Hello Bob.
John, rather than answer everything you've said I want to focus on two specific problems.
Added genetic information
Remember that there are only 4 letters: C, G, A and T. The genome of the common ancestor would have been a relatively short string composed of these four letters. The human genome, like all other genomes for higher organisms, is a long string composed of these four letters.
Genetic changes that are well understood include repeating sections of a string arbitrarily many times, copying a section from one place in the string to another, inserting a new section (as in a retrovirus) and deleting any letter or section. It's not hard to see that any combination of the four letters can be reached in this way. The limiting factor is that the intermediary steps have to be genomes for organisms capable of surviving and reproducing.
Your analogy where you tell me to shuffle letters in "cheese is tasty" to get to "baloney and mustard" fails because the latter includes letters not included in the former, and that's not the case for DNA. You could go from "the quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog" (which contains a full set of letters) to an English translation of War and Peace. Does this add information? You bet.
OK, let me be more specific.
My analogy is relevant, let me explain.
When I use this example; "cheese is tasty" to get to "baloney and mustard"
I assumed you understood that I was substituting one biological for another new biological form.
For example; the “cheese is tasty†would represent a bacteria and the "baloney and mustard" would be say a cat. Remember I never intended this example to represent a
specific transitional change from bacteria to a cat; I am simply trying to expose the fact that you cannot get from one species to another without the addition of new genetic information which codes for new appendages for example.
Take the genetic code for a dog for example. When you break down the DNA instructions they are specific to all dogs except for specific loss of information, or copying mutations which give us the different breeds.
If you asked a geneticist to examine a sample of DNA, and he/she was not informed of what type of DNA it was (in this case a dog), he/she would be able to match it up in a data base and identify it as a dog’s.
So I’m stating scientific fact, that there has never been observed any case where new DNA information has been observed, which is a death blow to the Darwinian theory of evolution.
You insist that information can't be added, but you need to define what you mean by information. By any definition I can think of, moving from CGAT to the simple repetition CGATCGAT adds information.
OK I’ll be even more specific.
For example, for a single celled organism such as an amoeba, to evolve into a cow for instance, you would need new information, not random base pairs, not copying errors and certainly not a loss of information, but complex and ordered DNA would need to develop over time that would code for ears, lungs, brain, legs, etc.
Do you understand now?
You say we never find transitional fossils, only fully formed creatures
What are you expecting transitional forms to look like? Every creature is a transitional form between its ancestors and its descendents. The only exceptions are those on the edge of extinction.
That is an example of the typical response I get from evolutionists. It’s a wide scope and baseless proclamation totally lacking in any scientific evidence or corroboration.
Every creature is a transitional form between its ancestors and its descendents. How on earth can anyone debate such a remark? I can think of at least one relevant rebuttal which has the distinction of being scientifically verifiable; there has never been a single example of a series of graduated transitional fossils which show a slow genetic transformation from one distinct species into another completly new species period. You simply cannot take a single species and proclaim it to be a transitional. The word “transitional†or “transition†means one or more in a series or lineage.
So what you are in effect saying is a cow is a transition to a pig because I say so. That is not science my friend.
What do you suppose Gould meant when he stated...
“The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontology. The evolutionary trees that adorn our textbooks have data only at the tips and nodes of their branches … in any local area, a species does not arise gradually by the gradual transformation of its ancestors; it appears all at once and fully formed.â€
Lest I be accused of quote mining you can find Gould discussing it in more detail in Gould’s book The Richness of Life, pages 263 and 264, found in its entirety on Google Books.
Now unless you have more impressive credentials than one of the brightest evolutionary scientists of history perhaps you’d like to rethink your statement Bob.
It’s an inconvenient problem I know, but it remains to be factual Bob.
There should be millions upon millions of transitional both in the fossils ( as Darwin himself stated) and in life but there are none.
Why must we cling onto this dead theory in spite of all the evidence to the contrary?
Why not just accept the truth.
God loves you Bob, and once you accept reality Jesus is waiting for you Bob.
I understand why so many are opposed to this Jesus fella. I mean who does he think He is God?
Anyway who wants to have eternal life in an everlasting paradise void of all evil anyway?
Sorry Bob, I usually don’t engage in this kind of light hearted sarcasm but the truth is that Jesus is an historical figure and not just some mythological character. There’s plenty of non biblical historical accounts of his life which actually corroborate the scriptures.
Do you know that there has not been found even a single case where any archaeological discovery has put any biblical detail in dispute?
It’s true Bob.
Historians used to mock Christians and spout out about how we foolishly believed in these stupid biblical myths.
They “
used to†Bob, but they don’t do that anymore because these mythological people such as King David and places keep on turning up in the rocks.
You can take any ancient historical account and find case after case after case where details have been revised and even removed because of archaeological discoveries.
That has never happened with the Bible, and that in itself is miraculous Bob.
The bible tells us that God formed man from the “dust of the ground†and for many years scientists laughed at us for believing such foolish things. However they stopped laughing when they discovered that clay and earth contain every single element found in the human body.
NASA’s Ames Research Center confirmed the bible’s account that every single element found in the human body exists within the soil.
Medical science did not know of the existence of germs until the 1890s Bob
In the late 1800s a Hungarian doctor, Dr. Ignaz was appalled by the staggering death rate by infection o9f women who gave birth in hospitals. Most children were born at home at the time and it was usually the homeless or sick women who gave birth in hospitals. The level of infectious fever in hospitals was horrendous according to accounts, and between 15 and 30 percent of these mothers died. This tragedy was considered normal at the time Bob!
So doctors Semmelweis began insisting that the nurses under his supervision follow his new orders, and wash their hands vigorously in water with chlorinated lime prior to examining living patients. This new procedure was considered foolish by his colleagues because the existence of microscopes and germs was unknown at the time. However, when doctor Semmelweis began to insist the doctors under his supervision also follow these new orders trouble began. The senior staff despised doctor Semmelweis and had him fired in spite of the fact that immediately after he implemented his new orders the death rate from infections fell to 2 percent!
Doctor Semmelweis later took a position at another hospital where his new procedures caused the death rate to drop to less that 1 percent, but again he was ridiculed and also fired from that hospital.
I’ll keep this short because this is a fascinating true story but time and space are my constraint at present.
The doctor was ridiculed for the rest of his life and in spite of the fact that the Hungarian government sent letters to all district hospitals demanding that all medical staff follow his instructions for washing hands and general sanitation, in spite of the obvious beneficial results, hospitals throughout Europe and North America continued to ignore his techniques and patients continued to die needlessly.
Decades of rejection and ridicule of his methods eventually caused doctor Semmelweis to have a nervous breakdown and was sent to a mental institution.
Ironically the doctor died from an infected cut on his hand caused from an operation.
The hospital staff refused to follow his request to wash their hands!
The reason I use doctor Semmelweis story is because he got his idea to wash hands to fight infectious death from Leviticus 15:13 in the Bible!
Thousands of years ago God commanded the Israelites to wash their hands in :running†water when dealing with those afflicted with diseases!
Until the last century most doctors who did chose to wash their hands did so in a bowl of water which obviously would allow germs to remain on their hands. However, Moses instructed the Israelites wash in “running†water which is the only way to remove these infectious germs.
Bob we Christians aren’t a bunch of gullible back woods morons...we are for the most part critically thinking and open minded people. Christianity isn’t based on a book of nice moral stories either Bob. Jesus left us loads and loads of corroborating evidence which we can find if only we are open minded enough to look and to accept the truth that we find.
Have a good look my friend. Keep an open mind and leave your preconceptions and assumptions behind. The proof is here.
I was where you are at one time. I had to ask myself an honest question...did I want the truth or did I want my truth.
If you want to talk fossils you want to talk to a member of this forum called The Barbarian. He can give you a huge amount of specific information.
I’m in discussion with Barbarian. However I am very well schooled in fossils my friend. I don’t need anyone to tell me what they are and how they formed.
Great discussing with you Bob.
John Bronzesnake
