- This topic is empty.
- AuthorPosts
- November 30, 2012 at 11:42 am#322830StuParticipant
Quote (seekingtruth @ Nov. 30 2012,21:40) Which imaginary friend would that be?
I didn't realise you kept more than one.Stuart
November 30, 2012 at 2:05 pm#322840seekingtruthParticipantYou're my “imaginary friend” since you don't really exist.
November 30, 2012 at 2:41 pm#322845TimothyVIParticipantYou guys realize that you are only reinforcing the absurdity of what you believe to be true, don't you?
Tim
November 30, 2012 at 4:11 pm#322852seekingtruthParticipantHey Tim how are you doing,
No I see it differently, I have more “proof” of God, than “proof” of Stu. You guys teach anything is possible, why shouldn't I believe Stu isn't just some random misfiring of bits, it's more plausible than all the complexities of life coming from nothing, now that truly is beyond absurd.Wm
November 30, 2012 at 6:42 pm#322864TimothyVIParticipantBetter than I deserve Seeking.
Thanks for asking.
TimNovember 30, 2012 at 7:29 pm#322866StuParticipantQuote (seekingtruth @ Dec. 01 2012,02:11) You guys teach anything is possible
Absolutely not. Where did you get that idea? From your Imaginary Friend?Matthew 19:26 But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.
Mark 10:27 And Jesus looking upon them saith, With men it is impossible, but not with God: for with God all things are possible.
Luke 1:37 For with God nothing shall be impossible.
On the other hand, what I really think is that the word “impossible” is the claim of someone who hasn't really thought about it. What should really be estimated is how likely something is.
To take an example from biological evolution, I would say that in the future it is very likely that skin colour will change for at least some groups of humans, as has been happening in the past tens of thousands of years.
But it is very unlikely, you may as well say impossible this time, that humans will develop wings. That is because there doesn't seem to be any selection pressure that would drive such a development, and characteristically wings are fundamental structures that use up two limbs of a four-limbed body plan, for example the wings of a bat are adaptations of what we call hands, so we would have to give up something fundamental to our survival to get wings.
It's with gods that anything is possible. Any old fantasy story will do, and there is no need to really explain anything. Christianity seems to be a hobby for those who would rather not know about the world, but nevertheless feel the need to invent joke explanations for what they observe, based on their celestial conspiracy theory of Imaginary Friends running the universe.
I've never asked for proof of your god. What I have asked for is unambiguous evidence. Do you have any? If you think about skin colour and wings and Big Bang cosmology, actually the thing that has the lowest likelihood of being true is the existence some invisible, incorporeal being with human intents that was more complex than any of the complex objects we admire that we know came about by natural selection, and is capable of any scale of manipulation of the contents of the universe you like, a being that itself apparently had no origins.
Stuart
December 1, 2012 at 10:59 am#322998TimothyVIParticipantHi Stu,
There is one thing that I have never quite understood concerning the theory of evolution.
Do gene mutations occur only because of selection pressure that would drive such a development.
Or do gene mutations occur and then just hang around until there is some need for that change, and if no need ever presents itself then the plant or animal carrying that gene mutation just dies off.Tim
December 1, 2012 at 11:00 am#322999charityParticipantQuote (t8 @ Nov. 30 2012,21:27) Quote (TimothyVI @ Dec. 01 2012,00:14) T8 and seekingtruth are showing a pattern of pretending that stu does not exist. This must come from an aptitude of pretending that other things do exist. Tim
Actually not me. My last 3 posts were randomly typed out by my pet monkey that was all. No need for alarm or offence. Just random keys that was all. Any design in construction of the language was coincidental I can assure you.
SMILE.An God promised that their would be good Wives found in the four corners of earth. That was after he made the earth round…
December 1, 2012 at 11:36 am#323000StuParticipantQuote (TimothyVI @ Dec. 01 2012,20:59) Hi Stu, There is one thing that I have never quite understood concerning the theory of evolution.
Do gene mutations occur only because of selection pressure that would drive such a development.
Or do gene mutations occur and then just hang around until there is some need for that change, and if no need ever presents itself then the plant or animal carrying that gene mutation just dies off.Tim
The classical neo-Darwinian model has it that mutations are random and caused by chemical or radiation damage, and that only mutations that are carried in sperm or egg cells would have any chance of becoming established. The selection pressures are the non-random process that results in some mutations becoming common because of the adaptive advantage they confer, and other versions of genes or new genes becoming uncommon because they are fatal to the individual or somehow prevent reproductive success.So mutations are not related to the selection pressures that might bear upon them. Most mutations are neutral, they might for example alter genes in a way that does not change the function of the protein derived from them: if you compare a protein in a rat with the protein that performs the same function in a human, it could be that the rat protein has a different amino acid sequence but works the same way chemically.
Other mutations are detrimental and could lead to the death of the cell in which they occur, or lead to a cancer. I understand that there are several well-known mutations that commonly recur, along with the ones that are random.
A third type of mutation could lead to a beneficial outcome. If that outcome involves the production of a new feature of some kind, then that new thing must have an immediate adaptive advantage for the organism, there is no such thing as hope for the future in natural selection; if it costs energy to build it then it is a liability unless its advantage outweighs the building cost. Such an expensive, useless adaptation would (on average) be lost again reasonably quickly.
There are some ideas out there that make it sound like some mutations might be kept in case they are useful in the future but they are mostly crackpot ones. There is an interesting example of storing up mutations I came across a while ago, where it was discovered that there are helper proteins with the job of holding other proteins in the right shape to do their jobs even if those proteins are changing their natural shapes because of accumulating mutations in the genome. Those helper proteins are very sensitive to environmental changes, and if the organism comes under environmental stress then the helper proteins don't get made, thus unleashing all the new weird protein shapes and causing a large increase in the variation expressed within that population – variation from which natural selection might find new varieties, fitter for the new environment.
There is another interesting idea being investigated by a virologist in the US which suggests that much of the human genome consists of DNA derived from retrovirus RNA, and that if the the newly acquired genetic material isn't being activated to make new viruses then it is just sitting “waiting” for some mutation that might kick it into some new life producing a protein new to the animal, after which natural selection will make that new functioning gene more or less common in the population according to its adaptive value.
Stuart
December 1, 2012 at 2:27 pm#323001princessParticipantQuote (TimothyVI @ Dec. 01 2012,04:42) Better than I deserve Seeking.
Thanks for asking.
Tim
TimDid you fall and bump your head? Better then you deserve…….. what is that?
If I could reach through this laptop I would twist your ear.
December 1, 2012 at 9:19 pm#323033Ed JParticipantQuote (TimothyVI @ Dec. 01 2012,20:59) Hi Stu, There is one thing that I have never quite understood concerning the theory of evolution.
Do gene mutations occur only because of selection pressure that would drive such a development.
Or do gene mutations occur and then just hang around until there is some need for that change, and if no need ever presents itself then the plant or animal carrying that gene mutation just dies off.Tim
Hi Tim,Yes, always ask questions, and ignore rants like Stuart gave in his last post before this post of yours.
Questions deserve real answers, not bloated rants of irrelevant feelings like Stuart is quick to give.
When you ask me any questions about “God”, I will always give you clear and concise answers.
The theory of evolution is a 'BS' story, one that is easily debunked when examined carefully.God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgDecember 2, 2012 at 8:30 am#323170charityParticipant…You Give em their own forum. you lock out all the rude an nasty… an all will be well.
NO! Because you Have no conclusion to who The rude an Nasty really are?
December 6, 2012 at 9:21 pm#323554ProclaimerParticipantQuote (TimothyVI @ Dec. 01 2012,23:59) Hi Stu, There is one thing that I have never quite understood concerning the theory of evolution.
Do gene mutations occur only because of selection pressure that would drive such a development.
Or do gene mutations occur and then just hang around until there is some need for that change, and if no need ever presents itself then the plant or animal carrying that gene mutation just dies off.Tim
Mutations occur regardless, but are detrimental to the species.Natural selection occurs to allow traits within a species that are favourable to the environment. When conditions change, there is enough variation of exisiting code to help the species to adapt and hence those with the favourable trait live longer and are better able to have more offspring leading to the trait to become mainstream within the species, rather than being contained with a minority.
If our traits are DNA code, then the code contains information beyond what we see in the features of a species. This is about robustness. Without this wide variation of code in a species DNA, they are easily wiped out with the smallest of changes.
e.g., if the virus kills 90% of a species, then the 10% left pass on their favourable trait to the next generation. If there was no variation, then the whole species could be wiped out by one virus. It is not a case of a mutation coinciding with the virus making contact with the species, rather that the code was already there waiting for its day to give it favoritism.
Think of it like this. The most popular operating system for PCs is Windows. The reason why viruses are so deadly to PCs is because each version of Windows has the same basic code and because Microsoft's OS was on 90+% of PCs, they were very vulnerable.
So if a virus can disable Windows Vista, then all Windows Vista machines become vulnerable. Hence why Microsoft need to issue updates to the OS. To combat this, Microsoft could make all Vista code different on every PC, just as each unit within a species is different. That way a virus could only attack a certain amount in any one time. But because man is not as clever as God, it is too hard and expensive for Microsoft to do what God has done and make the code different for each unit.
And like Windows, the code is already there. Any mutation in the code leads to files being corrupted and no corruption or mutation is really favourable to the OS. Perhaps in a rare case it might be. But it is usually detrimental. But even a corrupted version of Windows is still Windows. It doesn't become Unix or Linux or some new operating system.
And the code in Windows is much much less than the DNA code of any one person. No comparison.
December 7, 2012 at 6:58 am#323596StuParticipantIn other words, “I've got no idea”.
Stuart
December 7, 2012 at 9:52 am#323604charityParticipantDont feel Bad stu, science is trying to work out how to save the world, an religions trying to say to end it. can't even tell us when there own town's coming an end.
December 8, 2012 at 2:05 am#323645ProclaimerParticipantHere is the thing. Atheism is a religion. It is a belief that many have faith in.
And Evolution is partially responsible for Ethnic Cleansing and ensuing wars.I am not sorry to burst that bubble for you charity.
Science will not save your soul, no matter how much faith you put in it.
December 8, 2012 at 2:06 am#323646ProclaimerParticipantQuote (Stu @ Dec. 07 2012,19:58) In other words, “I've got no idea”. Stuart
Correct, you have no idea if there is a God or not.
If you say no, then that is your belief system that you have faith in.December 8, 2012 at 8:05 am#323697charityParticipantt8 your living off delegated Knowledge.
December 8, 2012 at 8:09 am#323698charityParticipantQuote (t8 @ Dec. 08 2012,12:06) Quote (Stu @ Dec. 07 2012,19:58) In other words, “I've got no idea”. Stuart
Correct, you have no idea if there is a God or not.
If you say no, then that is your belief system that you have faith in.
you Love your control. your More Dangerous to civilization than the men that didn't even Know when their town would end. let alone the world.December 8, 2012 at 8:12 am#323699charityParticipantwhy don't you Just delet the posts of the real trouble makers?
Instead of provocking the decent debate - AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.