Creationists

[Youwerecreated]

Actually, you are absolutely wrong about that. Mutations are ubiquitous. Every human being (you included) has between 100 and 200 unique new mutations. I guess the Charlatans at the Discovery Institute forgot to teach you that.

The sickle-cell anemia mutation occurs at the rate of about 10^-5 per generation. If that mutation occurs in a human living in a region where Malaria is prevalent, it will beneficially protect that person (and any descendents) from Malaria.

That said, this is only a minor, almost irrelevant example of the role of mutation in evolution. The primary role of mutations is to increase genetic variability.

All 200 or so of your personal mutations are point mutations on your DNA, i.e. a change to a single base pair in a single DNA codon. If they occur on a length of DNA that is actually a gene (as opposed to “junk DNA”), they will (at most) change a single amino acid on a single protein. I say “at most” because the DNA code is redundant, and about a quarter of even these mutations are completely silent.

These variations in our proteins are the expression of our genetic variability as a species. They are the reason that we come in different shapes, sizes, colors and all the other differences in our bodies and abilities. And this variation is the raw material upon which natural selection acts. If it is beneficial to be taller, then natural selection will favor those variations that increase height and eliminate those that reduce it.

But the eliminated variations are constantly being replenished by each generation’s new mutations. This includes some mutations that will reduce height (and be eliminated quickly) and some mutations that will increase height, even beyond the original variation of the population. In this way, over time, organisms can evolve completely beyond the limitations of their original variation. This is how mutation creates genetic novelty.

Do a bit of research and you will find that over the last several decades, the average height of the Japanese youngster has increased dramatically. The children often tower over the parents.

This is funny I attended the University of Arizona. You gave the typical answer on a so called beneficial mutation The sickle-cell anemia mutation.

I also see you are not up to date on the human genome project because they declare there is no junk DNA.



mutations

Scientific data - High Rate of Deleterious Mutations

The Myth of Beneficial Mutations - CSI

Hey YWCA, I went to U of A too. Studied mechanical engineering. What years were you there? I was 84 to 88. I actually sold the HVAC equipment on TGEN here in Phoenix and a guy that goes to our church is a researching there. And he is not even science loathing!

1981 to 1985

Probably when most of these ignorant kids were born.

 

[Hollie]

[/QUOTE]

If you're incapable of responding to the salient points, you should consider not participating in these discussions.

 

[Hollie]

Sorry partner but God comes first with believers,the same can be said for non-believers.

Why would the gods come first with non-believers? Doesn't the term "non-believer" suggest "non-believer"?

 

[Hollie]

What ? you hate hearing evolutionists that are in a better situation to actually know about what they are saying agreeing with me a believer.

Take hack and shove it lady, I have made my credentials known. What are your credentials ?

Just admit it,the truth hurts.

I'm totally underwhelmed... but impressed with the teenage bravado. Really, I am.

 

[Hollie]

Seriously? I've stated peviously I am not a young earth Creationists and I don't know anything about ICR nor have I ever visited their website. Boy do you lump everyone into the same mold. I suppose you believe all blacks are on welfare too.

So "who" or "what" created the "young earth".

 

[UltimateReality]

If you're incapable of responding to the salient points, you should consider not participating in these discussions.[/QUOTE]

Obviously, forums are meant to be a source of entrtainment as well as informative.

Hollie, did you enjoy my comment about the gentleman at my church being a researcher at TGEN? According to your fried worldview, I suppose you would discriminate against science-loathing, ignorant, Creationist Chrstians from holding such positions. It's a wonder how he gets any mapping done at all, you know being that he is such a science hater and all. Let me guess, you are a lesbian and part of the occupy movement as well?

 

[UltimateReality]

Seriously? I've stated peviously I am not a young earth Creationists and I don't know anything about ICR nor have I ever visited their website. Boy do you lump everyone into the same mold. I suppose you believe all blacks are on welfare too.

So "who" or "what" created the "young earth".

How would I know? I believe the earth is 4 billion years old, as do he folks at the discovery institute.

 

[Hollie]

Hollie, did you enjoy my comment about the gentleman at my church being a researcher at TGEN? According to your fried worldview, I suppose you would discriminate against science-loathing, ignorant, Creationist Chrstians from holding such positions. It's a wonder how he gets any mapping done at all, you know being that he is such a science hater and all. Let me guess, you are a lesbian and part of the occupy movement as well?

I'll ignore the lesbian reference as desperation on your part.

ID is part of what I like to call "The Self Destructing Creation Model." Earlier, creationists made no effort to conceal their agenda of promoting Biblical literalism. It was (as you may recall) originally called "Biblical Creationism" with great candor. Faced with the correct legal conclusions that it was merely religion, they retreated and renamed it "Scientific Creationism," making a half hearted attempt to edit out explicit Biblical references... but that fooled no one. When that met an equally unambiguous decision in the courts, the new version became "Intelligent Design." In the process, the creationist movement has become progressively less candid, more ambiguous, and frankly more pathetic.

In the same way, when creationists find themselves unable to deal with the multiple independent sources of evidence for evolution that include the fossils, the genetic comparisons, comparative anatomy, biogeography, ecology etc., they retreat further and further towards the subject of abiogenesis. But how does that help them?

Does a god that created bacteria and then let everything else evolve from there conform any better with the record of Genesis than no god at all? Either way, the Bible still cannot be taken literally. Adam and Eve are still an allegory. Biblical history is still a myth.

It is not the issue of abiogenesis that actually concerns the creationist movement. It is irrelevant to the actual disagreement with science, and most creationists already know that. The disagreement fundamentally is about evolution, not abiogenesis. And specifically, the issue is about the evolution of human beings, not the origin of the first cell.

Creationism is not a theist vs. atheist controversy. It is a Fundamentalist Christian (and now Muslim) vs. everybody else controversy. It is a single biblical literalist perspective versus even other Christians and Muslims who have no trouble with the scientific perspective.

Organisms still evolve through a combination of genetic mutation and natural selection. And the evidence still reflects a common origin for all living things from a common ancestor via a process of descent with modification, no matter how life arose in the first place. That is the problem for creationists.

 

[Montrovant]

Sorry partner but God comes first with believers,the same can be said for non-believers.

The problem is not with god coming first, the problem is ignoring evidence that contradicts a non-scientific belief and calling it science.

Believe what you will, but when you want to call it science and teach it as such, ignoring things that refute your interpretation of the bible just doesn't cut it.

 

[Montrovant]

How is that name calling? Most lay folks like yourself that come here to argue have blindly subscribed to the "fact" of evolution in their zealous need to deny God. There are really no true atheist only folks angry with God.

The quote function has gotten screwy, that wasn't my post!

I do want to comment on the last part of your post, though. Why do you think there are no true atheists? What assures you that people MUST believe in some sort of god? It seems silly, even arrogant, to say that no one truly disbelieves. Your statement also seems to imply that people don't disbelieve, they are only angry at the god in which YOU believe. The Christian god is not the only god believed in. The Abrahamic religions are not the only religions. Millions of people are believers in some sort of god or gods without believing in the god of Abraham. You seem to not only dismiss atheists, but anyone who doesn't believe in your god.

 

[UltimateReality]

Hollie, did you enjoy my comment about the gentleman at my church being a researcher at TGEN? According to your fried worldview, I suppose you would discriminate against science-loathing, ignorant, Creationist Chrstians from holding such positions. It's a wonder how he gets any mapping done at all, you know being that he is such a science hater and all. Let me guess, you are a lesbian and part of the occupy movement as well?

I'll ignore the lesbian reference as desperation on your part.

ID is part of what I like to call "The Self Destructing Creation Model." Earlier, creationists made no effort to conceal their agenda of promoting Biblical literalism. It was (as you may recall) originally called "Biblical Creationism" with great candor. Faced with the correct legal conclusions that it was merely religion, they retreated and renamed it "Scientific Creationism," making a half hearted attempt to edit out explicit Biblical references... but that fooled no one. When that met an equally unambiguous decision in the courts, the new version became "Intelligent Design." In the process, the creationist movement has become progressively less candid, more ambiguous, and frankly more pathetic.

In the same way, when creationists find themselves unable to deal with the multiple independent sources of evidence for evolution that include the fossils, the genetic comparisons, comparative anatomy, biogeography, ecology etc., they retreat further and further towards the subject of abiogenesis. But how does that help them?

Does a god that created bacteria and then let everything else evolve from there conform any better with the record of Genesis than no god at all? Either way, the Bible still cannot be taken literally. Adam and Eve are still an allegory. Biblical history is still a myth.

It is not the issue of abiogenesis that actually concerns the creationist movement. It is irrelevant to the actual disagreement with science, and most creationists already know that. The disagreement fundamentally is about evolution, not abiogenesis. And specifically, the issue is about the evolution of human beings, not the origin of the first cell.

Creationism is not a theist vs. atheist controversy. It is a Fundamentalist Christian (and now Muslim) vs. everybody else controversy. It is a single biblical literalist perspective versus even other Christians and Muslims who have no trouble with the scientific perspective.

Organisms still evolve through a combination of genetic mutation and natural selection. And the evidence still reflects a common origin for all living things from a common ancestor via a process of descent with modification, no matter how life arose in the first place. That is the problem for creationists.

I'm not really sure how all the statements above, some of them grossly inaccurate, related to your view of Christians doing fabulous work in the scientific community. I would like to clarify my comment on you being a lesbian. I have found that the anger some homosexuals face from so called Christians, who are not following the teachings of Christ, causes them to abandon their religious views. The guilt and shame associated with early homosexual feelings in our predominantly Judeo Christian culture, many times causes homosexuals to abandon their religious beliefs as a coping mechanism to deal with their guilt. While Christianity condemns homosexuality as a sin, Christ calls us to love and reach out to sinners, including homosexuals, not stand on the street corner with degrading signs that say "God hates fags". My experience has been that many who have been subjected to this abuse by so called fundamentalist Christians, or from rigid Christian parents who withhold love or disown once they come out, tend to go the other direction violently, going on a crusade to "teach those Christians a lesson once and for all and destroy their pathetic beliefs with all my science smarts." Evolution becomes just the avenue they need to prove the antagonist in their life wrong and deny God. Your posts contain just that type of hatred and anger, so I was just curious if my prediction was correct. Now I was a cop for 10 years, and I do find it somewhat curious you did not deny your were a lesbian, but sidestepped the issue. If you would answer one question though, were you raised in a Christian home?

 

[UltimateReality]

The quote function has gotten screwy, that wasn't my post!

I do want to comment on the last part of your post, though. Why do you think there are no true atheists? What assures you that people MUST believe in some sort of god? It seems silly, even arrogant, to say that no one truly disbelieves. Your statement also seems to imply that people don't disbelieve, they are only angry at the god in which YOU believe. The Christian god is not the only god believed in. The Abrahamic religions are not the only religions. Millions of people are believers in some sort of god or gods without believing in the god of Abraham. You seem to not only dismiss atheists, but anyone who doesn't believe in your god.

I am no longer speaking from a scientific stance, but a philosophical one now. Without God their is no Universal truth, no basis for morals. The point of my little saying is that most folks claiming atheism rarely behave like TRUE atheists. They still hold back with an inner uncertainty that deep down they might be wrong about the existence of a higher power. This uncertainty keeps them from living a truly free from God of the Bible existence. That little thing science still can't explain called a conscience keeps them from really living out their beliefs. William Provine during a debate admitted the evolutionary philosophical tennants that necessarily spring forth from belief in evolution:

"Let me summarize my views on what modern evolutionary biology tells us loud and clear … There are no gods, no purposes, no goal-directed forces of any kind. There is no life after death. When I die, I am absolutely certain that I am going to be dead. That’s the end for me. There is no ultimate foundation for ethics, no ultimate meaning to life, and no free will for humans, either."

Does a lion ponder the family the antelope left behind while he consumes his flesh? Darwinist make up all kinds of neat fairy tales about ethics and morals and how they developed but they are speculation. So the question is, if no one was looking, and you could get away with some truly evil sh-- that would benefit you in some monetary or positional way, would you do it? If it meant your family, your offspring, would survive and carry your genes forward, but someone else had to suffer, if you wouldn't get caught, would you go for it?

Regarding Abiogenisis, it is funny how evolutionists are always saying how scientific they are when the whole theory is the most non-scientific area of science currently studied. Berlinski addresses this in the video when comparing it to physics. It is laced with Materialistic mysticism that the most zealous of that worldview seem blind to see or accept. It is also really convenient that they don't dare touch abiogenesis, They speak of a common ancestor, but no one can seem to define what type of organism this common ancestor is. Is it a single cell organism? A virus? What? Someone please tell me, what is the definitive line where abiogenisis ends and evolution starts. I have never gotten an answer but for folks that have everything figured out, this shouldn't be that hard to define.

 

[Hollie]

I'm not really sure how all the statements above, some of them grossly inaccurate, related to your view of Christians doing fabulous work in the scientific community. I would like to clarify my comment on you being a lesbian. I have found that the anger some homosexuals face from so called Christians, who are not following the teachings of Christ, causes them to abandon their religious views. The guilt and shame associated with early homosexual feelings in our predominantly Judeo Christian culture, many times causes homosexuals to abandon their religious beliefs as a coping mechanism to deal with their guilt. While Christianity condemns homosexuality as a sin, Christ calls us to love and reach out to sinners, including homosexuals, not stand on the street corner with degrading signs that say "God hates fags". My experience has been that many overcompensate, going on a crusade to "teach those Christians a lesson once and for all and destroy their pathetic beliefs with all my science smarts." Your posts contain just that type of hatred and anger, so I was just curious if my prediction was correct. Now I was a cop for 10 years, and I do find it somewhat curious you did not deny your were a lesbian, but sidestepped the issue. If you would answer one question though, were you raised in a Christian home?

So... because your arguments have become flaming wreckage, you must compensate by spewing hate? Intellectually honest people use facts to conceive their educated opinions, not defend their preconceived ones. But, of course, intellectual honesty isn't for everyone.

Wallowing in self pity will help you not. The debasement was brought on by the impotence which you exhibit. Employ introspection and you shall understand why your cycle of self hate causes you such angst. Fix that which makes you a slave to ignorance and retrogression and you shall be a slave no more…

 

[UltimateReality]

I'm not really sure how all the statements above, some of them grossly inaccurate, related to your view of Christians doing fabulous work in the scientific community. I would like to clarify my comment on you being a lesbian. I have found that the anger some homosexuals face from so called Christians, who are not following the teachings of Christ, causes them to abandon their religious views. The guilt and shame associated with early homosexual feelings in our predominantly Judeo Christian culture, many times causes homosexuals to abandon their religious beliefs as a coping mechanism to deal with their guilt. While Christianity condemns homosexuality as a sin, Christ calls us to love and reach out to sinners, including homosexuals, not stand on the street corner with degrading signs that say "God hates fags". My experience has been that many overcompensate, going on a crusade to "teach those Christians a lesson once and for all and destroy their pathetic beliefs with all my science smarts." Your posts contain just that type of hatred and anger, so I was just curious if my prediction was correct. Now I was a cop for 10 years, and I do find it somewhat curious you did not deny your were a lesbian, but sidestepped the issue. If you would answer one question though, were you raised in a Christian home?

So... because your arguments have become flaming wreckage, you must compensate by spewing hate? Intellectually honest people use facts to conceive their educated opinions, not defend their preconceived ones. But, of course, intellectual honesty isn't for everyone.

Wallowing in self pity will help you not. The debasement was brought on by the impotence which you exhibit. Employ introspection and you shall understand why your cycle of self hate causes you such angst. Fix that which makes you a slave to ignorance and retrogression and you shall be a slave no more…

Huh? You are talking about yourself, right? Spewing hate? Answer the the simple question- Were you raised in a Christian home??? That post obviously hit a nerve. Methinks the lady doth protest too much. I think it is you who is in need of introspection.

It is also nice that you are so immature as to think that you somehow know me. Have you ever heard of Queer Creek in Tempe? It is a common hangout for gay men to engage in anonymous sex with eachother. There is a ministry that reaches out to them in Christ's love and seeks to help them out of their destructive lifestyle. Some of the men are victims of horrific sexual abuse as children and need intense counseling to come to grips with what drives them. Because most in the park are at the experimental stage, they still suffer from incredible guilt and shame... shame over things that happened to them that no one should ever have to suffer.

 

[Hollie]

I am no longer speaking from a scientific stance, but a philosophical one now. Without God their is no Universal truth, no basis for morals. .

It seems odd to be lectured by a fundie creationist about morals, especially in regard to your behavior within these preceding posts. If you look at the history of Christianity (and to be fair, I would have to include Judaism and Islam) you will realize that these religious institutions have no monopoly of morality. The deeds that they (sometimes) condemn now are the same ones that they performed in antiquity. No institution in history has changed its moral stance as much as the religious institutions.

Your straw man caricature of humanistic morals (rather- the lack thereof) is rather offensive. Humanistic ethics are based on compassion and reason, and are far more moral than those based on the bribery of future reward or the fear of future torture. Would you want your child to do the right thing because he knew it was the right thing to do, or because he wanted a reward and feared a punishment?

Actually, man's ethics and morality beats out the gods by light-years. God tacitly and obviously approves of slavery (Jesus speaks of servants to a Master and never thinks to condemn the injustice of one man owning another)-- man finds it repulsive. God not only approves of war, he ignites them left and right -- man creates a United Nations in an attempt to stop war. God commits genocide without blinking an eye -- man imprisons mass murderers and is repulsed by wanton slaughter. God not only approves of raping young women, he specifically rewards his soldiers with them.

Ultimately, your observations and value system regarding morality seems a bit skewed to me. If you told me that you have "felt" the presence of the gods and their moral compass, well, that's fine but to me, that has relatively little impact… unless of course you knew for certain that another of those "god of love" humanity wiping floods or virgin slaughters, or one of those long nights accompanied with the sacrificial lamb's blood being painted on the door thingys was to be visited upon us. If that's about to happen… umm… call me, (it didn't work out so well for the lambs).

But in the meantime, feel free to threaten others with your gods - that is certainly part of the history of Christiandom.

 

[Hollie]

Huh? You are talking about yourself, right? Spewing hate? Answer the the simple question- Were you raised in a Christian home??? That post obviously hit a nerve. Methinks the lady doth protest too much. I think it is you who is in need of introspection.

It is also nice that you are so immature as to think that you somehow know me. Have you ever heard of Queer Creek in Tempe? It is a common hangout for gay men to engage in anonymous sex with eachother. There is a ministry that reaches out to them in Christ's love and seeks to help them out of their destructive lifestyle. Some of the men are victims of horrific sexual abuse as children and need intense counseling to come to grips with what drives them. Because most in the park are at the experimental stage, they still suffer from incredible guilt and shame... shame over things that happened to them that no one should ever have to suffer.

You have a peculiar fascination with the gay lifestyle.

As with many fundie creationists, you view the universe as a physical projection of a moral construct, the focus of which is, of course, themselves. "It's all about me." It's a singularly utilitarian form of narcissism in which concessions are grudgingly conceded to obvious human limitations and perfected selves imaged in the form of flawless gods with absolute moral standards to which the fallible must aspire.

When Kurt Vonnegut asked the seemingly seminal question, "What are people for?", he bypassed the significant possibility: People aren't for. However, Kurt's 'Great Commandment' of the Church of God the Utterly Indifferent which I paraphrase, "Take care of the People; let the Gods take care of Themselves" should be rendered in lapidary permanence outside every public building.

My suggestion: Eschew ill-fitting, off-the-rack hand-me-downs. You have equal access to a fancied spirit world and, thus, are entirely qualified to create your own fetching, custom-fitted, designer religion. Otherwise, Vonnegut's contribution to the religion business is well worth considering.

 

[UltimateReality]

Huh? You are talking about yourself, right? Spewing hate? Answer the the simple question- Were you raised in a Christian home??? That post obviously hit a nerve. Methinks the lady doth protest too much. I think it is you who is in need of introspection.

It is also nice that you are so immature as to think that you somehow know me. Have you ever heard of Queer Creek in Tempe? It is a common hangout for gay men to engage in anonymous sex with eachother. There is a ministry that reaches out to them in Christ's love and seeks to help them out of their destructive lifestyle. Some of the men are victims of horrific sexual abuse as children and need intense counseling to come to grips with what drives them. Because most in the park are at the experimental stage, they still suffer from incredible guilt and shame... shame over things that happened to them that no one should ever have to suffer.

You have a peculiar fascination with the gay lifestyle.

As with many fundie creationists, you view the universe as a physical projection of a moral construct, the focus of which is, of course, themselves. "It's all about me." It's a singularly utilitarian form of narcissism in which concessions are grudgingly conceded to obvious human limitations and perfected selves imaged in the form of flawless gods with absolute moral standards to which the fallible must aspire.

When Kurt Vonnegut asked the seemingly seminal question, "What are people for?", he bypassed the significant possibility: People aren't for. However, Kurt's 'Great Commandment' of the Church of God the Utterly Indifferent which I paraphrase, "Take care of the People; let the Gods take care of Themselves" should be rendered in lapidary permanence outside every public building.

My suggestion: Eschew ill-fitting, off-the-rack hand-me-downs. You have equal access to a fancied spirit world and, thus, are entirely qualified to create your own fetching, custom-fitted, designer religion. Otherwise, Vonnegut's contribution to the religion business is well worth considering.

Were you raised in a Christian home?

 

[UltimateReality]

It seems odd to be lectured by a fundie creationist about morals, especially in regard to your behavior within these preceding posts.

Please enlighten me on what behavior you find so offensive? I ask you if you are a Lesbian and you find that offensive? Why would that be offensive to anyone in our current culture in the United States where gay marriage is being promoted and approved at every turn? You just got done spewing pages of all kinds of hate for Bible-thumping, intolerant Christians so I am a little surprised you would be shocked at me perfectly fitting your stereotypical mold of all Christians?

And once again your post is an EPIC FAIL, showing a complete, utter lack of understanding of basic Christian teachings and the role of the NEW TESTAMENT. But feel free to go ahead and keep posting the same ignorant dribble over and over and over and over. It will not unburden you of YOUR voracious anger towards God.

Finally, William Provine is a staunch evolutionist apologist. Those comments about morals and free will came from your side, not mine. Of course you didn't address any of them in your post as usual.

Were you raised in a Christian home?

 

[UltimateReality]

Huh? You are talking about yourself, right? Spewing hate? Answer the the simple question- Were you raised in a Christian home??? That post obviously hit a nerve. Methinks the lady doth protest too much. I think it is you who is in need of introspection.

It is also nice that you are so immature as to think that you somehow know me. Have you ever heard of Queer Creek in Tempe? It is a common hangout for gay men to engage in anonymous sex with eachother. There is a ministry that reaches out to them in Christ's love and seeks to help them out of their destructive lifestyle. Some of the men are victims of horrific sexual abuse as children and need intense counseling to come to grips with what drives them. Because most in the park are at the experimental stage, they still suffer from incredible guilt and shame... shame over things that happened to them that no one should ever have to suffer.

You have a peculiar fascination with the gay lifestyle.

As with many fundie creationists, you view the universe as a physical projection of a moral construct, the focus of which is, of course, themselves. "It's all about me." It's a singularly utilitarian form of narcissism in which concessions are grudgingly conceded to obvious human limitations and perfected selves imaged in the form of flawless gods with absolute moral standards to which the fallible must aspire.

When Kurt Vonnegut asked the seemingly seminal question, "What are people for?", he bypassed the significant possibility: People aren't for. However, Kurt's 'Great Commandment' of the Church of God the Utterly Indifferent which I paraphrase, "Take care of the People; let the Gods take care of Themselves" should be rendered in lapidary permanence outside every public building.

My suggestion: Eschew ill-fitting, off-the-rack hand-me-downs. You have equal access to a fancied spirit world and, thus, are entirely qualified to create your own fetching, custom-fitted, designer religion. Otherwise, Vonnegut's contribution to the religion business is well worth considering.

Hollie, Google is not such a mystery as to motivate one to eschew plagiarism. While musings from 2010 might not be considered lapidary in the world wide web, if you are going to quote people, the intellectually honest thing to do would be to put it in quotes and provide a link, such like my link to RuggedTouch's third post down, which can be found here...

How can there be freewill? - Page 13

 

[Hollie]

You just got done spewing pages of all kinds of hate for Bible-thumping, intolerant Christians so I am a little surprised you would be shocked at me perfectly fitting your stereotypical mold of all Christians?

I'm not shocked at all.