RE: DNA Proves Existence of a Designer
October 19, 2018 at 9:50 am
(This post was last modified: October 19, 2018 at 9:54 am by Peebothuhlu.)
At work.
Your word, then, is a poor thing. The meaning thereof being so subjective as to effectively be vacuous.
Why, just previously, you've posited that incest is a 'Sin' which implies synonymous-ity with 'Bad'.
Except where you state that incest happened "Because reasons" and hence was no longer to be equated to 'Bad'.
To further this distasteful turn of thought. How do you propose the verify the categorization of said deleterious mutations?
What will show the difference between a 'Sin' induced mutation versus a transcription induced mutation?
Also..... if some deleterious mutations equate to 'Sin'?
What do demonstrably benificial mutations equate/map to?
(October 19, 2018 at 9:34 am)CDF47 Wrote:(October 19, 2018 at 9:17 am)Peebo-Thuhlu Wrote: Regardless..... it is still an unintelligible comment/reply to myself in regards to our nascent conversation.
Sin, such as incest can lead to such design flaws as seen in some deformed children. This is one example I gave.
Your word, then, is a poor thing. The meaning thereof being so subjective as to effectively be vacuous.
Why, just previously, you've posited that incest is a 'Sin' which implies synonymous-ity with 'Bad'.
Except where you state that incest happened "Because reasons" and hence was no longer to be equated to 'Bad'.
To further this distasteful turn of thought. How do you propose the verify the categorization of said deleterious mutations?
What will show the difference between a 'Sin' induced mutation versus a transcription induced mutation?
Also..... if some deleterious mutations equate to 'Sin'?
What do demonstrably benificial mutations equate/map to?
