Up from the soup we arose...?

Originally posted by menace71
Ok so let's say evolution is true is man still evolving ? So like in another 100-million years we will have snouts to filter out the polluted atmosphere we made? Eyes that are evolved into UV filters like perfect sunglasses? LOL




Manny

not as fast as we used to. modern society, we don't let natural selection take its course and weed out the week of the population and substandard genomes are being spread into the population which will eventually degrade humanity.

in the future, it's quiet possible that further genetic evolution in humans is going to occur via intelligent design. by us that is.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Yes, I believe so.

[b]If so, that extra chromosome doesn't seem to have helped.
Correct again. But the question I was answering said nothing about whether the extra information helps or not. You just asked for an example of a mutation that results in extra information so I grabbed the first that came to mind that was well documented and indisputab ...[text shortened]... her or not it make sense to you. You have religious reasons for disputing it not logical ones.[/b]

Yes, I would. But then I would also have to try to determine where I was
wrong in my understanding of what is written in the Holy Bible, because I
believe it is true and can not be proven wrong.

Originally posted by googlefudge
Will you please for the love of god read this link.

http://www.skeptics.com.au/publications/articles/the-information-challenge/

This is an answer to the very question you are asking written at length by a
leading evolutionary expert.

And I suppose you believe this liar.

Originally posted by RJHinds
And I suppose you believe this liar.

hehehe. no, you should continue placing your faith on ambushing creationists who have to lie to get an interview with a genius.

I will not be as straight edged in my views as RJ but I just don't believe in evolution. I believe we were created.
I was thinking about my 3 year old and how advanced he has become in his 3 years. Language and growth and use of his hands and on and on and does not take millions of years for this to happen. We are pre-programmed is what I think just from simple observation.



Manny

Originally posted by VoidSpirit
hehehe. no, you should continue placing your faith on ambushing creationists who have to lie to get an interview with a genius.

Jesus said, "For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not
come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed."
(John 3:20)

Dawkins is afraid his lies will be exposed by the creationist's flashlight.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Jesus said, "For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not
come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed."
(John 3:20)

Dawkins is afraid his lies will be exposed by the creationist's flashlight.

dawkin's legacy is quiet safe from ignorant buffoons.

Originally posted by VoidSpirit
dawkin's legacy is quiet safe from ignorant buffoons.

I am sure Dawkins legacy is safe from ignorant baffoons;
but some creationists scare the piss out of him.

Originally posted by RJHinds
And I suppose you believe this liar.

The truth or otherwise of any statement is independent of the person making it.

I understand and know independently all the science that Dawkins refers to in that
article.

It represents the mainstream view of the scientific establishment.

You want an answer to your question, and I posted one.

I could potentially find one written by someone else, or re write it in my own words.
but none of that would change the content.

I am sorry that you dislike the person who wrote it but that is irrelevant to its veracity.

While the questions you ask are simple the answers are not.
not least because in science you have to be very clear about the meaning of the terms
you are using and they don't map precisely to the common use definitions used by
non-specialists.

You asked a question and I posted an answer to that very question written by a leading
specialist in the field, specifically for a lay audience.
If your only objection to it is the author then you have no valid objection at all.

Now if there is any point in his article you don't understand or wish to discuss that is fine
and I am more than happy to do so.
But you can't just keep sitting there saying "no one is answering (or able to answer) my
question" after I have posted (multiple times) a very detailed answer to that exact question
written by an expert in the field.

I have also in my own words posted as to why it is a logical necessity that if mutation can reduce
information content it must also be able to do the opposite.
You have ignored this as well.


EDIT: And yes I believe him (because his claims are backed up by science).
No he is not a liar (at least not in the sense of his work being false. I have no idea about his
level of personal truthfulness having never met him. But I have no evidence to suggest him
to be any more or less truthful in his private life than anyone else).

Originally posted by RJHinds
I am sure Dawkins legacy is safe from ignorant baffoons;
but some creationists scare the piss out of him.

you didn't even read his rebuttal, only seen an edited youtube video in which he pauses for a second to consider his answer. you won't read his rebuttal because you claim he is lying, but how can you know he is lying if you won't read his rebuttal?


how can you be so unfair towards a fellow human? is this the christian way? you condemning someone as liar without even knowing what that someone is saying?



you are not a christian, you are a pharisee.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Yes, I would. But then I would also have to try to determine where I was
wrong in my understanding of what is written in the Holy Bible, because I
believe it is true and can not be proven wrong.

OK, so how do you explain the diversity of life?
According to the Bible, everyone is descended from Adam and Eve, and later on, from Noah and his wife.
But I differ quite considerably from you, and most of those differences are genetic. So, are you claiming that Noah had all the genes that I have, and all the genes that you have and that we have each lost some of Noahs genes? Or did you or I somehow end up with some genes that Noah did not have? How did that happen if not via mutations?

Originally posted by googlefudge
The truth or otherwise of any statement is independent of the person making it.

I understand and know independently all the science that Dawkins refers to in that
article.

It represents the mainstream view of the scientific establishment.

You want an answer to your question, and I posted one.

I could potentially find one written by someone ...[text shortened]... ence to suggest him
to be any more or less truthful in his private life than anyone else).

He refers us to his books for the answer and I am not going to buy his
books only to find the answer is not there. I'm not as stupid as you
seem to think.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
you didn't even read his rebuttal, only seen an edited youtube video in which he pauses for a second to consider his answer. you won't read his rebuttal because you claim he is lying, but how can you know he is lying if you won't read his rebuttal?


how can you be so unfair towards a fellow human? is this the christian way? you condemning someone as li ...[text shortened]... even knowing what that someone is saying?



you are not a christian, you are a pharisee.

What do you know about a Christian or a Pharisee?

Originally posted by twhitehead
OK, so how do you explain the diversity of life?
According to the Bible, everyone is descended from Adam and Eve, and later on, from Noah and his wife.
But I differ quite considerably from you, and most of those differences are genetic. So, are you claiming that Noah had all the genes that I have, and all the genes that you have and that we have each lo ...[text shortened]... somehow end up with some genes that Noah did not have? How did that happen if not via mutations?

The diversity of life is someting God knows. I don't try to explain it.

Originally posted by RJHinds
The diversity of life is someting God knows. I don't try to explain it.

But you posted earlier:

I would like to see evidence where the mutation or evolutionary process was helpful. Then I might have cause to reconsider the theory of evolution.

Suggesting you are interested in learning. Now you say you would rather remain ignorant.