Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 222738 comments on the Best of New Orleans story from Jan 6, 2011, titled Evolution vs. Creation. In it, Best of New Orleans reports that:

High school senior Zack Kopplin is leading the fight to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Best of New Orleans.

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Gulgong, Australia

#106570 Nov 23, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
The truth about ENCODE and FUNCTIONALITY
By one of the researchers... 
"It was already known, for example, that vast portions of the genome are transcribed into RNA.  A small amount of that RNA encodes protein, and some serves a regulatory role, but the rest of it is chock-full of seemingly nonsensical repeats, remnants of past viruses and other weird little bits that shouldn’t serve a purpose.
http://blogs.nature.com/news/2012/09/fighting ... 
Read the whole article.Not that i expect this to arouse any dormant honesty you might have once had. Your repeated knuckle walking comments already confirm you as a deliberate liar who will claim anything to discredit the science you hate.
I have had enough of your sick and demented evos fluffing on forum. You are the one quote mining to detract from the substance of the article. You lying piece of excrement.

I can read as well as you can and the article states 80% functionality. A function is any function, be in regulatory or encoding.

You evos used to shove this rubbish about non functional junk down creos throats. Now you can suck eggs about it.

"The human genome encodes the blueprint of life, but the function of the vast majority of its nearly three billion bases is unknown. The Encyclopedia of DNA Elements (ENCODE) project has systematically mapped regions of transcription, transcription factor association, chromatin structure and histone modification. These data enabled us to assign biochemical functions for 80% of the genome, in particular outside of the well-studied protein-coding regions."

So you would care to take your foot out of your mouth and tell us what prediction TOE makes around non coding DNA? Ha ha! The answer is you lot thought TOE predicted left over useless junk, but now you are back tracking into buffoonery. Can TOE make a predition or not??????

2. The genome will be found to be fully functional. A creator has no need to put junk in the genome as evos predicted. So far we are up to a definite 80% and well credentialled researchers eg Gingeras from ENCODE, fully expect that to rise to 100%.

Here is what the researcher said...

And what’s in the remaining 20 percent? Possibly not junk either, according to Ewan Birney, the project’s Lead Analysis Coordinator and self-described “cat-herder-in-chief”. He explains that ENCODE only (!) looked at 147 types of cells, and the human body has a few thousand. A given part of the genome might control a gene in one cell type, but not others. If every cell is included, functions may emerge for the phantom proportion.“It’s likely that 80 percent will go to 100 percent,” says Birney.“We don’t really have any large chunks of redundant DNA. This metaphor of junk isn’t that useful.”

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketsc...

Just keep sucking eggs Chimney, and holding onto your faith, because all your struggling, accusations and tantrums are not going to change anything just because you know how to lie.

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Gulgong, Australia

#106571 Nov 23, 2013
So let's recap this 'science' you evos like to suggest you use. Certain predictions can be made from a creationist and evolutionary paradigm.

1. Adaptation is limited and organisms will remain in their familial cohorts. Evos require organisms with unlimited ability to adapt. What does the evidence suggest? All recent genomic research runs counter clockwise to evolutionary expectations and indeed there is plenty of biased data that supports the creo paradigm that the genome is restricted and limited in its ability to adapt from microbe to dinosaur. eg negative epistasis, majoority deleterious mutations, deteriorating genome. All evidence from breeders suggests a dog cannot be bred to be as big as a dinosaur.

2. The genome will be found to be fully functional. Evos need left over evolutionary junk. A creator has no need to put junk in the genome as evos predicted. What does the evidence suggest? So far we are up to a definite 80% and well credentialed researchers eg Gingeras from ENCODE, fully expect that to rise to 100%.

3. All organs will be found to have some function. A creator as no need to make functionless organs. Evos needed functionless organs. Creationists predictions are being validated with the evolutionary myth of 'NO function' being falsified. eg appendix, tail bone.

4. Organisms will be found to appear suddenly in the fossil record and in line with a documented account of the appearance of life. Evos require intermediates. Creo predictions continue to be valdiated. eg Tetrapods dated to 395mya, Cambrian explosion, punctuated equilibrium, animal life began in the sea.

Hence evolutionists would rather die than admit the evidence for creationism keeps mounting while evos continue to look silly with their flavours of the month and falsifications of previous claims.

Evo defaulting to the bluster of the majority is a fools talent. Evo empirical research based on algorithmic magic is only good for supporting the prevailing bias.

http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/...

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#106572 Nov 23, 2013
Poor Maz, she still has no clue as to junk DNA.

Just as vestigial organs can become new organs DNA can change its use to. The upshot is that most of the DNA with a new use is still "junk". In other words a huge section of DNA may only be a simple "switch" that could be replaced by a much shorter segment. Even your article says that junk DNA may have "functional elements". Creationism still cannot explain "junk DNA" without claiming that the "creator" is extremely incompetent.

Maz had changed grasping at straws into an art form. Her mad grabbing here and there let's her convince herself that she has won. The fact is that any of the people at project ENCODE would be laughing their asses off at her interpretation of their work.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#106573 Nov 23, 2013
MazHere wrote:
So let's recap this 'science' you evos like to suggest you use. Certain predictions can be made from a creationist and evolutionary paradigm.
1. Adaptation is limited and organisms will remain in their familial cohorts. Evos require organisms with unlimited ability to adapt. What does the evidence suggest? All recent genomic research runs counter clockwise to evolutionary expectations and indeed there is plenty of biased data that supports the creo paradigm that the genome is restricted and limited in its ability to adapt from microbe to dinosaur. eg negative epistasis, majoority deleterious mutations, deteriorating genome. All evidence from breeders suggests a dog cannot be bred to be as big as a dinosaur.
No, that is not supported by any research. You misinterpreted the research that shows there is a speed limit, but not a genetic destination limit on life.
2. The genome will be found to be fully functional. Evos need left over evolutionary junk. A creator has no need to put junk in the genome as evos predicted. What does the evidence suggest? So far we are up to a definite 80% and well credentialed researchers eg Gingeras from ENCODE, fully expect that to rise to 100%.
Ah, but that has not found to be the case. Again, even the "functional elephants" that you so proudly point at are minimally functional. Most of the "junk DNA" bits could be replaced by almost anything. That still makes the interior of the junk segments junk. You point out how scientists have to earn their funding. By overblowing the functionality of the genome p. E. hopes to keep the funds rolling in. The fact is that they would disagree with you.
3. All organs will be found to have some function. A creator as no need to make functionless organs. Evos needed functionless organs. Creationists predictions are being validated with the evolutionary myth of 'NO function' being falsified. eg appendix, tail bone.
And you misunderstand what a vestigial organ is. The appendix is vestigial in the sense that it is no longer used in digestion. Its original purpose. Your lungs are vestigial in the sense that if you never swam those old swim bladders would not be needed for flotation. New organs arise from old organs quite often.

You argument is a straw man argument since "no function" is not claimed.
4. Organisms will be found to appear suddenly in the fossil record and in line with a documented account of the appearance of life. Evos require intermediates. Creo predictions continue to be valdiated. eg Tetrapods dated to 395mya, Cambrian explosion, punctuated equilibrium, animal life began in the sea.
Hence evolutionists would rather die than admit the evidence for creationism keeps mounting while evos continue to look silly with their flavours of the month and falsifications of previous claims.
Evo defaulting to the bluster of the majority is a fools talent. Evo empirical research based on algorithmic magic is only good for supporting the prevailing bias.
http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/...
Sorry, but life appearing at all in the fossil record goes against the creationist account of the Bible. And since life appeared over many millions of years even in the Cambrian explosion that is not a problem for evolution at all.

Maz, you are unfortunately full of hot air. You are beginning to get boring since you repeat the same old debunked arguments.

You need a break, watch the video I linked at the top of this page.

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Gulgong, Australia

#106574 Nov 23, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
The brain itself has evolved though, so to a degree we are smarter.
This will become even more pronounced as we develop technology to enhance ourselves with cybernetics and mind machine interfacing.
It was discovered that we are more genetically different from the humans 10,000 years ago, than the humans 10,000 years ago were from neandertal. Evolution of the human race has accelerated because the increase in population size.
Well that explains it, especially as any hurry up done in the lab results in legs hanging off drosophila heads or a drop in fitness!

What you should say is your algorithmic magic that is always falsified over time can still be manipulated to support the prevailing bias, and has some guesswork to offer everyone.

"Comparisons of the map of each cluster’s network in each species plainly showed that certain connections exist in humans but not chimps. In the cortex, for example, 17.4% of the connections were specific to humans, Geschwind and co-workers reported in the 21 November 2006 Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences."

http://natzraya.com/New%20Folder/HumanApeDNA....

No doubt your researchers are able to continue the prevailing bias, given they have so many brains from our unknown and yet to be discovered chimp common ancestors.

The point is Aura, non human apes have different molecular machinery to mankind. Just because scientists can stain a hand full of enzymes and hammer a load of fragments into a biased alignment does not mean 'sameness'.

Difference Between Humans And Apes Linked To A Missing Oxygen Atom

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1998/09/...

http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/comm/steen/cogweb/...

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Lakeland, FL

#106575 Nov 23, 2013
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
I can, or have, posted research to back each and every claim I have made.
.
{snip of blah, blah, blah}
.
I agree, you have posted research. Followed immediately by posting a paper that claim most papers are wrong - which would include the ones you've posted.

You apparently have no feeling in your legs or you would have realized how badly you have shot yourself in the foot. Both feet really. More than once.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Lakeland, FL

#106577 Nov 23, 2013
The Dude wrote:
YOU? Maz, YOU are irrelevant. You're just a willfully ignorant uneducated mook who is being used by us as an example of monstrous stupidity - to great effect I might add. Reality sets the benchmark for EVERYONE. Then you ignore reality, lie constantly and we point it out. Simple.
Props!

“So it's not you, It's them?”

Level 9

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#106578 Nov 23, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey!!!
What's wrong with Conservapedia? They have come up with some very innovative explanations of life. For example take this article with a unique idea that explains how life may have returned to Australia after the flood. Ooh, and a video that helps:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =4mjmGbfyPPUXX&list=PLAC34 81305829426D
http://www.conservapedia.com/Post-Diluvian_Di...
That is one of my favorite Conservapedia pages. Yet CONs wonder why their religodogma lacks credibility with analytical, rational human beings? Projectile migration? That first bounce "down under" could have left a mark! LOL

“ad victoriam”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#106579 Nov 23, 2013
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
Well that explains it, especially as any hurry up done in the lab results in legs hanging off drosophila heads or a drop in fitness!
What you should say is your algorithmic magic that is always falsified over time can still be manipulated to support the prevailing bias, and has some guesswork to offer everyone.
"Comparisons of the map of each cluster’s network in each species plainly showed that certain connections exist in humans but not chimps. In the cortex, for example, 17.4% of the connections were specific to humans, Geschwind and co-workers reported in the 21 November 2006 Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences."
http://natzraya.com/New%20Folder/HumanApeDNA....
No doubt your researchers are able to continue the prevailing bias, given they have so many brains from our unknown and yet to be discovered chimp common ancestors.
The point is Aura, non human apes have different molecular machinery to mankind. Just because scientists can stain a hand full of enzymes and hammer a load of fragments into a biased alignment does not mean 'sameness'.
Difference Between Humans And Apes Linked To A Missing Oxygen Atom
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1998/09/...
http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/comm/steen/cogweb/...
You seem to think this refutes common ancestry, it doesn't. It merely points to an evolutionary difference.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Lakeland, FL

#106580 Nov 23, 2013
replaytime wrote:
I recently lost a 28 year old nephew to a stroke. He was very athletic, in college and the military. It made me realize why the hellll did I waste sooo much time on here discussing/arguing about how the fck we got here or how we got to where we are at. Life is about living it and enjoying all you can while you can. It can be gone in an instant and we never know when. I have said it before and I will say it again; you better believe I have questioned the man above many many times. You all have a good one and best to you all.
Keep your [email protected] comments and pity shyt to yourself. I am not looking for and don't want either.
RP, very sorry to hear about your nephew. My condolences and my best to you and your family.

I understand your feelings. The past 10 days have been very rough here. Several friends - some younger, so older - have passed away. My boss (and friend) just had a second brain tumor removed in the past three months.

Peace be with you.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Lakeland, FL

#106581 Nov 23, 2013
BTW, whoever put spam, clueless and nuts on RP's post can just STFU.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Lakeland, FL

#106582 Nov 23, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> An inventor must compulsorily have the right of ownership, true or false?
English was *not* invented, numbnutz.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Lakeland, FL

#106583 Nov 23, 2013
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> But an inventor do have the right of ownership, do you agree with that?
If English had been invented, yes. But it was *not* invented. You are making yet another pointless, totally stupid argument.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Lakeland, FL

#106584 Nov 23, 2013
SBT wrote:
<quoted text>
To repeat my point, "if its ancient its not primitive", you are confirming my point. In these ruins like Puma Punka, Baalbeck and others we see construction methods using stone that we the "advanced", cant duplicate. Our buildings are very young in relative age, watch what happens to our skyscrapers when there is an earthquake or a fire.
When you research the origin of such places they cant be explained with our science so the sources are what they are, they doc what they see and report. That's not wrong. The one I used fell into that category. If an author wants to take a guess thats his business and doesn't change the basis of my point concerning the facts. Such places are better explained with a Biblical worldview that is, man was advanced from the beginning, has been interrupted by self-destruction or judgements, and then rebounded in cycles.
Completely wrong. Starting with 'we the "advanced", cant duplicate'. Your whole argument is based on that but it's total crap.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Lakeland, FL

#106585 Nov 23, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey!!!
What's wrong with Conservapedia? They have come up with some very innovative explanations of life. For example take this article with a unique idea that explains how life may have returned to Australia after the flood. Ooh, and a video that helps:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =4mjmGbfyPPUXX&list=PLAC34 81305829426D
http://www.conservapedia.com/Post-Diluvian_Di...
Holy crap! That's hilarious! Volcanoes blew the critters all over the earth??? Astounding that anyone could actually think this possible.

LMAO!

“ad victoriam”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#106586 Nov 23, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Holy crap! That's hilarious! Volcanoes blew the critters all over the earth??? Astounding that anyone could actually think this possible.
LMAO!
I don't know whether to laugh hysterically , or to cry uncontrollably.

“ad victoriam”

Level 8

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#106587 Nov 23, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Holy crap! That's hilarious! Volcanoes blew the critters all over the earth??? Astounding that anyone could actually think this possible.
LMAO!
It maybe evidence we are indeed descendants of arboreal monkeys.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Lakeland, FL

#106588 Nov 23, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> I don't know whether to laugh hysterically , or to cry uncontrollably.
Me neither.

I can just imagine all the bunnies, kolas and such calmly sitting in a pyroclastic flow waiting to get blown back home.

Level 1

Since: Jul 12

Gulgong, Australia

#106589 Nov 23, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> You seem to think this refutes common ancestry, it doesn't. It merely points to an evolutionary difference.
Here we go again with another bizarre reply from you. I did not say differing ape/human molecular machinery, missing oxygen molecule, refutes common ancestry. We all know evos would be happy to offer great leaps of faith about the first homonid to loose expression of an oxygen molecule and survive the mutation. The data does give you evos something else to guesswork over and bring into the evo fold like a plethora of others eg Y chromosome.

A monkey/gorilla/orang is less like a chimp than a human only if you are content to appear non plausibly ridiculous and suggest genetic distance refers to genetic closeness and ancestry. It cannot possibly be the case, genetically or morphologically, that a monkey/gorilla is comparatively LESS gentically similar to a chimp than a human. Something is very amiss with evos ability to reflect 'similarity'!

By circular reasoning what ever organism is closest to mankind after hammering genes together bootstrapped to the prevailing bias, algorithmic magic will provide data suggesting genetic distances that actually mean nothing. Evos have done well to maintain that status by manipulating data and its reporting to support the prevailing bias in comparative genomics.

When researchers started coming up with reporting genomic data that suggested a chimp is genetically closer to mankind than a monkey or gorilla, and actually accepted it as having substantive scientific meaning, was the day 'science' lost its mind.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Lakeland, FL

#106590 Nov 23, 2013
Heads up! It's going to start raining Sicilians!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/article-251...

And fish! LOTS of fish!

http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/22/world/asia/japa...

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.

Weird Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Denny Crain's Place (May '10) 3 min Goku Black 27,307
True False Game (Jun '11) 7 min Geno 15,563
Things That Are Solid,... 28 min Rosa 133
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 1 hr Weird 223,335
First Word That Comes To Mind ....... (Apr '10) 1 hr Humor 13,168
'Double Letter S' (Dec '12) 2 hr Crazy Jae 871
Let's Play Songs Titled with Two Words ... (Nov '14) 2 hr wichita-rick 2,557
Poll What are you thinking right now? (May '08) 4 hr Crazy Jae 6,038
More from around the web