Replies

[[Describe exactly where microevolution ends and macroevolution begins]]

non species specific NEW information. When you or any other person can demonstrate NEW information can coem from any amount of accumulations of mutations, then and only then will you have a case for Macroevolution being the same process as MICROevolution. Microevolution is a very demonstratable process of information CHANGE that must work within the parameters of the species specific information database of isntructions. No amount of change within these parameters will tun- to illustraTE simply, the letters C A T into B A T- the ONLY way to get the necessary Bat specific iformation into a Cat is to laterally transfere the B from the Bat to the Cat- no amount of manipulation will turn the Cat’s C into a B (Yes, I know this is simplistic and has problems, however, it illustrates the necessary lateral gene trasference needed to start moving a Cat toward a Bat- And since Macreolvulution is an upward process, IF the Cat came first, there would be NO B above it for the transference to occure- there woudl be no Bats from which to get this NEW non species specific information/instructions from. Somehow, Macroevos MUST demonstrate how simple manipulations could produce the B instructions to occure in the Cat- however, ALL science has is assumptions= not evidence, about past events that they THINK took place. (I’m not suggesting Macroevos think Cats evolved into Bats, I just used the two species as a simple illustration cuz they were easy to spell lol)

Anyway- Frame shifts, Deletions, insertions etc etc all of which have been documented by science, can do nothign to create the B instructions in a cat. All they can do is manipulate trait characteristics unique top the Cat KIND- somethign which genetic bredding experiments have proven out tiem and time again, and somethign science confirms. Anythign that goes beyond the observable demonstratable evidence is simply assumptions that have no support scientifically.

There are many htings which come close to being seen as NEW infromation, however, these ALL turn out to be sybiotic relationships, and NOT NEW non species specific info being adopted by the host. The host can and often does Adapt- but not adopt as it’;s own.

The only TRUE examples of lateral gene transference in nature are between the same KINDS- Soem Bacteria can TRUELY transfere gene material to create TRUE NEW information, but it must be pointed out that these are the same KINDS of Bacteria that do so.

Sciecne has managed to INTELLIGENTLY transfer gene material under ideal lab conditions between dissimiliar species (they managed to transfer the genetic info for spiders silk into a goat who then produced silk in it’s milk. However, this presented a lot of problems and it also demonstrated that species are specifically DESIGNED to rteject and correct such invasive transferences. Other than ideal lab conditions, TRUE lateral gene transferences hbave NOT been observed or manipulated i nthe wild between dissimiliar KINDS, and as stated, sdpecies have several built in protection levels that protect against such invasive anomylies and prevent it from happeneing except between very simple like KINDS like Bacteria.

Late for nap- be back later if you have more objections.