Don't dictate beliefs

Sep 5, 2012 Full story: The Star Press 11,175

No one else can say otherwise? That is basically saying those who do "believe in God" are better? Hardly.

Full Story
KJV

United States

#11432 Jan 16, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>And another type of 'micro-evolution' is where genes duplicate. This *does* produce 'new DNA'. And yet another type of 'micro-evolution' is when the genes change at a single spot. This can change the nature of the protein encoded by the DNA.
I have not been able to find any documentation on new DNA found anywhere accept for that synthetic DNA made in a test tube. Do you know of any new DNA found in nature?
Thinking

Leighton Buzzard, UK

#11433 Jan 16, 2013
Bollocks.
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
Micro evolution is the mere turning on or off genes that already exist. Note the Russian Silver Fox on going 50+ year old study.
http://m.genome.cshlp.org/content/17/3/259.fu...
"The Farm-Fox Experiment, as it has become known, is, in essence, a fast-forwarded reconstruction of man’s first exercise in domestication"
So you believe you're better educated on the subject of evolution then
Berkeley's evolution team?
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/arti...
"Evolution at different scales: micro to macro
by the Understanding Evolution team
Evolution encompasses changes of vastly different scales — from something as insignificant as an increase in the frequency of thegene for dark wings in beetles from one generation to the next, to something as grand as the evolution and radiation of the dinosaurlineage. These two extremes represent classic examples of micro- and macroevolution.
Microevolution happens on a small scale (within a single population), while macroevolution happens on a scale that transcends the boundaries of a single species. Despite their differences, evolution at both of these levels relies on the same, established mechanisms of evolutionary change:"
KJV

United States

#11434 Jan 16, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>It seems that you, like many creationists, have the idea that evolution means that a cat will give birth to a dog. That is not what it means, nor was it ever what it means.
Macro evolution is the evolution of one kind to a whole new kind. I'm aware it takes along time, but at some point there has to be a line in the sand where the old kind ends and the new kind starts.
Again the only data on evolution that's been documented that I have seen has been the simple turning on or off genes. In lab creation of new genes ( not in nature ) and a test tube new DNA (again not in nature).
Thinking

Leighton Buzzard, UK

#11436 Jan 16, 2013
You're dumb.
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
Macro evolution is the evolution of one kind to a whole new kind. I'm aware it takes along time, but at some point there has to be a line in the sand where the old kind ends and the new kind starts.
Again the only data on evolution that's been documented that I have seen has been the simple turning on or off genes. In lab creation of new genes ( not in nature ) and a test tube new DNA (again not in nature).
KJV

United States

#11437 Jan 16, 2013
Thinking wrote:
<quoted text>Bollocks.
No, Berkeley's evolution team!
I don't make this stuff up. Your science has labeled the difference. So eat a few more of your goat bollocks.
Thinking

Leighton Buzzard, UK

#11438 Jan 16, 2013
I don't eat bollocks because I don't believe in your god.
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
No, Berkeley's evolution team!
I don't make this stuff up. Your science has labeled the difference. So eat a few more of your goat bollocks.

“There is no Truth in Faith”

Since: Dec 08

nowhere near a pound of $100's

#11439 Jan 16, 2013
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
Macro evolution is the evolution of one kind to a whole new kind. I'm aware it takes along time, but at some point there has to be a line in the sand where the old kind ends and the new kind starts.
Again the only data on evolution that's been documented that I have seen has been the simple turning on or off genes. In lab creation of new genes ( not in nature ) and a test tube new DNA (again not in nature).
Not true at all. Have you ever seen a color wheel? At what point exactly, does green become blue?
http://www.webdesign.org/img_articles/15053/C...

That's how evolution works. The difference between each element and its predecessor is minute. But over many generations, blue could become red.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#11441 Jan 16, 2013
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong.
Wrong.
Wrong.
Micro evolution is the mere turning on or off genes that already exist. Note the Russian Silver Fox on going 50+ year old study.
http://m.genome.cshlp.org/content/17/3/259.fu...
"The Farm-Fox Experiment, as it has become known, is, in essence, a fast-forwarded reconstruction of man’s first exercise in domestication"
So you believe you're better educated on the subject of evolution then
Berkeley's evolution team?
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/arti...
"Evolution at different scales: micro to macro
by the Understanding Evolution team
Evolution encompasses changes of vastly different scales — from something as insignificant as an increase in the frequency of thegene for dark wings in beetles from one generation to the next, to something as grand as the evolution and radiation of the dinosaurlineage. These two extremes represent classic examples of micro- and macroevolution.
Microevolution happens on a small scale (within a single population), while macroevolution happens on a scale that transcends the boundaries of a single species. Despite their differences, evolution at both of these levels relies on the same, established mechanisms of evolutionary change:"
You know less about evolution than even I gave you credit for.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#11440 Jan 16, 2013
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
Macro evolution is the evolution of one kind to a whole new kind. I'm aware it takes along time, but at some point there has to be a line in the sand where the old kind ends and the new kind starts.
And this is where your reasoning goes wrong. Look at my penny analogy. What is the 'line in the sand' where the amount of money in the pile goes from 'not a lot' to 'a lot'? The point is that there *isn't* such a line. The transition is gradual. In exactly the same way, each generation to the next would be 'micro-evolution'. There is no 'Big Jump' between any two generations. Where we draw the line is *our* choice for ease of language and not a part of the actual process.
Again the only data on evolution that's been documented that I have seen has been the simple turning on or off genes. In lab creation of new genes ( not in nature ) and a test tube new DNA (again not in nature).
Gene duplication is quite common. We have seen it in action in plants and seen the effects in animals (the globin family of proteins, for example).

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#11442 Jan 16, 2013
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
Macro evolution is the evolution of one kind to a whole new kind. I'm aware it takes along time, but at some point there has to be a line in the sand where the old kind ends and the new kind starts.
Again the only data on evolution that's been documented that I have seen has been the simple turning on or off genes. In lab creation of new genes ( not in nature ) and a test tube new DNA (again not in nature).
read and learn:

http://scholar.google.com/scholar...
KJV

United States

#11444 Jan 16, 2013
Ooogah Boogah wrote:
<quoted text>Not true at all. Have you ever seen a color wheel? At what point exactly, does green become blue?
http://www.webdesign.org/img_articles/15053/C...

That's how evolution works. The difference between each element and its predecessor is minute. But over many generations, blue could become red.
There is a point where the shade of blue stops and the shade of green starts.

Say you are ten feet from a brick wall and every second to move half way to the wall. When do to touch the wall?
KJV

United States

#11445 Jan 16, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>You know less about evolution than even I gave you credit for.
Tell it to Berkeley's evolution team.

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/arti...

Or the Russians working on the silver fox experiment longer then you've been alive.
KJV

United States

#11446 Jan 16, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>And this is where your reasoning goes wrong. Look at my penny analogy. What is the 'line in the sand' where the amount of money in the pile goes from 'not a lot' to 'a lot'? The point is that there *isn't* such a line. The transition is gradual. In exactly the same way, each generation to the next would be 'micro-evolution'. There is no 'Big Jump' between any two generations. Where we draw the line is *our* choice for ease of language and not a part of the actual process.

[QUOTE]Again the only data on evolution that's been documented that I have seen has been the simple turning on or off genes. In lab creation of new genes ( not in nature ) and a test tube new DNA (again not in nature).
"

Gene duplication is quite common. We have seen it in action in plants and seen the effects in animals (the globin family of proteins, for example).
Yes but show me and the world the new DNA created in nature.( there is none documented to date )
KJV

United States

#11447 Jan 16, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>read and learn:

http://scholar.google.com/scholar...
I've read that, now where is the new DNA created in nature? Still none.

“There is no such thing”

Since: May 08

as a reasonable person

#11448 Jan 16, 2013
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes turning on and off genes that are all ready there is micro evolution and yes that does take place. No new DNA created. No changing from one kind of animal to another.
Here is some fun stuff for ya.
http://cleverbot.com/
http://www.youtube.com/playlist...
Adam

Stoke-on-trent, UK

#11449 Jan 17, 2013
Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
Basically if you grovel before their deity enough then he won't punish you with eternal torment, and they call this "salvation."
It's a psychotic mythology.
Nicely put. Its an amoral. No one with any principles who has thought it through, could accept such an absurd propisition as heaven and hell.
Thinking

Leighton Buzzard, UK

#11450 Jan 17, 2013
That's because bollocks exist whilst your god does not.
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
One has nothing to do with the other.

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: May 08

Atlanta, Georgia

#11451 Jan 17, 2013
Adam wrote:
<quoted text>
Nicely put. Its an amoral. No one with any principles who has thought it through, could accept such an absurd propisition as heaven and hell.
No, it's immoral. Science is amoral.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#11452 Jan 17, 2013
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
I've read that, now where is the new DNA created in nature? Still none.
Several of those papers showed exactly that. It is common in plants and less common in animals.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#11453 Jan 17, 2013
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
Tell it to Berkeley's evolution team.
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/arti...
Or the Russians working on the silver fox experiment longer then you've been alive.
It's called an arbitrary label, since very few people can ever determine any real defining line between species, when a species becomes a completely different one is often just considered when they can no longer breed with the one referenced. The more we fill in the taxonomic tree, using the fossil record and genetics, the blurrier the lines between species get. The human line is so difficult to tell where one species ends and the next begins that they are having a hard time figuring out the specific order without utilizing genetics.

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.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Atheism vs. Theism: Knowns and Unknowns 40 min woodtick57 36
Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038 (Apr '12) 1 hr fadu singh 21,904
An atheist returns to Christ (Jan '09) 1 hr Patrick 4,083
How much faith it takes to believe in Evolution. 2 hr Patrick 176
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 2 hr Eagle 12 227,297
What Bums Me Out Most About Being an Atheist 2 hr californio 88
The Ultimate Evidence of God 4 hr susanblange 119
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••

Atheism People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••