Reason and Revelation
-
Chicken is not evidence
Why not? Once there were no domestic chickens, but ancient farmers tamed the wild jungle fowl and breed chickens which have shorter legs, more meat, and smaller brain.
And what about the other domesticated examples I put forth?
-
Salam LT and ALL,
Hi,
Mutations leads to errors and diseases. If I have a mutation which ultimately give rise to the development of another nose, how would that be passed on to my next child? If it doesn't then it is not evolution. Perhaps give me an example were a mutation(s) has given rise to a better change through evolution?
Mutations is neither good or bad. It is only good if it allows the species to survive in the environment. It is bad when it does not.
As for passing your mutated extra nose? Sickel Cell Anaemia, Thalacyma etc...these are passed on to the offspring either in a dormant or active form depending on the circumstances of the parents DNA...
Regards,
Johnny- No just comparing it to an environment and saying that it survued hence being good is not enough. It has to be all over good. Otherwise cutting off the hands of humans to make them escape handcuffing would also be beneficial but this can definitely not be taken as an example of beneficial mutation and both sickel cell anaemia and thalacyma are -ve. They dont add up any new info. Such processes would never be able to change a monkey to a man. Rashad Khalifa, a biochemist and a scientist on the roster for the United Nations back in the 1980s has used mathematical probability laws to show the utter impossibility of ape or ape like creatures chaging to men even if they were 99% similar which they are not. Thzey are less than 96% similar. Please before you reply go and view the clip "Evolution or Ceation, the final argument", no.17, at http//www.submissiontv.com . GOD Bless!
-
Hi Andya,
But this is breeding, mixing of DNA, which is very different from evolution.
The thing is, the traits found in domestic chickens (and dogs, and corn, and cabbage, and cattle, and goldfish etc etc) has not been there in the first place. They were selected through domestication, which is another way of saying we evolve our domestic species.
-
So where is the evidence?
Domestic chickens, dog breeds, cabbage forms...
Fossils.
Genetic similarity, especially 'plagiarized errors'.
The taxonomic hierarchy.
Bacterial resistance to drugs, tuskless elephants, lactose digestion in adult humans.
-
Hi,
This is not evidence for evolution.
Peace Andya
Then what do you consider to be evidence of evolution, then?
Items 1, 2, and 4 were the evidence available to Darwin, which led him to prpose the tehory of evolution through natural selection. Item 3 and 5 are later discoveries that further reinforces the idea that evolution happened.
-
Hi,
This is not evidence for evolution, but just mixing of genetic information ? .
I don't catch your response. I mean, most variation that exists in domesticated animals has not existed in their wild predecessors! Besides, you also ignore the other evidence I put forth like the taxonomic hierarchy and fossils, which are not necessarily related to genetics.
Tha makes me wonder, are you confused about evolution? What is your definition of evolution?
-
Hi Andya
There is no evolution. There is no evidence for it. How is the genome reprogrammed? This has to achieved if for evolution has to occur. But not just this but even if this occur at level of a particular cell-type, how would this information/change gona be accomodated in a particular species. I am a molecular biologist, and am looking at evolution at molecular level. Hence, I do not see any evidence. To make it simple, just tell me how the genome is reprogrammed if there is evolution?
-
Hi Andya
There is no evolution. There is no evidence for it. How is the genome reprogrammed? This has to achieved if for evolution has to occur. But not just this but even if this occur at level of a particular cell-type, how would this information/change gona be accomodated in a particular species. I am a molecular biologist, and am looking at evolution at molecular level. Hence, I do not see any evidence. To make it simple, just tell me how the genome is reprogrammed if there is evolution?
Your definition of evolution please. You can't just go claiming 'there is no evolution' without even saying what you think as evolution. Some of the evidence I have put forth led Darwin to propose his theories of evolution.
New variations arise all the time within the genome due to mutations and recombination. How is it that you choose to ignore this line of evidence?
-
Hi Andya,
Thanks for your replay.
I agree with you that new variations arise through mutation and genetic recombination. But this is just genetic mutation and recombination. An environmental impact generating a mutation is often not good or fatal, also one should not get confused with adaptation, where nothing is added or taken away from the genome. For argument sake, even if mutations does occur in me through evolution, which by some "luck" give me some advantages, how is this gonna pass on to my next generation? Isn't this needed for evolution to occur? Lets don't go around in a circle. These is no evolution because there is no evidence for it.
-
Hi Andya,
Thanks for your replay.
I agree with you that new variations arise through mutation and genetic recombination. But this is just genetic mutation and recombination. An environmental impact generating a mutation is often not good or fatal, also one should not get confused with adaptation, where nothing is added or taken away from the genome. For argument sake, even if mutations does occur in me through evolution, which by some "luck" give me some advantages, how is this gonna pass on to my next generation? Isn't this needed for evolution to occur? Lets don't go around in a circle. These is no evolution because there is no evidence for it.
That's why I'm baffled with your reply. You do know that you pass your genes to your offspring, right? Suppose a mutation happens in the DNA in your reproductive cells. This mutation might be inherited by your offspring. I thought you should know this?
By the way, what do you consider evolution is? You haven't answered that.
-
Hi,
Obviously there is no evolution, there is adaptation. If there is evolution then just give me one example or a scientific evidence to proof it.
Where is the evidence for evolution? Even if there is a mutation in my re-productive cells, it does not mean its gonna pass on to my next generation, even by chance it pass on, what is the chance its gonna benefit my next generation. Give me an example if such thing has ever occured.
Peace
-
Obviously there is no evolution, there is adaptation.
If you can say things like this then you at least have an idea of ehat evolution means .
Now, what do you consider to be evolution? As far as I know the study of adaptations is one field of evolutionary biology.
-
No i disagree. Adaptaion is not evolution. The difficulity with evolution is there is no evolution. If there is evolution then show me some scientific facts. Just one will be enough. As a scientist, I do not consider evolution because there is not a single scientific fact about it.
-
Hi bmbmm,
I have been following this discussion but dont see it going anywhere.
But what I couldnt help noticing was,Dec 8
This is how evolution is defined
It is important to note that biological evolution refers to populations and not to individuals and that the changes must be passed on to the next generation. In practice this means that, Evolution is a process that results in heritable changes in a population spread over many generations. This is a good working scientific definition of evolution; one that can be used to distinguish between evolution and similar changes that are not evolution.
Another common short definition of evolution can be found in many textbooks
"In fact, evolution can be precisely defined as any change in the frequency of alleles within a gene pool from one generation to the next."- Helena Curtis and N. Sue Barnes, Biology, 5th ed. 1989 Worth Publishers, p.974
Is this how you define evolution?
Dec 16
Then what do you consider to be evidence of evolution, then?
Dec 17
What is your definition of evolution?
Dec 18
Your definition of evolution please.
Dec19
By the way, what do you consider evolution is? You haven't answered that.
Dec 20
Now, what do you consider to be evolution?
And ur replies have always been something like ur last one
No i disagree. Adaptaion is not evolution. The difficulity with evolution is there is no evolution. If there is evolution then show me some scientific facts. Just one will be enough. As a scientist, I do not consider evolution because there is not a single scientific fact about it.
No disrespect to u, But looks to me, that ur definition of evolution is highly awaited by the people discussing here and also those following the discussion. So, do us all the favour and define evolution. )
Peace!