Genome sequencing leaves Creationists unable to respond

[Luminous]

I've been described in many ways....but never before agnostic.

What do you think?...something not at my disposal?

Ask me.

everyone is agnostic, and born agnostic... those who can't handle it, excuse themselves to deny God's will.
Can you really have certainty? what if you're wrong?
agnosticism is the only truth, there may be interesting ideas outthere...but that is all there is.

 

[Autodidact]

[SIZE=-1]Genetics, Vol. 151, 1621-1631, April 1999, Copyright © 1999 [/SIZE]
Beneficial Mutations, Hitchhiking and the Evolution of Mutation Rates in Sexual Populations
Did you read this article?
Are you wanting to talk specifics?
Again, this study proves evolution?

this study refutes your contention that there are no beneficial mutations. It describes beneficial mutations. Therefore you were wrong, when you said there were none. This would be a good time to thank me for correcting your misinformation on this point.

I read it, a little dry but some good points.
"evolutionist" want to give science as proof they are right.

There is no such thing as an "evolutionist." Biologists know that the scientific evidence supports their theory.

"creationist" want to give science as proof they are right.

Creationists oppose and reject science and the scientific method.

Both beliefs have unprovable points.

Science never proves anything. It's not about proof. Have I mentioned this before?

I know, I know, "evolutionist" specialize on the living organism only, forget about abiogenesis.

Sort of hard to "straight" faced say the origins dont matter.

It's not that they don't matter; it's a fascinating question. It's just not one that we've figured out yet--unlike evolution, which we have.

But your belief system is just as unprovable as mine.

Mine is based on empirical evidence; yours is not.

 

[Thief]

Hardly so... God does not require two bites of the same cherry when he does something.

Somewhat cryptic...should I assume something?

That would imply I believe Genesis to relevant or true... I do not. However it does contain some spiritual guidance.

Spiritual guidance is relevant....and true.
That God made an alteration is within His ability.
If not...is He God?

I see tinkering as making alterations to things he has already set in motion, as it is not working out the way he wanted or expected. That would seem to suggest his actions are not perfect.

It suggests more His allowance of our freewill...which is not perfect.

Prophets are needed to give us new paths to follow, when we are or have been, diverted from God's wishes by our free will. They do not make corrections to God's actions they make corrections to ours.

Your last line of post is correct.

 

[Blackheart]

that is a bold statement..., you need to back up this claim. besides defying ToE doesn't mean an adjustment to the theory...does it?

It shouldnt but it always does doesnt it.

fossils are not that easy to come by...you make it seem as though i can dig one up in my backyard and make up any story i want...
you obviously do not trust science...
if you don't then you should stop taking those headache pills cause you can't have it both ways...get my drift



why is it that no one has found fossils of kangaroos, penguins and bears on mount ararat? or anywhere in that region? it's not just about the transition from one form to the next is it? it's also about the environment and adaptation to it.

The point is that there should be MORE trans fossils than normal fossils. Where you find them is irrelevant to this point

 

[David M]

The point is that there should be MORE trans fossils than normal fossils. Where you find them is irrelevant to this point

Nearly all fossils are trans fossils.

Just for humans there are hundreds of trans fossils, i.e. every single hominid fossil.

Scientists get most excited over the ones that are transitional for large portions of the lineage, such as for tetrapods and aves.

 

[Autodidact]

The point is that there should be MORE trans fossils than normal fossils. Where you find them is irrelevant to this point

There are no "trans fossils" and "regular fossils." Every species on earth, and therefore every fossil on earth, is transitional between two other species. That's basic to how evolution works. Or, to put it differently, there are more "trans fossils", a lot more, in fact, all of them.

 

[waitasec]

The point is that there should be MORE trans fossils than normal fossils. Where you find them is irrelevant to this point

i just want to add salt to the wound...
where you find them is relevant because that will destroy the ToE hypothesis...
if you find 1 fossil of a penguin or any other animal that is not indigenous to the middle east...it's over and thusly will provide evidence for the noah fairy tale

besides, why should there be more? you realize we are talking about a lengthy period of time and thus far what has been discovered has supported ToE...


:beach:

 

[Dirty Penguin]

i just want to add salt to the wound...
where you find them is relevant because that will destroy the ToE hypothesis...
if you find 1 fossil of a penguin or any other animal that is not indigenous to the middle east...it's over and thusly will provide evidence for the noah fairy tale

besides, why should there be more? you realize we are talking about a lengthy period of time and thus far what has been discovered has supported ToE...


:beach:

I agree....

 

[Thief]

everyone is agnostic, and born agnostic... those who can't handle it, excuse themselves to deny God's will.
Can you really have certainty? what if you're wrong?
agnosticism is the only truth, there may be interesting ideas outthere...but that is all there is.

This would place a limit on everyone.
No matter what their viewpoint.

Have you found that ultimate truth....
please share.

 

[tumbleweed41]

The point is that there should be MORE trans fossils than normal fossils. Where you find them is irrelevant to this point

Silly Creationist.
Every fossil is a transitional fossil.

 

[openyourmind]

I don't know enough about this yet so I won't pretend to have the answer and hold up my book, "oh look it's written, so it's true." Ugh, really. I am a creationist and except this challenge. For, every question there are two types of answers right ones and wrong ones. This should be fun I love science in unlocks so much.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

I don't know enough about this yet so I won't pretend to have the answer and hold up my book, "oh look it's written, so it's true." Ugh, really. I am a creationist and except this challenge. For, every question there are two types of answers right ones and wrong ones. This should be fun I love science in unlocks so much.

Cool. See the problem is some creationist maintain a strict literal interpretation of their books. Christian creationist more than others. There's nothing wrong with Abiogenesis other than at this time there is no way to test the validity. We can and have tested the ToE and that's why it's regarded as fact.

 

[openyourmind]

Which at this point I have no valid arguement and stomping my feet and yelling sounds dumb. So as many before us we go and learn. If the evidence is fact and it turns out undeniable, well we go from there.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Which at this point I have no valid arguement and stomping my feet and yelling sounds dumb. So as many before us we go and learn. If the evidence is fact and it turns out undeniable, well we go from there.

That's the way to do it. There are plenty of well educated individuals here that can certainly point you in the direction of the evidence. Some here are mathematicians, physicist, biologist and more.

Here's a good starting point;
Evolution 101

Wikipedia is decent but just remember that the content there is (editable) content and may not always be accurate or extensive enough on a particular subject.

Enjoy...

Oh, Welcome to RF....

 

[openyourmind]

I know and understand the theroy of evolution. Until, I read this there really was no real proof either way. But, from what I've read thus far it could come to prove that man may not have looked the way we do today. But, still considered human instead of ape. Either way to have an idea of what man looked like or how big there where could help solve some other worldly mysteries. Wonder when religon will stop treating sceince like it's the devil's magic? ooohhhhhh scary, lmbo!

 

[Thief]

I know and understand the theroy of evolution. Until, I read this there really was no real proof either way. But, from what I've read thus far it could come to prove that man may not have looked the way we do today. But, still considered human instead of ape. Either way to have an idea of what man looked like or how big there where could help solve some other worldly mysteries. Wonder when religon will stop treating sceince like it's the devil's magic? ooohhhhhh scary, lmbo!

Would this be an atheist rant?

Or do you believe in God and science?

 

[openyourmind]

I believe in God with absolution but accept that I am human with many flaws and lots to learn. I know it is possible that the religous scribes of all the world have been in the hands of people capable of doing selfish things. You can either believe the discription of imaginitive people are literal and came from magic. Or, keep an open mind and see that what they speak of isn't magic but the practice of science now known by all.

Magic does exist, it the illusion of what is unseen. Just because you see how the trick is done, doesn't make it any less impressive. You should marvel in the preperation it took to make it happen. My kids still believe in magic, I just can't bring myself to ruin thier fun!

 

[openyourmind]

I knew this would be fun for me. I have studied a lot of things about history and sceince. I have many timelines on earthly events. When I started timeling scienceist theroy of evolution and mapped out from dino's to modern man I noticed something that is interesting to me. I haven't finished but once I have the entire over lay done I'd love to share it. Sorry creationist it offers this therory no apparent support. So evolutionist will enjoy it but I'll still look for it relation religous scripts, I have to examine all aspects after all!

 

[McBell]

I knew this would be fun for me. I have studied a lot of things about history and sceince. I have many timelines on earthly events. When I started timeling scienceist theroy of evolution and mapped out from dino's to modern man I noticed something that is interesting to me. I haven't finished but once I have the entire over lay done I'd love to share it. Sorry creationist it offers this therory no apparent support. So evolutionist will enjoy it but I'll still look for it relation religous scripts, I have to examine all aspects after all!

I would be most interested in getting a copy of any list of religious scriptures that even imply evolution you can compile.

 

[openyourmind]

Sorry I ended up mapping out evolution and found something. It may mean nothing to anyone else but I thought it was very interesting. I post a discription of what I've been looking at. You don't have to accept it but it could be fun.