A
Aloysium
Guest
That’s the rumour. And here’s the proof.
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
Last edited:
- Status
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
E
edwest211
Guest
Really? Wow. I hope their attention spans improve 
B
benjamin1973
Guest
What about the missing links in the Bible? I don’t hear much talk there of dinosaurs or of Neanderthals, either. Nor is there a mention of even a basic understanding of hygiene or the existence of viruses or germs.
A
anon65111186
Guest
Easy, the “elements entering into new combinations” could be referring to DNA and new mutations. Species that swam in the water became new species which lived on land. If it was the same species then how in the world could they have such a huge functional change and yet remain the same species?
There are vents we know on thr bottom of thr ocean that are as fire, and life lives there even at scalding temperatures, hotter than fire even.
Science has a lot of possibilities for those verses, but it sure looks like biblical observations of evolutionary processes.
B
buffalo
Guest
Dinosaur is a recent word. In the OT leviathan (sea monster) and behemoths (mighty animal) were the words.
Last edited:
E
edwest211
Guest
The word Dinosaur was created in 1842.
R
rossum
Guest
A
Aloysium
Guest
Random:
adjective - proceeding, made, or occurring without definite aim, reason, or pattern; eg : the random selection of numbers.
Randomness is the lack of pattern or predictability in events.
That would describe a universe created by a deistic god, not the one brought into existance from nothing by God, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
Natural Selection is the process whereby those organisms that better suited to their environment survive to produce viable offspring.
Are these the factors which led to this guy here?
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
adjective - proceeding, made, or occurring without definite aim, reason, or pattern; eg : the random selection of numbers.
Randomness is the lack of pattern or predictability in events.
That would describe a universe created by a deistic god, not the one brought into existance from nothing by God, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
Natural Selection is the process whereby those organisms that better suited to their environment survive to produce viable offspring.
Are these the factors which led to this guy here?
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
E
edwest211
Guest
Nah. I think it’s more like this:
“It is now generally recognized that beneficial mutations are rare, and that high-impact beneficial mutations are extremely rare. In higher life forms where population sizes are modest, the mutation rate per nucleotide per generation is normally extremely low (about 10−8). This means that the waiting time for a specific nucleotide within single chromosomal lineage would be 100 million generations.”
“We simulated a classic pre-human hominin population of at least 10,000 individuals, with a generation time of 20 years, using the numerical simulation program Mendel’s Accountant (Mendel version 2.4.2, now being released as 2.5).”
“Biologically realistic numerical simulations revealed that a population of this type required inordinately long waiting times to establish even the shortest nucleotide strings. To establish a string of two nucleotides required on average 84 million years. To establish a string of five nucleotides required on average 2 billion years. We found that waiting times were reduced by higher mutation rates, stronger fitness benefits, and larger population sizes. However, even using the most generous feasible parameter settings, the waiting time required to establish any specific nucleotide string within this type of population was consistently prohibitive.”
“Even given very substantial fitness effects, the waiting time for a specific point mutation ranged between 1.5 and 15.9 million years” which “is very sobering, since it is estimated that mankind evolved from a chimp-like creature in just 6 million years.”
“As string length increased linearly, the increase in waiting time was of an exponential nature. When there were as many as six nucleotides in the string, the average waiting time (4.24 billion years) approached the estimated age of the earth. When there were eight nucleotides in the string, the average waiting time (18.5 billion years), exceeded the estimated age of the universe.”
“Our results generally represent best-case scenarios in terms of minimizing waiting time. When we use more realistic parameter settings for our simulations, we consistently get much longer waiting times.”
“When a population faces a specific evolutionary challenge, a specific fix is needed, and it must arise in a timely fashion. Positive selection cannot generally begin to resolve an evolutionary challenge until just the right mutation (or mutations) happens at just the right position (or positions). Selection for the required trait can only begin after the mutation (or mutations) result in a substantial (selectable) improvement in total biological functionality.”
“It is now generally recognized that beneficial mutations are rare, and that high-impact beneficial mutations are extremely rare. In higher life forms where population sizes are modest, the mutation rate per nucleotide per generation is normally extremely low (about 10−8). This means that the waiting time for a specific nucleotide within single chromosomal lineage would be 100 million generations.”
“We simulated a classic pre-human hominin population of at least 10,000 individuals, with a generation time of 20 years, using the numerical simulation program Mendel’s Accountant (Mendel version 2.4.2, now being released as 2.5).”
“Biologically realistic numerical simulations revealed that a population of this type required inordinately long waiting times to establish even the shortest nucleotide strings. To establish a string of two nucleotides required on average 84 million years. To establish a string of five nucleotides required on average 2 billion years. We found that waiting times were reduced by higher mutation rates, stronger fitness benefits, and larger population sizes. However, even using the most generous feasible parameter settings, the waiting time required to establish any specific nucleotide string within this type of population was consistently prohibitive.”
“Even given very substantial fitness effects, the waiting time for a specific point mutation ranged between 1.5 and 15.9 million years” which “is very sobering, since it is estimated that mankind evolved from a chimp-like creature in just 6 million years.”
“As string length increased linearly, the increase in waiting time was of an exponential nature. When there were as many as six nucleotides in the string, the average waiting time (4.24 billion years) approached the estimated age of the earth. When there were eight nucleotides in the string, the average waiting time (18.5 billion years), exceeded the estimated age of the universe.”
“Our results generally represent best-case scenarios in terms of minimizing waiting time. When we use more realistic parameter settings for our simulations, we consistently get much longer waiting times.”
“When a population faces a specific evolutionary challenge, a specific fix is needed, and it must arise in a timely fashion. Positive selection cannot generally begin to resolve an evolutionary challenge until just the right mutation (or mutations) happens at just the right position (or positions). Selection for the required trait can only begin after the mutation (or mutations) result in a substantial (selectable) improvement in total biological functionality.”
Last edited:
E
edwest211
Guest
“The creation and fixation of a string of three (requiring at least 380 million years) would be extremely untimely adaptation in the face of any type of pressing evolutionary challenge (and trivial in effect), in terms of the evolution of modern man” who has “a genome with over three billion nucleotides.”
“We need multiple point mutations to arise on the same short strand of DNA, which is very difficult. While a population is waiting (through deep time) for the correct string to arise, genetic drift is systematically eliminating almost all the string variants. Nearly all of the time there will be essentially zero strings anywhere in the population that are even close to the target string.”
“We need multiple point mutations to arise on the same short strand of DNA, which is very difficult. While a population is waiting (through deep time) for the correct string to arise, genetic drift is systematically eliminating almost all the string variants. Nearly all of the time there will be essentially zero strings anywhere in the population that are even close to the target string.”
B
benjamin1973
Guest
And Dinosaurs must have been created on day 6.
Funny, the Bible doesn’t mention Adam and Eve’s encounters with T-Rex. You’d think that would be worth mentioning.
Funny, the Bible doesn’t mention Adam and Eve’s encounters with T-Rex. You’d think that would be worth mentioning.
T
Techno2000
Guest
Thanks for this… it’s the point I was trying to make.What good is evolution to make a animal fit if it takes forever to do so, its too late by then… in the real world of Nature .
Last edited:
B
benjamin1973
Guest
Yes, that’s right. Now you’ve got it!
B
benjamin1973
Guest
That’s a lot of quotation marks. Have you already linked your source?
T
Techno2000
Guest
He waited millions of years … but now he’s finally a chick magnet .
E
edwest211
Guest
A chick magnet? How did he get noticed by the ladies before he got the extra fancy plumage?
T
Techno2000
Guest
You caught the point I was trying to make .
A
Aloysium
Guest
And, that’s the nonsense people are arguing against. But, believers of evolution are not to be swayed by the reason found in the common sense available to all, nor even when science dictates otherwise, as stated in articles that have been linked here and in preceding threads.
Last edited:
B
buffalo
Guest
He is probably wondering - Adam named the animals, why are they calling them something different. Ahhh, humans, they always think they know better…
B
benjamin1973
Guest
- God made peacocks beautiful just 'cuz, but figured it would be better for peahens to stay a mottled brown. . . just 'cuz.
- Peacock plumage is an evolved trait-- it takes a lot of physical resources to grow something so elaborate, so the plumage serves as a visual indicator of the peacock’s reproductive fitness.
- Status