dakmanzero:

lol!

return of the Eddy!

okay,

master Eddy vs Darth Nferyn ,    lightsabers ignited!


FIGHT!

dakmanzero:

Hasn't stopped

Just gradual

brain density is increasing, upper body strength is reducing,

kids are maturing earlier ( m sure u noticed )




ure kidding right?


i hope

dakmanzero:

lol!

return of the Eddy!

okay,

master Eddy vs Darth Nferyn , lightsabers ignited!


FIGHT!

simmy:

@nferyn
Proponents of gene drift, sexual and natural selection

simmy:

refuse to answer the most important question.its another form of the use and disuse hypothesis, which doesnt make sense!

simmy:

Whatever physical adaptations i might have will NOT be passed down to my kids.

simmy:

And i still maintain that its too simple an explanation. Human organs like the heart or th kidney are just too complex tobe expalined away thus.

simmy:

Seual recombinations don't produce new or a different specie it just produces a more adapted version of the same thing

simmy:

Mutations are a more likely cause, but telling me that the fish turned int o a tadpole and then a dog or cat through mutation is insulting my intelligence

nferyn:

So now I represent the Dark Side of The Force

This little interjection by our Ever Telling Eddy shows how futile any attempts at reason with him are. Those empty oneliners are very telling
Maybe Eddy's insistence on not having evolved made him realise that he was perfectly fit in his environment of amoeba, I certainly wouldn't know.

xkape:

@nferyn

i don't know what ia m talking about??. oblige us with your superior knowledge then and explain how your natural selection can explain away the earliest formation of DNA from early organic matter. let us even ignore the fact that the cantenation of carborn molecules necessary for any type of organic matter has not been observed in any non-life scenario, here or in space. this is the foundation of life itself, once life appears u can draw all sorts of conjecture and nobody will be the wiser.

simmy:

@kag
Atheism has a lot to do with evolution.

the theory initself was an attempt by leading intellectuals o fthose times to find something to refute the bible's story of creation with.

I hope you're familiar circumstances surrounding the publishing of darwin's book. The book was named origin of species wasn't it? I'm glad u agree it does nothng of the sort. All darwin succeded in doing was to notice that all organisms are graded in levels of complexity and that has been known for thousands of years.

Pray tell me what predictions evolutins make and how isit testable? Please do not refer to all the fossils that have been unearthed by scientists.

These same scientists keep quiet when they unearth fossils which totally differ from their expectations.

And please because most people believe something (or have been browbeated into believing something) does not make it true.

Evolution is simply a theory (or a hypothesis, it does not matter) drawn up by people who do not fully appreciate or refuse to appreciate the complexities involved in life.

I fail to see how even a simple unicellular organism could have evolved from some amno acids.
Saying just because a couple of amino acids can be fused together in the lab or( even viruses) is evolution is like saying reciting a,b.c-z is poetry. Its a leap in logic and until scientists can prove exactly how this leap into complexity took place,then I'm at a loss as to what scienceis really about.

Most people fail to realise that the planet earth in itself had to be prefectly located for evoluiton to take place. it moves at just the right speed and wobbles in exactly the right way. It's mass is even perfectly balanced by jupiter to stop it from spriralling towards the sun (or away) and facts like these does not even remotely suggest a design which in turn suggests a designer which in turn suggests intelligence which "might" suggets a personality? PLEASE!!

These facts are not even the tip of the iceberg! The codes that contain the info. that makes u would fill all the volumes that exist in the world and way more. your body has "evolved ' a way of checking itself for accuracy (proofreading) and even purposely allows for mutation when it deems fit!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I don't mean to be rude but honestly you have to be crazy to even remotely consider evolution or just very ignorant

Ps: I'm not tryng to sound like a Mr. know-all but if you knew eeven half of how complex life really is you would realise that creation is infinitely more likely a possibility than evoluiton

nferyn:

You mean 99% of the scientific community working in Biology?

nferyn:

Random mutations under non-random selective pressure in large enough populations within long enough timespans will do. It's not because you do not see how it is possible that it isn't possible. Personal incredulity is a very weak form of argumenation.
No they aren't too complex. The eye is far more complex than the heart or kidneys, yet it is easy to propose a probable evolutionary mechanism.

nferyn:


Correct, they don't do that by themselves. If you add random mutations and reproductive isolation to the mix they do lead to speciation;
Why? Just think about what compound interests can do to your savings, even within a human lifespan.

xkape:

@KAG

all u can throw is invective?

fine explain to me how the lesser genetic complexitym of a virus would not act as a compressed time study the evolution that would occur in say early hominids given the difference in orders of magnitude of the permutations of genes that would be involed in the mutation of a single trait.

translation - if a virus is 1000 times less complex than an ape, a change based on genetic combinations in an ape that took 100,000 year in an ape would take 100,1000/ 1000! years in a virus if we assume simple permutations of genes. even if we assumed environmental and sexual bias as pushed by evolutionists, the effect will still be bottom heavy in favour of the virus, shortening the time evem futher. Hence studying mutation in a virus for a 10 years will be more than equivalent to studying mutation in a hominid for a hundred thousand. but of course i don't know any biology so all this is bollox.also known as math

nferyn:

1. Evolution theory does not equal abiogenesis.
2. Have you ever thought of the time it took for life to start on earth? How vain would it be to think we would observe it in a mere 300 years since the scientific revolution? How old exactly is abiogenesic as a scientific field?

xkape:

99% percent of scientists in Galileos time belived the earth was flat.

operative words, large enough, long enough always streches of the imagination reason and mathematical reasoning. where are the fossils of the de-selected specimens a scheme of random mutations would generate a plethora, a continuum of traits. fossil records show a quantisized speciation over time. one form leads to another in alogical progression of traits, where are the fossils of those mutations too outlandish to survive. many of the "ancestors of animals today" exist up till know in almost unchanged condition. if natural selection gives rise to better organisms, why are some of the rejects still around. where is the evidence of the destruction of the greater majority of the rejects. nferyn, wake up and smell the angels

xkape:

nferyn
i have always considered u one of the more intelligent people on this forum but this is weak
that is all u can come up with. splitting hairs on evolution not beign abiogenesis.

so u see it is vain to draw conclusion on the origin or development of life in only 300 years and yet u have been touting how evolution has been scientifically proven with observations withing the same 300 years!!
how old exactly is evolution as a scientific field

To clarify, evolution suggests that living organisms evoled from simple to more complex over time. are u sayin that the foundation was somehow imported to earth and afterwards evolved please educate me

KAG:

Yes, I was the one calling about 99% of all biologists fools, *rolls eyes*

The evolution of virii are used in the study of evolution (e.g. infectons and resistance of virii like the AIDS virus), but it's nonsensical to suggest that modern virii would follow the evolution path that lead to humans, ther's absolutely no reason for that to happen.

What makes a virus 1000 times less complex than an ape? What's your criteria for complexity? By the way, what you've proposed makes absolutely no sense, at least to me, as virii are as evolved as apes.

Fluffy:

Hello Remember me, I'm Fluffy, the one who started all this may I say something?        

xkape:

nferyn
i have always considered u one of the more intelligent people on this forum but this is weak
that is all u can come up with. splitting hairs on evolution not beign abiogenesis.

xkape:

so u see it is vain to draw conclusion on the origin or development of life in only 300 years and yet u have been touting how evolution has been scientifically proven with observations withing the same 300 years!!
how old exactly is evolution as a scientific field

xkape:

To clarify, evolution suggests that living organisms evoled from simple to more complex over time.

xkape:

are u sayin that the foundation was somehow imported to earth and afterwards evolved please educate me

xkape:

another little tidbit- frozen samples of flue found in victims of the 1918 pandemic in greenland were found not to have differentiated significantly from those found today. significant beign measured on assumed differentiation of viruses in the pleistocene. any explanations

Fluffy:

Hello Remember me, I'm Fluffy, the one who started all this may I say something?

TV01:

Hi Fluffy,

I think this thing has gotten bigger than just you now. I'm greatly enjoying the discourse. I suggest you do the same. Unless of course you have something pertinent that will elevate this
discussion.

Simmy, Xkape,

May the good Lord strengthen your arms.

May God "The Uncreated Creator" richly bless you.

xkape:

has the aids virus evolved into a more COMPLEX life form?

xkape:

Let me explain complex. has it developed the capacity to manufacture its own nucleic material or its own biochemical pathway for manufacturing food? has it developed any sexual characteristics?

xkape:

the "evolution u have mentioned is change strictly confined to the limits of what we know to be a retrovirus, it hasnt elevated itself even to the level of another type of virus like say a mimivirus.

xkape:

how is an ape 1000 times more complex than a virus please calculate the number of base pairs of material in a virus, the number in an ape, make a simple permutation of traits there from and see that 1000 is an overconservative estimate. and i used this means of measurment because the argument following was based on a simple mathematical calcullation relating random combinations of nuclear material to time.
which seems to be lost on u

KAG:


Close, but not quite. /the theory of evolution suggests that living organisms evolved over time. No simple and complex. Now, the important aspect of the ToE is, all it needs is life and an unperfect replicator, how the life appeared is immaterial when discussing the ToE. It could have been started by aliens, the Tetragrammaton, Zeus, Brahma, the IPU, anything.

xkape:

has the aids virus evolved into a more COMPLEX life form? Let me explain complex. has it developed the capacity to manufacture its own nucleic material or its own biochemical pathway for manufacturing food? has it developed any sexual characteristics?

the "evolution u have mentioned is change strictly confined to the limits of what we know to be a retrovirus, it hasnt elevated itself even to the level of another type of virus like say a mimivirus. how is an ape 1000 times more complex than a virus please calculate the number of base pairs of material in a virus, the number in an ape, make a simple permutation of traits there from and see that 1000 is an overconservative estimate. and i used this means of measurment because the argument following was based on a simple mathematical calcullation relating random combinations of nuclear material to time.
which seems to be lost on u

anybody else thinks my calculation is illogical
another little tidbit- frozen samples of flue found in victims of the 1918 pandemic in greenland were found not to have differentiated significantly from those found today. significant beign measured on assumed differentiation of viruses in the pleistocene. any explanations