Evidence Disproving Evolution

myself | 10/11/02 | gore3000

[balrog666]

[vanity] I never explored this before.

How do you change the base font? What is the html command format? How do you get cyrillic or a kanji font? Anybody?

I tried a few obvious command sequences from html guides but don't see the appropriate response when I preview it. Thanks in advance for any help!

[AndrewC]

I stand by my statements.

And I stand by mine. The fact that you can't understand that "the third way" means not creationist and not Darwinian is not my fault. I have posted Shapiro more than once and recommended that you read him. Obviously you do not interpret words the same as I do. This

Evolution is the history of organisms that have succeeded in adapting to changing circumstances. Over evolutionary time, this means altering the genome — the long-term information storage organelle of all living cells — to provide the functional information needed to survive and reproduce in new conditions. Those organisms that have the most flexible computational capabilities, in particular those that have the best means of altering information stored in the genome, will have an advantage. Thus, it makes sense for organisms to possess crisis-responsive natural genetic engineering functions, and we should not be surprised to find them ubiquitous in contemporary organisms, all of whom are evolutionary winners. Indeed, it is now difficult to imagine how organisms that depend upon gradual accumulation of stochastic mutations could persist in the evolutionary rat race

is certainly not a recommendation for Darwinian evolution.

[AndrewC]

The fonts must be available on the viewers computer. Font substitutions are used so what you intend may not be seen on the viewers computer. However, to change the font use this tag.

<font face="symbol"> or <font face="courier">

abcdefg

abcdefg

abcdefg

abcdefg

abcdefg

abcdefg

[<1/1,000,000th%]

You're quote mining again. You didn't even bother to read your own posted article. This reminds me of the time you tried to compare a clay pot full of sulphuric acid to a computer monitor.

You said,

This is a very big change, something out of nothing, something which changed humans a great deal. It is a large jump totally unexplainable by evolution.

A couple paragraphs further in the article, we read.

Finding real evidence for sudden genetic changes, however, has been slow. By using phylogenetic surveys, however, McDonald and King were able to distinguish between the youngest HERVs (human endogenous retroviruses) and more ancient lineages

In other words, further evidence that HERVs evolved from older retroviruses.

And no fair posting more comments before I can work my through this page.

[DWPittelli]

I said: It only takes a single point mutation to "make a new function" that allows people to resist malaria.

You said: Is this truly a mutation if the ability already existed?

A mutation is an error in the DNA copying. A single point mutation changes just one of the base pairs in the DNA (e.g., A becomes G in the ATGC code). Yes, the rise of sickle-cell anemia was due to a mutation. And yes, the linear clumping pattern of the red blood cells that occurs in carriers of this mutation is a new function that did not exist before the mutation.

[VadeRetro]

Lazamataz knows an escape-code trick for Cyrillic. It's evidently fairly tedious typing but I've seen him do it.

You're on your own with Kanji.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

Computer's and networks do not 'evolve' by themselves, they are intelligently designed.

Now you're quote mining me. Kinda cool actually.

In science, analogy is sometimes used to illustrate a point. I posted it to show that Shapiro is only proposing using analogies to illuminate evolutionary concepts in biology. The result of this approach led to the automated diagnostic testing machines that dominate the market today.

There is no non-Darwinian science here.

[balrog666]

Thank you. I thought I had tried that - we'll see.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

The statement, “only what can be known by science or quantified and empirically tested is rational and true”.

Of course I don't believe that. But the process of science doesn't benefit by being scripturally bound. Isn't this the basis for most of the arguments against evolution by Creationist/ID'ers? That evolutionists are following "atheist scripture"?

(I admit that most folks don't look at atheism as a religion, but it shares the same characteristics, so it should be treated as a religion.)

[<1/1,000,000th%]

A conjunction is the only one known to have happened around then (although timing is unsure given that we don't really know the date of Jesus' birth). But conjunctions are pretty common and non-spectacular, and it's hard to see why it would be called just a "star."

There was a coin minted at the time commemorating the event, but my reference is in a box up in the attic. I'll have to find it.

[AndrewC]

You are welcome.

You are welcome.

You are welcome.

You are welcome. Cyrillic doesn't work

abcdefg roman

abcdefg arial

abcdefg impact

abcdefg webdings

[balrog666]

Oh, I see now, it's Greek symbols. I thought you were punning in transliterated cyrillic when I first read it.

Thanks for the html command.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

Do not change the discussion to a religion which you do not understand and do not believe in.

I have repeatedly stated that I am a practicing Christian. That you don't understand this is easy to understand.

Your examples of non-evolved species have been repeatedly explained to you as examples of evolution. Why can't you defend your position?

[balrog666]

Lazamataz knows an escape-code trick for Cyrillic. It's evidently fairly tedious typing but I've seen him do it. You're on your own with Kanji.

Thanks, I'll have to ask him about that and put it in a hot-key.

I found a good Kanji page but I don't really read it. I have some friends working in Japan on robotics with web pages (and blogs) that I visit from time to time.

[AndrewC]

Again, you are very welcome.

[Heartlander]

Well, we can play this game if you like…

You said: It only takes a single point mutation to "make a new function" that allows people to resist malaria.

I said: Is this truly a mutation if the ability already existed?

We can go into the ‘next step – a wing develops’ later…LOL!
And the selective advantages of sickle-cell anemia is a strong case I might add…LOL!

[AndrewC]

The font face for the Greek letters is symbol.

abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ

[PatrickHenry]

Gone for the evening.
God Bless America.

[Heartlander]

I do not believe science should be bound by anything. This is my point. I believe that ID is only pointing to a corner in science. It is up to the scientific commune to find the other three (corners).

It is science that puts itself in a box if they believe a self-refutable statement like, “only what can be known by science or quantified and empirically tested is rational and true”.

It is an unsubstantiated philosophy like any other…

[<1/1,000,000th%]

Indeed, it is now difficult to imagine how organisms that depend upon gradual accumulation of stochastic mutations could persist in the evolutionary rat race.

If you define "Darwinian evolution" to be exactly what Darwin wrote, then I agree with you. Darwin mentioned several times in "Origin of Species" that natural selection was a slow process.

Modern biology recognizes your underlined quote to be part of evolutionary theory traditionally called "Darwinian" since Darwin wasn't able to define "slow". So I suppose you could call it a third way if you're a "Darwinian literalist".