The Problem of Darwin and DNA

[Asclepias]

Even though Wiki is not a good source when it comes to these things obviously you dont understand that "diverged" and "descended" are two different words with totally different meanings.

The problem with Wiki, as you know, is that it is only as good as those who add to it. It's the linked sources that are the real nuggets, IMO. If a Wiki article has good links, then it's a good source of info. No links or unreliable links, then not so much.

Enough about wiki, there are thousands of scientific articles. The point is they are of their own kind and can breed. The DNA strand of a wolve is much longer than that of a domestic dog, meaning it has more information and thus is more diverse and why it is believed to be closer to the original copy.

You also havent factored in that dogs and wolves will breed without human intervention.

 

[Asclepias]

... Instead of you being a family member of soybeans, each species was created and evolved (mutated) from there. Something like a wolf was first created, then information was removed to create toy poodles and chihuahuas. So that is one branch started. Cows mutated into Black Angus and other breeds. Another branch started. So thousands of branches were created, humans being one of them. Each species has its own tree, but each species remains unique and unchanging into alternate species because DNA information cannot be added in nature.

Agreed about the evolution of various animal species, but disagreed about various animal species not being related.

Why do we share 98% of the same DNA as chimps? 44% of a fruit fly? Putting DNA to Work - Introduction - Tracing Similarities and Differences in Our DNA

And you are missing the primary point. In order for you to go from fruit fly to chimp a lot of DNA information must be created. In nature that is impossible.

Are you saying that DNA information cannot be created by nature? What do you call mutations?

A mutation is either the replacement or removal of information. There is no new information ever added. Information cannot be created in nature.

So how did wolves DNA become more complex and have more information than dogs? Doesnt that kind of kill your claim?

 

[Weatherman2020]

Darwin had no idea how reproduction worked in the age he lived in. Today we have a pretty good idea so let's look at how his theory fits into science.
View attachment 92909

Every cell in our body has DNA, and reproduces using that DNA. Everything we are is in that DNA strand. Yeah, you thought a blu-ray held a lot of information. Each cell in your body has that DNA strand that has all the information that is you in it.
So a single cell organism will have a DNA strand of a length, let's call it a length of 1 for the discussion. A horse will have a DNA strand length of 100,000. Longer because it has information about bones, eyes, ears, fur, etc.
View attachment 92904


When we reproduce each parent has DNA that is combined to make the offspring. If the DNA is split exactly 50/50 there are 2 possible outcomes for the offspring. In nature the DNA will be split between the parents in any combination, thus the offspring has over a million possible outcomes on their DNA. In this diagram there are 2 lines, each being the side of the double helix.
View attachment 92906
So when DNA replicates there is a sophisticated series of mechanisms that basically unzips the DNA and rezips it. Since every tiny section of that DNA is information as to who you are. Any error in the replication process is a mutation (there are mechanisms to repair these defects, but not for this discussion). For example, if you receive a lethal dose of radiation, the radiation does not kill your cells. What it does is damage the DNA so it cannot properly replicate. And since your body is having to constantly replace your cells, you soon die because your cells are not being replaced.

View attachment 92908

But let's say there is damage to the DNA that is nonlethal but there is enough DNA damage that causes a mutation in offspring. All mutations are because information is now missing from the DNA strand.
View attachment 92910

Let's use dogs as an example. The wolf is the most diverse animal in that group, because it has the most complex DNA. Because of that all of our dogs today are probably decendants of Wolves. Why? People have bred them into unique shapes and sizes. Each change (mutation) in the animals offspring is due to a section of information being removed or replaced.
For example, I want a dog with short legs so I keep breeding those with the shortest legs. What I have done is removed the information about a wolfs long legs and replaced it with short legs. But the inbreeding has created other errors in the DNA with parts now missing. I want a breed of dog with a short nose. What I've done is remove the DNA information about a wolfs long nose. That's why many breeds have a large number of health issues - we have altered DNA so that information has been removed or replaced into mutations we call poodles and pit bulls. The DNA strand of our pet dogs is much shorter than that of wolves. The changes I have made are only removing or replacing information in that DNA strand. In nature information can never be created.
View attachment 92911
That is important to remember. Information does not get created in nature. It has never been observed in a lab and we don't even know how it would be possible. It would be like ten thousand scrabble pieces falling on the floor and creating a logical and grammer perfect story, except the scrabble pieces would also have to self replicate out of nothing. Yes, information in a DNA strand can be duplicated. But that is not new information, it is a mutation of existing information. An insect can lose their wings because that information about wings is now gone. The information about wings cannot be added naturally. A brown moth species can become a white moth species because the DNA is altered so that white is the only color option in the DNA information.
View attachment 92912

So let's go back to Darwin. Our starting point is some primeval goo. That goo then reproduced into insects and soybeans and eventually humans.
View attachment 92913

Here lies the problem that Darwin had no way of knowing. For each progression additional information must be added to the DNA. In order for the goo to become a soybean plant a lot of information must be added to the DNA strand. That single cell organism that has a strand length of 1 must somehow obtain the information to get to a strand length of 1,000 for the Soybean plant.
View attachment 92914

But in nature, information can only be removed, not created. The problem Darwin has is his theory must have additional information being added all of the time, and we know in nature exactly the opposite is what occurs.

For information to be created, it needs a creator.

So what really happened to start life? Each shall reproduce of its own kind it says in Genesis. So take the Darwin chart again.
View attachment 92913

Instead of you being a family member of soybeans, each species was created and evolved (mutated) from there. Something like a wolf was first created, then information was removed to create toy poodles and chihuahuas. So that is one branch started. Cows mutated into Black Angus and other breeds. Another branch started. So thousands of branches were created, humans being one of them. Each species has its own tree, but each species remains unique and unchanging into alternate species because DNA information cannot be added in nature.

Where's a link?

Here's a link. Go there and you can write your own OP on the topic too.
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)

 

[Weatherman2020]

... Instead of you being a family member of soybeans, each species was created and evolved (mutated) from there. Something like a wolf was first created, then information was removed to create toy poodles and chihuahuas. So that is one branch started. Cows mutated into Black Angus and other breeds. Another branch started. So thousands of branches were created, humans being one of them. Each species has its own tree, but each species remains unique and unchanging into alternate species because DNA information cannot be added in nature.

Agreed about the evolution of various animal species, but disagreed about various animal species not being related.

Why do we share 98% of the same DNA as chimps? 44% of a fruit fly? Putting DNA to Work - Introduction - Tracing Similarities and Differences in Our DNA

And you are missing the primary point. In order for you to go from fruit fly to chimp a lot of DNA information must be created. In nature that is impossible.

Are you saying that DNA information cannot be created by nature? What do you call mutations?

A mutation is either the replacement or removal of information. There is no new information ever added. Information cannot be created in nature.

So how did wolves DNA become more complex and have more information than dogs? Doesnt that kind of kill your claim?

Wolves are the closest to the created species. Toy poodles are nothing but a series of removing DNA information.

 

[Asclepias]

Dogs are not descended from wolves. They do share a common ancestor much like chimps and humans.

All life has a double helix DNA. Human DNA and Banana plants are 60% related. But it does not mean your relative is a banana.

That had nothing to do with my point. My point was that dogs were not descended from wolves. They instead share a common ancestor.

That's what I said, wolves and our pet dogs are from the same created branch. Same with zebras and horses. So we agree on that.

No thats not what you said. You said this which is false.

"Because of that all of our dogs today are probably decendants of Wolves. Why? People have bred them into unique shapes and sizes. Each change (mutation) in the animals offspring is due to a section of information being removed or replaced. "

You can take wolves and dogs up with science. OP is about Darwin was not right.

Science didnt make you claim something wrong then pretend you didnt make the claim. I am asking you.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Even though Wiki is not a good source when it comes to these things obviously you dont understand that "diverged" and "descended" are two different words with totally different meanings.

The problem with Wiki, as you know, is that it is only as good as those who add to it. It's the linked sources that are the real nuggets, IMO. If a Wiki article has good links, then it's a good source of info. No links or unreliable links, then not so much.

Enough about wiki, there are thousands of scientific articles. The point is they are of their own kind and can breed. The DNA strand of a wolve is much longer than that of a domestic dog, meaning it has more information and thus is more diverse and why it is believed to be closer to the original copy.

You also havent factored in that dogs and wolves will breed without human intervention.

What's dogs mating on their own have to do with DNA not being able to be created?

 

[Asclepias]

Agreed about the evolution of various animal species, but disagreed about various animal species not being related.

Why do we share 98% of the same DNA as chimps? 44% of a fruit fly? Putting DNA to Work - Introduction - Tracing Similarities and Differences in Our DNA

And you are missing the primary point. In order for you to go from fruit fly to chimp a lot of DNA information must be created. In nature that is impossible.

Are you saying that DNA information cannot be created by nature? What do you call mutations?

A mutation is either the replacement or removal of information. There is no new information ever added. Information cannot be created in nature.

So how did wolves DNA become more complex and have more information than dogs? Doesnt that kind of kill your claim?

Wolves are the closest to the created species. Toy poodles are nothing but a series of removing DNA information.

So now youre claiming that a DNA strand is shorter if the animal is small?

 

[Asclepias]

Even though Wiki is not a good source when it comes to these things obviously you dont understand that "diverged" and "descended" are two different words with totally different meanings.

The problem with Wiki, as you know, is that it is only as good as those who add to it. It's the linked sources that are the real nuggets, IMO. If a Wiki article has good links, then it's a good source of info. No links or unreliable links, then not so much.

Enough about wiki, there are thousands of scientific articles. The point is they are of their own kind and can breed. The DNA strand of a wolve is much longer than that of a domestic dog, meaning it has more information and thus is more diverse and why it is believed to be closer to the original copy.

You also havent factored in that dogs and wolves will breed without human intervention.

What's dogs mating on their own have to do with DNA not being able to be created?

Well you said that a wolfs dna is longer. How do you know that didnt come about from mating with dogs?

 

[Weatherman2020]

All life has a double helix DNA. Human DNA and Banana plants are 60% related. But it does not mean your relative is a banana.

That had nothing to do with my point. My point was that dogs were not descended from wolves. They instead share a common ancestor.

That's what I said, wolves and our pet dogs are from the same created branch. Same with zebras and horses. So we agree on that.

No thats not what you said. You said this which is false.

"Because of that all of our dogs today are probably decendants of Wolves. Why? People have bred them into unique shapes and sizes. Each change (mutation) in the animals offspring is due to a section of information being removed or replaced. "

You can take wolves and dogs up with science. OP is about Darwin was not right.

Science didnt make you claim something wrong then pretend you didnt make the claim. I am asking you.

You yourself acknowledge wolves and dogs are of a kind.

 

[Carla_Danger]

Darwin had no idea how reproduction worked in the age he lived in. Today we have a pretty good idea so let's look at how his theory fits into science.
View attachment 92909

Every cell in our body has DNA, and reproduces using that DNA. Everything we are is in that DNA strand. Yeah, you thought a blu-ray held a lot of information. Each cell in your body has that DNA strand that has all the information that is you in it.
So a single cell organism will have a DNA strand of a length, let's call it a length of 1 for the discussion. A horse will have a DNA strand length of 100,000. Longer because it has information about bones, eyes, ears, fur, etc.
View attachment 92904


When we reproduce each parent has DNA that is combined to make the offspring. If the DNA is split exactly 50/50 there are 2 possible outcomes for the offspring. In nature the DNA will be split between the parents in any combination, thus the offspring has over a million possible outcomes on their DNA. In this diagram there are 2 lines, each being the side of the double helix.
View attachment 92906
So when DNA replicates there is a sophisticated series of mechanisms that basically unzips the DNA and rezips it. Since every tiny section of that DNA is information as to who you are. Any error in the replication process is a mutation (there are mechanisms to repair these defects, but not for this discussion). For example, if you receive a lethal dose of radiation, the radiation does not kill your cells. What it does is damage the DNA so it cannot properly replicate. And since your body is having to constantly replace your cells, you soon die because your cells are not being replaced.

View attachment 92908

But let's say there is damage to the DNA that is nonlethal but there is enough DNA damage that causes a mutation in offspring. All mutations are because information is now missing from the DNA strand.
View attachment 92910

Let's use dogs as an example. The wolf is the most diverse animal in that group, because it has the most complex DNA. Because of that all of our dogs today are probably decendants of Wolves. Why? People have bred them into unique shapes and sizes. Each change (mutation) in the animals offspring is due to a section of information being removed or replaced.
For example, I want a dog with short legs so I keep breeding those with the shortest legs. What I have done is removed the information about a wolfs long legs and replaced it with short legs. But the inbreeding has created other errors in the DNA with parts now missing. I want a breed of dog with a short nose. What I've done is remove the DNA information about a wolfs long nose. That's why many breeds have a large number of health issues - we have altered DNA so that information has been removed or replaced into mutations we call poodles and pit bulls. The DNA strand of our pet dogs is much shorter than that of wolves. The changes I have made are only removing or replacing information in that DNA strand. In nature information can never be created.
View attachment 92911
That is important to remember. Information does not get created in nature. It has never been observed in a lab and we don't even know how it would be possible. It would be like ten thousand scrabble pieces falling on the floor and creating a logical and grammer perfect story, except the scrabble pieces would also have to self replicate out of nothing. Yes, information in a DNA strand can be duplicated. But that is not new information, it is a mutation of existing information. An insect can lose their wings because that information about wings is now gone. The information about wings cannot be added naturally. A brown moth species can become a white moth species because the DNA is altered so that white is the only color option in the DNA information.
View attachment 92912

So let's go back to Darwin. Our starting point is some primeval goo. That goo then reproduced into insects and soybeans and eventually humans.
View attachment 92913

Here lies the problem that Darwin had no way of knowing. For each progression additional information must be added to the DNA. In order for the goo to become a soybean plant a lot of information must be added to the DNA strand. That single cell organism that has a strand length of 1 must somehow obtain the information to get to a strand length of 1,000 for the Soybean plant.
View attachment 92914

But in nature, information can only be removed, not created. The problem Darwin has is his theory must have additional information being added all of the time, and we know in nature exactly the opposite is what occurs.

For information to be created, it needs a creator.

So what really happened to start life? Each shall reproduce of its own kind it says in Genesis. So take the Darwin chart again.
View attachment 92913

Instead of you being a family member of soybeans, each species was created and evolved (mutated) from there. Something like a wolf was first created, then information was removed to create toy poodles and chihuahuas. So that is one branch started. Cows mutated into Black Angus and other breeds. Another branch started. So thousands of branches were created, humans being one of them. Each species has its own tree, but each species remains unique and unchanging into alternate species because DNA information cannot be added in nature.

Where's a link?

Here's a link. Go there and you can write your own OP on the topic too.
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)

That's not a direct link. Do you have a link to this report, or did you write it yourself?

 

[Weatherman2020]

And you are missing the primary point. In order for you to go from fruit fly to chimp a lot of DNA information must be created. In nature that is impossible.

Are you saying that DNA information cannot be created by nature? What do you call mutations?

A mutation is either the replacement or removal of information. There is no new information ever added. Information cannot be created in nature.

So how did wolves DNA become more complex and have more information than dogs? Doesnt that kind of kill your claim?

Wolves are the closest to the created species. Toy poodles are nothing but a series of removing DNA information.

So now youre claiming that a DNA strand is shorter if the animal is small?

Now youre being stupid.

 

[Asclepias]

That had nothing to do with my point. My point was that dogs were not descended from wolves. They instead share a common ancestor.

That's what I said, wolves and our pet dogs are from the same created branch. Same with zebras and horses. So we agree on that.

No thats not what you said. You said this which is false.

"Because of that all of our dogs today are probably decendants of Wolves. Why? People have bred them into unique shapes and sizes. Each change (mutation) in the animals offspring is due to a section of information being removed or replaced. "

You can take wolves and dogs up with science. OP is about Darwin was not right.

Science didnt make you claim something wrong then pretend you didnt make the claim. I am asking you.

You yourself acknowledge wolves and dogs are of a kind.

I acknowledged they shared a common ancestor. You claimed that dogs were descended from wolves.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Darwin had no idea how reproduction worked in the age he lived in. Today we have a pretty good idea so let's look at how his theory fits into science.
View attachment 92909

Every cell in our body has DNA, and reproduces using that DNA. Everything we are is in that DNA strand. Yeah, you thought a blu-ray held a lot of information. Each cell in your body has that DNA strand that has all the information that is you in it.
So a single cell organism will have a DNA strand of a length, let's call it a length of 1 for the discussion. A horse will have a DNA strand length of 100,000. Longer because it has information about bones, eyes, ears, fur, etc.
View attachment 92904


When we reproduce each parent has DNA that is combined to make the offspring. If the DNA is split exactly 50/50 there are 2 possible outcomes for the offspring. In nature the DNA will be split between the parents in any combination, thus the offspring has over a million possible outcomes on their DNA. In this diagram there are 2 lines, each being the side of the double helix.
View attachment 92906
So when DNA replicates there is a sophisticated series of mechanisms that basically unzips the DNA and rezips it. Since every tiny section of that DNA is information as to who you are. Any error in the replication process is a mutation (there are mechanisms to repair these defects, but not for this discussion). For example, if you receive a lethal dose of radiation, the radiation does not kill your cells. What it does is damage the DNA so it cannot properly replicate. And since your body is having to constantly replace your cells, you soon die because your cells are not being replaced.

View attachment 92908

But let's say there is damage to the DNA that is nonlethal but there is enough DNA damage that causes a mutation in offspring. All mutations are because information is now missing from the DNA strand.
View attachment 92910

Let's use dogs as an example. The wolf is the most diverse animal in that group, because it has the most complex DNA. Because of that all of our dogs today are probably decendants of Wolves. Why? People have bred them into unique shapes and sizes. Each change (mutation) in the animals offspring is due to a section of information being removed or replaced.
For example, I want a dog with short legs so I keep breeding those with the shortest legs. What I have done is removed the information about a wolfs long legs and replaced it with short legs. But the inbreeding has created other errors in the DNA with parts now missing. I want a breed of dog with a short nose. What I've done is remove the DNA information about a wolfs long nose. That's why many breeds have a large number of health issues - we have altered DNA so that information has been removed or replaced into mutations we call poodles and pit bulls. The DNA strand of our pet dogs is much shorter than that of wolves. The changes I have made are only removing or replacing information in that DNA strand. In nature information can never be created.
View attachment 92911
That is important to remember. Information does not get created in nature. It has never been observed in a lab and we don't even know how it would be possible. It would be like ten thousand scrabble pieces falling on the floor and creating a logical and grammer perfect story, except the scrabble pieces would also have to self replicate out of nothing. Yes, information in a DNA strand can be duplicated. But that is not new information, it is a mutation of existing information. An insect can lose their wings because that information about wings is now gone. The information about wings cannot be added naturally. A brown moth species can become a white moth species because the DNA is altered so that white is the only color option in the DNA information.
View attachment 92912

So let's go back to Darwin. Our starting point is some primeval goo. That goo then reproduced into insects and soybeans and eventually humans.
View attachment 92913

Here lies the problem that Darwin had no way of knowing. For each progression additional information must be added to the DNA. In order for the goo to become a soybean plant a lot of information must be added to the DNA strand. That single cell organism that has a strand length of 1 must somehow obtain the information to get to a strand length of 1,000 for the Soybean plant.
View attachment 92914

But in nature, information can only be removed, not created. The problem Darwin has is his theory must have additional information being added all of the time, and we know in nature exactly the opposite is what occurs.

For information to be created, it needs a creator.

So what really happened to start life? Each shall reproduce of its own kind it says in Genesis. So take the Darwin chart again.
View attachment 92913

Instead of you being a family member of soybeans, each species was created and evolved (mutated) from there. Something like a wolf was first created, then information was removed to create toy poodles and chihuahuas. So that is one branch started. Cows mutated into Black Angus and other breeds. Another branch started. So thousands of branches were created, humans being one of them. Each species has its own tree, but each species remains unique and unchanging into alternate species because DNA information cannot be added in nature.

Where's a link?

Here's a link. Go there and you can write your own OP on the topic too.
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)

That's not a direct link. Do you have a link to this report, or did you write it yourself?

I wrote it.

 

[Divine Wind]

And you are missing the primary point. In order for you to go from fruit fly to chimp a lot of DNA information must be created. In nature that is impossible.

Agreed about DNA "created", but not impossible. Down Syndrome is full or partial extra copy of chromosome 21. XYY syndrome is a genetic condition in which a human male has an extra Y chromosome. Most mutations are bad, but some, by pure chance over millions of years, can be good.

 

[Asclepias]

Are you saying that DNA information cannot be created by nature? What do you call mutations?

A mutation is either the replacement or removal of information. There is no new information ever added. Information cannot be created in nature.

So how did wolves DNA become more complex and have more information than dogs? Doesnt that kind of kill your claim?

Wolves are the closest to the created species. Toy poodles are nothing but a series of removing DNA information.

So now youre claiming that a DNA strand is shorter if the animal is small?

Now youre being stupid.

I think its stupid to claim that wolves are closer to the original created animal without any proof. Especially since we know they share a common ancestor.

 

[Weatherman2020]

That's what I said, wolves and our pet dogs are from the same created branch. Same with zebras and horses. So we agree on that.

No thats not what you said. You said this which is false.

"Because of that all of our dogs today are probably decendants of Wolves. Why? People have bred them into unique shapes and sizes. Each change (mutation) in the animals offspring is due to a section of information being removed or replaced. "

You can take wolves and dogs up with science. OP is about Darwin was not right.

Science didnt make you claim something wrong then pretend you didnt make the claim. I am asking you.

You yourself acknowledge wolves and dogs are of a kind.

I acknowledged they shared a common ancestor. You claimed that dogs were descended from wolves.

OP is about Darwin being wrong.
Like I said, start your own OP if you want to claim dogs are not from wolves.

 

[PK1]

WTF is this thread trying to say?
Darwin's theory is about natural selection. DNA supports his famous theory explaining speciation, as well is 99% of biological scientists in this world, except for the religious nuts like yourself.
LOL!

Your evidence is zero. If you have evidence, show it or accept the OP.

I side with the 98% in the AAAS (Pew Research):
"98% of scientists connected to the American Association for the Advancement of Science say they believe humans evolved over time."

 

[Weatherman2020]

And you are missing the primary point. In order for you to go from fruit fly to chimp a lot of DNA information must be created. In nature that is impossible.

Agreed about DNA "created", but not impossible. Down Syndrome is full or partial extra copy of chromosome 21. XYY syndrome is a genetic condition in which a human male has an extra Y chromosome. Most mutations are bad, but some, by pure chance over millions of years, can be good.

Just as I said in the OP, information can be duplicated, but never created.

 

[Divine Wind]

...Enough about wiki, there are thousands of scientific articles. The point is they are of their own kind and can breed. The DNA strand of a wolve is much longer than that of a domestic dog, meaning it has more information and thus is more diverse and why it is believed to be closer to the original copy.

So? The "original" copy is merely the common ancestor, not the origin of their DNA history.

Ancient Wolf DNA Could Solve Dog Origin Mystery

14 Dog Breeds Closely Related To Wolves (You Will Be Surprised!)

 

[Weatherman2020]

WTF is this thread trying to say?
Darwin's theory is about natural selection. DNA supports his famous theory explaining speciation, as well is 99% of biological scientists in this world, except for the religious nuts like yourself.
LOL!

Your evidence is zero. If you have evidence, show it or accept the OP.

I side with the 98% in the AAAS (Pew Research):
"98% of scientists connected to the American Association for the Advancement of Science say they believe humans evolved over time."

Proving that you're one of the many programmed into turning off your brain when you hear the word "scientist". "Scientists say" is the most Pavlovian trigger mechanism humans have today.