25
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,340
Location: Reading, England

04 May 2015, 5:20 pm

OK Olddavid, if evolution is a hoax and an invention and demonstrably false, please explain the similarities in pseudogenes between anatomically-similar species.

I believe the issue here is twofold:

1) You are dogmatically tied to a falsified creationist account of history, and are unable to accept that Genesis is a lie because doing so would also undermine your other religious beliefs
2) You don't understand thermodynamics; you repeatedly mention that entropy makes the emergence of order from chaos impossible, without considering enthalpy



DentArthurDent
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jul 2008
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,884
Location: Victoria, Australia

04 May 2015, 8:08 pm

To be fair to David, I get the impression that he does not believe in genesis. Rather his conviction arises from a very simplistic view of entropy. Essentially he sees the universe as being a closed system and as such time, driven by entropy, can only go in one direction, leading to a situation where complexity must decrease. Whilst he freely admits that energy is not uniform throughout the universe, he stubbornly refuses to acknowledge that this fact leads to complexity IE low entropy high energy radiation gets transformed into high entropy lower energy and this transfer of energy states, along with the implications of e=mc2 is what fuels life and complexity, this process allows for complexity whilst driving up the total level of entropy in the universe. What he says will most likely come to pass, but not until all energy levels in the universe have become uniform.

I do remember him posting something about evolution being factual but only in line with entropy, which tends to suggest he thinks all life was created and was once far more complex.


_________________
"I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance anyday"
Douglas Adams

"Religion is the impotence of the human mind to deal with occurrences it cannot understand" Karl Marx


DentArthurDent
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jul 2008
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,884
Location: Victoria, Australia

04 May 2015, 8:37 pm

Oldavid wrote:

Exactly the same reason that a ball point pen or the Taj Mahal don't create themselves. Natural Laws will eventually destroy the pen and the Taj... not build them.


Strawman and you should know it. The Taj cannot self replicate and like all things (life included) degenerate. The point you are so assiduously ignoring is the fact that before living beings degenerate into a higher entropy forms, they reproduce. There is nothing in nature to prevent changes in complexity in these reproduced forms whilst there is an imbalance of energy throughout the universe.


_________________
"I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance anyday"
Douglas Adams

"Religion is the impotence of the human mind to deal with occurrences it cannot understand" Karl Marx


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 31,333
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

04 May 2015, 10:01 pm

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
To respond to an earlier post: But why would evolution create a ball point pen?....I suppose it should have skipped trees as well and just went straight to paper growing out of the ground, hell and why didn't evolution hell why didn't evolution just give us phones a few million years ago......

This is a great post! :)

Just trying to figure out the fine line between where evolution ends and invention begins is difficult to do. Of course I know evolution involves genes and invention doesn't. It seems like invention begins where evolution leaves off. When I look at other species, seems like evolution hasn't helped them in terms of invention as much. Some here and there like birds and certain nest builders are able to create structures that aid their survival but nothing as extravagant as what humans do.

Birds are fortunate to be able to fly while fish can swim extraordinarily fast. Humans aren't so good at either of these by themselves so this inventive part of evolution takes over where nature appears incomplete.


To me that says other animals are much better fit for the environment than humans, they don't need to invent things really to survive just fine...humans on the other hand do not fare well with nothing but their hands and feet to work with we need tools, clothes in a lot of areas to keep warm as humans tend not to be equipped with hair all over the body, weapons even just to more effectively hunt(well not so much now as you can go buy a steak) just seems most tasks other animals do without the use of inventions are things humans would not be so great at. I mean for instance back when humans depended on hunting and gathering for food I cannot very well picture humans pouncing on prey animals and biting/clawing them enough to kill them and then eating them nice and raw right there? a human needs tools to hunt something and turn it into food we can stomach.


_________________
Fascism is a disease.


Oldavid
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 May 2010
Age: 68
Gender: Male
Posts: 704
Location: Western Australia

05 May 2015, 4:32 am

The_Walrus wrote:
OK Olddavid, if evolution is a hoax and an invention and demonstrably false, please explain the similarities in pseudogenes between anatomically-similar species.

I believe the issue here is twofold:

1) You are dogmatically tied to a falsified creationist account of history, and are unable to accept that Genesis is a lie because doing so would also undermine your other religious beliefs
2) You don't understand thermodynamics; you repeatedly mention that entropy makes the emergence of order from chaos impossible, without considering enthalpy
Enthalpy has been dealt with in previous threads. Enthalpy has little or nothing to do with entropy even though the words are superficially similar. It is irrelevant to this discussion.

You pop it in, without any even attempted explanation as to why you think relevant, as though it is some sort of bogeyman to frighten me.

I'm not talking about the Genesis account of how and why things are as they are. I'm simply pointing out that the Darwinist paradigm is scientifically impossible.



Oldavid
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 May 2010
Age: 68
Gender: Male
Posts: 704
Location: Western Australia

05 May 2015, 4:48 am

DentArthurDent wrote:
Oldavid wrote:

Exactly the same reason that a ball point pen or the Taj Mahal don't create themselves. Natural Laws will eventually destroy the pen and the Taj... not build them.


Strawman and you should know it. The Taj cannot self replicate and like all things (life included) degenerate. The point you are so assiduously ignoring is the fact that before living beings degenerate into a higher entropy forms, they reproduce. There is nothing in nature to prevent changes in complexity in these reproduced forms whilst there is an imbalance of energy throughout the universe.
More impossible waffle, Arty. Entropy applies to reproduction as in the Law of Morphology that you choose to ignore. Your assertion above is typically incoherent and self-contradictory.

However, that will be of no interest to you because your base assumption is that Everything is a result of blind happenstance and you are the pinnacle of perfection.



Janissy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 May 2009
Age: 53
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,450
Location: x

05 May 2015, 7:59 am

Oldavid wrote:
Entropy applies to reproduction as in the Law of Morphology that you choose to ignore.


I don't know where you got this term Law of Morphology from- made it up? saw it on a creationist blog? But your repeated use of it shows that you don't know about DNA repair.

To quote you from other WP threads on evolution (since you talking about evolution is the only place google can find this supposed law)
Quote:
Law of Morphology; "the more complex an organism and the more often it is replicated the greater the chance that something will go wrong in the replication process


What this does not acknowledge is DNA repair. Your misunderstanding of DNA is closely related to your misunderstanding of entropy. You are just not truly accepting the implications of energy distributed unevenly throughout the universe and that energy can flow from a higher energy area to a lower energy area in parsed out amounts, not just explosions, and that this slow but steady stream of energy drives complexity. You repeatedly have used an "intentional housewife vs. a bomb" metaphor to illustrate how incoming energy can't produce order, only intention can, while ignoring the sun beaming down on the growing plants in the fields you keep. (I think somewhere along the way you said agriculture was your occupation).

Earth gets a continuous influx of regulated energy from the sun. The magnetic field keeps us from getting "bombed". So energy here on earth is kept in balance rather than ticking inexorably downwards. Reproduction does allow for copy errors and a complex organism does have a lot riding on the fidelity of various parts. You are imagining a DNA string which gets increasingly wrongly copied and those errors pile up and up and up but......http://www.nbs.csudh.edu/chemistry/faculty/nsturm/CHEMXL153/DNAMutationRepair.htm

The following is more or less what you or some other creationist have decided to call Law of Morphology.
link about DNA repair wrote:
Errors in DNA Recombination

DNA often rearranges itself by a process called recombination which proceeds via a variety of mechanisms. Occasionally DNA is lost during replication leading to a mutation.


This would indeed lead to a pile-up of errors if the following did not also exist:


link about DNA repair wrote:
DNA Repair

Damaged DNA can be repaired by several different mechanisms.

Mismatch Repair

Sometimes DNA polymerase incorporates an incorrect nucleotide during strand synthesis and the 3' to 5' editing system, exonuclease, fails to correct it. These mismatches as well as single base insertions and deletions are repaired by the mismatch repair mechanism. Mismatch repair relies on a secondary signal within the DNA to distinguish between the parental strand and daughter strand, which contains the replication error. Human cells posses a mismatch repair system similar to that of E. coli, which is described here. Methylation of the sequence GATC occurs on both strands sometime after DNA replication. Because DNA replication is semi-conservative, the new daughter strand remains unmethylated for a very short period of time following replication. This difference allows the mismatch repair system to determine which strand contains the error. A protein, MutS recognizes and binds the mismatched base pair.

Another protein, MutL then binds to MutS and the partially methylated GATC sequence is recognized and bound by the endonuclease, MutH. The MutL/MutS complex then links with MutH which cuts the unmethylated DNA strand at the GATC site. A DNA Helicase, MutU unwinds the DNA strand in the direction of the mismatch and an exonuclease degrades the strand. DNA polymerase then fills in the gap and ligase seals the nick. Defects in the mismatch repair genes found in humans appear to be associated with the development of hereditary colorectal cancer.

Nucleotide Excision Repair (NER)

NER in human cells begins with the formation of a complex of proteins XPA, XPF, ERCC1, HSSB at the lesion on the DNA. The transcription factor TFIIH, which contains several proteins, then binds to the complex in an ATP dependent reaction and makes an incision. The resulting 29 nucleotide segment of damaged DNA is then unwound, the gap is filled (DNA polymerase) and the nick sealed (ligase).

Direct Repair of Damaged DNA

Sometimes damage to a base can be directly repaired by specialized enzymes without having to excise the nucleotide.

Recombination Repair

This mechanism enables a cell to replicate past the damage and fix it later.


This is why your Law of Morphology can't be found anywhere in the field of biology (although google found me a Law of Morphology with a different meaning in a 19th century medical text discussing the morphology of blood cells). Anybody who understands DNA also understands how it self repairs.

Before you attempt a "gotcha! you just disproved evolution if all errors get corrected"- all errors don't get corrected. The vast majority do but sometimes an error sneaks by and the results are fatal or at least make reproduction impossible, but sometimes not. Voila! evolution.

p.s. for ooooanaooooo; none of the above will lead to wheels on mammals for the reasons already listed by other posters