Is Darwin's Theory of Evolution True? Part 4.1

  • Thread starter Thread starter Techno2000
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
No one can know what happened millions of years ago. Why does a water flea have more genes than a human being?
 
I’m not looking for proof but coherence and an understanding of what people are talking about when they use a term like evolution.
Hugh_Farey said:
The environmental trigger
Click to expand...
If the trigger is environmental change, what does it act upon? An excess of radiation or toxins triggers genetic change one can only hope is neutral because its effects are otherwise always bad. Where Scott Kelly’s year in space resulted in genetic change, it was the result of pre-existing factors within specific organ systems. In other words, what changed his genome from that of his identical twin was pre-existing within the biochemical structure of the cells that react to such triggers.
Hugh_Farey said:
mutations enabling better
Click to expand...
The original question addressed this point of how complex additions to an animal’s genome can occur. Changes in the neuro-musculo-skeletal system sort of go together but I understand involve complex coding in multiple places in the genome. This coding would also have to be accompanied by changes in the cerebellum and inner ear that regulate balance. This huge transformation in the DNA, like that responsible for the formation of the eye, is simplistically explained away by evolutionists and the kids who innocently take them at their word as authorities.
Hugh_Farey said:
unoccupied upper limbs were the stimulus
Click to expand...
Unoccupied upper arms do not act as a stimulus for anything unless there is a preprogrammed component of the genome that allows this to happen. It would be more likely the other way around, that the changes in the brain would result in an upright stance and a greater capacity to utilize the hands for art and the making of tools.

As an aside, tyrranosaurus unoccupied upper arms did not stimulate them to grow feathers and turn into wings.

As to what I was looking for, it’s a start. What it does is sort of support my suspicion that evo-Catholics are actually supporters of ID, but in denial.
 
Last edited:
The biology textbook cannot add God to the equation. It offers only materialism. Nothing made you and all life.
 
That’s right. Which makes the ‘trust us, it happened like this’ idea less and less credible.
 
benjamin1973 said:
Anything. Evolution isn’t something animals do, it’s the word for the accumulation of advantageous DNA.
Click to expand...
The only way this would work is for evolution to see into the future, and have the adaptation ready for the environmental pressure .
 
Exactly right, which is why all of this sounds less and less credible and possible. But you will get no simple answer. Apparently, the foggy curtain of millions of years can produce life as we know it - somehow, and it survives - somehow, and it continues - somehow… until today. Mountains are worn down over millions of years but this?
 
Yes. It would be an aspect of the ability of the DNA to react to stressors in the environment. It would not be so much predicting the future but having a preprogrammed function accompanying the creation of a particular kind of animal, which in addition to being better able to adapt, it could also diversify into many different “species” of that kind.
 
Last edited:
You cant argue a scientific theory except with another scientific theory.
 
If the world gets colder, then those who handle the cold well will have a better chance to survive and pass on their genes. Their descendents will also have a better chance to survive.
 
Not sure why you think this. Many changes happen slowly enough for there to be at least some members of a species which can handle the change. And many environmental pressures are from other animals, for example in an arms race between wolves and their prey. You guys are making it out as though every environmental pressure is a nuclear bomb or a comet hitting the Earth or something but that’s not the case.
 
Last edited:
It’s not really an All or Nothing Do or Die scenario. Given any kind of environmental pressure, some will do better than others. Even if they just have a 1% better chance of survival over a few Generations this leads to a huge advantage for that DNA.
 
It’s like life’s a river with many different rivers flowing from it into a great and mighty sea.

Or is it the sea that flows water into the river?

I think this is the big question.
 
Last edited:
It depends on the type of environmental pressure. For example, we’ll probably find out in the next couple hundred years whether polar bears can adapt to the very quick change in their environment, namely the receding ice in the North.
 
Last edited:
I think the better question is why are Catholics so hard up on evolution to begin with? There’s more then enough scientific evidence to prove its bare minimum worthy of considering, none of which subtracts in ones belief of a supernatural supreme deity.

Can we not plum the depths of science without consulting the bible on anything other then morality?
God made you to thirst for knowledge, seek it out.

Go to Mars, to he next solar system, cure morality. create an inter galactic space empire!
Onward, upwards!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top