I'm Back W/ Another Question
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
19-08-2013, 12:24 AM
I'm Back W/ Another Question
Okay you guys & gals, I know by know ya'll are probably tired of my stupidity, but I'd like your help. What is the response for the argument creationists give for mutations about having been preprogrammed by god to be "switched on" per se when they are needed? I've tried looking for a scientists answer, but all I'm getting are creationist websites.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-08-2013, 12:36 AM
RE: I'm Back W/ Another Question
Gods of the gap!

Smile

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-08-2013, 02:25 AM (This post was last modified: 19-08-2013 02:37 AM by Free Thought.)
RE: I'm Back W/ Another Question
(19-08-2013 12:24 AM)THEDEATHBERRY22 Wrote:  Okay you guys & gals, I know by know ya'll are probably tired of my stupidity, but I'd like your help. What is the response for the argument creationists give for mutations about having been preprogrammed by god to be "switched on" per se when they are needed? I've tried looking for a scientists answer, but all I'm getting are creationist websites.

Well, given that the vast majority of mutations are not 'needed' at all (the majority of mutations are neutral, meaning that they generally have no significant effect, mutations which cause significant change happen fairly rarely and take a decent number of generations to make a truly noticeable change in a species and those which cause significant change in individuals often result in deformity or death), I'd call "bogus!" on the 'mutations are switched on by god when needed' thing right off the bat.

It is also a pain to them that mutations are almost entirely random...

As far as I can go, my conclusion is thus; Mutations occur randomly and have no pattern and are most often completely inane.
Imagine, god pre-arrange these mutations and talking to his angels:
"I have a great idea! let's take this TCT codon and make it TCC! It's brilliant, those humans weill never see this trick!."
"But God, that still codes for Serine."
"Shut up, Jeffery, I know what I'm doing! I am god, after all."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Free Thought's post
19-08-2013, 06:06 AM
RE: I'm Back W/ Another Question
If mutations were "programmed", they would occur in EVERY member of the specie. They don't. There is no mechanism for "programming". They have never proposed what that might be. It's fiction. Nothing more. Clearly they have no clue what genetics is all about, or how it works. They're desperate to maintain the fiction that "pops in the sky" is in charge of something.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Sent by Jebus to put the stud back in Bible Study. "I believe Mr. Peanut is the Messiah" -- onlinebiker
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
19-08-2013, 04:16 PM
RE: I'm Back W/ Another Question
Sounds like they are confusing gene expression or epigenetics with genetics.

Since 08-01-2015 I have forgiven HeyWouldYouBlowMe 40 times for being a hypocritical uninformed false Christian piece of shit asshole in his insults to forum members. In each case, I just turned the other cheek and let it go.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-08-2013, 07:03 PM
RE: I'm Back W/ Another Question
Geneticists are currently able to switch on inactive genes. I've seen video of chickens born with teeth and (separately) a long tail. Traits that are clearly vestiges of their dinosaur heritage. So, dormant genes can be found and manipulated.
If any animal's evolutionary future simply lay in their current DNA, we would find out through sequencing and literally see the species' future.

Besides, the arguement doesn't allow for speciation, a huge component of evolution.

Example:
animals A and B are of the same species, thus share virtually identical DNA
several thousand generations later, they are now two different species
thousands of generations pass by and now the original species is now a dozen different ones

the argument requires every individual to possess genetic markers for billions of other species, although never used

That sounds like very unintelligent design to me.

[Image: images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRcmPL4codsbtiJhpFav3r...-w_49ttW6a]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Jeffasaurus's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: