Why you should think that the Natural-Evolution of species is true

  • Thread starter Thread starter IWantGod
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
More benefit than knowing the earth goes around the sun. For a lot of people, sure, you probably will never actually use it in your life, but if you work in a lot of the sciences it’s necessary.

The bigger issue is just the general attitude towards understanding things. You’ll notice that most or all of the anti-evolutionists here have a hostile attitude towards science. They will say they don’t, but on the other hand they’ll say almost all scientists are part of an international conspiracy because they hate God.
 
Last edited:

Sweeping gene survey reveals new facets of evolution​

More evidence for IDvolution.

Sweeping gene survey reveals new facets of evolution

It is textbook biology, for example, that species with large, far-flung populations—think ants, rats, humans—will become more genetically diverse over time.
But is that true?
“The answer is no,” said Stoeckle, lead author of the study, published in the journal Human Evolution .
For the planet’s 7.6 billion people, 500 million house sparrows, or 100,000 sandpipers, genetic diversity “is about the same,” he told AFP.
The study’s most startling result, perhaps, is that nine out of 10 species on Earth today, including humans, came into being 100,000 to 200,000 years ago.
“This conclusion is very surprising, and I fought against it as hard as I could,” Thaler told AFP.

“another unexpected finding from the study—species have very clear genetic boundaries, and there’s nothing much in between."

“If individuals are stars, then species are galaxies,” said Thaler. “They are compact clusters in the vastness of empty sequence space.”

The absence of “in-between” species is something that also perplexed Darwin, he said."

Read more at: Sweeping gene survey reveals new facets of evolution
 
Last edited:
Metis1 said:
Anyhow, I think “the deal is sealed”, at least for now, in that nobody here can provide evidence for this supposed magical wall. Nor are they likely to ever be able to do as such since, if that wall had any evidence for it, it would be shouted from the rooftops long ago and almost all scientists would have gotten use to eating crow for dinner. The fact that no such evidence has been found pretty much indicates that it probably doesn’t exist.
Click to expand...
A very key point Behe makes is:

A major point of the book was that if evolution has to skip even one baby step to attain a beneficial state (that is, if even one intermediate in a long and relentlessly detailed evolutionary pathway is detrimental or unhelpful), then the probability of reaching that state decreases exponentially.

This paper supports Behe’s claim:

Loading…

www.pnas.org

One of their conclusions is that a minimum of two specific mutations are indeed required for the protein to be able to transport chloroquine.

The need for multiple mutations neatly accounts for why the development of spontaneous resistance to chloroquine is an event of extremely low probability — approximately one in a hundred billion billion (1 in 1020) malarial cell replications — as the distinguished Oxford University malariologist Nicholas White deduced years ago. The bottom line is that the need for an organism to acquire multiple mutations in some situations before a relevant selectable function appears is now an established experimental fact.
 
Last edited:
Timely book release: (of course I will purchase it 😀)

Darwin Devolves: The New Science About DNA That Challenges EvolutionHardcover – February 26, 2019​

The scientist who has been dubbed the “Father of Intelligent Design” and author of the groundbreaking book Darwin’s Black Box contends that recent scientific discoveries further disprove Darwinism and strengthen the case for an intelligent creator.

In his controversial bestseller Darwin’s Black Box , biochemist Michael Behe challenged Darwin’s theory of evolution, arguing that science itself has proven that intelligent design is a better explanation for the origin of life. In Darwin Devolves, Behe advances his argument, presenting new research that offers a startling reconsideration of how Darwin’s mechanism works, weakening the theory’s validity even more.

A system of natural selection acting on random mutation, evolution can help make something look and act differently. But evolution never creates something organically. Behe contends that Darwinism actually works by a process of devolution—damaging cells in DNA in order to create something new at the lowest biological levels. This is important, he makes clear, because it shows the Darwinian process cannot explain the creation of life itself. “A process that so easily tears down sophisticated machinery is not one which will build complex, functional systems,” he writes.

In addition to disputing the methodology of Darwinism and how it conflicts with the concept of creation, Behe reveals that what makes Intelligent Design unique—and right—is that it acknowledges causation. Evolution proposes that organisms living today are descended with modification from organisms that lived in the distant past. But Intelligent Design goes a step further asking, what caused such astounding changes to take place? What is the reason or mechanism for evolution? For Behe, this is what makes Intelligent Design so important.
 
First off you’re assuming unidimensionality in the fitness function which is a false assumption. Secondly I find it strange that you would cite a paper showing exactly how a function could have evolved through incremental processes as proof that it could not have evolved through incremental processes. Again I have to wonder if you understand what you are citing.
Were you the one who said floods in Washington prove the entire world was flooded?
 
Last edited:
Anyone interested in Behe should watch the Nova episode available for free at the link below, which goes over the Kitzmiller vs Dover case:


If I recall correctly buffalo you like Nova.
 
Atreju said:
Were you the one who said floods in Washington prove the entire world was flooded?
Click to expand...
No, I make the point cataclysm is now widely accepted once again. J Harlen Bretz was ostracized for his claims and recently vindicated. It is now accepted floods can change the landscape very rapidly.

Nova used the word megaflood.

NOVA | Mystery of the Megaflood​

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/megaflood/scab-nf.html

What on earth made this?
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

These potholes were drilled into solid rock in a matter of hours by fast moving water, aka flood. We now understand many features we use to claim very long ages can be made in a very short time.
 
Last edited:
Science is going to stand behind the ruling of a judge to protect their paradigm? Not a good look at all.

We know much more now.

Also, read Behe’s after trial rebuttals.
 
Watch the episode.

In fact everyone should watch it since it also goes to the original question.
 
Last edited:
Ex-atheist and inventor of the gene gun

Dr. John Sanford “Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of the Genome”​

Below is additional support for IDvolution.​

Some quotes from Dr John Sanford on genetic entropy. Very consistent with IDvolution and Scripture. To get the full effect take the time to view the videos. Listen carefully where he states it is “kind of a trade secret of population geneticists.” The design of the genome is astonishing and shows intelligence, design and purpose.​

"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is a thought of God." Pope Benedict XVI​

----------------------------------------------------------------------​

“a vastly superior operating system”​

“a galaxy of design and complexity”​

“over 90% of the genome is actively transcribed”​

“the genome has multiple overlapping messages”​

“data compression on the most sophisticated level”​

“more and more the genome looks like a super super set of programs”​

“more and more it looks like top down design”​

“the reality is everybody is mutant”​

“the selection process really has nothing to grab hold of”​

“so it’s kind of a trade secret amongst population geneticists,any well informed population geneticist understands man is degenerating”​

“so in deep geological time we should have been extinct a long time ago”​

“the human race is degenerating at 1-5% per generation”​

“so personal and so immediate, because there is no circle of life where things where things stay the same, and it’s not an upward spiral of evolution, things keep getting better and better, it is a downward spiral exactly as described in Scripture”​

“I realized it had major implications for evolution, but I had no… I couldn’t have guessed how profound the biblical implications are, how profoundly the evidence supports the biblical perspective of a dying universe and a dying world, we are dying because of the fall”​

“and our only hope is Christ”​

Dr. John Sanford "Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of the Genome"1/2​

Dr. John Sanford “Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of the Genome” 2/2​

 
Last edited:
The link has definitive and specific critiques of the factual claims made in those books, not baseless smears.

Also I think you should make it clear that you are linking to your own blog.
 
Pretty much everyone here knows it.

Follow the supporting links, Lots of good stuff there! 😀
 
Last edited:
The questions asked have been dealt with ad nauseum here and elsewhere, including how mutations can lead to changes in phenotypes as they are often carried recessively, sometimes for many generations. If this wasn’t the case, geneticists would be against what I and some others have been posting-- but they simply ain’t.

Simply put, there simply is no scientific, including genetic, obstacle to evolution with the only real obstacle being a literalistic interpretation of the Creation accounts. As the Church has concluded, one can accept the ToE as long as it is understood God was behind it all, as it in no way goes against God and/or the Bible.

Have a great weekend, and I hope to “see yas” at mass.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top