(January 8, 2016 at 2:40 pm)pool Wrote: If 1 + 2 =3 is intelligent design so is
2 hydrogen atom + 1 oxygen atom = water

By the rules of bonglogic, perhaps. Unfortunately I don't recognize bonglogic as informative, troll. In any case, 1+2=3 isn't ID, it's math. H20 isn't ID..it's chemistry.

(January 8, 2016 at 2:40 pm)pool Wrote: If 1 + 2 =3 is intelligent design so is
2 hydrogen atom + 1 oxygen atom = water

A simple question: Is this seriously an argument for Intelligent Design and therefore theism?

You said earlier that you feel that you can no longer believe in evolution due to this, surely you are not serious though... surely you realize that this is equivocation and has absolutely nothing to do with theism or ID.

Natural selection is really fucking easy to grasp. It is merely the process of elimination. It is not even survival of the fittest, because sometimes due to luck and circumstance the fittest does not survive... it really is just "the survival of the survivors"/the process of elimination. It is EXTREMELY easy to grasp. What survives, survives... what doesn't, doesn't. You tend to be left with more efficiently mutated animals and the less efficient die. But that isn't natural selection, that's merely the common result of natural selection. Natural selection is merely the process of elimination.

(January 8, 2016 at 2:40 pm)pool Wrote: If 1 + 2 =3 is intelligent design so is
2 hydrogen atom + 1 oxygen atom = water

Er, no.

Or at least, the floor is yours to show that's true. Anyone can simply assert things; show your work, please.

Though I see from your smiley that you don't even believe what you just said.

(January 7, 2016 at 2:35 pm)stop_pushing_me Wrote:

(January 7, 2016 at 2:10 pm)Esquilax Wrote: If you present an overly simplified version of what you know to be a highly complex topic, for the purposes of making the idea seem cartoonish and unrealistic, because of a pre-existing ideological desire to discredit the idea, then that's dishonest.


Again, I must ask you to define genetic information before we begin a conversation about it, and to also explain how it's at all relevant to biological evolution. Moreover, why do you think that evolution describes an increase in genetic information? Because it, you know, doesn't? Like, at all? This is literally just a manufactured contention that has nothing to do with what evolution actually describes. It's irrelevant.

Regarding point mutations, are you conveniently omitting other forms of mutation dishonestly, or are you just not aware that point mutations are not the only kind? Because frameshift mutations do exist, and they can add whole new base pairs to a genome, not to mention repetitions are also possible. Restricting the conversation to just point mutations inaccurately simplifies things.


Just because it's not being expressed in one generation doesn't mean it won't be in the next, or the next, or the next. Evolution works over long periods of time and successive generations; a duplicated gene that persists over multiple generations has the same chance of mutating further than any other gene.


Point mutations are far from the only kind of mutation there is.


So you're asserting that there was a gene fit for digesting nylon, a substance that did not exist until 1931, just pre-existing and floating free? Really?


It's simple: a population of Italian Wall Lizards got left on a remote island during wartime, as an introduced species in isolation. The offspring of those lizards, faced with a new diet they didn't have normally, evolved entirely new cecal valves within their digestive system to cope. These valves do not exist, in any capacity, within the Wall Lizard populations they came from. By any definition, they are new structures evolving due to differing selective pressures.


If this is your definition, then surely you'd agree that evolution has already solved your manufactured problem via the existence of frameshift mutations? Or, you know, the fact that evolution doesn't require the production of entirely new information, since rejigged old information would still be a mutation as understood in the definition of evolution?


Good luck doing that while rejecting a cornerstone theory supporting the entirety of that field. I'm sure you'll go far; Answers in Genesis are always slavering for more shills with phds they don't use, after all.

I wasn't trying to oversimplify it to make it seem unrealistic. I'll call it neo-Darwinian evolution if that's better.

Information: what is conveyed or represented by a particular arrangement or sequence of things. This is exactly what the genetic code is. It is relevant to evolution. Evolution must account for the particular arrangement of the nucleotides that leads to functional proteins. 1000 nucleotide long sequence that leads to a protein has more information than a 100 nucleotide long sequence. Evolution would have to have a mechanism to increase the number of nucleotides while maintaining functional proteins.

Frameshift mutations are a subclass of point mutations. I already talked about these (maybe not to you), but they destroy the function of the protein. The protein is made of amino acids. Amino acids are coded by a specific set of 3 nucleotides. When you insert a nucleotide, you shift each following nucleotide over a space. This disrupts each following codon, which changes each amino acid in the protein.

As for duplication events, if the duplicated genes are expressed, you get too much protein product which disrupts the cell's functions. This organism would get selected against. If it isn't expressed it can't be selected for.

The nylonase enzyme is about 1500 nucleotides long, which shows that it is a derivative of a preexisting protein. I haven't looked into it that much, but my guess would be that nylon's chemical structure closely resembles the chemical structure of the original substrate. It wouldn't take much change in the existing protein to break down the similar molecule.

I read a quick article on the lizards. It says that they still don't understand the genetic basis for the change, and that they will look into it. I will predict right now that the genes that led to the valves were present (but not expressed) in the original lizards. These sequences were then selected for in the new environment. Something like this would require very high mutation rates with extremely fortunate nucleotide sequences to happen that quickly.

You say evolution doesn't need to make new information because it can modify existing information. This just asks the question of where the old information came from.

Howsabout you call it modern synth like you actually -were- seeking a degree in biology, rather than parroting your favorite disinformation source?

Quote:You say evolution doesn't need to make new information because it can modify existing information. This just asks the question of where the old information came from.

You, apparently, say the same..judging from the above. That's a question that's been asked and answered. Where is it that you got your "old information" from? Let me take a wild guess...your parents, just like those lizards.

I have to make a thesis?... too lazy, it's easy, just look at them and see their similarities

1 + 2 = 3
2 hydrogen atom + 1 oxygen atom = water

You don't get 3 if you 3 + 1 or 2 + 4, you have to 1 + 2 to get 3.
The same way, you don't get water if there are 3 hydrogen atom and 4 oxygen atom or any other combination, you need to have 2 hydrogen atom and 1 oxygen atom strictly = ID

(January 8, 2016 at 4:45 am)Constable Dorfl Wrote:

(January 8, 2016 at 4:29 am)AAA Wrote: What was wrong with it? Name calling is not helpful to anyone.

It is shit and lies that is what it is. I've never studied biology (well, if you were honest instead of an inverterate liar, you'd admit the same) and my knowlede of evolution is far better than yours simply from reading popular science books.

Does the poor widdle babbie not like it when his shit and lies are exposed? Go home to mammy baby, or grow up.

You can't just say you're exposing lies when you can't even be specific. If you have some secret knowledge of evolution then share it. It is people like you that give atheists the arrogant reputation.

Who asked for a thesis? Stop being so persecuted. I just asked you to do something other than assert design in atoms, and you still haven't done it.

(January 8, 2016 at 2:46 pm)Evie Wrote:

(January 8, 2016 at 2:40 pm)pool Wrote: If 1 + 2 =3 is intelligent design so is
2 hydrogen atom + 1 oxygen atom = water

A simple question: Is this seriously an argument for Intelligent Design and therefore theism?

You said earlier that you feel that you can no longer believe in evolution due to this, surely you are not serious though... surely you realize that this is equivocation and has absolutely nothing to do with theism or ID.

Natural selection is really fucking easy to grasp. It is merely the process of elimination. It is not even survival of the fittest, because sometimes due to luck and circumstance the fittest does not survive... it really is just "the survival of the survivors"/the process of elimination. It is EXTREMELY easy to grasp. What survives, survives... what doesn't, doesn't. You tend to be left with more efficiently mutated animals and the less efficient die. But that isn't natural selection, that's merely the common result of natural selection. Natural selection is merely the process of elimination.

Yep. It's a serious argument for ID.
Why don't I get 3 if I add 3 and 2? You got to add 1 and 2 to get 3. = ID
Why don't I get water if there is 3 hydrogen atoms and 3 oxygen atoms? You got to add 2 H atom and 1 O atom to get water. = ID

(January 8, 2016 at 2:50 pm)pool Wrote: I have to make a thesis?... too lazy, it's easy, just look at them and see their similarities

1 + 2 = 3
2 hydrogen atom + 1 oxygen atom = water

You don't get 3 if you 3 + 1 or 2 + 4, you have to 1 + 2 to get 3.

No......you don't.  I'm pretty sure there are -numerous ways- to get 3 out of one instance of addition between two variables......Mr. Math.

Quote:The same way, you don't get water if there are 3 hydrogen atom and 4 oxygen atom or any other combination, you need to have 2 hydrogen atom and 1 oxygen atom strictly = ID

No, you get something else.  Something like trioxidane.  H2O3.  H3O4......where ma chemistry folks at, is that a thing, lol?