Posted on 10/05/2009 9:03:40 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Plant geneticist Dr John Sanford began working as a research scientist at Cornell University in 1980. He co-invented the ‘gene gun’ approach to genetic engineering of plants. This technology has had a major impact on agriculture around the world...
(Excerpt) Read more at creation.com ...
ping!
And his brief conclusions were???????
Impossible? Perhaps.
But I had to laugh last week when someone declared the Genesis account of creation “impossible that it happened like that.”
OF COURSE IT’S IMPOSSIBLE THAT IT HAPPENED LIKE THAT.
Duh, we’re talking about God here.
Thanks for the ping!
‘Selection does help. Selection gets rid of the worst mutations. This slows mutational degeneration.‘Additionally, very rarely a beneficial mutation arises that has enough effect to be selected for—resulting in some adaptive variation, or some degree of fine-tuning. This also helps slow degeneration. But selection only eliminates a very small fraction of the bad mutations. The overwhelming majority of bad mutations accumulate relentlessly, being much too subtle—of too small an effect—to significantly affect their persistence. On the flip side, almost all beneficials (to the extent they occur) are immune to the selective process—because they invariably cause only tiny increases in biological functionality.
‘So most beneficials drift out of the population and are lost—even in the presence of intense selection. This raises the question—since most information-bearing nucleotides [DNA ‘letters’] make an infinitesimally small contribution to the genome—how did they get there, and how do they stay there through “deep time”?
‘Selection slows mutational degeneration, but does not even begin to actually stop it. So even with intense selection, evolution is going the wrong way—toward extinction!’
That’s funny. So they say it’s possible for a blind unguided process to create the Universe and everything in it, but that it is impossible for God to create the Heavens and the Earth according to Genesis. How utterly and totally laughable!
God has a good sense of humor doesn’t He?
Why would they need to? 2K years of "Because the Bible says so!" has worked fine so far.
...and He always has the last laugh!
Hey, you read the article. Good job! Of course, now God will hold you accountable for what you have learned. So if you have not already accepted Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior, you might want to start thinking about it. A soul is a terrible thing to waste.
Romans 10:9-13 That if you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved. 11 As the Scripture says, “Anyone who trusts in him will never be put to shame.” 12 For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile—the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, 13 for, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”
Excellent.
24 "This is what the LORD says— your Redeemer, who formed you in the womb: I am the LORD, who has made all things, who alone stretched out the heavens, who spread out the earth by myself,
25 who foils the signs of false prophets and makes fools of diviners, who overthrows the learning of the wise and turns it into nonsense,
Genetic algorithms, for example. It seems that, more generally, Dr. Sanford has quite poor mathematical background, especially with respect to the probability and statistics problems. Moreover, as someone who claims to be formerly "religious" with respect to evolution, he seem not to understand its principles:
"While there are some rare beneficial mutations (even as there are rare beneficial misspellings),1 bad mutations outnumber them—perhaps by a million to one."
Bad mutations make individuals die. Good mutations make them to thrive and pass the mutation to the progeny. Nobody is saying that the evolution is the net effect of bad and good mutations without taking into account this dying and proliferating!
I find a flaw in the degenerative mutation Vs. the natural selective enhanced mutation that drives the all important survival of the fittest dogma.
Mutations in all species are quite common. Only a few are recognizable. When good mutations enhance the being of a species, they pass the mutation on. There are 5 legged goats out there and two headed snakes. There are Siamese twins born in all species. There are species born without limbs, extra fingers and appendages etc.
There are fish that use extra strong fins to kind of walk on land and can breath out of water for short periods of time. There are birds with non functional wings and real strong legs.
The point is, if you were to find two goats that were both born with 5 legs, what do you think the chances of their offspring having 5 legs would be? The genes may be initially recessive but if you continued interbreeding I would bet a species of 5 legged goats could be established. While there is no conceivable use for a goat with 5 legs in nature, it is an example of how a mutation stands and becomes part of the natural gene pool for that species.
Humans have gotten larger and larger over the past few thousand years. Many tall men marry tall women and pass on those genes. It is subtle but genetic. Negative mutations make a species weaker and those subjects don't live as long, hence they don't breed as much and natural selection through survival of the fittest sets in.
God created the heavens and the Earth.
How? Are you going to hell if you ask that question?
Good find Charles- But inevitably, you’ll be hit with ‘You just don’t understand how science works (or evolution works)’. I’ve stated over and over and over again that there is a compelte lack of evidnece supporting what would have HAD to be a massive influx of purely positive mutaitons EVEN IF mutaitons could bring about macroevolution- which it can’t- The only slight hope for Macroevolution is lateral gene transference, because mutaitosn can ONLY work within species specific parameters, on info already present, it can NOT create new non species specific info- ONLY introducing info laterally between species, artificially, can do so- but htis has big big problems associated with it as well-
While Macroevos struggle to find even scant few ‘benificial mutations’ the hypoithesis of Macroevolution DEMANDS that trillions of positive mutaitosn had to take place (being unduly generous and allowing the idea that mutaitons could bring new info- which again, it can not)- Everyone just waves this fact and complete lack of evidnece away, and just attacks those who don’t accept the wild assumptions of Macroevolution liek they do, but at hteend of the day- the lack of evidence still plagues the hypothesis- Trillions of purely positive mutations would HAVE to have happened, yet we can’t even describe any today that were even remotely capable of doign what Macroevolution claims happened.
Despite my tagline I do read the articles usually. I don’t agree with them at times, but I see people who start a debate on a topic going in blind and it’s kind of embarrassing to watch.
[[The genes may be initially recessive but if you continued interbreeding I would bet a species of 5 legged goats could be established. While there is no conceivable use for a goat with 5 legs in nature, it is an example of how a mutation stands and becomes part of the natural gene pool for that species.]]
Actually no- the species specific info WILL revert back to hte ‘norm’ when left to itself- The genetic info tends toward self-correction, to keep a species fit- Microevolutionary changes can occure, but these al lfall within species specific paramters- which was again, designed to keep species fit and viable and thriving.
And, while more 5 legged goats may be born, in a few successive generations, you will not find those legs turnign into wings, or arms with oposable thumbs etc- What you are describing is microevolution- mistakes that fall within the parameters of species specific information- Macroevolution DEMANDS that non species specific information be itnroduced, on a massive scale- from outside sources- to move species beyond their own kinds
Something can’t come from nothing.
“God created the heavens and the Earth. How?”
God’s ways are not our ways. I think this is an impossible question for a human to answer - but God did give us science and the intellect to study His creation....
“Are you going to hell if you ask that question?”
Nope....and if anyone ever says that is true - it’s a lie.
How? Are you going to hell if you ask that question?
You are not going to hell if you ask that question, no matter what other posters tell you here. The question of how will be debated on these pages forever. The bible says God did it by saying "Let there be..." and 6 days later, he was finished and rested. Some would say these were mans interpretation of Gods word on why and how to a specific, not as scientifically enhanced audience. While the message is absolute the details will be debated indefinitely.
I believe God created it all and used evolution. I believe that our interpretation of one of God's "days" is presumptuous. But the story of creation was easier to tell to uneducated slaves than trying to explain the abstract theories of creation that science gives us today. This does not mean that the word is not true, but the audience was different back then and stories in simple language were the most common form of conveying lessons and education to folks of the day. I may be pounced on for this post and do not presume to have the exact answer. So take from it what you will and never stop searching for more answers. It is what makes us wise and helps us to understand all things physical and spiritual.
Also, now that scientists have discovered that individual genes have multiple functions, they now realize that beneficial mutations have become exceedingly more difficult. That is, for every one function that a mutation could hypothetically benefit, the mutation will be deleterious to numerous other functions. As such, natural selection cannot select for the positive mutation, because it is swamped by far more negative mutations. This is called “polyconstraint”, and it is but another MASSIVE nail in the coffin of the neo-Darwinian synthesis.
I have said, what if God gave you the knowledge of the universe and how every thing works. But he gave you the language of a bronze age goat herder. How would you express that knowledge. Actually the writer(s) of Genesis did a pretty good job.
==Something can’t come from nothing.
That’s not what the evos believe:
“The fact that life evolved out of nearly nothing, some 10 billion years after the universe evolved literally out of nothing, is a fact so staggering that I would be mad to attempt words to do it justice.”
—Richard Dawkins, “The Ancestor’s Tale” (2004)
“Are you going to hell if you ask that question?”
Not in the least. In fact, I think it was both natural and expected by God that we’d ask such questions. He didn’t create robots, but beings with free will. We choose to believe, and choose to love Him.
We were built to inquire. Built to ask questions. Built even to question our own salvation. Who could not help but to ask “Why?” to a everything?
I agree.
But here is a more subtle example. A bird that picks fish out of shallow rivers has a mutation that grows skin between it's “talons” is able to exploit the mutation to move better in the water and gain more access to food. 5 generations later, a carrier of a similar or same mutation is introduced into the gene pool and offspring have the same little webbing.
It is hard to argue that flying squirrels did not develop loose skin along their dorsals through some initially flawed mutation. But it would make sense that they exploited the mutation and it made the species stronger.
I would be hard pressed to think an honest argument can be made to suggest humans haven't evolved in the past 6,000 years. Humans are built different and our brains certainly work different today than they did back then. Beyond divine intervention, what macroevolutionary element was introduced into humans that made us taller and our heads bigger.
I submit that macroevolution begins with microevolution and evolves depending on the habitat and environment.
I thought I did. Simply put, I do not believe his conclusions. I would like to see the extent of his research, especially with regards to animals. I think more in depth research, while very difficult might show there are far more genetic mutations among all living things than he presumes. Here is why.
It is far easier to diagnose a harmful mutation in a species or specimen that is either dying or is dead. I believe MOST subtle genetic mutations go unnoticed and are unknown. It is not logical nor do I believe Dr. Sandford sought out perfectly healthy and strong specimens of creatures and decoded their genes to look for "positive" mutations. In his research, it is easy to find the gene that would cause a corn crop to be more susceptible to extreme heat and dry habitat than to gather a multitude of healthy specimens and study which have different genes and what those differences affect. When something is dead or is weak, we tend to investigate why. When a species is healthy we don't do as much research to see why they are thriving. Look at how dogs have become domesticated from wolves and the different "mutations" that spawned all the different breeds. Labradoodle? Greyhounds? Dachshunds? Chiwawas? Do we believe that at one time, these were all spawned from a breed of domesticated wolf? If not, then how do you explain the genetic similarities and differences. While we manipulate the genetic traits of these pets, we are actually exploiting the preferred genetic mutations that have occurred for a long time and passed on that gives each "breed" its unique characteristics.
If you believe that humans evolved from animals, how do you reconcile that with the Bible when it says that we were created in the image of God?
Another waste of perfectly good electrons.
You cannot be a Christian and call God, and his Son, the Second Person of the Trinity, a LIAR!
The SAME Bible that gives the Plan of Salvation that you claim to embrace, also gives the Genesis description of Creation. You can’t pick and choose which parts to believe.
Titus 1:2 and Hebrews 6:18 among many other passages state that it is impossible for God to lie. In the words of the late evangelist Oliver B. Greene, “I would rather play with forked lightning with my bare hands, standing in a pool of water, than to call God a liar!”
Well put. Try to explain Thermodynamics to a 5 year old. My second grader is struggling with condensation and how it is related to rain.
Really? then you better get right out there and start stoning gays, and burning witches right away...
Let's go back several hundred thousand years to the time just before the first homo sapiens appeared. The Earth is populated by several types of anthropoid apes, one of which is our most recent common ancestor. A stray cosmic ray comes along and mutates the DNA of one of these apes, tweaking it just enough so that when it reproduces, its offspring is no longer part of the same species, but is a human being. This human offspring of apes has all the DNA needed to produce human offspring.
The question is: how does it do that? There are no other human beings around with which it can reproduce. If the first human mates with an ape, the result will be half-human. How, then, does the human race get started?
Again, I'm not grinding an axe here. I'm not a Young Earther, nor a Biblical Literalist, nor a Six-Literal-Day Creationist. I just can't figure out how a human being could descend from a nonhuman ancestor. Please help!
“Labradoodle? Greyhounds? Dachshunds? Chiwawas? Do we believe that at one time, these were all spawned from a breed of domesticated wolf?”
Yes I believe they all came from a wolf kind. That fits perfectly with what the Bible says happened. He created each kind to reproduce after its kind. That has nothing to do with mutations but with breeding. If you breed two wolves you get a wolf. If you breed a wolf and another dog you get a mix therefore LOSING some of the genetic information for wolf. If you breed the mix and another dog you LOSE some more of the genetic information of the wolf kind. Eventually you will have no more wolf genes in the generations down the line. In other words you breed the wolf out of that line of dogs. Breeding is a LOSS of information. What you need for evolution is a GAIN of information. In the end those dogs are all still just dogs.
“You cannot be a Christian and call God, and his Son, the Second Person of the Trinity, a LIAR!”
You should never attempt to contribute to any conversation that remotely discusses anything complicated.
Please go away.
Your view the bible like a knitted sweater. Pull on one thread and the whole thing unravels. That is why you fight so tenaciously over this relatively minor biblical point. I believe the Bible is the LIVING word of God. It is as tough as any other part of his creation and just as complex. Every sentence has many meanings. If it didn’t you could read it once, get all the meaning, put it on the shelf and be done with it.
It is hubris in the extreme to think that early man was less intelligent than you and I. Especially if you believe the Bible.
Genesis 4:
20 Adah gave birth to Jabal; he was the father of those who live in tents and raise livestock. 21 His brother’s name was Jubal; he was the father of all who play the harp and flute. 22 Zillah also had a son, Tubal-Cain, who forged all kinds of tools out of [g] bronze and iron.”
Seven generations from Adam and they had domesticated animals, built housing, fashioned instruments and gave music lessons, and worked with bronze and iron which is no small feat. They didn’t learn it from someone else LIKE WE DO, they taught it to themselves. How far would we be today without the accumulation of centuries of knowledge? How far would you be personally if you had to start from scratch?
Finally an actual science guy.
Wonder why CMI used such an old picture?
Anyway, creating Heaven and Earth using words “Let there be...” more fits the concept of God starting the gradual evolution, rather than tinkering with each and every molecule manually.
“I believe God created it all and used evolution. “
Man needs evolution because, when a new idea for an invention springs forth, it hasn’t been tested by prolonged use by numerous different people.
So, after he brings forth the first version, he goes to work fixing the flaws people find. And he markets that one. Then the letters come in . . .
And so it goes. We’ve been evolving the automobile for more than a hundred years and there’s no end in sight.
Now for God. He sees the end from the beginning - He is able to look fa-a-ar into the future and see the end product before He ever makes the first prototype. So He simply makes the final version first. He has no use for evolution, unlike man, who can’t see tomorrow.
The Bible is correct.
I reconcile quite simply, faithfully, logically and scientifically. I am not conflicted here. God's word and message is perfect. It was perfect then and is perfect now. You may take it upon yourself to judge me (which goes against Jesus' teachings, but I do not interpret the Word of God as it is literally written in our English version of the Bible.
First the translations from ancient languages to English have a lot to be desired. Take the words love and kill as an example. We use many more words for express different forms of each today where the same word had many meanings. Visa Versa is also true. The best interpretation of "Thou Shall Not Kill" would be "Though Shall Not Murder" as an example.
Next, God's people were given knowledge and designed to grow and learn, it is in fact perfect as this trait is necessary if we are to understand and develop our relationship and faith in him. We had to start somewhere and we were a far more primitive bunch when God first passed the words of creation on to his feeble people. The evolution of man is ironically reflected in the evolution of the written Word of God in the Bible. Note, the Books of the Old Testament are not in perfect chronological order as some would argue. But if you follow the message in the Bible, you will find we go from stories to explain our existence and awareness, to expressions of violence and sin (still in stories) that were and were not acceptable, to prophecies etc.
Now consider the audience of the earliest New Testament. They were first just aware of their existence (knowledge). Then they were slaves presumably with no education. They passed lessons and knowledge through stories as they did not write and could not read. Eventually, the stories (in their current form for the time) were captured and scripted. It was indeed humans that wrote the word of God. But it was God who inspired the stories and guided the message to perfection.
I do not believe that God worked on a 24-hour clock, dictated by the rotation of the earth when he said, "Let there be light!" But the story of God starting creation and finishing it is absolute. And that is what would have been understood and passed on for generations 5,000 to 6,000 years ago to slaves. I believe it still rings true today.
We have been and are still made in God's image. Who are we to say what God's image is? He may still be making us in his image. I don't know how long one of God's "days" are, but we may still be in the 6th day.
As was previously posted, what if God were to have tried to explain to his people that he started the universe, galaxies, stars, our solar system, our sun, this planet and all life on it with a "Big Bang"? I suppose it would have been like trying to explain Thermodynamics to my second grader.
I'll finish where I started. Our existence is by divine initiation. We are perfect by design. But that design has several engineering challenges. How do you create a being that will be smart enough to explore, learn, grow, have free will and not give it room to develop? By design, we are given talents and traits by God to, of our own free will, exploit. We use these talents to enable us to worship him through Jesus Christ with the help of the holy spirit. We use these talents to help our fellow brothers and sisters. We pass our faith on to succeeding generations. We spend our whole lives experiencing a myriad of trials, tribulations, successes and failures. We question the unknown and seek answers. In the end, we are here for a short time and we must use that time to evolve our relationship with God, to grow wise in our understanding of our place in his world, and hopefully earn a place in heaven for our own unique and knowledgeable soul.
I am only slightly offended by the crass remark made in your post. I hope this gives you a little insight and something to think about.
Sincerely yours, Tenacious. God Bless you.
The article GGG spams has no references. I searched Pubmed for John Sanford. Got 4 references, 1988 to 1992, none afterward.
They all relate to using the gene gun to introduce DNA into plant cells.
Tried JC Sanford, J C Sanford in the search and got no results.
What has he done since?
“How far would you be personally if you had to start from original incest”
there, fixed it.
How do you reconcile the opposite belief with the fact that we share certain enzymes even with bacteria?
I don't believe it happened that way myself, so many environmental variables can have such a huge impact over time that I don't think it was the birth of a single baby that changed everything.
The simple fact is that I do want to find out how it happened, one way or the other, not just stop looking and declare Genesis the answer to it all.
Has science made mistakes, come up to dead ends and been wrong, unable to answer every question? Heck yeah, that's what makes it so interesting imho. Science has to carry all the burden in these arguments, when you argue with someone who ultimately come back with "He snapped his fingers and made it that way" it gets kind of hard to have a civilized debate over things.
All I can say is look how far science have come in the past 100 years, I think eventually we will come up with a hypothesis on how we evolved that will answer most if not all questions answered based on logic and fact. Lets face it, many people will never believe in it no matter how concrete the proof, but we still have a long way to go before we get there.
Did God create the Labradoodle? They are quite unique and now an established breed. They certainly have lost some genetic traits as the Labrador Retriever and the Poodle were interbred and produced offspring. But the offspring also collected some of the previously excluded genes that gives it its unique traits. For the offspring, the curly hair of the baby lab pup is a mutation from its species previous genome. It collected and propagated new genes which affect the physical and behavioral traits.
Where Great Danes part of the landscape when Adam and Eve left the Garden of Eden? Were all 1,000+ species of K-9 already here when Noah loaded the ark with two of each? Did he take every species of elephant and horse with him?
Please see my other posts for more detailed explanations of my position.
While writing my reply, someone posted his publications. Why didn’t they show up in a PubMed search?
What is a Courtesy Associate Professor? Never heard of that term. Is it like an adjunct prof?
Ok. They had less knowledge than we did. Therefore, their understanding of how the universe works along with the laws of physics (as we know it today) would have been fruitless. As you say, "They didn't learn it from someone else LIKE WE DO, they taught it to themselves." God taylored his word and message to their "level of knowledge" so they would understand it. He gave it to them in a story that they could remember and pass on. Eventually it was written down and today we study what God taught them as they understood it.
It is no less perfect today. But the perfection is in the message and lessons, not the actual translated and printed English text that some of us memorize and regurgitate as proof of our faith to others.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.