Creationists

[Koios]

It is a fact jack .We are accumulating more harmful mutations then we can get rid of. It's like this. A person thinks they can be rich if they contiue to spend more then they bring in,kinda like Obama. Unless you would like to present a number on beneficial mutation rate and compare it to the harmful mutation rate.

I didn't think so.

Because you don't believe in evolution, you fail to realize that evolution has effectively stopped in human populations, especially in industrialized nations. This is because there are no consistent selective pressures, since we have successfully conquered our environment. Except for the most debilitating diseases, most people born in industrialized societies will make it to maturity and potentially mate. This is completely unnatural relative to how our hunter-gatherer ancestors lived. This means that harmful mutations are not selected against and are allowed to propagate themselves within the population. However, because of sexual selection, the fittest and most attractive are still procreating amongst eachother.

This all means that harmful mutations being evermore present in our population is simply due to he fact that there is no longer a selective pressure to kill them off. It is not because the genome is falling apart. Your proposed cause for the observed effect is wrong.

Not at all. For one thing, we're getting taller.

 

[newpolitics]

It is a fact jack .We are accumulating more harmful mutations then we can get rid of. It's like this. A person thinks they can be rich if they contiue to spend more then they bring in,kinda like Obama. Unless you would like to present a number on beneficial mutation rate and compare it to the harmful mutation rate.

I didn't think so.

Because you don't believe in evolution, you fail to realize that evolution has effectively stopped in human populations, especially in industrialized nations. This is because there are no consistent selective pressures, since we have successfully conquered our environment. Except for the most debilitating diseases, most people born in industrialized societies will make it to maturity and potentially mate. This is completely unnatural relative to how our hunter-gatherer ancestors lived. This means that harmful mutations are not selected against and are allowed to propagate themselves within the population. However, because of sexual selection, the fittest and most attractive are still procreating amongst eachother.

This all means that harmful mutations being evermore present in our population is simply due to he fact that there is no longer a selective pressure to kill them off. It is not because the genome is falling apart. Your proposed cause for the observed effect is wrong.

Not at all. For one thing, we're getting taller.

I would argue that any selection pressure that caused humans to get taller over even relatively recent human history no longer exists. Technically, we are always evolving in small ways, but I am saying there isn't a consistent enough selection pressure to produce a macroscopically observable effects anymore. Although, one exception might those that are best able to deal with environmental toxins such as plastics, industrial chemicals in our water and food. Those that are able to live surrounded by these carcinogenic substances without developing cancer might be the next stage of humans. This is the only possible avenue I see for us evolutionarily. As long as everyone is permitted to live because of modern medicine, which will only get better, the idea of selection pressure becomes obsolete for humans. Although sexual selection will always be there, and is something I am not taking into account. So, at best, I am saying no natural selection exists for humans anymore, aside from getting past environmental toxins. This simply leaves sexual selection to do whatever it is it will do. Who knows.

 

[Koios]

Because you don't believe in evolution, you fail to realize that evolution has effectively stopped in human populations, especially in industrialized nations. This is because there are no consistent selective pressures, since we have successfully conquered our environment. Except for the most debilitating diseases, most people born in industrialized societies will make it to maturity and potentially mate. This is completely unnatural relative to how our hunter-gatherer ancestors lived. This means that harmful mutations are not selected against and are allowed to propagate themselves within the population. However, because of sexual selection, the fittest and most attractive are still procreating amongst eachother.

This all means that harmful mutations being evermore present in our population is simply due to he fact that there is no longer a selective pressure to kill them off. It is not because the genome is falling apart. Your proposed cause for the observed effect is wrong.

Not at all. For one thing, we're getting taller.

I would argue that any selection pressure that caused humans to get taller over even relatively recent human history no longer exists. Technically, we are always evolving in small ways, but I am saying there isn't a consistent enough selection pressure to produce a macroscopically observable effects anymore. Although, one exception might those that are best able to deal with environmental toxins such as plastics, industrial chemicals in our water and food. Those that are able to live surrounded by these carcinogenic substances without developing cancer might be the next stage of humans. This is the only possible avenue I see for us evolutionarily. As long as everyone is permitted to live because of modern medicine, which will only get better, the idea of selection pressure becomes obsolete for humans. Although sexual selection will always be there, and is something I am not taking into account. So, at best, I am saying no natural selection exists for humans anymore, aside from getting past environmental toxins. This simply leaves sexual selection to do whatever it is it will do. Who knows.

Chicks dig taller guys, and thus have taller babies.

 

[ReallyMeow]

Theres no escaping evolution just because we have padded ourselves from one facet of natural selection, theres still mutations (cancer and variation) and non- instant death scenarios. peoples ability to focus and endure the commute without dying, stay sharp through a days work so you can move forward in a career by being seen as hard working rather than lazy, come home and still be well adjusted around the wife is probably the biggest selector, in my bullshit estimate.

Lactose tolerance is pretty recent too iirc.

 

[newpolitics]

Not at all. For one thing, we're getting taller.

I would argue that any selection pressure that caused humans to get taller over even relatively recent human history no longer exists. Technically, we are always evolving in small ways, but I am saying there isn't a consistent enough selection pressure to produce a macroscopically observable effects anymore. Although, one exception might those that are best able to deal with environmental toxins such as plastics, industrial chemicals in our water and food. Those that are able to live surrounded by these carcinogenic substances without developing cancer might be the next stage of humans. This is the only possible avenue I see for us evolutionarily. As long as everyone is permitted to live because of modern medicine, which will only get better, the idea of selection pressure becomes obsolete for humans. Although sexual selection will always be there, and is something I am not taking into account. So, at best, I am saying no natural selection exists for humans anymore, aside from getting past environmental toxins. This simply leaves sexual selection to do whatever it is it will do. Who knows.

Chicks dig taller guys, and thus have taller babies.

Indeed. Sexual selection is still in play. But they could only get so tall without further mutation. As the population gets bigger, it will take longer for these mutations to be expressed in the entire population. In other words, without mutation, the species could only become as tall as the tallest human right now. Isn't this the case? I am kind of guessing here, but it seems intuitive.

 

[newpolitics]

Theres no escaping evolution just because we have padded ourselves from one facet of natural selection, theres still mutations (cancer and variation) and non- instant death scenarios. peoples ability to focus and endure the commute without dying, stay sharp through a days work so you can move forward in a career by being seen as hard working rather than lazy, come home and still be well adjusted around the wife is probably the biggest selector, in my bullshit estimate.

Lactose tolerance is pretty recent too iirc.

I agree there is no stopping evolution, but I believe we have slowed it down considerably and fundamentally altered it, relative to how it operates in nature for other species, or for humans before we developed civilization, but more importantly, modern medicine and technology. Perhaps I am exhibiting an incredible bias here. I do not know. Only time will tell, however there are some scientists who would agree, including Michio Kaku. Check out his video with "Big Think" on YouTube about this.

 

[ima]

Really Hollie ? I just presented you with the facts evolution over millions of years through mutations is the fairytale.

No; you didn't. Bear in mind, it's merely bullshit pseudoscience designed so the Christians whose faiths may be fragile in the light of current human understanding, can quench doubts that science is building within them.

It's not designed to in fact discredit what actual scientists, adhering to scientific method, know to be utterly beyond reproach: life evolved on Earth and was not placed here by any intelligent being that has left the slightest trace of his/her/its existence, much less proof of the creation point, method and source.

Simple truth, pursuant to the 9th Commandment.

Simple truth was given. The numbers were provided by evolutionist but they don't teach their pupils the problems that they know exists that I pointed out to you. Pseudoscience was just presented to you that is being taught by evolutionist. They have no answer for this problem and they tried nameing a process in which it rids harmful mutations in bunches but that just is not the case we have over 6,000 genetic disorders and counting. So I just refuted your fairytale and built evidence for a young earth with one little post. The thing is I did this before earlier in the thread it either got ignored or the people like daws didn't understand it the argument, I would say the latter.

Here's a simple truth: if creator there is, it created life as we know it to have evolved as we are now discovering through real science. Science would then be only human's observation of creation. The bible simply needs a re-write. Or just throw it away. That's what I did.

 

[Youwerecreated]

From the same article:

"MUTATION is the ultimate source of genetic variation; it is both the substrate for evolution and the cause of genetic disease".

What do you expect from an evolutionist based site ?

Do you ever think before you hit the "submit reply" button?

Why would you link to an "evolutionist based site" in a failed attempt to prove your gawds?

I don't want to believe in God so you failed, in other words.

 

[Youwerecreated]

YWC, you do realize that genetic mutations can get corrected, don't you?

Yes and the process of repairing mutations are enzymes that find and attempt to repair these errors. That to me is evidence for design not something that would happen by random chance.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Hollie hollie hollie, you're still in denial.

how's that? hollies' never denied your full of shit.
face it wyc you're de queen of denial.

You have nothing really to say but spread hate, got it.

 

[Youwerecreated]

It is a fact jack .We are accumulating more harmful mutations then we can get rid of. It's like this. A person thinks they can be rich if they contiue to spend more then they bring in,kinda like Obama. Unless you would like to present a number on beneficial mutation rate and compare it to the harmful mutation rate.

I didn't think so.

Because you don't believe in evolution, you fail to realize that evolution has effectively stopped in human populations, especially in industrialized nations. This is because there are no consistent selective pressures, since we have successfully conquered our environment. Except for the most debilitating diseases, most people born in industrialized societies will make it to maturity and potentially mate. This is completely unnatural relative to how our hunter-gatherer ancestors lived. This means that harmful mutations are not selected against and are allowed to propagate themselves within the population. However, because of sexual selection, the fittest and most attractive are still procreating amongst eachother.

This all means that harmful mutations being evermore present in our population is simply due to he fact that there is no longer a selective pressure to kill them off. It is not because the genome is falling apart. Your proposed cause for the observed effect is wrong.

What ever floats your boat but that is hardly what evolutionist think.

 

[Youwerecreated]

No; you didn't. Bear in mind, it's merely bullshit pseudoscience designed so the Christians whose faiths may be fragile in the light of current human understanding, can quench doubts that science is building within them.

It's not designed to in fact discredit what actual scientists, adhering to scientific method, know to be utterly beyond reproach: life evolved on Earth and was not placed here by any intelligent being that has left the slightest trace of his/her/its existence, much less proof of the creation point, method and source.

Simple truth, pursuant to the 9th Commandment.

Simple truth was given. The numbers were provided by evolutionist but they don't teach their pupils the problems that they know exists that I pointed out to you. Pseudoscience was just presented to you that is being taught by evolutionist. They have no answer for this problem and they tried nameing a process in which it rids harmful mutations in bunches but that just is not the case we have over 6,000 genetic disorders and counting. So I just refuted your fairytale and built evidence for a young earth with one little post. The thing is I did this before earlier in the thread it either got ignored or the people like daws didn't understand it the argument, I would say the latter.

Here's a simple truth: if creator there is, it created life as we know it to have evolved as we are now discovering through real science. Science would then be only human's observation of creation. The bible simply needs a re-write. Or just throw it away. That's what I did.

In short, the theory was built on the extrapolations of microadaptations which I argue organisms have the ability to adapt to their enviornment but there are limits to adapting and that is one of the reasons for extinction. The organism lacked the ability to adapt to it's enviornment.

 

[Hollie]

YWC, you do realize that genetic mutations can get corrected, don't you?

Yes and the process of repairing mutations are enzymes that find and attempt to repair these errors. That to me is evidence for design not something that would happen by random chance.

Similarly, harmful mutations could be evidence of creation at the hand of incompetent designer gawds,

 

[Hollie]

What do you expect from an evolutionist based site ?

Do you ever think before you hit the "submit reply" button?

Why would you link to an "evolutionist based site" in a failed attempt to prove your gawds?

I don't want to believe in God so you failed, in other words.

You're befuddled, as usual.

Quote obviously, the failure is yours: your over reaching need to believe in gawds. That need of yours supplants any requirement for reason, rationality or objectivity.

The issue, which you are unwilling to come to terms with, is not a matter of which gawds myth you have arbitrarily accepted to believe but the utter lack of reasonable or rational standard you accept with that belief. None of your views regarding gawds are either reasonable or even intuitive. You simply accept what you are fed by charlatans at various Christian ministries and you spend not a moment being concerned by the blatant lies, falsehoods and propaganda they disseminate. It's a complete lack of any ethical standard, yet you blithely proceed on, unaware and unconcerned that you are an accomplice to lies, falsehoods and propaganda.

 

[ima]

Simple truth was given. The numbers were provided by evolutionist but they don't teach their pupils the problems that they know exists that I pointed out to you. Pseudoscience was just presented to you that is being taught by evolutionist. They have no answer for this problem and they tried nameing a process in which it rids harmful mutations in bunches but that just is not the case we have over 6,000 genetic disorders and counting. So I just refuted your fairytale and built evidence for a young earth with one little post. The thing is I did this before earlier in the thread it either got ignored or the people like daws didn't understand it the argument, I would say the latter.

Here's a simple truth: if creator there is, it created life as we know it to have evolved as we are now discovering through real science. Science would then be only human's observation of creation. The bible simply needs a re-write. Or just throw it away. That's what I did.

In short, the theory was built on the extrapolations of microadaptations which I argue organisms have the ability to adapt to their enviornment but there are limits to adapting and that is one of the reasons for extinction. The organism lacked the ability to adapt to it's enviornment.

Is this in response to what I said? How?

 

[Crackerjaxon]

The belief that the earth is 6000 years old stems from research done by Bishop James Ussher who arrived at the figure by adding the lifespans of the offspring of Adam and Eve. Not all Christians believe the earth is 6000 years old. I would say that most don't.

Fundie atheists love to use the 6000 year figure to belittle people of faith while maintaining, with a straight face, that hydrogen evolves into human beings.

The concept of spontaneous generation was disproved years ago, yet fundie atheists still maintain that is exactly how life began -- some sort of mysterious generation of cells from an undefined primordial soup.

They leap from the perfectly reasonable assumption that environment affects the genetic makeup of populations to the preposterous notion that evolution is the sole reason things are the way they are.

Evolution to them is a magical force that shapes our being based on the miracle of random chance. They steadfastly maintain the idiotic lie that dogs evolved from wolves while everyone with a triple digit IQ understands that they are a product of selective breeding.

Living things adapt to their environment or die. That is not a groundbreaking idea, or the be-all end-all of existence.

Fundie atheists constantly create straw man gods and then destroy the straw man ecstatically claiming that they've proven there is no God.

Fundie athiests take it as an article of faith that any teleological evidence of design in living matter is a creationist plot.

They are, on the whole, not very bright and should be ignored by people of good will with a genuine desire to know the universe.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Here's a simple truth: if creator there is, it created life as we know it to have evolved as we are now discovering through real science. Science would then be only human's observation of creation. The bible simply needs a re-write. Or just throw it away. That's what I did.

In short, the theory was built on the extrapolations of microadaptations which I argue organisms have the ability to adapt to their enviornment but there are limits to adapting and that is one of the reasons for extinction. The organism lacked the ability to adapt to it's enviornment.

Is this in response to what I said? How?

Yes it was an asnwer to your thought .They = evolutionist believe these microadaptations are evidence of evolution and they believe adaptations are due to mutations. They had to try and come up with a mechanism to explain adaptations,ruling out the idea we had the ability to adapt already in our genes.

 

[Youwerecreated]

The belief that the earth is 6000 years old stems from research done by Bishop James Ussher who arrived at the figure by adding the lifespans of the offspring of Adam and Eve. Not all Christians believe the earth is 6000 years old. I would say that most don't.

Fundie atheists love to use the 6000 year figure to belittle people of faith while maintaining, with a straight face, that hydrogen evolves into human beings.

The concept of spontaneous generation was disproved years ago, yet fundie atheists still maintain that is exactly how life began -- some sort of mysterious generation of cells from an undefined primordial soup.

They leap from the perfectly reasonable assumption that environment affects the genetic makeup of populations to the preposterous notion that evolution is the sole reason things are the way they are.

Evolution to them is a magical force that shapes our being based on the miracle of random chance. They steadfastly maintain the idiotic lie that dogs evolved from wolves while everyone with a triple digit IQ understands that they are a product of selective breeding.

Living things adapt to their environment or die. That is not a groundbreaking idea, or the be-all end-all of existence.

Fundie atheists constantly create straw man gods and then destroy the straw man ecstatically claiming that they've proven there is no God.

Fundie athiests take it as an article of faith that any teleological evidence of design in living matter is a creationist plot.

They are, on the whole, not very bright and should be ignored by people of good will with a genuine desire to know the universe.

I have no idea how long man has been on this planet it could not have been as long as evolutionist claim though and that is a fact supported by the data.

Creantionist love science and to want to know how God did it. You're sounding like an atheist fundie and should be ignored.

Geez that was simple.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Do you ever think before you hit the "submit reply" button?

Why would you link to an "evolutionist based site" in a failed attempt to prove your gawds?

I don't want to believe in God so you failed, in other words.

You're befuddled, as usual.

Quote obviously, the failure is yours: your over reaching need to believe in gawds. That need of yours supplants any requirement for reason, rationality or objectivity.

The issue, which you are unwilling to come to terms with, is not a matter of which gawds myth you have arbitrarily accepted to believe but the utter lack of reasonable or rational standard you accept with that belief. None of your views regarding gawds are either reasonable or even intuitive. You simply accept what you are fed by charlatans at various Christian ministries and you spend not a moment being concerned by the blatant lies, falsehoods and propaganda they disseminate. It's a complete lack of any ethical standard, yet you blithely proceed on, unaware and unconcerned that you are an accomplice to lies, falsehoods and propaganda.

How many times must you be shown that you're an Idelogue and nothing more before you understand most people ignore your hateful posts filled with rhetoric.

 

[Hollie]

I don't want to believe in God so you failed, in other words.

You're befuddled, as usual.

Quote obviously, the failure is yours: your over reaching need to believe in gawds. That need of yours supplants any requirement for reason, rationality or objectivity.

The issue, which you are unwilling to come to terms with, is not a matter of which gawds myth you have arbitrarily accepted to believe but the utter lack of reasonable or rational standard you accept with that belief. None of your views regarding gawds are either reasonable or even intuitive. You simply accept what you are fed by charlatans at various Christian ministries and you spend not a moment being concerned by the blatant lies, falsehoods and propaganda they disseminate. It's a complete lack of any ethical standard, yet you blithely proceed on, unaware and unconcerned that you are an accomplice to lies, falsehoods and propaganda.

How many times must you be shown that you're an Idelogue and nothing more before you understand most people ignore your hateful posts filled with rhetoric.

You have shown only that you become incensed when your specious opinions are refuted.

That causes you to lash out with angry diatribes which you hope will provide you an excuse for avoidance and sidestepping.