Evolution and Creationism

[rossum]

Mutations are mistaken RNA copies of DNA - introducing oddball amino acids into a Genome which are generally either always null or deliterious…

Generally yes, but in a few cases those oddball amino acids are beneficial.

Darwin’s Finches Natural Selection? Did not include any New mutation

As far as we can tell it was a change in the proportions of existing genetic variants in the population. That meets the definition of evolution. It does not meet the definition of macroevolution, but that has not been claimed by the scientists who did those studies. Those finches are an excellent example of evolution adapting organisms to a changing environment.

Only a Darwinist would attempt to spread the LIE that That Event proves Macro-Evolution…

I will need a reference for that. You are claiming a lie while showing us no evidence. Show us your evidence or withdraw the accusation please.

Your source used the word “proves” incorrectly. That leads me to think that your source was not a scientist.

 

[rossum]

Genetic entropy over time, is corrupting the genome.

And natural selection over time is cleaning the genome of deleterious corruption.

 

[buffalo]

Because most short people have short children. Was that really so difficult?

Taller people have a survival advantage in combat. They can reach the tall fruit.

 

[buffalo]

And natural selection over time is cleaning the genome of deleterious corruption.

Is it now your claim NS is a conservative process?

 

[EndTimes]

Genetic entropy over time, is corrupting the genome.

Constant RNA → DNA mistakes aka mutants…

aka Devolution…

 

[EndTimes]

Mutations are mistaken RNA copies of DNA - introducing oddball amino acids into a Genome which are generally either always null or deliterious…

Generally yes, but in a few cases those oddball amino acids are beneficial.

I said that… You forgot to include: and only in a limited fortuitous dead-end manner…

Darwin’s Finches Natural Selection? Did not include any New mutation

Yes… Darwin’s Finches showed how devolution can occur. A Rasher of New Mutations are an essential bedrock of Darwinism’s argument. They did not and do not occur. Darwin’s Finches have zero connection with “Macro-Evolution”

 

[rossum]

Taller people have a survival advantage in combat. They can reach the tall fruit.

Shorter people have an advantage in times of famine, they need less food to keep healthy.

Is it now your claim NS is a conservative process?

Natural selection cannot add to the variation in the population genome. It can however vary the proportions of different variants. Deleterious variants will not be conserved while beneficial variants will be made more common. Does that count as “conservative”? Deleterious variants are certainly not conserved, but instead are eliminated over time.

 

[rossum]

Darwin’s Finches have zero connection with “Macro-Evolution”

You have failed to either support your earlier accusation of a “LIE” or to withdraw it. Is this really how you want to present yourself to your audience?

 

[Techno2000]

Those finches are an excellent example of evolution adapting organisms to a changing environment.

And that is about as far as evolution is going to go…sorry.

 

[rossum]

And that is about as far as evolution is going to go…sorry.

Why would evolution need to go any further? There is no point in adapting to an environment that no longer exists. Our very distant ancestors were adapted to an environment with minimal oxygen in the atmosphere. That changed, so now almost every living organism is adapted to living with free oxygen around. Are you sorry that, thanks to your evolving ancestors, you can breathe air?

 

[buffalo]

More evidence for IDvolution

from one of those pesky creation sites. not

Probability of change in life: Amino acid changes in single nucleotide substitutions​

Abstract​

Mutations underpin the processes in life, be it beneficial or detrimental. While mutations are assumed to be random in the bereft of selection pressures, the genetic code has underlying computable probabilities in amino acid phenotypic changes. With a wide range of implications including drug resistance, understanding amino acid changes is important. In this study, we calculated the probabilities of substitutions mutations in the genetic code leading to the 20 amino acids and stop codons. Our calculations reveal an enigmatic in-built self-preserving organization of the genetic code that averts disruptive changes at the physicochemical properties level. These changes include changes to start, aromatic, negative charged amino acids and stop codons. Our findings thus reveal a statistical mechanism governing the relationship between amino acids and the universal genetic code.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0303264720300393

Did they say in-built? Yes they did.

 

[Freddy]

Freddy:

Indeed It is. Why did you say I was wrong? I didn’t say that.

Acceleration is not time.
Measuring acceleration doesn’t give you time either.

I’m just giving you one of the many measures of change of rates because your definition for time is; measure of change of rate.

Your physics appears to be as confused as your biology.

Yes, acceleration is not time. They’ve got different units which should give you a clue.
And no, measuring acceleration will give you time. You simply divide by velocity (m/s/s divided by m/s gets you s). Eighth grade maths.
And no, that isn’t my definition.

Is this discussion of time going to be as tortuous as the one on basic evolutionary processes?

 

[Freddy]

Freddy:

Well, yeah. Most tall people have tall children.

Why hasn’t gigantism become fixed in the human population?

There hasn’t been enough time. A few thousand years is not long enough.

 

[Techno2000]

buffalo:

Freddy:

Well, yeah. Most tall people have tall children.

Why hasn’t gigantism become fixed in the human population?

There hasn’t been enough time. A few thousand years is not long enough.

If it did go to gigantism, that would only be an example of selective breeding.

 

[Techno2000]

Are you sorry that, thanks to your evolving ancestors, you can breathe air?

Lol, that’s quite a stretch

 

[Techno2000]

There is no point in adapting to an environment that no longer exists.

About only adapting to an environment change your going to see in real life is camouflage, and shedding… that’s about it.

 

[Noose001]

Time is a measure of the rate of change.

Yes, acceleration is not time. They’ve got different units which should give you a clue.
And no, measuring acceleration will give you time. You simply divide by velocity (m/s/s divided by m/s gets you s). Eighth grade maths.
And no, that isn’t my definition.

My bad but i still beg to differ; ‘rate of change’ is a vague description of time.

Your physics appears to be as confused as your biology.

Nope. Your Biology has been exposed, that’s why we are on to something else.

 

[buffalo]

Less than 2 minutes

 

[buffalo]

Now that the bases are loaded - here is the home run.

In the beginning was the Word: the Word was with God and the Word was God.

Information is prime… IDvolution - God “breathed” the super language of DNA into the “kinds” in the creative act.

 

[stoplooklisten]

God “breathed” the super language of DNA into the “kinds” in the creative act.

Agree. Many genes are dormant and express themselves in later generations.

DNA/RNA need programmers. Random, non-intelligence doesn’t write good code.