Debate discussion
Religion
>
If you don't believe in evolution
Mod
Tracing the evolution of the eye. Or do you mean on a chemical scale?
Lauren wrote: "http://www.goodreads.com/story/show/3...\Tracing the evolution of the eye. Or do you mean on a chemical scale? "
I would imagine that a frameshift mutation that dislocates that many base sequences and like you said, "produces different proteins then what it normally would have produced. " ...produces millions of new proteins, would create a not only millions of chemically-scaled changes but structural ones as well. For that matter, it would create a drastic change in the organism...like real DRASTIC..
Mod
You seem to be implying that inserting a few additional base pairs into a strand of DNA would then shift everything over a couple pairs so when your body went to use the DNA everything after that mutation would be "off" and thus none of it would work. If I'm mistaken and that's not what you’re saying let me know." Yes, that is what I'm implying...
"So if you introduce a few extra bases the most you'll be affecting are the genes coded for in that particular stretch of DNA."
I understand that BUT for a mutation to be passed on to the next generation and be of any relevance to evolution...it has to occur DURING the initial stages of cell replication upon conception, the cell replication and division of asexual reproduction, or a direct mutation on the gametes that will be passed on to the next generation and thus become "permanent" if favorable.
So really...the mutation or frameshift has to happen to the DNA that will be copied over and over to form the new organism...and copied again to be transferred into the reproduction method of that same organism.
So the change isn't just a slight alteration of proteins, its huge...
I guess the question really comes down to: Is DNA divided into "gene sections" that if a frameshift mutation happens in this specific gene code for a protein- it doesn't affect the rest of the DNA strand...or is it a single alignment where any new bases introduced here will shift the whole segment all the way to end? and thus increase the proteins coded for...thus increase the complexity as Lauren suggested.
I would read it but by how you put it I dont understand a word ur saying ^_^''
Mod
*sigh* What I meant was, I understand what she's saying but I don't. Like for example, I just read what you wrote but I don't get what you're saying.
Mod
I'll read it and come back...Also the question of the mathematical probability of such benefitual mutations happening with perfect correspondance with changes in the environment...and the chance of it all is quite slim. How could evolution argue that all life is based on such slim chances?
Even if millions of years pass, it still seems too slim a chance that evolution framed diversity as it is now.
Another question:
Is there a scientific example of branching in the hierarchy of organisms, the hierarchy of life, caused by frameshift mutations?
Lauren wrote: "Hm. Have you taken freshman biology yet?"Nope.
Mod
Actually, mutations happen all the time, when you give a million animals a million years. You have your logic backwards. The mutations are always there, it's the one that happen to be useful at the moment that stay.
"Even if millions of years pass, it still seems too slim a chance that evolution framed diversity as it is now. "
As it's happened, obviously not that slim.
Sheeky, you'll learn all this then. I did.
Koe wrote: "Malaz said "Also the question of the mathematical probability of such benefitual mutations happening with perfect correspondance with changes in the environment...and the chance of it all is quite ..."I mean could you give me another example of how a frameshift mutation,or addition on one gene could positively benefit an organism. Could you give me a scientific example of an alteration of one protein could benefit an organism?
Mod
You keep using that word. I don't think you know exactly what it means. Koe already told you this.
"Could you give me a scientific example of an alteration of one protein could benefit an organism? "
A protein mutation that caused a light sensitive patch on a cell. The first eye of sorts. Now the cell has better direction to find food, because it can sense it's surroundings.
Koe wrote: "Sure how about the famous example of sickle cell anemia.This is an adaptive trait in areas where malaria is common.
http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources......."
Sickle cell anemia is not a positive change...how will sickle cell anemia become favorable? (But that's besides the point- I understand your point...nevertheless, if I'm not mistaken, it is a mutation, an alteration, not an addition to the chromosome.)
Okay on the origins of life in relation to evolution...Do you want to give me a run-down before I start throwing out questions?
Your parents sound really nice. Lucky you lol
I understand your theory Girl4beluga. I can see how it could make sense...
I'm not debating. I don't believe it, I don't believe or dis-believe anything. I just posted to let Girl4beluga know that she isn't stupid, which you keep drilling into her.
Shant argue, not in the mood. Have a nice night...or morning...or whatever...Have a nice next 12 hours X)
We have just disproven the theory that humans evolved from an apelike animal with the discovery of Ardi.This isn't true at all. The Ardipithecus ramidus fossil simply added detail to our understanding of human evolution. It gave us, for example, new information about when bipedalism first appeared. Ardipithecus lived 4.4 million years ago. The last common ancestor between humans and apes lived about 5-7 million years ago. The Ardipithecus fossil doesn't change that timeline at all. We still share a common ancestor with chimps and other apes; we just now know that bipedalism appeared earlier than we previously thought.
Mod
If you were given medicine, and got better, science got it right. Fucking deal with it.
"there synonyms"
I COULD WRITE a dictionary and change all the definitions. It's completely subjective, ergo, not proof.
"Yes and may I recommend Harris, Hitchens, and Dennet, and while your at it read "God and the new Atheism" by Haught. "
Your really do have no idea what you're talking about, do you.
"You have know right to mock me."
KNOW right, you say? What an idiot.
"The idea of God was around before there even was a written language. "
Prove it. And btw, what would that prove anyway, that humans always had an imagination?
The idea of God was around before there even was a written language.The idea of a flat Earth was around before language. The idea of geocentrism was around before language. What's your point?
Girl4beluga wrote: "Evolution was not discovered to prove God false. "Not necessarily, but it did have that general effect. If we can explain things without a deity, there is really no more need to assume there is one.
Mod
Nathan can you stop being mean and just read her post as anything other than a target that must be degraded. I agree with her. You guys didn't address one part of her post, you just continued doing the very thing she was saying. You guys might think that you are the "good" guys but all you really do is sit here all day and insult people. If instead of calling people retarded you explain why they are wrong it would be different. You don't, you just name call. Let me use simple math: law of detachment if a then b
a
therefore b
If you bully people then you are pathetic.
You bully people.
Therefore you are pathetic.
And yes you bully people.
Bully: "a blustering, quarrelsome, overbearing person who habitually badgers and intimidates smaller or weaker people."
Get a life.
Pretty sure we did actually reply to the content of it in one of the threads.
1. I would just like to point out that J made a point without totally trashing on me
Calling people retarded over and over again doesn't prove your point. Ignoring what people say and calling them retarded doesn't prove your point. You don't have a point and are a sad old man who enjoys picking on little kids. I will only answer any more posts from you if you include sound logic, and refrain from cussing or using demeaning insults. I am sorry that your life sucks enough that you have to try and make little kids feel bad about themselves. You failed in this attempt. I know who I am, love who I am, and know what I believe. No sad old man is going to shake me. I am happy to discuss my disagreements with you, but being insulted again and again isn't something that I will take. By the way I have flagged you from goodreads. Have a nice life. Please stop picking on poor innocent people who are younger than you, and may not have their ideas set in stone.
Nope. And theology is the study of belief, so...
Girl4beluga wrote: "Mukesh wrote: "Nope. And theology is the study of belief, so..."AND............................."
And, that's circular.
What does flagging mean?? Like: 'Oi, this dude is rude..'??
Mod
I would just like to point out that 30min after I flagged Nathan's post it magically disappeared.
Liz wrote: "I would just like to point out that 30min after I flagged Nathan's post it magically disappeared. "
Which post did you flag?
So, you will only believe it when you see it. Have you ever seen a giant squid? Have you ever seen Uluru? If not, then do you not believe they exist?
The same way i trust my mom to pick me up from work.What if you were waiting outside work for your mom to come get you and she didn't show up, and you took that as a sign that it was your mother's will that you walk home from work, and so you did. When you got home from work, would you give your mother credit for having picked you up? Because this is what God does: he lets you do things for yourself, he never shows up at work in his Toyota, but then he takes the credit for it. Would you have
How is she helping you get home from work if you walk home yourself? In that, she deserves no credit. Just like God.
You've completely missed the point. How is doing nothing helping you do something? It isn't.
Is there ever a time when God is not helping you?
Ah, no. Your metaphor doesn't even make sense. First you say that humans need to do work while God does basically nothing. Then you say this is the same as humans putting money in a bank account, doing nothing for two hundred years, and getting a reward. Idiot.
We would have gotten that 'tough love' affect perfectly well without God in the first place.
We would have gotten that 'tough love' affect perfectly well without God in the first place.
The 'tough love' concept is scientific. It takes experience and then observation to view it as an alternative.
Are you seriously suggesting that religion doesn't affect me? HAHAHAHA.
Small mutations built up over t..."
-something smaller and more specific please... like could you trace it out for me?