Evidence For And Against Evolution

[shunyadragon]

As I said before, I have no education in science this is why I am asking questions and this is why I am willing to accept the coclutions of peer reviewed articles. As you made it clear I am in no position to "correct" brilliant scientists that went trough the process of peer review.

I do not believe that is the reason you are asking question.

Sure random mutations can create diversity,....... the question is, can they create the diversity required to create a flagelum or an eye from the preexisting systems described in the videos?

Previous questions have been answered and now you are asking me another question.. The gentic diversoty simply exists in all species including humans. Selective breeding is artificial yes, but it operates on the same diversity of the genetics that exist in all population. Yes the normal genetic diversity that naturaly exists in populations is more than enough for evolution to work over time.

 

[leroy]

Yes. Why did you not read the paper that the video was based upon? The video is a very very shortened version.

Here is a question that you need to answer:

Can you describe the different sorts of mutations involved in evolution?

The paper that you quoted doesn't claim (nor denies) that flagellums evolved by a process of random mutations and natural selection.

About your question, what do you mean by evolution in this context?

 

[shunyadragon]

Granted, but how did the diversity came to be in the first place.?

Mutations occur in the RNA and DNA of all known life forms, from the first known life forms likely bacteria.to the present. The first known life forms known to exist in the fossil record are bacteria colony fossils known as stromatolites 3.48 billion old. No other fossil life forms are known to exist at that time. Simply mutations occur over time in all life and over time the diversity of genetics existing the first bacteria.

If you move the goal posts further back we are in abiogenesis.

 

[shunyadragon]

The paper that you quoted doesn't claim (nor denies) that flagellums evolved by a process of random mutations and natural selection.

About your question, what do you mean by evolution in this context?

. . . because as I previously described evolution does not take place in the 'process of random mutations,' because the individual mutations do not represent a process, nor do they in themselves 'cause' anything. The simply develop the diversity in the genes of populations.

 

[leroy]

I do not believe that is the reason you are asking question.



Previous questions have been answered and now you are asking me another question.. The gentic diversoty simply exists in all species including humans. Selective breeding is artificial yes, but it operates on the same diversity of the genetics that exist in all population. Yes the normal genetic diversity that naturaly exists in populations is more than enough for evolution to work over time.

So the genetic diversity required for the evolution of eyes and flagela was already there (before the systems appeared?)

 

[leroy]

. . . because as I previously described evolution does not take place in the 'process of random mutations,' because the individual mutations do not represent a process, nor do they in themselves 'cause' anything. The simply develop the diversity in the genes of populations.

Ok more semantic games... Honestly what is wrong with you? I will reformulated my question without using the term evolution

Did complex stuff like eyes and flagella appeared by a mechanism of random mutations + natural selection.... If yes can you support your asertion?

Just kitting, I know that you are not going to answer anyway

 

[leroy]

Mutations occur in the RNA and DNA of all known life forms, from the first known life forms likely bacteria.to the present. The first known life forms known to exist in the fossil record are bacteria colony fossils known as stromatolites 3.48 billion old. No other fossil life forms are known to exist at that time. Simply mutations occur over time in all life and over time the diversity of genetics existing the first bacteria.

If you move the goal posts further back we are in abiogenesis.

That is very interesting, but that was not my question.

Yes random mutations can create diversity and then natural selection could "select" some of these variants (I agree)

The question is, can the process of random mutations and natural selection create the diversity required to produce an eye or a flagelum from the preexisting systems described in the videos?

 

[Subduction Zone]

The paper that you quoted doesn't claim (nor denies) that flagellums evolved by a process of random mutations and natural selection.

About your question, what do you mean by evolution in this context?

I am quite sure that you did not understand it or you did not read it. You do realize that scientists do not need to state the obvious, don't you?

 

[Subduction Zone]

That is very interesting, but that was not my question.

Yes random mutations can create diversity and then natural selection could "select" some of these variants (I agree)

The question is, can the process of random mutations and natural selection create the diversity required to produce an eye or a flagelum from the preexisting systems described in the videos?

Yes.

 

[dfnj]

I find this commentary on the failures of genetic research and molecular biology very interesting. With the amount of money that got pumped into bio-tech companies you would think we would have seen some significant results by now. But there's more to how the body forms and operates that just genetics. All DNS does is provide a sequence for protein production. The way the field mechanisms work and how life is formed you could argue there's intelligence in the Universe driving life formation.

 

[McBell]

I find this commentary on the failures of genetic research and molecular biology very interesting. With the amount of money that got pumped into bio-tech companies you would think we would have seen some significant results by now. But there's more to how the body forms and operates that just genetics. All DNS does is provide a sequence for protein production. The way the field mechanisms work and how life is formed you could argue there's intelligence in the Universe driving life formation.

Next you will be presenting Ray Comforts "Atheist Nightmare" video about bananas?

 

[leroy]

Yes.

Care to support your asertion?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Care to support your asertion?

Not really. The problem appears to be that when people support their claims you do not understand the support. I asked you a question that you ducked. I asked it so that we could see what level your understanding is at.

Can you describe what a mutation is?

 

[shunyadragon]

So the genetic diversity required for the evolution of eyes and flagela was already there (before the systems appeared?)

First, the flagellum did not suddenly appear, they evolved in steps, as demonstrated in the current research. The genetic diversity in the populations provided the variation for each stage of the evolution. The variation and stages of the evolution of the flagellum had a survival and selective advantage.

 

[shunyadragon]

I find this commentary on the failures of genetic research and molecular biology very interesting. With the amount of money that got pumped into bio-tech companies you would think we would have seen some significant results by now. But there's more to how the body forms and operates that just genetics. All DNS does is provide a sequence for protein production. The way the field mechanisms work and how life is formed you could argue there's intelligence in the Universe driving life formation.

You could argue that there is intelligence in the universe, but your making a subjective anecdotal anthropomorphic argument from the negative that our universe, and life could not come about naturally There is no falsifiable hypothesis that could possibly come to that conclusion.

 

[Jim]

The question is, can the process of random mutations and natural selection create the diversity required to produce an eye or a flagelum from the preexisting systems described in the videos?

For discussion purposes between you and me, let’s say that it can’t. Is there something that follows from that?

 

[Jim]

... the question is, can they create the diversity required to create a flagelum or an eye from the preexisting systems described in the videos?

I’m not sure what you’re asking. Are you asking for people’s personal opinions about that? Are you asking if any researchers think that it can happen? Are you asking if anyone has seen it happen? Are you asking if anyone has a model for how it could happen? Are you trying to find out if anyone has any reasons for thinking that it can happen, that would look convincing to you?

I haven’t seen any reason to think that it can’t happen. Have you?

 

[ecco]

You have made an argument about the actions of men. Not about the existence of gods. One does not follow the other by default. You are just doing what creationists do, but taking the other position. That is why this goes nowhere. You have no means to support that gods do not exist. You only have reasons for why you would conclude that personally. You believe it.

I see that you did not dispute that Atlas is nothing more than a creation of man's imaginings, like Superman. There is no reason to believe that Atlas or Superman are, in any sense, real entities.

I see that you did not dispute that Shiva is nothing more than a creation of man's imaginings, like Wonderwoman. There is no reason to believe that Shiva or Wonderwoman are, in any sense, real entities.

The argument I made about the actions of men is that they create(d) gods. The creations of man's imaginings are not real entities - not Atlas, not Superman. Do I really need to continue to make the argument to specify all of man's creations like Spiderman or Mighty Mouse or Mickey Mouse or Ra or UNkulunkulu?

If we take away all the gods that are the creations of man's imaginings, how many gods, which gods, are we left with - NONE.

 

[ecco]

Why do you keep referring to "proof"? Science, and history, for the most part, is not about proving anything, it is about accumulating evidence.

You erroneously used the term, so I was using it sarcastically in response.

Do try to keep track of the conversation. The first usage of "proof/prove" was your...
See post # 2654 above.[/QUOTE]

I don't believe in Bigfoot, but I can't prove it doesn't exist.

 

[shunyadragon]

Ok more semantic games... Honestly what is wrong with you? I will reformulated my question without using the term evolution

Did complex stuff like eyes and flagella appeared by a mechanism of random mutations + natural selection.... If yes can you support your asertion?

Just kitting, I know that you are not going to answer anyway

I have answered all the questions you have presented with sound science and references. You have the tendency to ignore my responses and twist my responses to things I did not say.

They did not just 'appear,] the evolved by way of the genetic diversity in the populations that develop through genetic drift. The steps are small as the appearance of light sensitive cells in Jellyfish for the beginnings of the eye that gave the animals an advantage of detecting light and dark. It has been shown that the genes involve in the light sensitive cells are related to the genes of animals as progressively more complex eyes that have a survival advantage. In some steps the mutation is simple the doubling of the primary genes for eyes by mutation that resulted in a more complex eye with a survival advantage over the simpler eye. ;