Posted on 06/20/2013 6:51:51 AM PDT by fishtank
I am sincere in my comment. We are all subject to current worldly thinking. That is why it is so important to go back to the classics to get closer to the truth.
You are sincere in your insults? That makes me feel much better.
What do you mean by “the classics,” anyway, when it comes to science? Back before we knew anything about genes? Before we understood how old the Earth is? I prefer to get closer to “the truth” by acquiring knowledge, not by abandoning it.
Do you have any reading comprehension skills. Do you understand any of the points being made with you. I said I was sincere in my comments to you to make you think. But YOU decided to be insulted, rather than think.
I am sincere in that too many people get their “truth” from the common media, from cartoons and even movies and many lies and partial truths in text books. That is why the classics and foundation are so important to build on. But as you say, that is not important anymore.
Are you honestly unable to make the connection between Mendels work and your observations regarding size of dogs? But then you would have to admit you don’t know it all, which is very humbling. I have been humbled by the best because they took time to make me think.
I have presented in my comments regarding hogs and mammoths some evidence to your point. You think because we have mapped the sequence for dogs and maybe identified a gene for large and small dogs that that is the final answer? There is MUCH DNA and processes in the cells we don’t understand. And the more we understand the bigger the mystery. All this “junk” DNA we have to ignore because we haven’t a clue as to its purpose and function.
To even think that all of this happens at random and by mutation is very illogical. Let me change just one item of code on any computer program and let me know the odds of making it a better program or even a working program.
If the universe and its process are all random, why would you look for any pattern and understanding? If it is all random, there is no logic in your understanding of the universe.
If you understand there is a design, then it gets exiting and you work to understand the design and how it works. If it is all random mutation, why bother with science? It can’t be understood or replicated.
You're being insulting again, and condescending on top of it. If you sincerely want to get somebody to think, it works better if you don't start by accusing them of watching too many cartoons. Really, this is interpersonal relations 101.
You have no idea how much I've thought about these subjects, how old I am, where I get my information, or anything else. It seems like you're choosing to attack a straw man because you don't actually have anything to say about the points I'm making or the facts I'm presenting.
That is why the classics and foundation are so important to build on.
You still haven't said what classics you're talking about.
You think because we have mapped the sequence for dogs and maybe identified a gene for large and small dogs that that is the final answer?
The final answer to what? To the question of why some dog breeds are small and others are large, and why there's a lot more variation in the size of dogs than in the size of wolves? Maybe, maybe not. But that wasn't my point.
There is MUCH DNA and processes in the cells we don’t understand.
Yes, of course. That doesn't mean we should ignore what we do understand. I don't have much time for the "we don't understand everything, therefore we understand nothing" argument.
To even think that all of this happens at random and by mutation is very illogical. Let me change just one item of code on any computer program and let me know the odds of making it a better program or even a working program.
Life is not a computer program. And, of course, there are computer programs that change their own code, or write new code themselves, to generate better solutions. They're called "genetic algorithms."
If the universe and its process are all random, why would you look for any pattern and understanding? If it is all random, there is no logic in your understanding of the universe.
If you understand there is a design, then it gets exiting and you work to understand the design and how it works.
What makes you think I think the universe and its processes are all random? Obviously they're not. But nonrandom doesn't necessarily mean designed. I think of the course of a stream. It's influenced by random-seeming events, like a stick falling into it here or a crumbling of the bank there, but its overall course is constrained by certain physical properties--as are the random-seeming events for their part. So the stream's course isn't really random; but it's not designed, either.
The Lost World of Fossil Lake
http://www.press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/L/bo14707097.html
http://fieldmuseum.org/users/lance-grande
Lance has been a curator in the Geology Department of Field Museum for over 21 years. He was Chair of the museum’s Science Advisory Council (an elected representative of the curatorial staff) from 2001 through 2004, and Chair of the Field Museum Scholarship Committee (the museum’s main funding organization for visiting scientists) from 1986 through 2004. He holds the appointment of Adjunct Professor of Biology at both the University of Illinois and the University of Massachusetts. He is a member of the Committee on Evolutionary Biology at the University of Chicago, and a Research Associate in the Department of Vertebrate Paleontology at the American Museum of Natural History in New York.
Nessie?
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.