Creation AND Evolution?

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
No offense to either, but I think Lemon Lime and Kelly both fail to fully comprehend the time scale we are dealing with which renders bad mutations unproblematic.

Seems like the underlying problem is a failure to comprehend the basic mechanics of natural selection. At least in KJ's case. I haven't bothered to read LL's posts.

KJ doesn't seem able to wrap his mind around the mechanism by which "the good move on" and "the bad" don't. If he can't understand this, then the time scale is moot. Unfortunately he's not about to check himself to see if he's got it wrong. It seems to be a pride thing.

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
Reproduction isn't a singular chain that can be broken if one link goes bad. Beneficial mutations proliferate through reproduction.

It's not a case of Bob gives birth to Clive, and Clive gives birth to Dave, and Oh dear Dave gets hit by a truck (end of the good mutation). It's a case of Bob gives birth to Clive who gives birth to Dave, Sally and Donald. In this sense, the good mutation can survive the untimely demise of Dave.

Does not alter what I said every generation can be dramatically affected, and push everything done before on to the next. Repenting the montra only the good survive don’t make it true.

Originally posted by @kellyjay
Does not alter what I said every generation can be dramatically affected, and push everything done before on to the next. Repenting the montra only the good survive don’t make it true.

Survival of the fittest Kelly, survival of the fittest.

No faith is required to understand the reality of this mechanism.

Originally posted by @kellyjay
No!

You don’t get that as a given that is a statement of faith!

There wasn’t an infinite number of life forms that started. Instead a finite number was, when it supposedly began.

Which means time was never an answer to any issue instead it had to be the number of lives.

The amount of time only really adds one thing to the equation and that wou ...[text shortened]... nless you are a true believer, than only what supports the theory is acceptable nothing else is!

If you would have bothered to read the Wikipedia page on evolution, you would have noticed a helpful diagram that might help you understand the - honestly rather simple - mechanism. Have a look:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution#Natural_selection

Originally posted by @kazetnagorra
If you would have bothered to read the Wikipedia page on evolution, you would have noticed a helpful diagram that might help you understand the - honestly rather simple - mechanism. Have a look:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution#Natural_selection

So simple indeed you can’t seem to explain it yourself and need to keep referring to a wiki page. 🙄

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
Survival of the fittest Kelly, survival of the fittest.

No faith is required to understand the reality of this mechanism.

You need quite a bit of faith to get life to create itself first before it gets to get fit and survive all on its own without any intelligent intervention.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
So simple indeed you can’t seem to explain it yourself and need to keep referring to a wiki page. 🙄

I suggest you read some of the previous pages of this thread, where I have explained in some detail how natural selection works. Sadly, KellyJay still appears to not understand how it works.

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
No offense to either, but I think Lemon Lime and Kelly both fail to fully comprehend the time scale we are dealing with which renders bad mutations unproblematic.

Time can only work to be the magic ingredient enabling evolution if there was already an extremely high probability of it happening.
By the way, millions of years isn't nearly enough time... try thinking in terms of billions (or trillions) of years.

Anyone who believes he will eventually average more money made than lost gambling at a casino is also kidding himself.
Time alone cannot cause a shift in probability. If I flip a coin 1,000,000,000,000 times in a row the probability of getting heads or tails on each flip remains the same. The number of times flipping the coin has no affect on the probability of getting either heads or tails.

Sorry GoaD, but there's nothing magical about enormous spans of time that will cause an improbability to become a probability.

Originally posted by @lemon-lime
Time can only work to be the magic ingredient enabling evolution if there was already an extremely high probability of it happening.
By the way, millions of years isn't nearly enough time... try thinking in terms of billions (or trillions) of years.

Anyone who believes he will eventually average more money made than lost gambling at a casino is also ...[text shortened]... g magical about enormous spans of time that will cause an improbability to become a probability.

What "probability" are you talking about, and how did you compute it?

Originally posted by @suzianne
Well, unless the planet the aliens are from grows biologic spaceships in the backyard (not likely, I'm guessing life hasn't evolved that far anywhere, to be capable of space travel on its own), then yeah, they're artificial, and therefore created.

This is interesting, because you immediately made two reasonable assumptions. Without 'knowing' you assumed 1) it was intelligently designed and 2) it was desinged by an alien species.
You could be wrong on the second count if you had very little knowledge of human technological capability, but your first assumption would be absolutely spot on.
But how were you able to do that?

The question ID theory attempts to explain is how, in the absense of any evidence other than your initial observation, you were able to accurately assess the object to be purposely designed rather than formed by natural forces.

Originally posted by @kazetnagorra
What "probability" are you talking about, and how did you compute it?

How did you "compute" the probability of life starting on its own and from there evolving into higher life forms?

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
No offense to either, but I think Lemon Lime and Kelly both fail to fully comprehend the time scale we are dealing with which renders bad mutations unproblematic.

Having more time doesn’t help, it all revolves around windows of opportunity.

Originally posted by @thinkofone
[b]You really think only good things occured with random mutations anywhere in a code, genetic or otherwise?

You repeatedly ask questions such as this even though not only hasn't anyone made this claim, multiple people have repeatedly corrected you on this.

Why do you keep doing this?[/b]

Strength in numbers, eh? There are more of you than there are of him.
wow ... well sure, who can argue with that?

Originally posted by @lemon-lime
Strength in numbers, eh? There are more of you than there are of him.
wow ... well sure, who can argue with that?

Read the posts again.

KJ was asserting that someone was making a claim that they didn't and has made similar false assertions with others on this thread as well. A number of people have corrected KJ and explained to him that that wasn't a claim that they were making. The crux of the matter is whether or not KJ was correctly assessing the claim being made. He wasn't. He was misrepresenting their claim.

Is this really so difficult for you to understand?

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
Survival of the fittest Kelly, survival of the fittest.

No faith is required to understand the reality of this mechanism.

Survival of the fittest does not adjust genetic codes to help or hurt anything.

Survival of the fittest doesn't give or take away genetic mutations, it doesn't direct what
is required, not does it hinder.

It simply means that if something can live, it will live, if it cannot, it will not, due to
whatever it is that ends its life.

Nothing notable or remarkable about that.

Modern day living creatures go through life and those best suited to their environments
will do better than those that are not as well suited. So white rabbits will survive in the
snow better than black ones will if color is the swing factor in survival.