DNA Error Checking Proves Evolution i...

DNA Error Checking Proves Evolution is Wrong

Posted in the Evolution Debate Forum

First Prev
of 13
Next Last
JRS

Oak Creek, WI

#1 Apr 5, 2010
DNA Error Checking Proves Evolution is Wrong

The scientific fact that DNA replication includes a built-in error checking method and a DNA repair process proves the evolutionary theory is wrong. The fact is that any attempt by the DNA to change is stopped and reversed.

“Wear white at night.”

Since: Jun 09

Rio Rancho, NM

#2 Apr 5, 2010

“Shaggin' Wagon.”

Level 1

Since: Apr 09

Springfield, MA

#3 Apr 5, 2010
Right (twit).....then the fact that there are still about 150 mutations per generation proves there is no designer.
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#4 Apr 5, 2010
Uh, you do realise that DNA was pretty much the clincher for evolution and the nail in the coffin for creationism, right?

Anything else you wanna bring up that we have addressed already? Cuz you tried this one.

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#5 Apr 5, 2010
JRS wrote:
DNA Error Checking Proves Evolution is Wrong
The scientific fact that DNA replication includes a built-in error checking method and a DNA repair process proves the evolutionary theory is wrong. The fact is that any attempt by the DNA to change is stopped and reversed.
Since this process is known to be less than 100% effective, you still have nothing.

Or didn't you know that the repair mechanism for DNA is not perfect? Could it be that your creationist web site left that little fact out? Could it be that they have lied by omission...AGAIN?

When will you learn not to trust what you find on creationist web sites? I know you desperately want to believe them, but they are collectively a lying bunch and do not deserve your trust.
MIDutch

Waterford, MI

#6 Apr 5, 2010
JRS has to "trust" "creationist" websites.

The alternative is to actually put out an effort, do real work, learn real facts, do actual research and get a science education.

And we all know how anathema that is for "creationists".

It's just so much easier to copy and paste and plagiarize sciencey sounding quote-mines and sound-bites.
Aaron

United States

#7 Sep 18, 2010
you know that there are over a million (as in more than a million) base pairs in one strand of DNA right? and only 130 mutations every generation is pretty precise in my book.

Level 7

Since: Sep 07

La Quinta, CA

#8 Sep 19, 2010
Aaron wrote:
you know that there are over a million (as in more than a million) base pairs in one strand of DNA right? and only 130 mutations every generation is pretty precise in my book.
Listen kid,
You are talking to people who are well versed in all aspects of this topic. We are smarter, better educated and more familiar with the material.
The more you post there, the more obvious it will become that you are working off of a simplistic Fundamentalist Christian concept of evolution.
Why don't you start by telling us precisely what the theory of evolution entails?
If you can't do that, there's really no point discussing the issues within the topic.
Frankly there's no reason for us to believe that you are qualified to engage in discussion, let alone debate.
MIDutch

Waterford, MI

#9 Sep 20, 2010
Aaron wrote:
you know that there are over a million (as in more than a million) base pairs in one strand of DNA right? and only 130 mutations every generation is pretty precise in my book.
You DO realize that every human has up to 100 mutations that his/her parents didn't have, don't you?

100 mutations per person multiplied by however many people are born around the world on any given day over the course of 20 years (the average length of time for a "generation") equals a little more than 130.

If you are not sure about the math, ask any 5th or 6th grader to check your figures for you.
hahaha

Ipoh, Malaysia

#10 Dec 17, 2010
"You DO realize that every human has up to 100 mutations that his/her parents didn't have, don't you?
100 mutations per person multiplied by however many people are born around the world on any given day over the course of 20 years (the average length of time for a "generation") equals a little more than 130"
yeah right and after mil of yrs..we'll mutate/evolve/anything u wanna call it into other kind of life form(can it be that we revert back to monkeys by "chance"?)...yay
hahaha

Ipoh, Malaysia

#11 Dec 17, 2010
"You DO realize that every human has up to 100 mutations that his/her parents didn't have, don't you?
100 mutations per person multiplied by however many people are born around the world on any given day over the course of 20 years (the average length of time for a "generation") equals a little more than 130.
If you are not sure about the math, ask any 5th or 6th grader to check your figures for you"
yeah rite and after x mil of years..we'll mutate/evolve/other made up term into other kind of life form..(can it be monkeys..cause we're so related by "chance")
and other species will also evolve as well don't you worry bout that..hmmm(then again..can we really be monkeys..hmmm...gorilla looks ok tho,can i choose?)
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#12 Dec 17, 2010
hahaha wrote:
"You DO realize that every human has up to 100 mutations that his/her parents didn't have, don't you?
100 mutations per person multiplied by however many people are born around the world on any given day over the course of 20 years (the average length of time for a "generation") equals a little more than 130.
If you are not sure about the math, ask any 5th or 6th grader to check your figures for you"
yeah rite and after x mil of years..we'll mutate/evolve/other made up term into other kind of life form..(can it be monkeys..cause we're so related by "chance")
and other species will also evolve as well don't you worry bout that..hmmm(then again..can we really be monkeys..hmmm...gorilla looks ok tho,can i choose?)
Then DA? May I ask, what scientific alternative do you propose?

Level 1

Since: Nov 08

Boise, ID

#13 Dec 17, 2010
hahaha wrote:
"You DO realize that every human has up to 100 mutations that his/her parents didn't have, don't you?
100 mutations per person multiplied by however many people are born around the world on any given day over the course of 20 years (the average length of time for a "generation") equals a little more than 130"
yeah right and after mil of yrs..we'll mutate/evolve/anything u wanna call it into other kind of life form(can it be that we revert back to monkeys by "chance"?)...yay
So why are chimps and humans different? It is because their DNA is different, is it not?

“I am evolving as fast as I can”

Since: Jan 08

Brooklyn, in Dayton OH now

#14 Dec 17, 2010
hahaha wrote:
"You DO realize that every human has up to 100 mutations that his/her parents didn't have, don't you?
100 mutations per person multiplied by however many people are born around the world on any given day over the course of 20 years (the average length of time for a "generation") equals a little more than 130"
yeah right and after mil of yrs..we'll mutate/evolve/anything u wanna call it into other kind of life form(can it be that we revert back to monkeys by "chance"?)...yay
You do realize that you have way to much 'X-Men' in your education and not nearly enough science. The fact that children are not carbon copies of their parents has been well known for centuries. the DNA analysis has long identified that there are about 100 sequences in a child that do not appear in the parents. That's a mutation. Now most are benign. Your apparent focus is all mutations are detrimental -- which is not supported by the evidence. Care to try again?
LGK

Northampton, UK

#15 Dec 17, 2010
Erasmus05 wrote:
<quoted text>
So why are chimps and humans different? It is because their DNA is different, is it not?
Because they are different & always have been from the get go, the DNA error checking makes sure of that. Why then are there many variants WITHIN humans & WITHIN chimps you might ask? Well, that because correcting mechanism isn't 100% & needs room for error. I think engineers call this redundancy. It's slam dunk ('hope I'm using Americanism correctly) proof of design. We couldn't ask for more really.

You see to error check means you have a standard in MIND. Otherwise what's anything an error in relation to? In a blind purposeless world there are no errors. DNA has mind written all over it.

Level 1

Since: Nov 08

Boise, ID

#16 Dec 17, 2010
LGK wrote:
<quoted text>
Because they are different & always have been from the get go,
Evidence please.

the DNA error checking makes sure of that.
Then please explain why every human is born with 100 to 200 mutations.

Why then are there many variants WITHIN humans & WITHIN chimps you might ask?
Humans and chimps are both variants within apes. Humans and bears are both variants within mammals. Humans a fish are both variants within vertebrates. All variation is caused by the same thing: random mutations filtered through natural selection.

Well, that because correcting mechanism isn't 100% & needs room for error.
Why does it need room for error?
I think engineers call this redundancy.
No, they don't. No engineer designs buildings that produce genetic mutations.
It's slam dunk ('hope I'm using Americanism correctly) proof of design. We couldn't ask for more really.
Yes, proof of design through evolutionary mechanisms.
You see to error check means you have a standard in MIND. Otherwise what's anything an error in relation to?
The standard is the other, complementary strand of DNA. That's it. And even then, errors still get passed on to the next generation and set a new "standard" for the next generation. The standard changes with every generation.

In a blind purposeless world there are no errors.
Which is why DNA "errors" are a needlessly anthropomorphized term. There are tons of these in science. Your point?

DNA has mind written all over it.
I see CAT written here and there, but have yet to see MIND. Please explain?
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#17 Dec 17, 2010
LGK wrote:
<quoted text>
Because they are different & always have been from the get go, the DNA error checking makes sure of that. Why then are there many variants WITHIN humans & WITHIN chimps you might ask? Well, that because correcting mechanism isn't 100% & needs room for error. I think engineers call this redundancy. It's slam dunk ('hope I'm using Americanism correctly) proof of design. We couldn't ask for more really.
Baseless claims based on incredulity remain so no matter how many times you repeat them.
LGK wrote:
You see to error check means you have a standard in MIND. Otherwise what's anything an error in relation to? In a blind purposeless world there are no errors. DNA has mind written all over it.
Really? Because "errors" are all a "blind purposeless world" are capable of, so you guys keep telling us.(shrug)

It's important to note that "errors" in this context is from the perspective of the outside observer (that would be us humans, as so far no other has been demonstrated). DNA self-replicates, but does so in an imperfect fashion. And despite "error correction" mechanisms, it doesn't prevent mutations from occurring. And for your claim that "things reproduce according with their kind", a COMPLETE prevention of mutations must be in place. Otherwise, by definition, DNA does NOT reproduce in "after it's own kind".

SO!

While we're here dealing with your baseless claims all over again, allow me once more to provide you with the vehicle that would change all that:

(ahem)

What exactly IS the "scientific theory" of ID/Creationism? Who or what is the creator and how can we tell? What mechanism did it use to do whatever it is you think it did and how can we tell? When and where did it do it? How is "design" quantified? How is Complex Specified Information (CSI) measured/quantified? What scientific observations can be made in regards to ID/Creationism? Why is this allegedly all-powerful universe-creating creator apparently incapable of such a simple thing like evolution and how were the "designer's" limits determined scientifically? What useful scientific predictions does ID/Creationism make? How can it be tested? How can it be falsified? Why do nearly all fundies lie and ignore anything they find theologically inconvenient? Why is it that every time I ask these questions that not one single fundie EVER wants to answer them?

Thanks in advance for your forthcoming non-answers. They are VERY informative. As usual.
The Dude

Wallasey, UK

#18 Dec 17, 2010
Erasmus05 wrote:
I see CAT written here and there, but have yet to see MIND. Please explain?
And LGK? MIND the KITTENS, for the CATS MIND.

http://www.funnycatsite.com/pictures/So_Sad_C...

Level 7

Since: Sep 07

La Quinta, CA

#19 Dec 17, 2010
LGK wrote:
It's slam dunk ('hope I'm using Americanism correctly) proof of design.
You aren't.

"Slam dunk" means a very high percentage score.

In this case, the proper term would be "not actually". Since we all know the crap you are talking about is completely made up.
LGK

Northampton, UK

#20 Dec 17, 2010
Erasmus 05
Humana are born with mutations because the code gets degraded with each reproductive cycle. Given enough of them, weíll be extinct. Of course no engineer designs a building with mutations Ė itís the PRINCIPLE of redundancy, not the detail that matters.

I find it strange that the standard is the complimentary strand. Thatís clever isnít it? Just assert it. I donít think so.

If the complimentary strand is standard, where did it come from? What was its standard? I think you have not explained the problem, just relocated it. Letís start again. Both strands are versions of the SAME code & error checking is to preserve that very same code.

What we now need to move on is an act of will, a will to admit. Admit Darwinism was an excellent theory, in 1859. But today, it just ainít true. Now Will is not changed by evidence or reasoning. It's purely voluntary, thatís why itís called Free Will. We uses it as we pleases.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 13
Next Last

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.

Evolution Debate Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 36 min tangled bank 168,043
News Why Atheist Richard Dawkins Supports Religious ... (Jun '17) 43 min Rose_NoHo 6,072
The Design of Time is Prophecy and is absolute ... 3 hr 15th Dalai Lama 33
What's your religion? (Sep '17) 7 hr Davidjayjordan 1,164
Illuminati Elite never studied 'evolutionary LU... 7 hr Davidjayjordan 6
Womans Birth Cycle absolutely Proves Design and... 21 hr Rose_NoHo 75
News Evolution debate vote (Mar '09) 21 hr WELL SAID 3,404