Started by TheBadger, July 19, 2013, 08:23:53 pm
QuoteAnalysisFor evolution to work on a grand scale, where nature transforms a family of animals into a new family of animals, beneficial mutations must appear to add new information to the genetic code. Without mutations, there cannot be any major evolutionary steps. While the weight of scientific evidence demonstrates clearly that the genetic information already existing within a species can contribute variation within animal populations due to natural selection, this process always strains out information and it never adds new genetic information, or previously non-existent coding to the genome. However, while many Darwinists claim that rare, beneficial mutations do exist, the math shows that random mutations result in the net removal of functional programming from the genetic code rather than adding new information to it.Beneficial mutations are extremely rare. The few mutations that are considered "beneficial" always involve the loss of genetic information and they generally result in the deterioration of the animal's health. We learn in biology class that our genetic code is made up of DNA, the long strands of the nucleotide bases Adenine, Guanine, Thymine, and Cytocine, which are A, G, T, and C for short. These four bases provide the digital code for our system, resembling the way 0s and 1s make up binary code for computers. Within the cell, during the process of translation, these nucleotides are read in groups of three, referred to as codons. Every codon is similar to a small transport vehicle of three letters that code for an amino acid, which go on to make up proteins.Finally, if neo-Darwinian evolutionary model of origins were history, we should expect to discover a number of beneficial mutations that were the result of added genetic information. However, the weight of scientific evidence demonstrates clearly that we all inherited a damaged, deteriorating version of a once perfect and fully functioning genetic code.
QuoteWhat happens when you make a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy? The short answer is you get cancer and die, not evolve
QuoteIn nature there are negative genetic mutations and positive genetic mutations
QuoteWe need only look at probability to know with out a doubt that the negative is dominant and the positive is recessive
QuoteYou are making assumptions that are not correct in my view, they are 'kort door de bocht' (Dutch for too simply stated). 1:QuoteWhat happens when you make a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy? The short answer is you get cancer and die, not evolveIt doesn't work that way.
QuoteWe need only look at probability to know with out a doubt that the negative is dominant and the positive is recessiveThat is not correct, or we won't be here.
QuoteLike Ulco said if that was true then we wouldn't be here
Quote from: Dune on July 21, 2013, 04:25:09 pmSorry guys, this is getting too much for me. I want to create, not debate. Interesting to follow though.
Quote from: TheBadger on July 21, 2013, 01:25:59 pmThanks guys! actually I am pretty neutral. I don't have a problem with the truth whatever that is. For me there are two fundamental questions, the how and the why.The how is biology/science, and the why is metaphysics/philosophy/religion. I am neutral because I am not bothered by the seeming conflict between Science and metaphysics.
Quote from: TheBadger on July 21, 2013, 01:25:59 pmBut what sparked this post (besides the conversation I heard and mentioned in the OP) is that the more I read about the how/science the more I am seeing that it reads an awful lot like religion. Can you believe that as I begin to explore this all with an open mind, I am finding just as many fanatics in "science" as religion?
Quote from: TheBadger on July 21, 2013, 01:25:59 pmMy problem is, the more I learn about Darwinism, and modern sciences continued relationship with darwin's ideas. The less I think the study of evolution is about the how, and more about rejecting any claims of why.
Quote from: TheBadger on July 21, 2013, 01:25:59 pmBasically I think evolution is a real biological process, my problem is darwinism makes understanding it impossible. Darwin understood almost nothing about genetics, and yet everything I have been reading about evolution is based entirely on the racist nut-bags ideas. I just don't get that!? Genetics proves there is no such thing as race, or rather, genetics proves there is only one human race.
Quote from: TheBadger on July 21, 2013, 01:25:59 pmYes I put it simply. But I think fundamentally correctly.http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/cancer-help/about-cancer/what-is-cancer/cells/how-cancer-starts
QuoteWhat you are saying here is that because man is here, and man evolved, therefore evolution is true.
QuoteIf you can find me one example of a positive genetic mutation in a lab study I would be grateful.