What's new
By:
Filters
Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

[_ Old Earth _] Kirk Cameron grateful for Atheist help

We Creationists do not deny evolution we just think it has limits.
Click to expand...

It does indeed have limits, but creationists are generally clueless about what they are. Hence, we see them say "if evolution is true, show me a cat turning into a horse." And no matter how much you explain how it works, they rarely get it.
 
t does indeed have limits, but creationists are generally clueless about what they are. Hence, we see them say "if evolution is true, show me a cat turning into a horse." And no matter how much you explain how it works, they rarely get it.
Click to expand...

But then you say that a whale turned into a cow or something like that. By that reasoning why couldn't a cat turn into a horse over the course millions of years?
 
John said:
But then you say that a whale turned into a cow or something like that.
Click to expand...
No, whales descended from land-dwelling mammals. Your use of terms like 'turned into' also display a fundamental misunderstanding of evolutionary theory.
By that reasoning why couldn't a cat turn into a horse over the course millions of years?
Click to expand...
Because neither cats nor any other animal 'turn into' something else. You may find this resource helpful:

http://cogweb.ucla.edu/ep/Evolution.html
 
jasoncran said:
engineers build parts that they know cant handle the job, does evolution do this?
ever wonder why some parts fail early on a car. i have seen some of the reasons, poor design or delibarately designing them to fail. One doesnt place rubber parts in the path of hot exhaust for a reason, either poor design or to make money. car manufactures make far more money on parts then the car as a whole.
Click to expand...

Ah. Now I understand your question. :)
Yes, to some extent you could say that Evolution does this as well. See, everything in nature is a trade-off. Being big makes it less likely that you will be eaten by predators, but it also means that you require more food. Having long slender legs might make you a faster runner, but it also makes your legs more likely to break.

And for that very reason most life-treathening hereditary diseases do not manifest until after the reproductive age. If one were to imagine a natural purpose for everything that lives, it would be to propagate and continue the survival of their genes.

For some species that means that the act of reproduction can, in fact, be life treathening in and of itself. See various breeds of spiders and praying mantis for examples. Another example of a trade-off might be weak links in the tails of some lizards, which will break off, leaving the predator with just a wriggling tail while the lizard, while tail-less, will survive.

In general you might say that having the ultimate anything is very costly and might not be the best solution under the circumstances. And thus nature balances the risks/costs/required resources against the potential benefit. Cheetas are the fastest land animals around, and while that is impressive, this kind of extreeme specialisation will most likely lead to their extinction in the coming decades.

Hope this answers your question. :)
 
the engineers do that to save money and or make money. i dont agrree with that conclusion of why that is done in evolution, because i believe in the designer.

want not waste not.
 
the engineers do that to save money and or make money. i dont agrree with that conclusion of why that is done in evolution, because i believe in the designer.

want not waste not.
Click to expand...

Engineers are starting to realize that for many things, evolution works better than design. Genetic algorithms solve many complex problems that weren't accessible by design.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_algorithm

BTW, it not only works better, it's usually more efficient:

So how did evolution do it--and without a clock? When he looked at the
final circuit, Thompson found the input signal routed through a
complex assortment of feedback loops. He believes that these probably
create modified and time-delayed versions of the signal that interfere
with the original signal in a way that enables the circuit to
discriminate between the two tones. "But really, I don't have the
faintest idea how it works," he says.

One thing is certain: the FPGA is working in an analogue manner. Up
until the final version, the circuits were producing analogue
waveforms, not the neat digital outputs of 0 volts and 5
volts. Thompson says the feedback loops in the final circuit are
unlikely to sustain the 0 and 1 logic levels of a digital
circuit. "Evolution has been free to explore the full repertoire of
behaviours available from the silicon resources," says Thompson.

That repertoire turns out to be more intriguing than Thompson could
have imagined. Although the configuration program specified tasks for
all 100 cells, it transpired that only 32 were essential to the
circuit's operation. Thompson could bypass the other cells without
affecting it. A further five cells appeared to serve no logical
purpose at all--there was no route of connections by which they could
influence the output. And yet if he disconnected them, the circuit
stopped working.

It appears that evolution made use of some physical property of these
cells--possibly a capacitive effect or electromagnetic inductance--to
influence a signal passing nearby. Somehow, it seized on this subtle
effect and incorporated it into the solution.
http://www.netscrap.com/netscrap_detail.cfm?scrap_id=73

And your idea demands an incompetent designer. Dandelions reproduce asexually, but they still produce flowers and nectar for insects that no longer do the flower any good. This is highly inefficient, and it would be better for the dandelion to not have to expend energy in making the nectar. Our lower backs are poorly constructed to support an upright stance, and this leads to many people experiencing pain and disability. If God was the "designer", He would be a very poor one. He is the Creator, no mere "designer."
 
jasoncran said:
the engineers do that to save money and or make money.
Click to expand...

And in nature it serves the purpose of saving and obtaining resources.

jasoncran said:
i dont agrree with that conclusion of why that is done in evolution, because i believe in the designer.
Click to expand...

You are, of course, free to believe what you want, but Evolution, by its very definition, is a verifiable fact. And as has been mentioned earlier, there is nothing in the Theory of Evolution which dictates that you have to stop believing in god.
 
question for mr.barbarian can jesus raise the dead? Mr. Barbarian claims to be an rc. Did jesus die and rise again.?
 
Well, then I have a question for you jasoncran:

Do you believe that allele frequencies can and do change over time within a population?
 
define the allele frequencies so that i can answer correctly. I dont believe in macroevolution if that what that is.
 
jasoncran said:
define the allele frequencies so that i can answer correctly. I dont believe in macroevolution if that what that is.
Click to expand...

Evolution can be defined as the change in allele frequencies in a population over time. And it is a verifiable fact, which I'm sure you'll agree.

Alleles can for instance be the genes that interchangably dictates whether a child gets blue or brown eyes. A change in it's frequency simple means that if in the current generation 15.0% of the population has the genes for blue eyes and in the next generation 15.1% has the genes for blue eyes, a change in its frequency has occured.

It can happen due to a mutation that changes a gene, thus introducing a new version which will then affect the frequency of all the other alleles of the same type within the population, or it can happen due to various selection and breeding pressures causing a gene to either increase or decrease its frequency.

And that's evolution.
 
doensnt mean the the mutation will surive or is a beneficial one. That maynot mean a different species from the change,of eye color.

i heard a while ago there is something the nuclei of cells that turns on and off parts of the dna. any info.

a piece of electronics has an indivual signature yet it doesnt change the function of it all.
 
jasoncran said:
doensnt mean the the mutation will surive or is a beneficial one. That maynot mean a different species from the change,of eye color.
Click to expand...

Never said it did. In fact, due to the large amounts of what is commonly called "junk DNA", most mutations do nothing at all on a phenotypical level. And of those that do, most are bad. But some will turn out to be an improvement on the current system, in some way, however small. And that is where Natural Selection comes in, weeding out the bad changes, and letting the good changes survive onto the next generation. Now, what a "good" change is depends a lot on the environment the species finds itself in.

The phrase "survival of the fittest" is somewhat misleading since it gives the impression that everything is trying to become faster and stronger. But faster and stronger costs a lot of resources, so if resources are scarce, perhaps the ones who are a bit slower and weaker, but able to utilize the resources better are the ones selected for.

But as I said, mutations is only one of the causes that affect allele frequencies.

jasoncran said:
i heard a while ago there is something the nuclei of cells that turns on and off parts of the dna. any info.
Click to expand...

This is, in essence, true. DNA can, in many ways be seen as a sort of code. And in that code you get "Starts" and "Stops", basically telling the processes within the nucleus where to start and stop making certain proteins. But, you can also get code that says "Ignore this piece of code" or "Read this piece of code", meaning that the production of certain proteins can, in a sense, be turned on and off.

This is a gross simplification, but as a real-world example, we now know that chickens still possess the necessary genes to produce teeth, and through genetic manipulation we can switch on those genes and voila', we now have chickens with teeth.

jasoncran said:
a piece of electronics has an indivual signature yet it doesnt change the function of it all.
Click to expand...

I am unclear as to what you mean by this. Please elaborate.
 
an electromagnetic signature that is part of it,yet doesnt affect function, cell phones have an a unique em field that is trackable and can be used to convict in a crime.

This was done in a court case and it was the pivotal piece.

all electronic devices do this and it unknown why.
 
then i ask this is god is fully able to manilupate the events that lead to the birth of christ(his lineage)? Then the Lord is able to see in to the future?
 
God is outside of time. He is not constrained by it. If He were not omniscient, then He would not be God.

Can God use contingency as well as necessity? Yes, He can. He has no need to "manipulate" things. He is the Creator.
 
Then why if the Lord knows the beggining and end of anything and everything how does evolution fit the picture?
Think about this, if you know that your choice to drive somewhere has a certain route that is longer than another route which one are you going to use?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top