Mike Krailo
Well-known member
- Local time
- Today, 10:34
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2020
- Messages
- 1,042
Doc, we are not in disagreement over the basics of evolution as it pertains to small benificial changes in beneficial traits that make a given life form better or more able to survive. It's those big jumps I have a problem with.
Jon, God is not intrinsically part of the world or the universe you see when looking at pics from the Hubble Telescope, but there could be some way that he holds it all together to ground all observable entities into reality. What I'm saying is that the universe is not an accident. The reason I made a big deal about something cannot come from nothing is relative to us humans thinking that we can create life in the form of a single cell that replicates or that it happened by accident without a creator. A cell is something easier to talk about since I am no astrophysicist. Did you look at the last link I posted? The link before that one is even easier to understand to get a better perspective.
Also I'm not saying that i don't believe in the basic concept in evolution where a cell or organism over time takes on properties that enhance it's own survival. But a fruit fly has always been a fruit fly since its creation or until it's extinction. It doesn't turn into a human over time. This is all part of the genetic code for all living things. That means that the creation of living things has no common ancestor. The biological sequence in each type of living thing is predetermined just like the code we write makes a program work a specific way. Code doesn't write itself but the code does allow for small genetic traces that are good for it to be passed on to generations. That part of evolution I have no problem with. It's when you jump to the crazy conclusion that there are jumps from one species to another where it becomes rubbish. That is not how cells replicate within species. Ask any biologist how that happens? Small changes are just that. SMALL. The basic phenotype is always replicated during that process.
Taken from your article, they make mention of 50,000 fly wings as an example of evolution. This is exactly what I'm talking about when I say that the genetic code does allow for these small mutations based on what is best for the species. I do not deny that. What I do take issue with is the idea that a fruit fly can somehow over time evolve into a human or any other completely different species. Or the big one, that all phenotypes came from one cell that came from one accidental primordial soup of time. That's just not possible because in is not in the genetic code of the species.
You will take note that all and I mean ALL biological creatures that can fly naturally in the air have WINGS. They don't have jetpacks. They never had jetpacks and never will have jetpacks or any other type of mechanism to fly other than some type of wings. Usually there are two of them for birds and some even amount in the insect world. These are unchangeable on their own naturally as a part of the genetic code for all life.
That the self evident design behind these amazing forms of life can generate on their own through evolution (this is the crazy part of evolution that I do not believe) has to be reduced to a powerful illusion by people like R. Dawkins. To me this is part that should make it self evident.
Great, a non scientist, non biologist telling us that DNA code isn't interpreted by anything. That's not true, there could not be a replication of the basic phenotype without the DNA sequence being interpreted by something. Otherwise what's the point in having a code at all.
BTW, I wasn't feeling good today and it ends up I have tested positive for C19. So I might take it easy on the God debate. Just a low grade fever so I don't think it's too bad.
Jon, God is not intrinsically part of the world or the universe you see when looking at pics from the Hubble Telescope, but there could be some way that he holds it all together to ground all observable entities into reality. What I'm saying is that the universe is not an accident. The reason I made a big deal about something cannot come from nothing is relative to us humans thinking that we can create life in the form of a single cell that replicates or that it happened by accident without a creator. A cell is something easier to talk about since I am no astrophysicist. Did you look at the last link I posted? The link before that one is even easier to understand to get a better perspective.
Also I'm not saying that i don't believe in the basic concept in evolution where a cell or organism over time takes on properties that enhance it's own survival. But a fruit fly has always been a fruit fly since its creation or until it's extinction. It doesn't turn into a human over time. This is all part of the genetic code for all living things. That means that the creation of living things has no common ancestor. The biological sequence in each type of living thing is predetermined just like the code we write makes a program work a specific way. Code doesn't write itself but the code does allow for small genetic traces that are good for it to be passed on to generations. That part of evolution I have no problem with. It's when you jump to the crazy conclusion that there are jumps from one species to another where it becomes rubbish. That is not how cells replicate within species. Ask any biologist how that happens? Small changes are just that. SMALL. The basic phenotype is always replicated during that process.
Taken from your article, they make mention of 50,000 fly wings as an example of evolution. This is exactly what I'm talking about when I say that the genetic code does allow for these small mutations based on what is best for the species. I do not deny that. What I do take issue with is the idea that a fruit fly can somehow over time evolve into a human or any other completely different species. Or the big one, that all phenotypes came from one cell that came from one accidental primordial soup of time. That's just not possible because in is not in the genetic code of the species.
You will take note that all and I mean ALL biological creatures that can fly naturally in the air have WINGS. They don't have jetpacks. They never had jetpacks and never will have jetpacks or any other type of mechanism to fly other than some type of wings. Usually there are two of them for birds and some even amount in the insect world. These are unchangeable on their own naturally as a part of the genetic code for all life.
That the self evident design behind these amazing forms of life can generate on their own through evolution (this is the crazy part of evolution that I do not believe) has to be reduced to a powerful illusion by people like R. Dawkins. To me this is part that should make it self evident.
Great, a non scientist, non biologist telling us that DNA code isn't interpreted by anything. That's not true, there could not be a replication of the basic phenotype without the DNA sequence being interpreted by something. Otherwise what's the point in having a code at all.
BTW, I wasn't feeling good today and it ends up I have tested positive for C19. So I might take it easy on the God debate. Just a low grade fever so I don't think it's too bad.
