07 Apr 11
Originally posted by KellyJayWhy do snakes and whales have vestigial hind legs?
I do not accept they all have the same common ancestor, I accept they were built
with the same design since it was and is highly effectvie why bother changing it,
even if the some of the other parts of varoius creatures are different.
Kelly
07 Apr 11
2 edits
Originally posted by KellyJayFrom your first paragraph: “...could just happen! ...”
So a lot of random mutations could just happen over and over building things
like a heart, veins, arteries, along with the makeup of the blood so it takes care
of other needs like the brain and lungs. In addition to building the parts they
must work together as a system, could just happen! As these small mutations
occur the parts are built and simultane ...[text shortened]... here are
too many variables over time that even with intent life are just mind boggling.
Kelly
are you denying here that advantageous mutations can happen? -I honestly don't know what it is you are saying here in your first paragraph.
“....random mutations done a little at a time one tiny
step at a time, again randomly ...”
are you ignoring the natural selection part here which is NOT purely random?
“...No directions are being given ...”
correct -but lets continue:
“....so that the proper mutation that is REQUIRED is FORCED to appear when it is NEEDED ….” (my emphases)
firstly, the next advantageous mutation to be selected for by natural selection is not “REQUIRED” or “NEEDED” for the guaranteed survival of a population of organisms of the same species if that is what you mean by “REQUIRED” or “NEEDED” ? If the mutation is selected for by natural selection then that means that the organisms were surviving BEFORE the mutation (else there would be no organisms for that mutation to occur in! -so no mutation! ) so that mutation could not have been needed or required to guaranteed survival of the organisms but as natural selection selected for that mutation then that means it must give at least occasionally a non-essential but, never-the-less, a significant survival/reproductive advantage.
Secondly, there is nothing “FORCING” any mutations to occur. Unless you are denying that they DO occur?
“...or stay as long as long as it is required, since getting a good mutation
does not mean a bad one can undo it next time around. ...”
why would a bad mutation “undo” that a good mutation has done “ next time around”?
If first we have a good mutation and then, later on, there is a bad mutation in an individual that just happens to “undo” that good mutation, then natural selection would weed out that bad mutation well before it has a chance to spread to the whole gene-pool. Then we would be just left with the good one.
As I was at pains to make clear in a previous post, “the disadvantageous mutations are irrelevant because natural selection continually weeds them out thus they would have no long-term effect/change on the gene pool.”.
“....if the male or female change in
such a way they don’t mesh with the other sex the race is over, ...”
if, for example, a mutation prevents mating (lets say in a purely sexual species) then that mutation would be weeded out by natural selection because, without the individual ever mating, the individual has no chance of passing on its genes and hence there is no chance of that mutation being passed on to the species/race as a whole and therefore it could not possibly result in the race ending as you just suggested above.
“...splitting into two different sexes had to be done all the while keeping each sex compatible with the other. ...”
in what way would they not “keeping each sex compatible with the other”?
FIRST there was only asexual reproduction -bacteria are an example of that.
THEN sexual reproduction and asexual reproduction in the same life form evolved but BEFORE male and female distinction evolved -the single-celled ciliates are a classical example of this ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ciliate “Ciliates can undergo both asexual and sexual reproduction “ ) .
THEN the ability to reproduce was lost by selection as it ceased to become advantageous in the changing environment.
THEN male/female distinction evolved along side the evolution of specialised sex cells.
07 Apr 11
1 edit
Originally posted by KellyJayYour response to twhitehead's post doesn’t make much sense.
"No, a bad mutation would not undo it. Natural selection takes care of that."
No, you are not looking at this correctly if you say that! Random mutations are just
that, they change things randomly, there isn't anything safe from a random
change; what is why is called RANDOM! You want to stack the deck this is the part
where I don't think you are not l ...[text shortened]...
move on, but they fail to take into account that is not the way it works in reality.
Kelly
twhitehead said:
"No, a bad mutation would not undo it. Natural selection takes care of that." ( twhitehead's quote)
note here that the above quote does not in any way imply or mean that mutations are NOT purely random nor does it require mutations to be non-random to be true.
But then you say:
“...No, you are not looking at this correctly if you say that! Random mutations are just
that, they change things randomly, ….”
yes, they are purely random -so what? Lets continue:
“....there isn't anything SAFE from a random
change; what is why is called RANDOM! ...” (my emphasis)
how does them being purely random mean that “ there isn't anything SAFE from” such a random mutation?
As he just said, “Natural selection takes care of that” i.e. Natural selection would weed out any disadvantageous mutation thus any beneficial mutations ARE “SAFE” because, thanks to natural selection, they cannot ever be removed from the gene-pool by the bad ones.
07 Apr 11
Originally posted by KellyJayWhile I was waiting for someone to move on one
So a lot of random mutations could just happen over and over building things
like a heart, veins, arteries, along with the makeup of the blood so it takes care
of other needs like the brain and lungs. In addition to building the parts they
must work together as a system, could just happen! As these small mutations
occur the parts are built and simultane ...[text shortened]... here are
too many variables over time that even with intent life are just mind boggling.
Kelly
of my chess games, I decided to visit this forum
again. I did not believe I would ever want to post
anything again while these atheist are on it. However,
after reading the replies you received from your
threads, I could hardly believe there could be so many
stupid people on a chess website. You can not reason
with stupid. Stupid is as stupid does. They are so stupid,
they will probably think I am referring to you. If you
get through to them, that will be a miracle. This may
seem like an insult, but I'm just calling it like I see it.
If I were in your place, I would just leave them alone.
07 Apr 11
Originally posted by RJHinds😞
While I was waiting for someone to move on one
of my chess games, I decided to visit this forum
again. I did not believe I would ever want to post
anything again while these atheist are on it. However,
after reading the replies you received from your
threads, I could hardly believe there could be so many
stupid people on a chess website. You can no ...[text shortened]... but I'm just calling it like I see it.
If I were in your place, I would just leave them alone.
07 Apr 11
Originally posted by RJHindsIs that a plank in your eye?
While I was waiting for someone to move on one
of my chess games, I decided to visit this forum
again. I did not believe I would ever want to post
anything again while these atheist are on it. However,
after reading the replies you received from your
threads, I could hardly believe there could be so many
stupid people on a chess website. You can no ...[text shortened]... but I'm just calling it like I see it.
If I were in your place, I would just leave them alone.
07 Apr 11
Originally posted by KellyJayI am really having great difficulty understanding why you can't seem to understand something as simple as a two step process:
No, you are not looking at this correctly if you say that! Random mutations are just
that, they change things randomly, there isn't anything safe from a random
change; what is why is called RANDOM! You want to stack the deck this is the part
where I don't think you are not looking at this properly. This is why the true
believers are not looking at this ...[text shortened]... d
move on, but they fail to take into account that is not the way it works in reality.
Kelly
1. Random mutations.
2. Natural selection.
You keep emphasizing 1. and ignoring 2., then calling us dishonest.
Tell me what you don't understand in the following:
1. Random mutations happen in DNA all the time.
2. Most of these mutations are harmful or neutral and the harmful ones usually result in the recipients dying off.
3. The mutations that are beneficial are more likely to be propagated and become more frequent in a population.
You may argue the statistics, you may argue the rates of mutations, you may make may valid arguments (if backed up with evidence), but the argument you keep making is invalid and seems to show a lack of understanding of the above 3. points.
07 Apr 11
Originally posted by Proper KnobYou have been following the discussion or no? Design and evolution through
Sorry, i don't understand.
Mammals all have the same 'stable systems', you've explained to me why you think 'stable systems' can't have evolved in some technical detail, i would like the same technical detail explaining why mammals can't have a shared ancestor.
I'm looking for [b]WHY they can't share an ancestor. What precisely is stopping the process from happening?[/b]
random mutations/natural selection are next to each other and we can look at
how complex the living systems are we are looking at, and with that which is
the one most likely to get us what we see today? Common or shared ancestors
are not comletely ruled out for select life forms, I'd feel safe with dogs and wolves,
but not Jelly fish and whales.
Kelly
07 Apr 11
Originally posted by Andrew HamiltonIf you want to tell me about life on other planets produce some, or stick with what
I have no idea what your point is here.
I didn't indicate that I want to show that there is life on another planets.
How does this relate to my argument I just said in that post?
you have data for, simple enough?
Kelly
08 Apr 11
1 edit
Originally posted by RJHindsOne of the things I strive for in my walk with Christ is not to let these types of things
While I was waiting for someone to move on one
of my chess games, I decided to visit this forum
again. I did not believe I would ever want to post
anything again while these atheist are on it. However,
after reading the replies you received from your
threads, I could hardly believe there could be so many
stupid people on a chess website. You can no ...[text shortened]... but I'm just calling it like I see it.
If I were in your place, I would just leave them alone.
get personal. I'm not very good at it, you can ask some of the people here I've
blasted from time to time, but I do try to admit it when I step out of line. I do not
think honest debate where people give their honest opinions even when they
differ from mine means they are stupid, they could have a different foundational
world view than I do, they may accept somethings I reject as solid truth so we
come up with different ways to view the same thing and I may not always be the
one in the right. I do not at all feel any Atheist is not worth the time or energy to
talk to, if they have a lot of passion for their beliefs GREAT! I worry more about
those lukewarm people than I do someone who is red hot in the beliefs or someone
who is very cold in their belief system.
If my desire is to serve Jesus Christ and not myself, than I need to serve others
no matter what because Jesus loves them, period. There is a point where you will
need to dust the dirt off your shoes yes, and when some people get me there I just
write them off and not respond to anything they say any more, which means I do
not get to take cheap shots at them either.
Kelly
08 Apr 11
Originally posted by twhiteheadThink of it like this.
I am really having great difficulty understanding why you can't seem to understand something as simple as a two step process:
1. Random mutations.
2. Natural selection.
You keep emphasizing 1. and ignoring 2., then calling us dishonest.
Tell me what you don't understand in the following:
1. Random mutations happen in DNA all the time.
2. Most of t ...[text shortened]... t you keep making is invalid and seems to show a lack of understanding of the above 3. points.
Gen 1
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 0
Gen 2
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 0, A first mutation
Now nothing in the rule book says that the next mutation could not occur anywhere.
Gen 3
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 0, B
Gen 4
1, 2, R, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 0, B
Random mutations are just that, nothing would be fixed in place, otherwise you'd
never be able to build something new if something had to be altered.
Kelly
08 Apr 11
Originally posted by KellyJayYes, I understand, I guess someone has to have the patience
One of the things I strive for in my walk with Christ is not to let these types of things
get personal. I'm not very good at it, you can ask some of the people here I've
blasted from time to time, but I do try to admit it when I step out of line. I do not
think honest debate where people give their honest opinions even when they
differ from mine means t ...[text shortened]... ything they say any more, which means I do
not get to take cheap shots at them either.
Kelly
to deal with them. It looks to me like you can't reason with them.
That is why I called them stupid. I decided if they want to believe
their ancestors were apes, then, as stupid as that sounds, let them
be.
08 Apr 11
Originally posted by RJHindsThe spirit of Dasa lives on here at Spirituality, it seems.
...after reading the replies you received from your
threads, I could hardly believe there could be so many
stupid people on a chess website. You can not reason
with stupid. Stupid is as stupid does. They are so stupid,
they will probably think I am referring to you...