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

[Aloysium]

incorrect information

A few points worth mentioning:
People are displaying patience on both sides of the argument.
Incorrect is not infrequently used in situations involving an opinion. It would be interesting to hear someone who believes there is no absolute truth commenting on the incorrectness of a statement meaning anything other than it being not part of a shared illusion.
Information requires not only an “object”, an event or structure in reality, which it is describing, but also the person doing the understanding. As is the case with the proverbial elephant and the blind men, what sounds incorrect is usually a different take on the subject matter.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

If you mean they are revealed scientifically as messages from God, that has not happened.

They are His signatures.

I read your “Signature in the Cell” and was not impressed. Giving something a title does not make something exist. (See “Unicorns”)

 

[buffalo]

I read your “Signature in the Cell” and was not impressed.

Give it time to settle in. The evidence is mounting and at least you are open to it.

Even before “Signature in the Cell” Catholics saw God’s signature in His creation.

 

[Aloysium]

They should not be on the site at all

They have offered you an opportunity to reaffirm your faith and communicate it to others who are ready to hear it. It’s a challenge that one necessarily not need take. We don’t need to respond to everything we disagree with. What some people say can most certainly be upsetting, and I have blocked posters in the past whom I felt were blaspheming although the moderators apparently felt otherwise.

 

[Bradskii]

rossum:

Uriel1:

So let’s take the only one of the three with any scientific credibility…

All three have scientific credibility. For HbC see Modiano et al (2001) “Haemoglobin C protects against clinical Plasmodium falciparum malaria”. For Apo A-I Milano see Cheung et al (1988) “Characterization of A-I-containing lipoproteins in subjects with A-I Milano variant”. A search on Google Scholar will find more papers for both.

… viz. Lipase persistence

You have misread my point here. I was talking about Lactase persistence, not Lipase persistence. There are plenty of references in the Wikipedia article.

rossum

Forgive me; I mean lactase (relating to milk) persistence and the science on life expectancy and hip fractures is correct

So you don’t think that being lacotose persistant would offer any nutritional advantage to groups who relied on pastorlism?

And incidentally (let’s not get into a he said/she said discussion), there are studies that indicate that persistance has overall healtb benefits: The Origins of Lactase Persistence in Europe

I thought that as this was of interest to you academically you would have been aware of this and at least have mentioned it.

 

[Hugh_Farey]

The lactase persistence was offered as an advantage. It is a disadvantage, always was and always will be.

Not to me, it isn’t. How very assertive you are. To suggest that the increased risk of hip fracture outweighs the immense nutritional advantages gained by lactose tolerance is a matter of opinion. Fair enough, but it is one with which I profoundly disagree.

 

[Uriel1]

Uriel1:

rossum:

Uriel1:

So let’s take the only one of the three with any scientific credibility…

All three have scientific credibility. For HbC see Modiano et al (2001) “Haemoglobin C protects against clinical Plasmodium falciparum malaria”. For Apo A-I Milano see Cheung et al (1988) “Characterization of A-I-containing lipoproteins in subjects with A-I Milano variant”. A search on Google Scholar will find more papers for both.

… viz. Lipase persistence

You have misread my point here. I was talking about Lactase persistence, not Lipase persistence. There are plenty of references in the Wikipedia article.

rossum

Forgive me; I mean lactase (relating to milk) persistence and the science on life expectancy and hip fractures is correct

So you don’t think that being lacotose persistant would offer any nutritional advantage to groups who relied on pastorlism?

And incidentally (let’s not get into a he said/she said discussion), there are studies that indicate that persistance has overall healtb benefits: The Origins of Lactase Persistence in Europe

I thought that as this was of interest to you academically you would have been aware of this and at least have mentioned it.

I know the paper - it discusses how where peoples drink an unnatural product they may develop a resistance for the lactase enzyme; it signally fails to mention the morbidity and mortality increase, hence why it was not well rfegarded

 

[Bradskii]

I know the paper - it discusses how where peoples drink an unnatural product they may develop a resistance for the lactase enzyme; it signally fails to mention the morbidity and mortality increase, hence why it was not well rfegarded

But you do understand that any (debateable) late term negative aspects don’t relate to the evolutionary benefits?

 

[rossum]

The lactase persistence was offered as an advantage.

Please go back and re-read the question you asked, and that I was answering. You asked for a “new function”, not an advantage. In this case it happens to be both, but a new function due to a mutation does not have to be advantageous.

It is a disadvantage, always was and always will be.

No it is not. Lactase persistence reduces the prevalence of osteoporosis due to increased calcium uptake from milk. Are you still perhaps confusing Lactase persistence with Lipase persistence?

Jesus is God, the uncreated light and creator of the world and Buddhists reject that, clasping at a nonsensical construct of evolution (no fossil evidence) to argue against Jesus. They should not be on the site at all

Ah… So there is a new version of the Bible out: “Go and preach to all men, except Buddhists.” Maybe that will cut down on the number of JWs knocking on my door?

You might also want to have a good look at the Catholic calendar of saints, specifically saints Barlaam and Josaphat. Yes, the Buddha was a canonised Catholic saint. Very ecumenical.

If you want to discuss Buddhism then this is not the place to do it. I suggest you start a new thread in the Non-Catholic Religions section.

rossum

 

[Uriel1]

No it is not. Lactase persistence reduces the prevalence of osteoporosis due to increased calcium uptake from milk. Are you still perhaps confusing Lactase persistence with Lipase persistence?

That was a simple typo - there is NOT increased bone calcium uptake by drinking milk; read the data on hip fractures and increased morbidity, but there are more arterial plaques hence the increased mortality

 

[edwest211]

Please continue. As a moderator on another forum (not here), I am aware that lurkers do visit at various times just to see what’s being said. Some stick around.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

I read your “Signature in the Cell” and was not impressed.

Give it time to settle in. The evidence is mounting and at least you are open to it.

Which is more than I can say about you, since you refused to read the book that I suggested. Openness indeed!

 

[Techno2000]

explain how a bird evolved wings from legs and survived predation in the period between losing the functional leg and gaining the wing

Right, how did anything survive when it’s half one thing and half another .

 

[rossum]

You persistent misunderstanding persists. How does a Colugo survive with a half-wing/half-leg? It survives because its limbs function well enough as wings and also well enough as legs.

All evolution has to do is to form something that can survive well enough.

rossum

 

[buffalo]

All evolution has to do is to form something that can survive well enough.

Without foresight or purpose of course.

 

[Gorgias]

You might also want to have a good look at the Catholic calendar of saints, specifically saints Barlaam and Josaphat . Yes, the Buddha was a canonised Catholic saint. Very ecumenical.

This seems to be one of your favorite stories. I’m happy it amuses you. To disabuse you of what you think you’re claiming, though:

• Being in the ‘Roman Martyrology’ doesn’t mean you’re part of the calendar of saints as celebrated in the Church. (That’s the Roman Missal, and these two were never included in the Missal.)
• Barlaam and Josaphat were never formally canonized.

Of course, it’s cute to say “the Catholic Church considers the Buddha a saint”, and it has a particular comic value. For a good knee-slapper, though, I prefer the Dalai Lama’s comment, “[Jesus] reached a high state, either as a Bodhisattva, or an enlightened person, through Buddhist practice or something like that.”

 

[Aloysium]

You asked for a “new function”, not an advantage. In this case it happens to be both, but a new function due to a mutation does not have to be advantageous.

I’m too lazy to research the mechanism behind lactase permanence. With that caveat, I would say that it is not a new mutation in the sense that lactase production would have been, coinciding with the serendipitous, planned and designed according to others, of onset of milk production in mammals, presumably coded in another part of the genome. The loss of lactase production assists in weaning offspring from their mothers; being able to get to and utilize other sources of nutrition, they can easily move on. That function from what I recall of readings a few decades old now, has to do with the shutting down of certain processes as development proceeds, going along with the turning on of others.

By the way, the increased prevelance of individuals who have the ability to digest lactose would have come about most likely because what others found to be an inhospitable environment, was fine for them And their offspring.

I’m not sure how this is any sort of proof of evolution vs creation. I haven’t seen any creationist arguments against adaptation, the emergence of genetic abnormalities nor the fact that changes in the environment are related to those in the organisms of which it is comprised.

 

[edwest211]

Your last sentence is spot on. Instead of being uncritical and simply allowing certain information to be accepted as true without examining it, especially with this subject, we should consider alternatives. We should not simply accept conclusions drawn to date. One small error in interpreting data going back millions of years becomes of a very big error. In scientific journals, I’ve read “must have,” “appears to be,” “function unknown,” and similar.

 

[rossum]

That was a simple typo

Lipase has an article on Wikipedia. Simple typos do not.

My point about your question specifying new functions, not advantages, remains.

You still have my other two example to deal with.

There are plenty more new functions just in humans: the ability to breathe low pressure oxygen has evolved multiple times for example. Beyond humans there are many examples, such as the ability of some bacteria to digest nylon precursors.

Some mutations can give rise to new functions. Such mutations have been observed. Whatever website you got the ides that new functions couldn’t appear from was wrong. Do not trust that website.

rossum

 

[Bradskii]

rossum:

No it is not. Lactase persistence reduces the prevalence of osteoporosis due to increased calcium uptake from milk. Are you still perhaps confusing Lactase persistence with Lipase persistence?

That was a simple typo - there is NOT increased bone calcium uptake by drinking milk; read the data on hip fractures and increased morbidity, but there are more arterial plaques hence the increased mortality

Forget bone calcium. Forget hip fractures. Forget arterial plaques.

Do you not think that an ability to drink (for example) sheep or goats milk would be an evolutionary benefit to pastoralists? And note the word ‘evolutionary’.