22 Mar 09
7 edits
Originally posted by KellyJay….Let me say this AGAIN, natural selection does not design anything
Let me say this AGAIN, natural selection does not design anything
it acts as a filter. It kills off that which cannot make it, supposedly
leaving behind that which is improving or able to live. It does not
direct mutaitons to take place at certain times under certian conditions
to do specific things.
I've been very clear on this point, more than once th some but not
all, those that lived grew in numbers, again a filter not a director.
Kelly
it acts as a filter.
..…
Why do you say this yet “AGAIN” -given the fact that there is clear evidence to the contrary, this not only debunks this assertion of yours but, in doing so, shows it to be irrelevant to the discussion.
….It does not
direct mutations to take place at certain times under certain conditions
to do specific things.
..…
Again I have to point out to you that nobody said nor implied this and you know it.
As you already know, natural selection works IN CONJUNCTION WITH mutation to design things. The mutations came first and only then natural selection comes into play -but you already know this -are you just pretending you don't understand this very simple concept?
….You really have to be told that mosquitoes may not get killed off by
things we attempt to kill them with? It wasn't created yet, does not
for a second mean they were already going to live through it, because
it wasn't going to kill them.
.…
I am unsure if I understand what you are saying here -are you implying that some mosquitoes were ALWAYS resistant to DDT or what?
if you ARE implying that some mosquitoes were ALWAYS resistant to DDT then explain the premise for your belief that a new mutation that happens to give DDT resistance could have NOT come AFTER the mosquitoes populations were repeatedly exposed to DDT.
And explain the the premise for your belief that a new mutation that just happens to give DDT resistance MUST have existed in the mosquitoes populations JUST BEFORE the mosquitoes populations were repeatedly exposed to DDT.
But if you are NOT suggesting the above, then what are you saying here?
22 Mar 09
1 edit
Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton[/b]I said it again, because you are not displayed how your point is true,
[b]….Let me say this AGAIN, natural selection does not design anything
it acts as a filter.
..…
Why do you say this yet “AGAIN” -given the fact that there is clear evidence to the contrary, this not only debunks this assertion of yours but, in doing so, shows it to be irrelevant to the discussion.
….It does not
direct mutations to t ly exposed to DDT.
But if you are NOT suggesting the above, then what are you saying here?
you have not brought up anything to explain how your point is proven.
The only thing you have done is say your right, and forgive me, that
isn't enough. I've given you an example of why I believe what I have
said is true, you have not shown me how I am looking at it is in error,
you just say I'm in error.
I'll start a new thread to discuss this disagreement in greater detail.
23 Mar 09
1 edit
Originally posted by KellyJay….I said it again, because you are not displayed how your point is true,
I said it again, because you are not displayed how your point is true,
you have not brought up anything to explain how your point is proven.
The only thing you have done is say your right, and forgive me, that
isn't enough. I've given you an example of why I believe what I have
said is true, you have not shown me how I am looking at it is in error, ...[text shortened]... say I'm in error.
I'll start a new thread to discuss this disagreement in greater detail.[/b]
you have NOT brought up anything to explain how your point is proven.
..…(my emphasis)
But I just did prove it and twice! Reminder for the THIRD time:
….“…
So natural selection didn’t design drug-resistant metabolism in drag-resistant bacteria? 😛
And natural selection didn’t design DDT-resistant metabolism in DDT-resistant mosquitoes? 😛
.…
The two examples above are examples of observable proof of evolution (which is merely natural selection working in conjunction with mutations) redesigning metabolism -how is this not proof that evolution causing changes in the design of living things? -Answer -it IS proof and you know it.
You also haven’t answered any of my questions and yet I have answered all of yours.
….I'll start a new thread to discuss this disagreement in greater detail..…
-so that you can simply not answer questions there as well 😛
It is extremely rude and offensive in a discussion to be so opinionated as to always expect others to answer YOUR questions but often never give a straight answer to the questions repeatedly put to you. It is also extremely rude and offensive in a discussion to be so opinionated as to simply ignore what the other person has just said and instead, just endlessly repeat over and over again some irrelevant 'point' -the only person you would really be “discuss this disagreement in greater detail” to is yourself -good luck.
23 Mar 09
Originally posted by KellyJayYou don't have to, I've done it for you: Thread 110229.
I'll start a new thread to discuss this disagreement in greater detail.
24 Mar 09
Originally posted by Andrew HamiltonSo if I say the horse is an example of why your wrong you'd be
[b]….I said it again, because you are not displayed how your point is true,
you have NOT brought up anything to explain how your point is proven.
..…(my emphasis)
But I just did prove it and twice! Reminder for the THIRD time:
….“…
So natural selection didn’t design drug-resistant metabolism in drag-resistant bacteria? 😛
And ...[text shortened]... you would really be “discuss this disagreement in greater detail” to is yourself -good luck.
okay with that?
Kelly
24 Mar 09
3 edits
Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton[/b]You have not answered my questions, twice now you give me two
[b]….I said it again, because you are not displayed how your point is true,
you have NOT brought up anything to explain how your point is proven.
..…(my emphasis)
But I just did prove it and twice! Reminder for the THIRD time:
….“…
So natural selection didn’t design drug-resistant metabolism in drag-resistant bacteria? 😛
And you would really be “discuss this disagreement in greater detail” to is yourself -good luck.
examples of "PROOF" of your belief that evolution works the way
you claim it does. Neither time have you done anything other than
make the claim, that is proof. I don't accept your proof, PROVE it
show me how those things prove your point of view is right, do not
just tell me they do. I gave you an example, I told you why, walked
you through the process, you spout off two examples and think
you've done enough. I also refuted your examples, gave you another
reason or why what occurred could have done so without the means
you have suggested.
I've told you over and over natural selection does not design, it is
a filter that only stops the bad from moving on, it does NOT direct
mutations to occur, it does not say when the mutations should occur,
it does not keep or take away anything at the right time, it has no
plan, it has not intent, it does nothing but filter out that which cannot
make it under the conditions that life form finds itself in. If it were a
design it would have to find the right mutations, call up what was
needed, put all things together just right, it would have to make sure
all the systems in the body worked together, and trial and error would
not get that job done! As I pointed out to you and others here before
with the example of blood clotting, you cannot have it looking for the
timing on when to clot, if any attempts were made that made it
happen to early the body dies due to clots, too late it bleeds to death.
You have an unworkable process you believe in, but that is all you
have displayed so far is just an opinion on your two examples.
How do you think natural selection designs anything, what is the
process according to you that makes it something other than just
a filter?
KJ
24 Mar 09
Originally posted by Andrew HamiltonWhat question have I not addressed or answered of yours?
[b]….all it takes is you
giving me a couple of questions about DID natural selection design
DDT-resistant is enough to prove your point?
..… (my emphasis)
What you mean by “DID” in the above?
Are you saying that natural selection did NOT design DDT-resistant mosquitoes? 😛
if yes then if it wasn’t natural selection then what did desi ...[text shortened]... CAN and sometimes DOES change the design (design of metabolism in this case) of a living thing.[/b]
Kelly
24 Mar 09
1 edit
Originally posted by KellyJay…You have not answered my questions
You have not answered my questions, twice now you give me two
examples of "PROOF" of your belief that evolution works the way
you claim it does. Neither time have you done anything other than
make the claim, that is proof. I don't accept your proof, PROVE it
show me how those things prove your point of view is right, do not
just tell me they do. I hat is the
process according to you that makes it something other than just
a filter?
KJ[/b]
..…
Yes I have.
….now you give me two
examples of "PROOF" of your belief that evolution works the way
you claim it does.
.…
Precisely! Questions answered.
Which questions have I failed to answer?
….Neither time have you done anything other than
make the claim, that is proof.
…
In what way is examples of evolution being observed to cause changes in a species NOT proof that evolution can and sometimes does cause changes in a species? 😛
(I don’t expect you to give a clear answer this very simple question because you just ignore such questions in the hope we all forget about them)
…. I don't accept your proof,
…
Of course you don't accept ANY such proof -you don’t accept science nor evidence nor logic.
…
I've told you over and over natural selection does not design,
…
….How do you think natural selection designs anything, what is the
process according to you that makes it something other than just
a filter?
…
The existence of mutations that add NEW variants to the population that didn't exist in the population before.
24 Mar 09
Originally posted by KellyJayJust for starters, the bottom of my last post at the bottom of Page 13:
What question have I not addressed or answered of yours?
Kelly
…
….You really have to be told that mosquitoes may not get killed off by
things we attempt to kill them with? It wasn't created yet, does not
for a second mean they were already going to live through it, because
it wasn't going to kill them.
.…
I am unsure if I understand what you are saying here -are you implying that some mosquitoes were ALWAYS resistant to DDT or what?
if you ARE implying that some mosquitoes were ALWAYS resistant to DDT then explain the premise for your belief that a new mutation that happens to give DDT resistance could have NOT come AFTER the mosquitoes populations were repeatedly exposed to DDT.
And explain the the premise for your belief that a new mutation that just happens to give DDT resistance MUST have existed in the mosquitoes populations JUST BEFORE the mosquitoes populations were repeatedly exposed to DDT.
But if you are NOT suggesting the above, then what are you saying here?
..…
You can CLEARLY see TWO questions in the above -NOW will you answer THOSE two? -I will now wait to see if you actually do answer them.
24 Mar 09
1 edit
Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton[/b]I'm pretty sure I did address those points already, I'll double check
Just for starters, the bottom of my last post at the bottom of Page 13:
[b]…
….You really have to be told that mosquitoes may not get killed off by
things we attempt to kill them with? It wasn't created yet, does not
for a second mean they were already going to live through it, because
it wasn't going to kill them.
.…
I am unsure if I ...[text shortened]... above -NOW will you answer THOSE two? -I will now wait to see if you actually do answer them.
and if not I'll give you, your answers.
Kelly
24 Mar 09
6 edits
Originally posted by KellyJay….I'm pretty sure I did address those points already,
I'm pretty sure I did address those points already, I'll double check
and if not I'll give you, your answers.
Kelly[/b]
..…
But there isn't just ‘points’ there but ‘questions’ and you didn’t answer them (and still haven’t).
Are you REALLY going to answer them?
…I'll double check ..…
Mmmm -that should take you about 50 seconds of reading AT MOST I guess -there isn't much there to read. You don't even have to go back a page -all posts after those questions are, so far, on this page.