Evolution or Intelligent Design?

There are 20 comments on the New University story from Sep 24, 2010, titled Evolution or Intelligent Design?. In it, New University reports that:

The UC Irvine community was given a chance to witness an intellectual debate aimed at broadening the perspective on the origins of life on May 7. 'A Colloquium on Origins: Evolution and Intelligent Design' featured two experts on the origin theory of intelligent design: Paul Nelson, a senior fellow at the International Society for Complexity ...

Join the discussion below, or Read more at New University.

The Dude

Ellesmere Port, UK

#554 Mar 8, 2012
graist wrote:
<quoted text>
Is it your claim that there is no evidence for a world wide flood?
No.

It's your claim that there is.

Congratulations, all life is dead, including Noah, and we were never born to have this conversation.

Oh wait a minute - Goddidit with magic! PHEW! Problem solved, Bible saved!

Since: Sep 07

La Quinta, CA

#555 Mar 8, 2012
graist wrote:
Just a diversion. What did the cow supposedly evolve from? If it did evolve from some other animal then explain how.
Aurochs. People captured young aurochs and bred the most docile to produce a breed that was less wild.
Did they all stay in the same place as to evolve uniformly?
Yup.
All cows have the exact same anatomy.
Not even close.
Oh they used corrals like in the old west. It was an old western fairy tale.
Not the west, the east.
You see if there was a Pre-cow animal and some wondered over her and some over there then we would have two or more animals that are very similar, but different anatomy.
And we do. Are you claiming that a Texas Longhorn and a North American Bison have the same anatomy?
He thinks humans have evolved as far as they can, by the way.
He's wrong, there is no "limit" to evolution. however humans have eliminated much of the selection.
When I asked him how two different tribes of homini separated at different ends of our county could possibly evolved at the same rate so as to end up with humans having the same anatomy the conversation was suddenly over.
Because you are the only one claiming that that happened. Asking that question would be like finding a priest and asking him:

"How is it that Jesus was dying on the cross at the exact same time that he was walking on water? It doesn't make sense! It's a fairy tale!"
He didnít want to disturb his faith in the might god of evolutionary theory. You see his life makes sense right now, but if he decides to try and make sense of one, just one, positive mutation causing humans to end up anatomically identical his life just might get a little complicated.
Again, YOU are the only one claiming that different groups evolved the same mutations.

NO ONE else on the thread.
NO ONE else in science.
NO ONE else in the WORLD is making that claim.

JUST you.
graist

Paris, TN

#556 Mar 8, 2012
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh NOW you claim everyone's DNA is different. Because earlier in the thread the entire human race were all clones.
You DO remember saying that mutations never happened don't you?
DNA has nothing to do with mutations stupid. Why don't you go get somemore fundementals in your religion of evolution. Fundie
graist

Paris, TN

#557 Mar 8, 2012
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
Aurochs. People captured young aurochs and bred the most docile to produce a breed that was less wild.
<quoted text>
Yup.
<quoted text>
Not even close.
<quoted text>
Not the west, the east.
<quoted text>
And we do. Are you claiming that a Texas Longhorn and a North American Bison have the same anatomy?
<quoted text>
He's wrong, there is no "limit" to evolution. however humans have eliminated much of the selection.
<quoted text>
Because you are the only one claiming that that happened. Asking that question would be like finding a priest and asking him:
"How is it that Jesus was dying on the cross at the exact same time that he was walking on water? It doesn't make sense! It's a fairy tale!"
<quoted text>
Again, YOU are the only one claiming that different groups evolved the same mutations.
NO ONE else on the thread.
NO ONE else in science.
NO ONE else in the WORLD is making that claim.
JUST you.
You are just a flipping retard.
The Dude

Ellesmere Port, UK

#558 Mar 8, 2012
graist wrote:
<quoted text>
DNA has nothing to do with mutations stupid. Why don't you go get somemore fundementals in your religion of evolution. Fundie
Wow.

Do you hate kittens or do you REALLY hate kittens?

Okay graist:

You say you are not the same as your parents and that all humans are not clones. Ergo, we all have ever so slightly different DNA. In fact the ONLY time two human beings share the EXACT SAME DNA is in twins.

So if all humans are born just a little bit different to each other, how is this possible if mutations do not occur in DNA?
The Dude

Ellesmere Port, UK

#559 Mar 8, 2012
graist wrote:
<quoted text>
You are just a flipping retard.
I thank you for your concise and informative point by point rebuttal.
The Dude

Ellesmere Port, UK

#560 Mar 8, 2012
graist wrote:
<quoted text>
DNA has nothing to do with mutations stupid. Why don't you go get somemore fundementals in your religion of evolution. Fundie
Oh, and um, you appear to have forgotten - I DID point to people who were more informed on the fundamentals of evolution. I presented you with a number of scientific organisations (which you promptly dismissed as all being part of the evil world-wide atheist Darwinist Liberal evolutionist conspiracy) who ALL AGREED WITH ME that mutations are a regular occurrence in the genome. Even creationists know this.

Except you apparently.

Since: Sep 07

La Quinta, CA

#561 Mar 8, 2012
graist wrote:
<quoted text>
You are just a flipping retard.
You asked specific questions. We answered them.

The problem that has been repeating itself this entire thread is this:

Since YOU are ignorant of the facts, you ask what YOU think are "gotcha" questions that we can't answer.

However, since WE actually KNOW the answers, we're able to provide them.

Your only response "Fairy tale".

You have YET to address A SINGLE point that ANY of us has made on any grounds other than your desire to dismiss it.

It's not our fault you failed to graduate high school.

Since: Sep 07

La Quinta, CA

#562 Mar 8, 2012
graist wrote:
<quoted text>
DNA has nothing to do with mutations stupid. Why don't you go get somemore fundementals in your religion of evolution. Fundie
Mutations are, BY DEFINITION, unexpected change in DNA.

Saying that DNA has nothing to with mutation is like saying vowels have nothing to do with the alphabet.
graist

Paris, TN

#563 Mar 9, 2012
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
Mutations are, BY DEFINITION, unexpected change in DNA.
Saying that DNA has nothing to with mutation is like saying vowels have nothing to do with the alphabet.
By DEFINITION a mutation is a change in the anatomy of an animal, not it's DNA. That is how the Animal changed from One animal to Another.

The DNA in an organism's genome can be analyzed to diagnose vulnerabilities to inherited diseases, and can also be used to determine a child's paternity (genetic father) or a person's ancestry. Normally, every person carries two variations of every gene, one inherited from their mother, the other inherited from their father. The human genome is believed to contain around 20,000 - 25,000 genes. In addition to studying chromosomes to the level of individual genes, genetic testing in a broader sense includes biochemical tests for the possible presence of genetic diseases, or mutant forms of genes associated with increased risk of developing genetic disorders.

Genetic testing identifies changes in chromosomes, genes, or proteins.[5] Usually, testing is used to find changes that are associated with inherited disorders. The results of a genetic test can confirm or rule out a suspected genetic condition or help determine a person's chance of developing or passing on a genetic disorder. Several hundred genetic tests are currently in use, and more are being developed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nucleic_acid_seq...

Nothing about millions of years of ancestors that changed with positive mutations over millions of years over the continent of africa. They did say "or mutant forms of genes associated with increased risk of developing genetic disorders." Disorder not order.

In bioinformatics, a sequence alignment is a way of arranging the sequences of DNA, RNA, or protein to identify regions of similarity that may be due to functional, structural, or evolutionary relationships between the sequences.[8] If two sequences in an alignment share a common ancestor, mismatches can be interpreted as point mutations and gaps as insertion or deletion mutations (indels) introduced in one or both lineages in the time since they diverged from one another. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nucleic_acid_seq...

<P>
"that may be due to functional" & "If two sequences in an alignment" More IFs and supposing.


<P>
There is also a chance that an Intelligent Designer designed all of theses similar animals with similar DNA and it is not a blind process of happy accidents.
graist

Paris, TN

#564 Mar 9, 2012
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
You asked specific questions. We answered them.
The problem that has been repeating itself this entire thread is this:
Since YOU are ignorant of the facts, you ask what YOU think are "gotcha" questions that we can't answer.
However, since WE actually KNOW the answers, we're able to provide them.
Your only response "Fairy tale".
You have YET to address A SINGLE point that ANY of us has made on any grounds other than your desire to dismiss it.
It's not our fault you failed to graduate high school.
Oh yes you are soooooo smart. You think you evolved from an ape.

Yep, just another retard.
graist

Paris, TN

#565 Mar 9, 2012
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, and um, you appear to have forgotten - I DID point to people who were more informed on the fundamentals of evolution. I presented you with a number of scientific organisations (which you promptly dismissed as all being part of the evil world-wide atheist Darwinist Liberal evolutionist conspiracy) who ALL AGREED WITH ME that mutations are a regular occurrence in the genome. Even creationists know this.
Except you apparently.
Yes mutations that cause genetic disorders. Dork!

The human genome is believed to contain around 20,000 - 25,000 genes. In addition to studying chromosomes to the level of individual genes, genetic testing in a broader sense includes biochemical tests for the possible presence of genetic diseases, or mutant forms of genes associated with increased risk of developing genetic disorders.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nucleic_acid_seq...

Since: Sep 07

La Quinta, CA

#566 Mar 9, 2012
graist wrote:
<quoted text>
By DEFINITION a mutation is a change in the anatomy of an animal, not it's DNA. That is how the Animal changed from One animal to Another.
No. If that were true, then it would be a "mutation" if I cut off your arm since that would be a change in your anatomy and not your DNA.

Mutations are changes in the DNA. Period.
The DNA in an organism's genome can be analyzed to diagnose vulnerabilities to inherited diseases, and can also be used to determine a child's paternity (genetic father)
You claim that you can use DNA to determine if someone is the father of an individual, or to rule someone out as the father.

That would imply that the DNA from potential father A is different from the DNA from potential father B, and that you can compare the two different sets of DNA to determine which is more closely related to the offspring.

That's nested a heirarchy.

You could test the father's father. The father's father's father. You could keep going back for as many generations as you could recover DNA.

Each generation further back would have slightly less in common with the absolute youngest generation because they are further removed.

Does ANY of that sound familiar?
If two sequences in an alignment share a common ancestor, mismatches can be interpreted as point mutations and gaps as insertion or deletion mutations (indels) introduced in one or both lineages in the time since they diverged from one another.

"that may be due to functional" & "If two sequences in an alignment" More IFs and supposing.
Again, you REALLY don't understand what you are saying, do you.

"IF I call you from my phone, THEN your phone should ring."

Is that an "if" statement where I'm making something up? Or, is that a cause and effect statement found in logic. An "If - Then" statement.

Do you know the difference?
There is also a chance that an Intelligent Designer designed all of theses similar animals with similar DNA and it is not a blind process of happy accidents.
A "chance"?

Is it your claim that a designer would use the same proteins in different animals to cause the same effects?

Why not use different proteins in different animals instead of the same protein over and over?

Let's say there were four different proteins that all did the EXACT same thing. Wouldn't the designer use all four instead of just one over and over again?

Since: Sep 07

La Quinta, CA

#567 Mar 9, 2012
graist wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh yes you are soooooo smart. You think you evolved from an ape.
Yep, just another retard.
You and I are both apes. All humans are apes.

Again, this is an example of your lack of vocabulary getting in the way.

If you actually understood the words used in the debate, you wouldn't keep making these rookie mistakes.

Since: Sep 07

La Quinta, CA

#568 Mar 9, 2012
graist wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes mutations that cause genetic disorders. Dork!
You JUST claimed that mutations don't cause genetic disorders.

Which is it?

Do mutations effect DNA or not?
The Dude

Ellesmere Port, UK

#569 Mar 9, 2012
graist wrote:
<quoted text>
By DEFINITION a mutation is a change in the anatomy of an animal, not it's DNA. That is how the Animal changed from One animal to Another.
Man. If we put the collective IQ's together of Cowboy, Mighty Dollar, Shadow and Jimbo all together, it equates to a rather large value in the negative numbers. But you beat them single-handedly.
The Dude

Ellesmere Port, UK

#570 Mar 9, 2012
graist wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes mutations that cause genetic disorders. Dork!
Yup. Like antibiotic resistance.

We're all born with mutations, so according to you, you were born with over a hundred genetic disorders.

Actually that sounds reasonable now ya think about it.

Since: Nov 07

St. James, NY

#571 Mar 9, 2012
graist wrote:
<quoted text>
What does this questions have to do with evolutionary theory not making any sense.
Because if those 1.7 million+ species did not evolve then that means they were created as is, and that they have existed since the beginning of life on Earth. That means that there were cows wandering around back when the fossil record shows only single celled organisms. Does that make any more sense to you then Evolution?

There was a time when there were no human beings on the planet. If we did not evolve, where did we come from?

Nylon eating bacteria could not have existed prior to 1935 since nylon did not exist. If they did not evolve, how did they come about?

----------
TVtropes shirt "For Science" now available for pre-order:
http://discordmerch.com/index.php...

Since: Nov 07

St. James, NY

#572 Mar 9, 2012
graist wrote:
<quoted text>
Just a diversion. What did the cow supposedly evolve from? If it did evolve from some other animal then explain how. Did they all stay in the same place as to evolve uniformly?
If you were really and truly interested in finding an answer there are plenty of books on the subject. Asking on a discussion forum is an incredibly inefficient way to learn about subjects like this.

On that note, how much research did you do before you determined Evolution made no sense? How many books on Evolution did you read?

----------
TVtropes shirt "For Science" now available for pre-order:
http://discordmerch.com/index.php...

Since: Nov 07

St. James, NY

#573 Mar 9, 2012
graist wrote:
<quoted text>
That is variaton accross a kind of animal. Just like beagles and great danes are different. But they are all still dogs anatomically and so are different races of humans.
So they are identical...yet different.

----------
TVtropes shirt "For Science" now available for pre-order:
http://discordmerch.com/index.php...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

UC Irvine Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Army Research Grant to Explore Communication Th... (Sep '08) Apr 6 Ken Baltimorean 8,271
News Study: Democrats have more positive body langua... Mar '15 Sterkfontein Swar... 39
News Flag ban in UC Irvine lobby sparks debate Mar '15 Sneaky Pete 5
News Same-sex marriage arguments flooding federal co... (Aug '14) Mar '15 kuda 30
News Teen 'Burns From Inside Out' After Allergic Rea... Dec '14 Spotted Girl 4
News Editorial: UC tuition hikes don't sit well Nov '14 Ace McMillan 4
News NASA Begins Sixth Year Of Airborne Antarctic Ic... (Oct '14) Oct '14 One way or another 4
More from around the web