A simple case for intelligent design

[tas8831]

Then you are quite aware that BLAST is not what is used to prove relationship in a court of law.....

Of course - why would it be? The only people that use BLAST to assess genome-wide % identity that I am aware of are creationists in their desperation.

Better question - why do you think that BLAST is the only thing ever used in the study of evolution?

So, if your claim that chimps and humans are only 2% different were true, then the same test used in a court of law could be used with only a 2% margin of error.....

Where did you get the 2% margin of error?

So, why are you refusing to use the proven test

What "proven test" are you referring to?

THIS ONE???

The tested methodology:

Science 25 October 1991:
Vol. 254. no. 5031, pp. 554 - 558

Gene trees and the origins of inbred strains of mice

WR Atchley and WM Fitch

Extensive data on genetic divergence among 24 inbred strains of mice provide an opportunity to examine the concordance of gene trees and species trees, especially whether structured subsamples of loci give congruent estimates of phylogenetic relationships. Phylogenetic analyses of 144 separate loci reproduce almost exactly the known genealogical relationships among these 24 strains. Partitioning these loci into structured subsets representing loci coding for proteins, the immune system and endogenous viruses give incongruent phylogenetic results. The gene tree based on protein loci provides an accurate picture of the genealogical relationships among strains; however, gene trees based upon immune and viral data show significant deviations from known genealogical affinities.​

Do you even know what 'test is used in a court of law'? Because I don't think you do.

and instead using one that uses an algorithm to match sequences randomly?

If the sequences are being matched BY their sequence, it isn't 'randomly', is it? Hilarious that you trust lying creationists like Jay Wile and Tomkins so readily.

Because you can’t get your pseudoscientific answers to come out in your favor in other way....

In reality, the DNA testing methods admissible in court HAVE been used to assess phylogeny and guess what - same results!

Phylogenetic relationships among Homo sapiens and related species based on restriction site variations in rDNA spacers

"We mapped restriction sites in “the external and internal spacer regions and compared the arrangements of sites. The estimated sequence divergence betweenHomo sapiens andPan troglodytes, Pan paniscus, Gorilla gorilla, Pongo pygmaeus, Hylobates lar, H. agilis, andMacaca fuscata was 2.7, 2.3, 3.8, 7.3, 6.8, 7.8, and 14.1%, respectively. The genetic relationships inferred from these distances generally correspond to those inferred from analyses of other molecular markers in the literature."​

The thing is, these court-approved tests are not quite as informative as are other means of assessing phylogeny, and they utilize relatively data.

I mean who you trying to convince with your PR rant, yourself?

Projection - one of your more endearing qualities.
It is a shame that you cannot recognize your own ignorance on these subjects - were you able to, you might not embarrass yourself so frequently.

 

[tas8831]

You got the ones you claim went before the common ancestor and the ones after.

Surely you can produce one out of the billions required?

Can you produce one of the organic polymer precursers poofed by Yahweh from dust of the ground? Surely you can provide one example of the billions needed.

 

[tas8831]

You already have. You just keep imagining the incredible design you see isn’t really design, because no one wants to admit to the Designer....

Cool question begging, bro!

 

[Subduction Zone]

Based upon connecting different creatures that have no relationship with those “missing common ancestors”.

But then that’s why every creature found stays the same until it goes extinct. There is no evolution when you stop imagining missing common ancestors that don’t exist.....

If you want to claim "no relationship" that puts the burden of proof upon you. If you refuse to learn all we can do is to point out your errors. And no, not "every creature remains the same until it goes extinct" where did you get that idea from?

If you want to make demands, from me at least, you need to first learn the scientific method, and you must learn what is and what is not evidence. Until you do all I really need to do is to point out your errors. You have to meet me at least part of the way if you want to make demands.

 

[Subduction Zone]

One out of countless billions is certainly not a ridiculous demand.

Might as well just admit you got nothing to back up your claims..... it would save us all time....

Of course it is. You are not able to currently judge any evidence produced for you. All you can do is deny without a basis in reality.

Your refusal to take a little time to learn the basics puzzles me. What is your motivation in avoiding learning the basics. It is almost as if you know that once you understand you will realize that you are wrong. But you use the name "truth seeker" That means you should be willing to find out whether you are right or wrong.

 

[We Never Know]

You got the ones you claim went before the common ancestor and the ones after.

Surely you can produce one out of the billions required?

Your excuses of not being able to find them when you claim you can clearly identify what came before and what came after is just that, an excuse.

They never existed because the link between the different creatures you are trying to connect never existed.....

I’m not the one claiming my ancestors from 2000 years ago split to become anything..... If you wish to make the claim that my ancestors 2000 years ago were not human just like I am, that’s your burden to prove.

Deliberately try to throw straw men in often to avoid the subject?

I will admit evidence for something that happened millions and millions of years ago is hard to come by but there is some.
You should understand how hard evidence is to come by because in what 3-4 thousand years you can't produce any evidence for the flood for example.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Of course - why would it be? The only people that use BLAST to assess genome-wide % identity that I am aware of are creationists in their desperation.

Lol, creationists use BLAST because that is what evolutionists use. They just use more realistic numbers. Aren’t you tired of spreading PR junk yet?

Better question - why do you think that BLAST is the only thing ever used in the study of evolution?

Oh it’s not, you got other random matching algorithms that are just as pseudoscientific.

Where did you get the 2% margin of error?
What "proven test" are you referring to?

You just said you were aware BLAST wasn’t used in a court of law to prove relationship. Now you don’t know what is suddenly????

THIS ONE???

The tested methodology:

Science 25 October 1991:
Vol. 254. no. 5031, pp. 554 - 558

Gene trees and the origins of inbred strains of mice

WR Atchley and WM Fitch

Extensive data on genetic divergence among 24 inbred strains of mice provide an opportunity to examine the concordance of gene trees and species trees, especially whether structured subsamples of loci give congruent estimates of phylogenetic relationships. Phylogenetic analyses of 144 separate loci reproduce almost exactly the known genealogical relationships among these 24 strains. Partitioning these loci into structured subsets representing loci coding for proteins, the immune system and endogenous viruses give incongruent phylogenetic results. The gene tree based on protein loci provides an accurate picture of the genealogical relationships among strains; however, gene trees based upon immune and viral data show significant deviations from known genealogical affinities.​

Do you even know what 'test is used in a court of law'? Because I don't think you do.
If the sequences are being matched BY their sequence, it isn't 'randomly', is it? Hilarious that you trust lying creationists like Jay Wile and Tomkins so readily.

Except in a court of law the genomes are compared side by side, loci by loci, not by matching by algorithms. You should be ashamed of yourself for intentionally trying to mislead people.

In reality, the DNA testing methods admissible in court HAVE been used to assess phylogeny and guess what - same results!

Phylogenetic relationships among Homo sapiens and related species based on restriction site variations in rDNA spacers

"We mapped restriction sites in “the external and internal spacer regions and compared the arrangements of sites. The estimated sequence divergence betweenHomo sapiens andPan troglodytes, Pan paniscus, Gorilla gorilla, Pongo pygmaeus, Hylobates lar, H. agilis, andMacaca fuscata was 2.7, 2.3, 3.8, 7.3, 6.8, 7.8, and 14.1%, respectively. The genetic relationships inferred from these distances generally correspond to those inferred from analyses of other molecular markers in the literature."​

The thing is, these court-approved tests are not quite as informative as are other means of assessing phylogeny, and they utilize relatively data.
Projection - one of your more endearing qualities.
It is a shame that you cannot recognize your own ignorance on these subjects - were you able to, you might not embarrass yourself so frequently.

Yes, matched using algorithms.

Then they only used restriction site variations, I.e. they cut up the genome and only used portions of it.....

Aren’t you tired of misleading people yet just to spread your PR???

Do evolutionists have no shame?

Not quite as informative? They seem to be informative enough to show relationship and guilt of a suspect, without having to use algorithms to randomly match portions....

What you meant to say was they would show chimps weren’t even rated at all..... so we will downplay their importance....

 

[Subduction Zone]

Lol, creationists use BLAST because that is what evolutionists use. They just use more realistic numbers. Aren’t you tired of spreading PR junk yet?


Oh it’s not, you got other random matching algorithms that are just as pseudoscientific.


You just said you were aware BLAST wasn’t used in a court of law to prove relationship. Now you don’t know what is suddenly????


Except in a court of law the genomes are compared side by side, loci by loci, not by matching by algorithms. You should be ashamed of yourself for intentionally trying to mislead people.


Yes, matched using algorithms.

Then they only used restriction site variations, I.e. they cut up the genome and only used portions of it.....

Aren’t you tired of misleading people yet just to spread your PR???

Do evolutionists have no shame?

Not quite as informative? They seem to be informative enough to show relationship and guilt of a suspect, without having to use algorithms to randomly match portions....

What you meant to say was they would show chimps weren’t even rated at all..... so we will downplay their importance....

If creationists understand BLAST better where are their papers in well respected professional journals?

 

[Justatruthseeker]

I will admit evidence for something that happened millions and millions of years ago is hard to come by but there is some.
You should understand how hard evidence is to come by because in what 3-4 thousand years you can't produce any evidence for the flood for example.

I don’t expect to be able to produce evidence for the flood.

Unlike other extinction events where new creatures were created, the same animals that lived before the flood were brought through it. There would be no sharp demarcation line where new life not existing before began..... while the previous life ended......

But I’m not the one claiming I have ancestors before the split, ancestors after the split, but none of those that split. Yes, out of the countless billions of splits required, I can certainly understand you might not be able to find a few billion. But I’m just asking for one.......

I’m not claiming the animals before the flood changed into different animals after the flood. If I made that claim it would be incumbent upon me to prove it. I accept they were the same before and after, so no extinction line would be visible.....

The other extinction events are only noticeable because the creatures before are not the same creatures after. Did the same creatures continue, just in reduced numbers, you would never know they happened....

Can evolutionists be honest enough to admit this fact? Probably not as that would nullify their argument.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I don’t expect to be able to produce evidence for the flood.

Unlike other extinction events where new creatures were created, the same animals that lived before the flood were brought through it. There would be no sharp demarcation line where new life not existing before began..... while the previous life ended......

But I’m not the one claiming I have ancestors before the split, ancestors after the split, but none of those that split. Yes, out of the countless billions of splits required, I can certainly understand you might not be able to find a few billion. But I’m just asking for one.......

I’m not claiming the animals before the flood changed into different animals after the flood. If I made that claim it would be incumbent upon me to prove it. I accept they were the same before and after, so no extinction line would be visible.....

Then you do not understand the flood. If it existed as told in the Bible there would be all kinds of evidences for it. The lack of evidence tells us that it did not happen.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Then you do not understand the flood. If it existed as told in the Bible there would be all kinds of evidences for it. The lack of evidence tells us that it did not happen.

Really?

What evidence do you have of the five previous extinction events?

All you got is the life then existing did not continue. The fossil types changed.

But as I figured, evolutionists can’t be honest....

 

[Subduction Zone]

Really?

What evidence do you have of the five previous extinction events?

All you got is the life then existing did not continue. The fossil types changed.

But as I figured, evolutionists can’t be honest....

The evidence is a huge drop off of diversity in fossil life following the events.

You just told me that you do not understand the concept of evidence. Understanding evidence will help you in your search for the truth. Do you wish to discuss it?

 

[Justatruthseeker]

The evidence is a huge drop off of diversity in fossil life following the events.

You just told me that you do not understand the concept of evidence. Understanding evidence will help you in your search for the truth. Do you wish to discuss it?

No, you just admitted you don’t understand the concept of evidence.

A huge drop in the diversity of life.

Versus the flood where the same diversity that existed previously existed afterwards. There was no drop in diversity.

Hence it would by your own admission be unnoticeable. No change in diversity equals no sharp demarcation line. But that was already explained to you. Even if you then just admitted it would require a huge drop in diversity of life to be noticeable.

Such a shame you can’t even see your own fallacies.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, you just admitted you don’t understand the concept of evidence.

A huge drop in the diversity of life.

Versus the flood where the same diversity that existed previously existed afterwards. There was no drop in diversity.

Hence it would by your own admission be unnoticeable. No change in diversity equals no sharp demarcation line. But that was already explained to you. Even if you then just admitted it would require a huge drop in diversity of life to be noticeable.

Such a shame you can’t even see your own fallacies.

Don't be silly. I never said that the flood predicted a drop of diversity in life. You do not understand what the flood predicts. The flood myth actually predicts that organ transplants should not be a problem. That you have to wait so long for a kidney refutes the flood myth.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Don't be silly. I never said that the flood predicted a drop of diversity in life. You do not understand what the flood predicts. The flood myth actually predicts that organ transplants should not be a problem. That you have to wait so long for a kidney refutes the flood myth.

Because you don’t understand reality.

Breeding poodle with poodle reduces the diversity, not increases it.

I would expect as Noah’s sons and their families separated and interbred, that those with Asian features would breed only with those with Asian features and so those features would become set.

And the waiting line for Kidneys would be much shorter if you willingly gave up one of yours...... instead of waiting for someone on a donor list to die, then hoping they can get the kidney before decay sets in, or the donors kidney is healthy enough to begin with....

Fallacy after fallacy is all you have. Ignoring reality that as interbreeding occurs, lines segregate into specific types....

Well go through real life genetics all over again. Over 100 breeds were produced from wolves, but 100 breeds can not be produced from the poodle. The further from the original pair, the more set in their type they become and less compatible with their own Kind because of accumulation of errors.

Hence Ligers can barely interbreed even with their parents. Instead of a new species, you are seeing how one goes extinct.....

 

[Subduction Zone]

Because you don’t understand reality.

Breeding poodle with poodle reduces the diversity, not increases it.

I would expect as Noah’s sons and their families separated and interbred, that those with Asian features would breed only with those with Asian features and so those features would become set.

And the waiting line for Kidneys would be much shorter if you willingly gave up one of yours...... instead of waiting for someone on a donor list to die, then hoping they can get the kidney before decay sets in, or the donors kidney is healthy enough to begin with....

Fallacy after fallacy is all you have. Ignoring reality that as interbreeding occurs, lines segregate into specific types....

Well go through real life genetics all over again. Over 100 breeds were produced from wolves, but 100 breeds can not be produced from the poodle. The further from the original pair, the more set in their type they become and less compatible with their own Kind because of accumulation of errors.

Hence Ligers can barely interbreed even with their parents. Instead of a new species, you are seeing how one goes extinct.....

Too much nonsense. You should be trying to learn why the flood myth predicts no problems with organ transplants.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Too much nonsense. You should be trying to learn why the flood myth predicts no problems with organ transplants.

You should try to learn real life genetics instead of fantasies and realize 100 breeds of dogs were produced from wolves but 100 breeds can’t be produced from the poodle.

You should really stop ignoring that greater diversity leading to less diversity simply because it falsifies the evolution hypothesis.

Accept reality SZ and stop ignoring it and you will be able to match reality with what we see instead of having to propose nonsense....

 

[Subduction Zone]

You should try to learn real life genetics instead of fantasies and realize 100 breeds of dogs were produced from wolves but 100 breeds can’t be produced from the poodle.

You should really stop ignoring that greater diversity leading to less diversity simply because it falsifies the evolution hypothesis.

Accept reality SZ and stop ignoring it and you will be able to match reality with what we see instead of having to propose nonsense....

I understand real world genetics far better than you do. Dogs continually interbred with wolves. That kept their genetic diversity high. Your myth predicts almost no genetic diversity. It takes a population for their to be genetic diversity and your myth lowered the populations down below the extinction level for most species.

And you REALLY need to quit projecting your sins upon others.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

I understand real world genetics far better than you do. Dogs continually interbred with wolves. That kept their genetic diversity high. Your myth predicts almost no genetic diversity. It takes a population for their to be genetic diversity and your myth lowered the populations down below the extinction level for most species.

And you REALLY need to quit projecting your sins upon others.

Dogs don’t continually interbreed with wolves. In fact in almost all occasions we breed Poodles only with Poodles. Come on SZ can you not even accept reality any more?

Asians bred exclusively with Asians until we developed the technology to reach great distances. And still Asians tend on the whole to breed with other Asians, etc.

Mine predicts exactly what we observe. Greater diversity leading to less diversity. Hence over 100 breeds of dogs from wolves while only a few can be obtained from the Poodle.

You require we ignore reality.

In fact my Shih Tzu would not be certified as a pure breed if its ancestors were bred with wolves or anything other than Shih Tzu.

All you understand is fake genetics while ignoring the reality.....

It’s ok though, you can admit to yourself that diversity decreases with inbreeding, not increases. Everyone else already knows this..... each variation within the species becomes more and more set in their line, until the are bred with another variation in that species and information lost in each line is returned.

Hence Asian mates with Asian and produces only Asian. African mates with African and produces only African. Only when Asian mates with African is a new variation in the species produced. In this case an Afro-Asian.

But that’s why your hypothesis fails to match reality of how variation in the species is produced....

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Mine predicts exactly what we observe. Greater diversity leading to less diversity. Hence over 100 breeds of dogs from wolves while only a few can be obtained from the Poodle.

Justatruthseeker, I want you to put aside prior arguments and disagreements on every level for a minute, and I just want you to think, very carefully, about the above statement. Look at it again and remind yourself "poodles are one of the 100 breeds of dogs", and you should very promptly realize the significant logical contradiction of what you've just written here.

Have you noticed it?