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.
buffalo said:
Designs try to incorporate efficiency. When designing a cell phone, one goal is to mininmize power consumption.
Click to expand...
False. I used the example of cryptography. If an enemy can see that where there were once 20 messages a day, there are now 200 messages a day, then the enemy can use that information. This is called Traffic Analysis. One way to defeat such traffic analysis is to always send 250 messages a day over that link, even if the bulk of the messages are nonsense.

Design does not prevent the use of junk content. I repeat my question, what property of the designer means that junk DNA is impossible?

rossum
 
buffalo said:
The virus and bacteria front loading is enormous.
Click to expand...
I would need to see the research paper that provided the quantitative evidence for this. You are making an unsupported claim here.

It is in the nature of random mutations that some of them will not be useful now, but will, randomly, be useful in future. You need to calculate the level of “front loading” to be expected from random mutations alone and then show that the level found in actual bacteria and viruses is measurably greater than the expected randomly generated value.

That is a significant piece of scientific work, and I am not aware of any published ID paper that covers it.

rossum
 
Last edited:
Techno2000 said:
Do you think the Rose is the only flower that has a fragrance ?There are probably flower out there with fragrances that man hasn’t even discovered yet.
Click to expand...
No, and quite probably, respectively. What was your point?
Techno2000 said:
I suppose Neanderthal Man was hard at work selectively breeding all these flowers to get them to smell just right.
Scented Primrose
Plumeria
[etc. etc.]
Click to expand...
You suppose incorrectly. If you are interested in the history of garden flowers you can easily find lots of information on the internet.
 
What did the dinosaur evolve from ? Lets see… it started out tiny, then millions of years later it became huge, and then millions of years later it became tiny again…really ? :crazy_face:
 
If Chicxulub happens tomorrow, how would that effect the DNA of plants and animals ?
 
Last edited:
Exactly, which is why so many species died out in the aftermath of the impact. The environment had changed too fast for evolution to deal with.

rossum
So how did they evolve if they’re all dead ?
 
lol

Dude, at this point, I’m just glad that you’re capable of admitting that dinosaurs existed. Baby steps, amirite?

Dinosaurs were not a single species. Some were large, and some were small. The large ones died out, because a house-sized animal can’t easily escape from environmental disasters like huge fire storms, and later drought or a nuclear winter or whatever.
 
Last edited:
Mutations can have a positive effect. The bigger question, does this hurt or help the organism survive in the long run. If the total positive effect of mutations is outweighed by the negative, over time the organism may die off.

The argument is whether these “beneficial” mutations can give rise to the morphological changes needed to add novel functional features. Possible does not mean probable. Evo has a hard climb…
 
Absolutely. If they can’t mate, their genetic paths have diverged, and they will evolve independently.
 
Hmmm - I would double check with Apple engineering… If the cell phone is always in the charger it is not as useful as one that isn’t.

If one USES junk dna then it has purpose. One has have exhausted the designers intent to know if something is useful or junk.

If I use a 555 clock, there may be features that will be idle or not used. I may purchase the cheaper version rather than design out the unneeded features.
 
They will adapt independently. Then when they find the bones they call it a “NEW” species when it was just an adapted one.
 
When you have a source species, and two sub-populations adapt independently for whatever reason (like geographic circumstances), to the point at which they can no longer reproduce, then now you have new species.

Lions and tigers are a good example. They are obviously both large cats. But they are clearly different species.
 
benjamin1973 said:
The large ones died out, because a house-sized animal can’t easily escape from environmental disasters like huge fire storms, and later drought or a nuclear winter or whatever.
Click to expand...
OK, so it took fire and drought to kill off the big ones.If the fire wouldn’t do the trick… the drought would.Now get to the part of how all this changed the DNA of dinosaurs.
 
Last edited:
benjamin1973 said:
lol

Dude, at this point, I’m just glad that you’re capable of admitting that dinosaurs existed. Baby steps, amirite?

Dinosaurs were not a single species. Some were large, and some were small. The large ones died out, because a house-sized animal can’t easily escape from environmental disasters like huge fire storms, and later drought or a nuclear winter or whatever.
Click to expand...
The third one didnt know if should eat chicken feed, or eat it’s friend’s head off.
 
Last edited:
Dinosaurs were not a single species.

Those species which survived survived. Those which did not had their DNA erased from the face of the Earth.
 
Yeah super vague.

“Erased from the face of the Earth” is so ambiguous in meaning.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top