Posted on 09/28/2009 8:30:49 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Knockout strategies have demonstrated that the function of many genes cannot be studied by disrupting them in model organisms because the inactivation of these genes does not lead to a phenotypic effect. For living systems, this peculiar phenomenon of genetic redundancy seems to be the rule rather than the exception. Genetic redundancy is now defined as the situation in which the disruption of a gene is selectively neutral. Biology shows us that 1) two or more genes in an organism can often substitute for each other, 2) some genes are just there in a silent state. Inactivation of such redundant genes does not jeopardize the individual’s reproductive success and has no effect on survival of the species. Genetic redundancy is the big surprise of modern biology. Because there is no association between redundant genes and genetic duplications, and because redundant genes do not mutate faster than essential genes, redundancy therefore brings down more than one pillar of contemporary evolutionary thinking...
(Excerpt) Read more at creation.com ...
Technical, but very interesting...ping!
Thanks for the ping!
Why do you continue to post these articles that prove nothing more than we may or may not understand the fundamental natural processes that created observed phenomenon?
Even if I bought all the junk science in the article (which I do not), “we don’t know” (or in the case of the authors, “we refuse to understand real science”) does not result in “therefore it is designed.” It is like seeing a rock on the ground and saying “only a person could have put it there” because you don’t understand how it ended up in its final position.
Once again I will make it repeat my challenge: Introduce us to the corporeal designer and demonstrate exactly how said designer can be placed into the scientific method or quit spinning fables.
You have to buy so many fallacies — in the analysis, the research, the fact that none of this is published in any scientific journal — that to suggest this is anything other than apologetics is willful ignorance built from going backwards from a desired conclusion to cherry-picked observations.
Please, you are embarrassing all conservatives by this line of “attack” (well, really just gumming).
Oh, I forgot: Have a blessed night and may God have mercy on your soul.
I will say a prayer again for you tonight.
As usual, you have failed to address a single point in the paper. Which means you have said exactly nothing...LOL!
All?
It sure as hell doesn't embarrass THIS conservative.
Are Liberals ALL embarrassed by the Global Warming Hoax?
That hoax is apparently the ONLY accepted theory allowed in Colleges and Universities and in published articles, and the same colleges and universities and Article publishers all ridicule the idea that creation was and is a guided process.
So, speak for yourself. You don't speak for me.
I read something that made me laugh hard today.
I think someone sent it in an e-mail. The point simply was, If man evolved from apes, then why do apes still exist?
Come on there are 3 id/creationists/cdesign proponentsists who are in desperate need of your help.
Those evil atheist evo’s are making them look like fools.
http://www.fark.com/cgi/comments.pl?IDLink=4664509
Go ahead and show everybody your superior debating skills. You constantly state how you can send “evo’s” crying, and there is absolutely no scientific evidence supporting the Evolutionary theory. Well big man in the echo chamber show us what you can do enter the Temple of Darwin and tear it down . Personally I doubt you can do much against actual scientist without your cheerleaders and a controlled friendly environment
But it sure was nice of him to volunteer to pray for my soul!
>>That hoax is apparently the ONLY accepted theory allowed in Colleges and Universities and in published articles, and the same colleges and universities and Article publishers all ridicule the idea that creation was and is a guided process.<<
If he isn’t embarrassing you, then you aren’t paying attention.
Creation was undoubtedly a guided processes — BUT, pinprick attacks on TToE that result in a unfounded result “so therefore we have an intelligent designer” are 100% in the theological realm.
People who understand science and the scientific process know the fallacy of conflating theology with science. Using lots of scientific sounding words isn’t science — it is linguistic legerdemain.
Science deals 100% with the physical universe. What produced that universe (I personally believe God did) is a different discussion.
>>As usual, you have failed to address a single point in the paper. Which means you have said exactly nothing...LOL!<<
I don’t have to address the article. It is the usual claptrap that starts from a premise and then works backwards through cherry-picked (and unpublished in any science journal) “facts.” Your source has all the scientific qualifications of Weekly World News.
If the conclusion is “therefore there is an intelligent designer” then it is the same as an astronomer saying “I observed the rotation of celestial bodies today and noted a wobble in Neptune, therefore your moon is in Sagittarius and you should avoid taxicabs today.”
I just want people to know many (most) Conservatives do know science and expose this back door attempt to link ignorance with theology.
My biggest job is to clarify when science ends and philosophy begins.
And please spare us all your “religion of Darwin” nonsense. The fact you don’t understand something does not make it religion.
I told you, if you can get them to allow me to post my Creation and ID links at will, I might just show up from time to time. But I will not participate on a site that won’t let me choose which topics I want to post and talk about. Have fun with your fellow Darwin-drones over at Aflac, or whatever it’s called.
>>The point simply was, If man evolved from apes, then why do apes still exist?<<
That is so old, it isn’t even funny.
Man and ape share a common ancestor. Man did not evolve from “apes” any more than parakeets evolved from ostriches. New species have evolved over time without the source species being affected one way or the other (look at modern day crocodiles which exist despite other species from the same root).
Evolution is not linear with one nail driving out another.
You should reply to your emailer and suggest they learn real science from hard texts (or even school if need be) and not from internet catchphrases.
You embarrass all Conservatives!
>>I told you, if you can get them to allow me to post my Creation and ID links at will, I might just show up from time to time. But I will not participate on a site that won’t let me choose which topics I want to post and talk about. Have fun with your fellow Darwin-drones over at Aflac, or whatever it’s called.<<
LOL.
Thanks — I knew you would come through.
Internet world, meet ggg. 100% filler, no substance.
(as I have said many times, I only post on these to let the world at large know that this silly new attack angle is obvious and fails at every step and that most Conservatives DO know science).
==I don’t have to address the article.
You can’t address the article. I have no doubt that you felt it over your head and part your hair before you even cleared the abstract...LOL!
If we evolved from apes, why are there still apes today?’ In response to this statement, some evolutionists point out that they don’t believe that we descended from apes, but that apes and humans share a common ancestor. However, the evolutionary paleontologist G.G. Simpson had no time for this ‘pussyfooting’, as he called it. He said, ‘In fact, that earlier ancestor would certainly be called an ape or monkey in popular speech by anyone who saw it. Since the terms ape and monkey are defined by popular usage, man’s ancestors were apes or monkeys (or successively both). It is pusillanimous if not dishonest for an informed investigator to say otherwise.’ http://creation.com/qa
Wow! Refuted by your own side, that has got to hurt!
>>You can’t address the article. I have no doubt that you felt it over your head and part your hair before you even cleared the abstract...LOL!<<
You are really grasping at straws. You can pray at the feet of your astrologer witch-doctors.
Good night — I have made my point. It wasn’t for you. The only reason you post these is to get attention to make up for all time you spent as an ignored child (LOOK AT ME LOOK AT ME I CAN DO A POOPY). I don’t mind giving you a little bit (I do try to be kind), but I am done here.
Good night.
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.