In article
<a63c930e-6600-470c-8358-9206a3821ee8@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
"IlBeBauck@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
" <IlBeBauck@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:
> On May 3, 10:21=A0am, Ken <flakey...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > On May 3, 6:10=A0am, Free Lunch <lu...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Sat, 3 May 2008 06:01:43 -0700 (PDT), in alt.talk.creationism
> > > "IlBeBa...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
" <IlBeBa...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
> > > <eeb5ec69-977d-44ca-8217-3a765c351...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>:
> >
> > > >On May 2, 9:02=A0pm, c...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Cary Kittrell)
wrote:
> > > >> In article
<5aa53b76-ccb0-4f42-8265-2e082ba6b...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> oups.com> "IlBeBa...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
" <IlBeBa...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:
> >
> > > >> > On May 2, 1:15=3DA0pm, c...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Cary
Kittrell) wr=
> ote:
> > > >> > > In article
<9b8fa6e7-dca9-4acb-af5a-d5d225a5a...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> groups.co=3D
> > > >> > m> "IlBeBa...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
" <IlBeBa...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:
> >
> > > >> > > > On May 1, 4:49=3D3DA0pm, Budikka666 <budik...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wro=
> te:
> > > >> > > > > Grrl Scientist
atwww.scienceblogs.com/grrlscientisthttp://tin=
> yurl.com/=3D
> > > >> > 5la6=3D3D
> > > >> > > > lh
> > > >> > > > > re****ts on: "five male and five female Italian wall
lizards, =
> Podarcis
> > > >> > > > > sicula, were translocated from the islet of Pod Kopiste
to th=
> e nearby
> > > >> > > > > islet of Pod Mrcaru, both of which belong to Croatia and
are =
> located
> > > >> > > > > in the southern Adriatic Sea"
> >
> > > >> > > > > War erupted and scientists never got back to see the
lizards =
> until
> > > >> > > > > relatively recently. =3D3DA0What they found was an
amazing ex=
> ample of ju=3D
> > > >> > st
> > > >> > > > > how fast evolution can work its wiley ways.
> >
> > > >> > > > > Footnote to idiot creationists: Yeah, they're still
lizards, =
> and no,
> > > >> > > > > no scientist has ever claimed they're not. =3D3DA0But
what yo=
> u're too st=3D
> > > >> > upid
> > > >> > > > > to grasp no matter how many times you're hit over your
stupid=
> heads
> > > >> > > > > with it, evolution isn't just about speciation (which
leads t=
> o
> > > >> > > > > everything else) and nothing more. =3D3DA0Evolution is
about =
> change with=3D
> > > >> > in aas=3D3D
> > > >> > > > e
> > > >> > > > > gene pool. =3D3DA0That's what it's rooted in and that's
how i=
> t works its=3D
> > > >> > ion
> > > >> > > > > magic.
> >
> > > >> > > > > It really is that simple. =3D3DA0And if you cannot grasp
this=
> basic,
> > > >> > > > > demonstrated fact, then you too are really simple.
> >
> > > >> > > > > Budikka
> >
> > > >> > > > REPLY: =3DA0By what mechanism or evolutionary process does
new =
> information=3D
> >
> > > >> > > > become a part of the genome (which is needed for Darwinnian
Evo=
> lution
> > > >> > > > to be viable) ?
> >
> > > >> > > Overall? =3DA0Multiple copies of a coding gene, followed by
mutat=
> ion of
> > > >> > > one of the copies. =3DA0The organism now produces two
different
> > > >> > > proteins, the original and a new variant.
> >
> > > >> > > In a given organism? =3DA0Acquisition of genes from other
species=
> ,
> > > >> > > most commonly via viruses.
> >
> > > >> > > Not to metion that after a certain level of complexity is
> > > >> > > reuiached, new information is no longer necessary. =3DA0It's
> > > >> > > not new genes any longer, it's different switch settings
> > > >> > > (sed "evo-devo");
> >
> > > >> > > REPLY: =A0That is quite remarkable indeed. =A0Has any
scientist(s=
> ) =A0calculated=3D
> > > >> > =A0the chances that new life forms came about by this mutated
proce=
> ss ? =A0 than=3D
> > > >> > ks.
> >
> > > >> By any single event of this type? =A0I'm not sure.
> >
> > > >> By ac***ulations of these changes? =A0Well, that's what evolution
> > > >> is all about.
> >
> > > >> Incidentally, I don't know if you'd consider this "new
information" o=
> r
> > > >> not, but I can think of an example where repeated copies of a
single =
> gene
> > > >> seem related to fitness: =A0it's been found recently that humans
> > > >> living in cultures which eat a lot of starch have more copies of
> > > >> the gene which produces the starch-digesting enzyme amalyze.
> >
> > > >> Multiple copies can be bad too, as in Huntington's chorea or
> > > >> fragile-X syndrome.
> >
> > > >> -- cary- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > > >> - Show quoted text -
> >
> > > >REPLY: =A0 Well, lets see what staunch atheist / co-discoverer of
the
> > > >DNA structure , Dr. Francis Crick, has to say on the mathematical
> > > >probability that life formed in this way by accident. (and before I
> > > >do, just let me say : 'Case closed !' ....based on the worlds
foremost
> > > >leading Biologist =A0,and atheist at that) . =A0So, could you tell
us w=
> hat
> > > >your personal ulterior motive would be for rejecting God ?
> > > >Thanks. =A0 :
> >
> > > Thank you for demonstrating that you do not understand anything
about
> > > science and don't care that you have quotes that are misleading
without
> > > context. You have once again demonstrated your moral corruption and
> > > commitment to fight truth wherever you find it.
> >
> > > [quotes deleted because they are not properly attributed and are
> > > generally taken out of context, more evidence of the dishonesty of
> > > Christianists]- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > > - Show quoted text -
> >
> > Note: Many, if not most of Dimwit Dave's replies, have
> > nothing to do with the original subject
> > Even after someone has made a
> > deh ptailed and carefully crafted challenge complete with references
to
> > one of his posts, there's usually no reply, or if he does, he makes a
> > few comments followed by "Regards, and...End." so he gets in the last
> > word
> >
> > He almost never answers a direct question, but instead goes
> > off on some tangent or leading question about Dog, ***, or religion
> > completely unrelated to the original subject with the intent to gain
> > control of the thread and push HIS point of view.- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> REPLY: At a 10 to the 40,000 th power against you ... you are
> certainly going to have a VERY sticky end in eternity from pretending
> there is no personal Creator (so you can live as you like for a few
> short years left on earth) . And all the smokescreen defaming,
> wi****ng, hoping, etc... that Christians are wrong, simply isnt going
> to change matters in the least for you .
Beg pardon? Could you explain to me why demonstrating that life
was designed would lead to the conclusion that Christians are
not "wrong"?
There are several thousand other creation myths out there, competing
with Genesis. And a much greater likelihood that if Some Things
indeed did create the universe, They would be entities about which
we know absolutely nothing.
-- cary
|
