All cellular functions are  irreducibly complex
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
15-09-2015, 04:47 AM
RE: All cellular functions are  irreducibly complex
(15-09-2015 04:24 AM)Godexists Wrote:  
(15-09-2015 03:28 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  Just to remind everyone why it is so important that Godexists cannot answer my question. If he cannot tell us "What mechanism is in place to stop small changes from accumulating over many generations" then he cannot refute the millions of confirmed cases of evolution.

He has basically admitted that evolution exists (he should change his user name).

ah really ??

[Image: asddsa11.jpg]

you conflate micro evolution with macro evolution.

macro evolution has NEVER been observed.

No, it has, but you'll just move the goal post every time anyways.

New species of bacteria that has evolved to metabolize new molecules for energy? Not macro enough.

Ring species of various forms of animals where species A can interbreed with B, and B with C, and C with D, but once D comes into contact with A they are unable to successfully breed with one another. Nope, not 'macro' enough.

Micro evolution happens, as does macro. Unless you have evidence to show of a mechanism that prevents small changes from accumulating enough over time that separated populations of the same species cannot diverge enough under different selective pressures so as to become so distant that they cannot interbreed successfully, you fucking got nothing.

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-09-2015, 04:51 AM
RE: All cellular functions are  irreducibly complex
(15-09-2015 04:22 AM)Godexists Wrote:  
(14-09-2015 07:06 PM)Chas Wrote:  You cannot logically get from "it has been observed" to "it simply does NOT happen".

That is lazy, incorrect, fallacious thinking.

Take a logic course. Drinking Beverage

but russells teapot isnt a fallacious argument ?

[Image: russel10.jpg]

No, it is not fallacious; you have simply drawn a spurious parallel.

While there is simply no reason to expect a teapot to be orbiting, there is a massive amount of evidence for evolution.

Chew on this:
Where there exists imperfect replication and differential survival, evolution is the inevitable result. There can be no other outcome.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
15-09-2015, 04:54 AM
RE: All cellular functions are  irreducibly complex
(15-09-2015 04:24 AM)Godexists Wrote:  
(15-09-2015 03:28 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  Just to remind everyone why it is so important that Godexists cannot answer my question. If he cannot tell us "What mechanism is in place to stop small changes from accumulating over many generations" then he cannot refute the millions of confirmed cases of evolution.

He has basically admitted that evolution exists (he should change his user name).

ah really ??

[Image: asddsa11.jpg]

you conflate micro evolution with macro evolution.

macro evolution has NEVER been observed.

Direct observation is not required; It was known that there was a large planet beyond Uranus before Neptune was observed because of the evidence of its existence.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
15-09-2015, 05:03 AM
RE: All cellular functions are  irreducibly complex
Please "elucidate" me ?

Dude doesn't know English as well as science.
He's a fraud. A snake-oil salesman.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
15-09-2015, 06:26 AM
RE: All cellular functions are  irreducibly complex
(14-09-2015 05:53 PM)Godexists Wrote:  
(14-09-2015 12:40 PM)Popeyes Pappy Wrote:  Can you define an increase of information in the genome? For example would you consider adaptations that change a fish's fin into a human hand or bat's wing an increase in information?

from a bacteria to man, that would require definitively a hudge amount of increased information.

Well GE, since you refuse to answer the question I am going to do it for you. It has already been brought to your attention that length can be added to the genome by doubling events. Length can also be added via horizontal transfer from other organisms. But maybe just adding length isn’t enough for you so I’m going to answer the question with a definition that applies to the way you would like to see an increase in information in the genome defined as part of your argument. An increase in information in the genome is any change that results in new form or function. Here is a graphic example of a mutation leading to an increase of information in the human genome.

[Image: 518px-Polydactyly_01_Rhand_AP.jpg]

This type of mutation is usually caused by changes to hox clusters. Hox clusters are genes that control when, where and how other genes, in this case the genes for fingers, are expressed. It simply adds the same protein to an extra spot during embryonic development and presto. Someone is born with an additional fully functional finger. This type of mutation is all it took to slowly one small step over time to transform fish fins into legs with feet, arms with hands or wings. They all have the same basic bone structure as building blocks. The changes required to get from a fish fin to your arm are well documented in the fossil record. No god required.

[Image: tetrapod_evo.jpg]

So now you know you can add information to the genome. You know you can add the type of information to the genome that is required for macro evolution. Now that you know these things the next time you post some drivel about no evidence for macro evolution or you can’t add useful information to the genome you will be a liar and a fraud.

Save a life. Adopt a greyhound.

[Image: anigrey.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Popeye's Pappy's post
15-09-2015, 06:31 AM
RE: All cellular functions are  irreducibly complex
[Image: Evolution-Drums-Kids--Shirts.jpg]

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Banjo's post
15-09-2015, 06:35 AM
RE: All cellular functions are  irreducibly complex
As a prophet - Big Grin - the worst part is all of this IDiot shit is rather demeaning to god. If I was old school, I'd be out stoning motherfuckers. Angry

living word
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes houseofcantor's post
15-09-2015, 07:12 AM
RE: All cellular functions are  irreducibly complex
(15-09-2015 06:26 AM)Popeyes Pappy Wrote:  An increase in information in the genome is any change that results in new form or function. Here is a graphic example of a mutation leading to an increase of information in the human genome.

Which can only be the result of design, according to GE.

If you were a scientist presenting a paper, he would have quote-mined you and used it to show that you think design is the explanation.

Yeah, he's that dishonest.

Of course a design that randomly spits out 6-fingered humans makes no sense in the context of a "perfect" designer, but it makes perfect sense if it's a natural process that's far from perfect that has no designer behind it.

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheInquisition's post
15-09-2015, 07:34 AM
RE: All cellular functions are  irreducibly complex
(15-09-2015 04:54 AM)Chas Wrote:  Direct observation is not required; It was known that there was a large planet beyond Uranus before Neptune was observed because of the evidence of its existence.

It's not even possible to answer GE with regard to direct observation because he will just move the goal posts. It's completely arbitrary when a series of small changes accumulate enough to become 'macroevolution', so whatever we point to GE will just demand more of a change or over a longer time frame, all the while ignoring that we do have physical evidence like with fossil records etc.

Another question that I could be asking GE which he would not be able to answer is how do you tell the difference between microevolution and macroevolution. But he'll just come out with word salad about 'kinds' in response.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Mathilda's post
15-09-2015, 07:42 AM
RE: All cellular functions are  irreducibly complex
(15-09-2015 07:12 AM)TheInquisition Wrote:  Yeah, he's that dishonest.

Place wouldn't be hurt by having a science orientated admin, 'cause our two ain't...

Not that I'm questioning the Starkocracy. Shocking

Bechased

living word
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like houseofcantor's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: