Creationists

[daws101]

Conjecture daws ? It's nonsense because he is saying this mutation has allowed a space for our brains to grow larger and thus make us more intelligent. Hmm the neanderthals had bigger brains then modern day humans are we devolving ? why are neanderthals extinct ? were neanderthals more intelligent ? You tried slipping this through before. Clearly that gene is different in humans because the creator wanted it that way.

I still believe the creator used our genes to make sure his punishment for sin is met.

really slapdick: "You tried slipping this through before"YWC is a false statement attempting to infer some sort of wrong doing.
the reality is I presented evidence that refuted your gene paranoia.


your belife besides being silly and ignorant has no basis in fact!

You could not spot conjecture if it swam up and bite you on your twinkie, dick breath.

all of your posts are conjecture efinition of CONJECTURE
1obsolete a : interpretation of omens b : supposition
2a : inference from defective or presumptive evidence b : a conclusion deduced by surmise or guesswork .

 

[daws101]

This is the washington post dummy.

?Junk DNA? concept debunked by new analysis of human genome - Washington Post

yeah and....it's no proof that god did it!

The moral of this story is do not use outdated material unless you like looking like a fool that you're,

l there no moral to your story...it's a dodge around the other nine proofs of evolution in modern humans.

 

[ima]

A virus consists of a nucleic acid molecule in a protein coat.An infection or disease can be caused by such an agent.

A virus is not a living organism and does not possess the ability to adapt as you suggest the host cell is what has the ability to adapt.

Only living organisms have the ability to adapt so your question makes no sense.

I used to be a meat eater but my thinking EVOLVED to a more compassionate and healthy lifestyle. And I'm passing these traits down to my 2 daughters who are both vegetarians and against cruelty to animals. See how that works?

That is called making a choice not evolving.

My thinking evolved from a neanderthal to a person who doesn't mistreat sentient beings. vegetarians are healthier and have more chance of survival and longevity.

Anyways, here's another one. I was in a house that was built in the late 18th century and when we went upstairs, had to duck to get through the doors. That's because back then, humans were shorter, and we're getting taller as the centuries pass. So we're evolving to a taller and taller species all the time, with our brains getting bigger as well as we grow. Is THAT evolution of the human species?

 

[daws101]

No changes are coming from what was once thought of as junk DNA.

wow you're just full of dodges today!

"No changes are coming from what was once thought of as junk DNA"---ywc
is this a question or a statement ?
without the proper punctuation and context it's meaningless.

[ame=http://youtu.be/eYDmEaN48E8]What Darwin Never Knew (NOVA) Part 6/8 HD - YouTube[/ame]

Junk DNA is has a function of keeping the organism healthy. It is also genetic information from previous generations. Also can provide answers why organisms have the ability to adapt but there are still limits to adaptations.

you do realise that the previous statement contradicts this one:"No changes are coming from what was once thought of as junk DNA"---ywc
now who has problems following the gist of this thread?

 

[daws101]

Yes it is the washingtonpost, dummy. You're so consumed by the "angry fundie" syndrome, you can't understand what is written.

read it twice, still no mention of god....

Are you confusing conversations again ?The whole point was to show you were using outdated material now if you wish to discuss the vmat2 gene let's do it.

no but you are ..you started yammering about the god gene that's the main point of this conversation, any thing else is you trying and failing to get over..
so who's confused again?

 

[Youwerecreated]

You don't understand what you're writing. Vestigial bones suggest remnants of anatomy that were once used and now serve no purpose. Whales, for example,

Why would the gawds add useless parts to humans and animals alike?

No you don't understand these bones assuming they worth left over parts and performed no function is nothing but an assumption and no evidence to back the assumption.

That's a lot of dancing but you're running out of excuses to avoid addressing the issue that the usefulness of vestigial organs / anatomy is assumption.

CB360: Function of vestigial organs.

Practically all "vestigial" organs in man have been shown to have definite uses and not to be vestigial at all.

Source:

Morris, Henry M., 1974. Scientific Creationism, Green Forest, AR: Master Books, pp. 75-76.

Response:

1. "Vestigial" does not mean an organ is useless. A vestige is a "trace or visible sign left by something lost or vanished" (G. & C. Merriam 1974, 769). Examples from biology include leg bones in snakes, eye remnants in blind cave fish (Yamamoto and Jeffery 2000), extra toe bones in horses, wing stubs on flightless birds and insects, and molars in vampire bats. Whether these organs have functions is irrelevant. They obviously do not have the function that we expect from such parts in other animals, for which creationists say the parts are "designed."

Vestigial organs are evidence for evolution because we expect evolutionary changes to be imperfect as creatures evolve to adopt new niches. Creationism cannot explain vestigial organs. They are evidence against creationism if the creator follows a basic design principle that form follows function, as H. M. Morris himself expects (1974, 70). They are compatible with creation only if anything and everything is compatible with creation, making creationism useless and unscientific.

2. Some vestigial organs can be determined to be useless if experiments show that organisms with them survive no better than organisms without them.

Links:

Theobald, Douglas, 2004. 29+ Evidences for macroevolution: Prediction 2.1: Anatomical vestiges. 29+ Evidences for Macroevolution: Part 2

References:

1. G. & C. Merriam. 1974. The Merriam-WebsterDictionary. New York: Simon & Schuster. 2. Morris, H., 1974. (see above). 3. Yamamoto, Y. and W. R. Jeffery., 2000. Central role for the lens in cave fish eyedegeneration. Science 289: 631-633.

Great you posted something I said.

 

[daws101]

Conjecture daws ? It's nonsense because he is saying this mutation has allowed a space for our brains to grow larger and thus make us more intelligent. Hmm the neanderthals had bigger brains then modern day humans are we devolving ? why are neanderthals extinct ? were neanderthals more intelligent ? You tried slipping this through before. Clearly that gene is different in humans because the creator wanted it that way.

I still believe the creator used our genes to make sure his punishment for sin is met.

The neanderthals likely did not go extinct it is likely that they interbred with modern humans. Neanderthals were highly intelligent they lived in complex social groups, used tools, created structures, and used language. The primary advantage that homo sapiens had were the much larger social groups and the communication between them.

We do have bigger brains than Neanderthals did
Study through CT scans suggests we are distinguished by different mental capacities
Below:


Modern humans possess brain structures larger than their Neanderthal counterparts, suggesting we are distinguished from them by different mental capacities, scientists find.

We are currently the only extant human lineage, but Neanderthals, our closest-known evolutionary relatives, still walked the Earth as recently as maybe 24,000 years ago. Neanderthals were close enough to the modern human lineage to interbreed, calling into question how different they really were from us and whether they comprise a different species.

To find out more, researchers used CT scanners to map the interiors of five Neanderthal skulls as well as four fossil and 75 contemporary human skulls to determine the shapes of their brains in 3-D. Like modern humans, Neanderthals had larger brains than both our living ape relatives and other extinct human lineages.

The investigators discovered modern humans possess larger olfactory bulbs at the base of their brains. This area is linked primarily with smell, but also with other key mental functions such as memory and learning — central olfactory brain circuitry is physically very close to structures related to memory.

.."We all know from our personal experience about the intense links between smell and memory — for example, when, after years and as adults, we enter our old school building and by breathing and smelling the air of the stairways or of our old classroom, suddenly we are vividly and undecidedly transported back in our memory into our school days and associated experiences that we learned long ago," said researcher Markus Bastir, a paleoanthropologist at Spain's National Museum of Natural Sciences, in Madrid.

Intriguingly, smell may also play a social role, such as for recognizing family and friends and reinforcing group cohesion.

"In the German language — I am Austrian-born — we have a saying, 'Ich kann dich gut riechen,' which translates into English as, 'I can smell you well,' but means, 'I like you,'" Bastir told LiveScience. "That would reflect a linguistic example how smell relates to social behavior."

Compared with Neanderthals, modern humans also possess larger temporal lobes, an area near the base of the brain. "Neuroscientists relate temporal lobes with language functions, long-term memory, theory of mind (the ability to consider the perspective of others), and also emotions," Bastir said.

We also have a relatively wider orbitofrontal cortex than Neanderthals, a part of the brain immediately above the eyes. "The effects of the wider orbitofrontal cortex are difficult to evaluate," Bastir said. The area is linked with decision-making.

All in all, it remains unclear exactly how these brain differences might have set us apart from Neanderthals, Bastir cautioned. We only know how these skulls molded themselves around these brains, and not the precise structures of the brains in question.

In the future, Bastir and his colleagues would like to scan the interiors of more fossil skulls to refine their ideas about them. An implicit problem of the project is the fragility of the structures they would like to examine, he said.

The scientists detailed their findings online Tuesday in the journal Nature Communications.

Follow LiveScience for the latest in science news and discoveries on Twitter @livescience and on Facebook.

© 2012 LiveScience.com. All rights reserved.

http://searchresults.verizon.com/se...+brains+than+modern+humans&context=Brwsr-v6IE

 

[Youwerecreated]

I used to be a meat eater but my thinking EVOLVED to a more compassionate and healthy lifestyle. And I'm passing these traits down to my 2 daughters who are both vegetarians and against cruelty to animals. See how that works?

That is called making a choice not evolving.

My thinking evolved from a neanderthal to a person who doesn't mistreat sentient beings. vegetarians are healthier and have more chance of survival and longevity.

Anyways, here's another one. I was in a house that was built in the late 18th century and when we went upstairs, had to duck to get through the doors. That's because back then, humans were shorter, and we're getting taller as the centuries pass. So we're evolving to a taller and taller species all the time, with our brains getting bigger as well as we grow. Is THAT evolution of the human species?

So you're suggesting that neanderthals were less intelligent even though they had bigger brains underminding daws video yesterday.

 

[Youwerecreated]

wow you're just full of dodges today!

"No changes are coming from what was once thought of as junk DNA"---ywc
is this a question or a statement ?
without the proper punctuation and context it's meaningless.

What Darwin Never Knew (NOVA) Part 6/8 HD - YouTube

Junk DNA is has a function of keeping the organism healthy. It is also genetic information from previous generations. Also can provide answers why organisms have the ability to adapt but there are still limits to adaptations.

you do realise that the previous statement contradicts this one:"No changes are coming from what was once thought of as junk DNA"---ywc
now who has problems following the gist of this thread?

Unlike you I don't suffer from tunnel vision and am thourough in most responses.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Conjecture daws ? It's nonsense because he is saying this mutation has allowed a space for our brains to grow larger and thus make us more intelligent. Hmm the neanderthals had bigger brains then modern day humans are we devolving ? why are neanderthals extinct ? were neanderthals more intelligent ? You tried slipping this through before. Clearly that gene is different in humans because the creator wanted it that way.

I still believe the creator used our genes to make sure his punishment for sin is met.

The neanderthals likely did not go extinct it is likely that they interbred with modern humans. Neanderthals were highly intelligent they lived in complex social groups, used tools, created structures, and used language. The primary advantage that homo sapiens had were the much larger social groups and the communication between them.

also the Neanderthals were not good at developing new skills they used the same weapons tech for all of their existence

Neanderthals, do you know how long they actually existed whether they had time to develop new technology ?

 

[daws101]

Conjecture daws ? It's nonsense because he is saying this mutation has allowed a space for our brains to grow larger and thus make us more intelligent. Hmm the neanderthals had bigger brains then modern day humans are we devolving ? why are neanderthals extinct ? were neanderthals more intelligent ? You tried slipping this through before. Clearly that gene is different in humans because the creator wanted it that way.

I still believe the creator used our genes to make sure his punishment for sin is met.

The neanderthals likely did not go extinct it is likely that they interbred with modern humans. Neanderthals were highly intelligent they lived in complex social groups, used tools, created structures, and used language. The primary advantage that homo sapiens had were the much larger social groups and the communication between them.

It's possible they did not go extinct I believe they did in the global flood. I really find it hard to believe that DNA could survive 70,000 years as evolutionist claim.

you know just for a split second YWC almost seemed rational!

 

[daws101]

That is called making a choice not evolving.

My thinking evolved from a neanderthal to a person who doesn't mistreat sentient beings. vegetarians are healthier and have more chance of survival and longevity.

Anyways, here's another one. I was in a house that was built in the late 18th century and when we went upstairs, had to duck to get through the doors. That's because back then, humans were shorter, and we're getting taller as the centuries pass. So we're evolving to a taller and taller species all the time, with our brains getting bigger as well as we grow. Is THAT evolution of the human species?

So you're suggesting that neanderthals were less intelligent even though they had bigger brains underminding daws video yesterday.

hey slapdick niether of the clips I posted said or presented any thing about neanderthals....you are either confused or making shit up.

 

[daws101]

Junk DNA is has a function of keeping the organism healthy. It is also genetic information from previous generations. Also can provide answers why organisms have the ability to adapt but there are still limits to adaptations.

you do realise that the previous statement contradicts this one:"No changes are coming from what was once thought of as junk DNA"---ywc
now who has problems following the gist of this thread?

Unlike you I don't suffer from tunnel vision and am thourough in most responses.

your own posts prove you wrong!

 

[Hollie]

No you don't understand these bones assuming they worth left over parts and performed no function is nothing but an assumption and no evidence to back the assumption.

That's a lot of dancing but you're running out of excuses to avoid addressing the issue that the usefulness of vestigial organs / anatomy is assumption.

CB360: Function of vestigial organs.

Practically all "vestigial" organs in man have been shown to have definite uses and not to be vestigial at all.

Source:

Morris, Henry M., 1974. Scientific Creationism, Green Forest, AR: Master Books, pp. 75-76.

Response:

1. "Vestigial" does not mean an organ is useless. A vestige is a "trace or visible sign left by something lost or vanished" (G. & C. Merriam 1974, 769). Examples from biology include leg bones in snakes, eye remnants in blind cave fish (Yamamoto and Jeffery 2000), extra toe bones in horses, wing stubs on flightless birds and insects, and molars in vampire bats. Whether these organs have functions is irrelevant. They obviously do not have the function that we expect from such parts in other animals, for which creationists say the parts are "designed."

Vestigial organs are evidence for evolution because we expect evolutionary changes to be imperfect as creatures evolve to adopt new niches. Creationism cannot explain vestigial organs. They are evidence against creationism if the creator follows a basic design principle that form follows function, as H. M. Morris himself expects (1974, 70). They are compatible with creation only if anything and everything is compatible with creation, making creationism useless and unscientific.

2. Some vestigial organs can be determined to be useless if experiments show that organisms with them survive no better than organisms without them.

Links:

Theobald, Douglas, 2004. 29+ Evidences for macroevolution: Prediction 2.1: Anatomical vestiges. 29+ Evidences for Macroevolution: Part 2

References:

1. G. & C. Merriam. 1974. The Merriam-WebsterDictionary. New York: Simon & Schuster. 2. Morris, H., 1974. (see above). 3. Yamamoto, Y. and W. R. Jeffery., 2000. Central role for the lens in cave fish eyedegeneration. Science 289: 631-633.

Great you posted something I said.

You're confused. What you said was obviously nothing more than a reiteration of what you read at the fundie Christian site, the ICR.

Item 1 above does provide evidence of vestigial appendages. I seem to recall you claiming there was no such evidence.

Why do you think your gawds would design parts that are useless?

 

[daws101]

Once again showing your ignorance.

Once again showing your biblical tales and fables are easily dismantled and lacking validation when confronted with fact.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PXH5lwMBNiE]Global Flood: Evidence for Rocks and Fossils - YouTube[/ame]

you gotta be fuckin'kidding.....

 

[daws101]

She Must Be a Scientist; She Works in Front of a Green Screen

She Must Be a Scientist; She Works in Front of a Green Screen

This is Dr. Ann Gauger, a “Senior Research Scientist at Biologic Institute” (which is funded by the Intelligent Design-promoting Discovery Institute), talking about what she thinks is population genetics:

Science & Human Origins: How accurate are current models used in population genetics? - YouTube

The commenters at Sandwalk have already dismantled everything she said… (Sandwalk: Ann Gauger Describes the Intelligent Design Creationist Version of Population Genetics) but a lot of viewers noticed something else even more interesting:

She’s not really in a lab.

She’s in front of a green screen.

The lab is a lie.

Did you expect anything else? She’s an ID proponent. It’s not like they do any actual science — they just make things up and spread their lies to people gullible enough to believe them because they look professional, sound authoritative, and pretend to be scientists.

THAT'S not even a good green match !if you look at her head and shoulders you can see the line...

 

[Youwerecreated]

Conjecture daws ? It's nonsense because he is saying this mutation has allowed a space for our brains to grow larger and thus make us more intelligent. Hmm the neanderthals had bigger brains then modern day humans are we devolving ? why are neanderthals extinct ? were neanderthals more intelligent ? You tried slipping this through before. Clearly that gene is different in humans because the creator wanted it that way.

I still believe the creator used our genes to make sure his punishment for sin is met.

The neanderthals likely did not go extinct it is likely that they interbred with modern humans. Neanderthals were highly intelligent they lived in complex social groups, used tools, created structures, and used language. The primary advantage that homo sapiens had were the much larger social groups and the communication between them.

We do have bigger brains than Neanderthals did
Study through CT scans suggests we are distinguished by different mental capacities
Below:


Modern humans possess brain structures larger than their Neanderthal counterparts, suggesting we are distinguished from them by different mental capacities, scientists find.

We are currently the only extant human lineage, but Neanderthals, our closest-known evolutionary relatives, still walked the Earth as recently as maybe 24,000 years ago. Neanderthals were close enough to the modern human lineage to interbreed, calling into question how different they really were from us and whether they comprise a different species.

To find out more, researchers used CT scanners to map the interiors of five Neanderthal skulls as well as four fossil and 75 contemporary human skulls to determine the shapes of their brains in 3-D. Like modern humans, Neanderthals had larger brains than both our living ape relatives and other extinct human lineages.

The investigators discovered modern humans possess larger olfactory bulbs at the base of their brains. This area is linked primarily with smell, but also with other key mental functions such as memory and learning — central olfactory brain circuitry is physically very close to structures related to memory.

.."We all know from our personal experience about the intense links between smell and memory — for example, when, after years and as adults, we enter our old school building and by breathing and smelling the air of the stairways or of our old classroom, suddenly we are vividly and undecidedly transported back in our memory into our school days and associated experiences that we learned long ago," said researcher Markus Bastir, a paleoanthropologist at Spain's National Museum of Natural Sciences, in Madrid.

Intriguingly, smell may also play a social role, such as for recognizing family and friends and reinforcing group cohesion.

"In the German language — I am Austrian-born — we have a saying, 'Ich kann dich gut riechen,' which translates into English as, 'I can smell you well,' but means, 'I like you,'" Bastir told LiveScience. "That would reflect a linguistic example how smell relates to social behavior."

Compared with Neanderthals, modern humans also possess larger temporal lobes, an area near the base of the brain. "Neuroscientists relate temporal lobes with language functions, long-term memory, theory of mind (the ability to consider the perspective of others), and also emotions," Bastir said.

We also have a relatively wider orbitofrontal cortex than Neanderthals, a part of the brain immediately above the eyes. "The effects of the wider orbitofrontal cortex are difficult to evaluate," Bastir said. The area is linked with decision-making.

All in all, it remains unclear exactly how these brain differences might have set us apart from Neanderthals, Bastir cautioned. We only know how these skulls molded themselves around these brains, and not the precise structures of the brains in question.

In the future, Bastir and his colleagues would like to scan the interiors of more fossil skulls to refine their ideas about them. An implicit problem of the project is the fragility of the structures they would like to examine, he said.

The scientists detailed their findings online Tuesday in the journal Nature Communications.

Follow LiveScience for the latest in science news and discoveries on Twitter @livescience and on Facebook.

© 2012 LiveScience.com. All rights reserved.

Search - MyVerizon.com

Neanderthals Were Too Smart to Survive - Softpedia

Neanderthal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

BBC - Science & Nature - Horizon

NeuroLogica Blog » Neanderthal Intelligence

 

[Youwerecreated]

My thinking evolved from a neanderthal to a person who doesn't mistreat sentient beings. vegetarians are healthier and have more chance of survival and longevity.

Anyways, here's another one. I was in a house that was built in the late 18th century and when we went upstairs, had to duck to get through the doors. That's because back then, humans were shorter, and we're getting taller as the centuries pass. So we're evolving to a taller and taller species all the time, with our brains getting bigger as well as we grow. Is THAT evolution of the human species?

So you're suggesting that neanderthals were less intelligent even though they had bigger brains underminding daws video yesterday.

hey slapdick niether of the clips I posted said or presented any thing about neanderthals....you are either confused or making shit up.

No I was blowing up your theory of evolution.

 

[daws101]

Yes which is an ability that all organisms possess, has nothing to do with an organism evolving in to a new kind.

Where do you think vestigial bones come from? Are they spare parts left over from tinkering by the gawds?

No they are not spare parts left over they are parts that have lost function over time showing that the curse on man for sin is alive and well. The list of such items are decreasing because they are finding many of these things still perform a function.

You are speaking of both bones and organs.

 

[Youwerecreated]

you do realise that the previous statement contradicts this one:"No changes are coming from what was once thought of as junk DNA"---ywc
now who has problems following the gist of this thread?

Unlike you I don't suffer from tunnel vision and am thourough in most responses.

your own posts prove you wrong!

Sorry you have a problem grasping my posts