Evolution is not evolutionary!

[Anomalocaris]

I could very well be wrong, but I would consider it similar to how cancer grows. The cells multiple at a normal slow rate plugging along doing their own thing until one new cell is created that has a different strength. The cell may create more acids, multiply faster, attack different organs at a higher rate, etc. The other cells stay the same, but they created a new cell that is stronger and in many cases helps the weaker/original cells. They continue on until they create another new cell with new/higher strengths. So on and so forth until they have nothing else to feed on and multiply.

Stands to reason that bacteria could work the same way. New cells created newer/stronger cells, that created newer/stronger cells, that created newer/stronger cells, that created newer/stronger cells, so an and so forth with the original cells remaining the same, continuing to multiply, and living on/from the new cells, eg. us.

May be wrong, but simple brain can rationalize it enough to believe that it makes sense.

You need them stronger cancer cells in your brain. The existing ones are not doing the trick.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I could very well be wrong, but I would consider it similar to how cancer grows. The cells multiple at a normal slow rate plugging along doing their own thing until one new cell is created that has a different strength. The cell may create more acids, multiply faster, attack different organs at a higher rate, etc. The other cells stay the same, but they created a new cell that is stronger and in many cases helps the weaker/original cells. They continue on until they create another new cell with new/higher strengths. So on and so forth until they have nothing else to feed on and multiply.

Stands to reason that bacteria could work the same way. New cells created newer/stronger cells, that created newer/stronger cells, that created newer/stronger cells, that created newer/stronger cells, so an and so forth with the original cells remaining the same, continuing to multiply, and living on/from the new cells, eg. us.

May be wrong, but simple brain can rationalize it enough to believe that it makes sense.

You are very well wrong indeed.

[Court Jester]

Tell me how

[Anomalocaris]

Tell me how

Get cancer in your brain?

[Court Jester]

Tell me how

Get cancer in your brain?

You're a very special person.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Tell me how

Evolution is change through time. Not a runaway growth that ends up dead.

[Anomalocaris]

Okay, your cancer analogy is not all together applicable to evolution in bacteria, although it is a little more applicable to evolution in more complex organisms.

Evolution occurs when the genes of a particular organism is altered in such a way that the organism becomes more likely to succeed in reproducing in the environment in which it find itself.   However, bacterias are unlike more complex organisms in that bacterias engage in lateral gene transfer.  This means different bacterias in the same environment can trade genes without reproduction.  So bacteria's heritable traits are not entirely defined by the genes it inherited when it first came into existence.   When a bacteria reproduce, it can be passing on genes it didn't inherited from its parent.  So evolution in bacteria are far more chaotic and less susceptible to a clean inheritance model that work for more complex cells.

---

Tell me how

Evolution is change through time. Not a runaway growth that ends up dead.

There are cancer cells that can spread to other individuals and thus continue to propagate even if the cancer kills the original host.

[Court Jester]

Tell me how

Evolution is change through time. Not a runaway growth that ends up dead.

It's certainly not exact to cancer cell growth/mutation, but a similar concept. The change/changes does/have occur(ed) at some point. My reasoning with the similarity (which again could be wrong, I'm not a scientist) is that we share 98.9% of our DNA from the Bonobos in the Congo, leaving it to be considered our closest relative. There are still Bonobos and humans.

So the theory would explain the question of "...If evolution is true and works the way they say it does, why is there still bacteria just as simple now as it was then!" =For the same reason that there are humans and we still have chimps, apes, bonobos, ect. One mutated/evolved/what-have-you from the other but it's own species continued to live and multiply while that new "strain" also continued on it's own process of growth.

[Anomalocaris]

Evolution is change through time. Not a runaway growth that ends up dead.

It's certainly not exact to caner cell growth/mutation, but a similar concept. The change/changes does/have occur(ed) at some point. My reasoning with the similarity (which again could be wrong, I'm not a scientist) is that we share 98.9% of our DNA from the Bonobos in the Congo, leaving it to be considered our closest relative. There are still Bonobos and humans.

So the theory would explain the question of "...If evolution is true and works the way they say it does, why is there still bacteria just as simple now as it was then!" =For the same reason that there are humans and we still have chimps, apes, bonobos, ect. One mutated/evolved/what-have-you from the other but it's own species continued to live and multiply while that new "strain" also continued on it's own process of growth.

Evolution is not about replacing existing species in their original environments, although that can occur. It is about adapting to new or changing environments.

So as long as the environment that produced the original species continue to exist, the original species is likely to continue to exist. But some members of that original specie may wonder off into a slight different environment, then they may evolve to adopt better to the new environment.

[Cyberman]

They left a few heteros in Britain ??

One, at least.

I'm always amused when people like professors Dawkins, Myers and Tyson, and even people like Thunderf00t, speak out about religious matters, those with vested interests call for them to stick to science. Yet people like the minister in the OP can expound on science till the cows come home, and that's considered perfectly fine in some quarters.