The origin of life

[rossum]

Fact one - It can’t be done in a lab. To predict the future regarding this is to simply make a faith statement.

It is you who are making a faith statement here. Currently we cannot make life from scratch in the lab. What we may or may not be able to do in a lab in the future is a prediction, which as you say is a faith statement.
Stephen C. Meyer:

concentration of functional information

Unless and until we have an objective and tested way to measure “functional information” the concept is useless. If De Meyer cannot measure functional information then he has no way to tell how much is present in any living organism. I have not so far seen any details of how to measure FI.

rossum

 

[buffalo]

. If De Meyer cannot measure functional information then he has no way to tell how much is present in any living organism. I have not so far seen any details of how to measure FI.

rossum

How would you go about it rossum? What do you think is the key?

 

[rvilbig]

God created everything and said it was good. Mutations are corruptions. DNA language corruptions do not render an increase of information but cause noise which muddles it. Every generation further from Adam and Eve are more corrupted.

God is still creating at this very moment. As Aquinas argued, of this we read in John 5:17: “My Father works even until now, and I work.” (cf. Aquinas, II Sentences, dist. XII, q.1 art.2). Furthermore, it’s a general Scholastic principle that “the generation of one thing is the corruption of another” (STh, I q.72 a.1). So even if modern humans were a “corruption” of Adam and Eve’s genes, these “corruptions” resulted in the generation of new genes, hence the diversity seen among the races of humans. God did not create life in the distant past and then abandon the universe to devolve into lesser forms. Think about it.

Hope this helps,

-Ryan Vilbig

 

[buffalo]

God is still creating at this very moment. As Aquinas argued, of this we read in John 5:17: “My Father works even until now, and I work.” (cf. Aquinas, II Sentences, dist. XII, q.1 art.2). Furthermore, it’s a general Scholastic principle that “the generation of one thing is the corruption of another” (STh, I q.72 a.1). So even if modern humans were a “corruption” of Adam and Eve’s genes, these “corruptions” resulted in the generation of new genes, hence the diversity seen among the races of humans. God did not create life in the distant past and then abandon the universe to devolve into lesser forms. Think about it.

Hope this helps,

-Ryan Vilbig

It doesn’t.

God finishes His works on creation and then he rested from creating.

Now, He does sustain HIs creation.

The diversity of humans comes through adaptation.

 

[Moonstruck888]

The diversity of humans comes through adaptation.

You certainly do change your mind a lot…

 

[rossum]

How would you go about it rossum? What do you think is the key?

It is not up to me to decide how Functional Information is measured. The concept belongs to Dr Meyer so it is up to him to determine how it is measured.

For myself I am not sure how much the concept adds to the debate. Natural selection is a way to select “what works in the current environment”. If that is what Dr Meyer means by “functional information” then I do not see what re-engineering it on the name level adds to the debate. If “functional information” is something different from “what works in the current environment” then perhaps he needs to explain more clearly what it actually is and how it differs from “what works in the current environment”.

rossum

 

[buffalo]

You certainly do change your mind a lot…

How so?

 

[grannymh]

It doesn’t.

God finishes His works on creation and then he rested from creating.

Now, He does sustain HIs creation.

The diversity of humans comes through adaptation.

In my humble opinion, you and Ryan are saying the same thing in different words. Especially when it comes to the immaterial, spiritual soul which is the hallmark of human nature.

 

[Moonstruck888]

How so?

Yesterday, you said that adaptation was impossible and that the only possible deviations from the orginal Adam and Eve template are deliterious.

 

[buffalo]

Yesterday, you said that adaptation was impossible and that the only possible deviations from the orginal Adam and Eve template are deliterious.

Gotta quote? - adaptation is obvious to anyone. There is some confusion here.

 

[rvilbig]

It doesn’t.

God finishes His works on creation and then he rested from creating.

Now, He does sustain HIs creation.

The diversity of humans comes through adaptation.

The Catholic Encyclopedia says otherwise: “God is immanent, or intimately present, in the universe because His power is required at every moment to sustain creatures in being and to concur with them in their activities.” (emphasis added).

Also, adaptations come from mutations, so even in your own philosophy, mutations are not necessarily corruptions.

The days of Genesis 1 are not to be interpreted as literal days that have disappeared into the past. After all, “This is the day the LORD has made; let us rejoice in it and be glad.” (Ps 118:24). God is making right now, on this very day, He has made. Rejoice!

I really think Aquinas was right on with his interpretation of John 5:17: “My Father works even until now, and I work.” (cf. Aquinas, II Sentences, dist. XII, q.1 art.2).

-Ryan Vilbig
ryan.vilbig@gmail.com

 

[buffalo]

The Catholic Encyclopedia says otherwise: “God is immanent, or intimately present, in the universe because His power is required at every moment to sustain creatures in being and to concur with them in their activities.” (emphasis added).

Also, adaptations come from mutations, so even in your own philosophy, mutations are not necessarily corruptions.

The days of Genesis 1 are not to be interpreted as literal days that have disappeared into the past. After all, “This is the day the LORD has made; let us rejoice in it and be glad.” (Ps 118:24). God is making right now, on this very day, He has made. Rejoice!

I really think Aquinas was right on with his interpretation of John 5:17: “My Father works even until now, and I work.” (cf. Aquinas, II Sentences, dist. XII, q.1 art.2).

-Ryan Vilbig
ryan.vilbig@gmail.com

I do not think what I am posting conflicts with the Catholic Encyclopedia . THe distinction is creation vs sustenance. God finished creating ex nihilo.

Adaptations come from regulatory processes. Mutations are not the driver.

Let’s go back to the finches. The beaks change according to need through regulatory processes not mutations. They then return the previous shape when no longer needed.

Variability is front loaded.

 

[rvilbig]

I do not think what I am posting conflicts with the Catholic Encyclopedia . THe distinction is creation vs sustenance. God finished creating ex nihilo.

Adaptations come from regulatory processes. Mutations are not the driver.

Let’s go back to the finches. The beaks change according to need through regulatory processes not mutations. They then return the previous shape when no longer needed.

Variability is front loaded.

Well, Aquinas certainly would disagree with your understanding of nature. Also, even modern physicists are inclined to believe that God is still creating ex nihilo at the present moment, as Wolfgang Smith has written: “The determinative act [when the wavefunction collapses], moreover, is in fact more than a mere choice, a mere selection of one element from a given ensemble: for it brings into existence, as it were, ex nihilo, - something which previously did not exist as an actual entity.” (Quantum Enigma, page 66) Mutations are often very good. My brother’s genes have some mutations in them that gave him some height that neither of my parents or grandparents have. Also, I think your explanation of the finches is incorrect; their genes changed through mutations and then there was natural selection.

-Ryan Vilbig
ryan.vilbig@gmail.com

 

[edwest2]

Do you seriously believe a word of what you’ve just said?

Benedict XVI himself, your infallible leader, accepts that Evolution and an old Earth are facts.

500 core genes that are conserved and immortal? How can they be immortal if 99.9% of organisms are extinct. What evidence do you have for any of this?

No, the word fact should not be associated with those two concepts.

God bless,
Ed

 

[buffalo]

Well, Aquinas certainly would disagree with your understanding of nature. Also, even modern physicists are inclined to believe that God is still creating ex nihilo at the present moment, as Wolfgang Smith has written: “The determinative act [when the wavefunction collapses], moreover, is in fact more than a mere choice, a mere selection of one element from a given ensemble: for it brings into existence, as it were, ex nihilo, - something which previously did not exist as an actual entity.” (Quantum Enigma, page 66) Mutations are often very good. My brother’s genes have some mutations in them that gave him some height that neither of my parents or grandparents have. Also, I think your explanation of the finches is incorrect; their genes changed through mutations and then there was natural selection.

-Ryan Vilbig
ryan.vilbig@gmail.com

My explanation of the finches is correct.

The butterfly wingspot is turned on and off by a regulatory switch.

 

[Moonstruck888]

No, the word fact should not be associated with those two concepts.

God bless,
Ed

Then I suggest you take that up with Benedict, because you’ll get precisely nowhere trying to convince me.

 

[Moonstruck888]

Gotta quote? - adaptation is obvious to anyone. There is some confusion here.

Yes.

"That flies in the face of current understanding that DNA fights against mutations with self correcting mechanisms.

And mutations corrupt language meaning they do not increase meaning."

 

[buffalo]

Yes.

"That flies in the face of current understanding that DNA fights against mutations with self correcting mechanisms.

And mutations corrupt language meaning they do not increase meaning."

Conclusion - that mutations are not the driving force behind adaptation.

 

[Moonstruck888]

Conclusion - that mutations are not the driving force behind adaptation.

That conclusion is incorrect. Mutation and selection are the driving force behind adaptation.

Tell me, what colour to you imagine Adam and Eve were?

 

[buffalo]

That conclusion is incorrect. Mutation and selection are the driving force behind adaptation.

Tell me, what colour to you imagine Adam and Eve were?

As created I have no way of knowing. But with their preternatural gifts they might not need skin pigmentation.