The Genesis Conflict - 101 - The Earth in Time and Space

[LOki]

No you lost it because I took it from you.

Don't Stop Believin'

Right just keep lying to yourself.

It's time for you to sober up, cupcake.

The booze is writing checks your brains can't cash.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Don't Stop Believin'

Right just keep lying to yourself.

It's time for you to sober up, cupcake.

The booze is writing checks your brains can't cash.

hey fruit loop good thing for you if I was drunk, you need all the help you can get.

 

[LOki]

Right just keep lying to yourself.

It's time for you to sober up, cupcake.

The booze is writing checks your brains can't cash.

hey fruit loop good thing for you if I was drunk, you need all the help you can get.

Your dumb is obvious from a mile away--your drunk doesn't make your dumb any more (or less) obvious.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Yes,not by adapting though. they just ignore this evidence.

Ah yes. Your other infamous ignorance on the topic of evolution: believing that adaptation is individual. Evolution in no way purposely creates mutations in response to the environment so that the organism can adapt. Evolution creates mutations which change the offspring of the organism, and those offspring that happen to be better adapted to the environment pass on their better-adapted genes.

So, it's not that actual scientists ignore bad mutations. Is that ignorant people such as yourself propagate their misunderstanding of the topic they condemn but don't grasp.

Hey YWC: how many times do you think someone will need to point out you continuously get the topic wrong before you figure out perhaps you don't actually know what you're talking about?

Good effects from mutations ? there should be a long list of these if mutations are the cause of macro-evolution making things better. Can you give me that list of good effects again ?

Another of your usual challenges. I've given you a list previously. You ignore them all, claiming they are either not macro-evolution, or don't count. Why is it that you feel the need to specify good effects of mutations must only be macro-evolution? Oh that's right: because you know you're wrong and need to continually drag the topic to your made up moving goalpost definition of evolution.

So let's use a simple example: antibiotic resistance. It's a mutation in bacteria that gives it a beneficial effect. Then it can go on to mutate and gain resistance to two antibiotics, and three. Some bacteria will mutate to have faster transportation, and use different forms of energy. All of these are cumulative. So clearly numerous beneficial mutations are possible. Here's your squirm question you'll avoid again: how many beneficial mutations differentiate between micro and macro evolution in your universe? Again, I'm not talking about "kinds" or "types" or any other vague undefined language you use to muddy the waters. I'm purely talking about the number of mutations required.

And this is precisely the defensive non-answer answer that I'm speaking of.

Can you counter with a summation of your side's version of the events I just did then? I tried to sum it up nice and neat and succinct, but you're stating that I'm being dishonest. Please correct me. If it's all wrong, then please present a nice succinct summation of the events.

Thanks.

I missed the start of this, but I'd be happy to explain whatever set of events you'd like. What are you looking for?

You calling someone ignorant when you don't have a clue about mutations, other then what you read in a textbook.

Listen i can't help it you don't understand when mutations cause a change at all ,it is usually harmful to the organism and if that harmful mutation gets passed on to offspring it can just keep speading through the population. Thank Goodness God put a mechanism in there to correct many genetic mistakes or we would eventually go extinct.

We have over 4,500 genetic disorders and the number is growing. You point to bacteria building resistence to antibiotics as evolution. No it is simply adapting all living organisms have that ability.

Do you really understand bacteria building antibiotic resistence ?



Antibiotic Resistance of Bacteria: An Example of Evolution in Action?


by Georgia Purdom, Ph.D.

July 10, 2007



Bacteria are single-celled microorganisms, and most bacterial species are either spherical (called cocci) or rod-shaped (called bacilli). The 3D rendering on the left shows bacilli bacteria.

The extraordinary ability of certain bacteria to develop resistance to antibiotics—which are otherwise useful in speeding recovery from some illnesses—has been a hot topic on the minds of doctors, hospital staff, reporters, and the general public for several years. It is also heralded as a textbook example of evolution in action.

These bacteria are being studied by evolutionary scientists with the hope that they will reveal secrets as to how molecules-to-man evolution could have happened.

But are bacteria really evolving?

Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria

Antibiotics are natural substances secreted by bacteria and fungi to kill other bacteria that are competing for limited nutrients. (The antibiotics used to treat people today are typically derivatives of these natural products.) Scientists are dismayed to discover that some bacteria have become resistant to antibiotics through various alterations, or mutations, in their DNA.

Hospitals have become a breeding ground for antibiotic resistant bacteria. These bacteria proliferate in an environment filled with sick people who have poor immune systems and where antibiotics have eliminated competing bacteria that are not resistant.

Bacteria that are resistant to modern antibiotics have even been found in the frozen bodies of people who died long before those antibiotics were discovered or synthesized.1

History of Antibiotic Resistance

Antibiotics were first discovered through a providential experiment by Alexander Fleming in 1928. His work eventually led to the large-scale production of penicillin from the mold Penicillium notatum in the 1940s. As early as the late 1940s resistant strains of bacteria began to appear.2 Currently, it is estimated that more than 70% of the bacteria that cause hospital-acquired infections are resistant to at least one of the antibiotics used to treat them.3

Antibiotic resistance continues to expand for a multitude of reasons, including over-prescription of antibiotics by physicians, non-completion of prescribed antibiotic treatments by patients, use of antibiotics in animals as growth enhancers (primarily by the food industry), increased international travel, and poor hospital hygiene.2

How Do Bacteria Become Resistant?

Bacteria can gain resistance through two primary ways:

1. By mutation, and

2. By using a built-in design feature to swap DNA (called horizontal gene transfer)—bacteria share resistance genes.

An antibiotic kills a bacterial cell by simply disrupting a critical function. This is achieved in the cell in much the same way that a saboteur can cause a massive jetliner to crash by simply cutting the hydraulic lines.


Antibiotic resistance of bacteria only leads to a loss of functional systems. Evolution requires a gain of functional systems for bacteria to evolve into man.

The antibiotic binds to a protein so that the protein cannot function properly. The normal protein is usually involved in copying the DNA, making proteins, or making the bacterial cell wall—all important functions for the bacteria to grow and reproduce.

If the bacteria have a mutation in the DNA which codes for one of those proteins, the antibiotic cannot bind to the altered protein; and the mutant bacteria survive. In the presence of antibiotics, the process of natural selection will occur, favoring the survival and reproduction of the mutant bacteria. (The mutant bacteria are better able to survive in the presence of the antibiotic and will continue to cause illness in the patient.)

Although the mutant bacteria can survive well in the hospital environment, the change has come at a cost. The altered protein is less efficient in performing its normal function, making the bacteria less fit in an environment without antibiotics. Typically, the non-mutant bacteria are better able to compete for resources and reproduce faster than the mutant form.

Let’s look at a famous example to help clarify this. During the anthrax scare shortly after the September 11, 2001, attacks in the U.S., Ciprofloxacin (Cipro) was given to potential victims. Cipro belongs to a family of antibiotics known as quinolones, which bind to a bacterial protein called gyrase, decreasing the ability of the bacteria to reproduce. This allows the body’s natural immune defenses to overtake the infectious bacteria as they are reproducing at a slower rate. Quinolone-resistant bacteria have mutations in the genes encoding the gyrase protein. The mutant bacteria survive because the Cipro cannot bind to the altered gyrase.

This comes at a cost as quinolone-resistant bacteria reproduce more slowly.4, 5, 6 Resistance to this family of antibiotics is becoming a major problem with one type of bacteria which causes food poisoning. This bacteria increased its resistance to quinolones 10-fold in just five years.7

Bacteria can also become antibiotic resistant by gaining mutated DNA from other bacteria. Unlike you and me, bacteria can swap DNA. But this still is not an example of evolution in action. No new DNA is generated (a requirement for molecules-to-man evolution), it is just moved around. It’s like taking money from your left pocket and putting it into your right pocket—it doesn’t make you wealthier. This mechanism of exchanging DNA is necessary for bacteria to survive in extreme or rapidly changing environments like a hospital (or like those found shortly after the Flood).8

What Does It Really Prove?

The mechanisms of mutation and natural selection aid bacteria populations in becoming resistant to antibiotics. However, mutation and natural selection also result in bacteria with defective proteins that have lost their normal functions.

Evolution requires a gain of functional systems for bacteria to evolve into man—functioning arms, eyeballs, and a brain, to name a few.

Mutation and natural selection, thought to be the driving forces of evolution, only lead to a loss of functional systems. Therefore, antibiotic resistance of bacteria is not an example of evolution in action but rather variation within a bacterial kind. It is also a testimony to the wonderful design God gave bacteria, master adapters and survivors in a sin-cursed world.

Are all bacteria bad? Visit www.answersmagazine.com/go/bacteria-good-or-bad to find out.


Dr. Georgia Purdom earned her doctorate from Ohio State University in molecular genetics and spent six years as a professor of biology at Mt. Vernon Nazarene University. She is now a researcher and writer for Answers in Genesis-US, and she teaches online courses for Answers Education Online.

Antibiotic Resistance of Bacteria: An Example of Evolution in Action? - Answers in Genesis

I posted this for others to read because I know you won't.

I'm gonna post another article to so people can see through your Baloney.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Hey HICK ,here are a few more articles you might want to read and discuss it will help you with your faulty reasoning you have been taught.

Antibiotic Resistance and Evolution

Bacterial Resistance to Antibiotics
One of the biological concepts that evolutionists try to present as evidence for their theory is the resistance of bacteria to antibiotics. Many evolutionist sources mention antibiotic resistance as "an example of the development of living things by advantageous mutations." A similar claim is also made for the insects which build immunity to insecticides such as DDT.

However, evolutionists are mistaken on this subject too.

Antibiotics are "killer molecules" that are produced by microorganisms to fight other microorganisms. The first antibiotic was penicillin, discovered by Alexander Fleming in 1928. Fleming realized that mould produced a molecule that killed the Staphylococcus bacterium, and this discovery marked a turning point in the world of medicine. Antibiotics derived from microorganisms were used against bacteria and the results were successful.

Soon, something new was discovered. Bacteria build immunity to antibiotics over time. The mechanism works like this: A large proportion of the bacteria that are subjected to antibiotics die, but some others, which are not affected by that antibiotic, replicate rapidly and soon make up the whole population. Thus, the entire population becomes immune to antibiotics.

Evolutionists try to present this as "the evolution of bacteria by adapting to conditions."

The truth, however, is very different from this superficial interpretation. One of the scientists who has done the most detailed research into this subject is the Israeli biophysicist Lee Spetner, who is also known for his book Not by Chance published in 1997. Spetner maintains that the immunity of bacteria comes about by two different mechanisms, but neither of them constitutes evidence for the theory of evolution. These two mechanisms are:

1) The transfer of resistance genes already extant in bacteria.

2) The building of resistance as a result of losing genetic data because of mutation.

Professor Spetner explains the first mechanism in an article published in 2001:

Some microorganisms are endowed with genes that grant resistance to these antibiotics. This resistance can take the form of degrading the antibiotic molecule or of ejecting it from the cell... [T]he organisms having these genes can transfer them to other bacteria making them resistant as well. Although the resistance mechanisms are specific to a particular antibiotic, most pathogenic bacteria have... succeeded in accumulating several sets of genes granting them resistance to a variety of antibiotics.306

Spetner then goes on to say that this is not "evidence for evolution":

The acquisition of antibiotic resistance in this manner... is not the kind that can serve as a prototype for the mutations needed to account for Evolution… The genetic changes that could illustrate the theory must not only add information to the bacterium's genome, they must add new information to the biocosm. The horizontal transfer of genes only spreads around genes that are already in some species.307

So, we cannot talk of any evolution here, because no new genetic information is produced: genetic information that already exists is simply transferred between bacteria.

The second type of immunity, which comes about as a result of mutation, is not an example of evolution either. Spetner writes:

... [A] microorganism can sometimes acquire resistance to an antibiotic through a random substitution of a single nucleotide... Streptomycin, which was discovered by Selman Waksman and Albert Schatz and first reported in 1944, is an antibiotic against which bacteria can acquire resistance in this way. But although the mutation they undergo in the process is beneficial to the microorganism in the presence of streptomycin, it cannot serve as a prototype for the kind of mutations needed by NDT [Neo-Darwinian Theory]. The type of mutation that grants resistance to streptomycin is manifest in the ribosome and degrades its molecular match with the antibiotic molecule.308


Bacteria quickly become immune to antibiotics by transferring their resistance genes to one another. The picture above shows a colony of E. coli bacteria.
In his book Not by Chance, Spetner likens this situation to the disturbance of the key-lock relationship. Streptomycin, just like a key that perfectly fits in a lock, clutches on to the ribosome of a bacterium and inactivates it. Mutation, on the other hand, decomposes the ribosome, thus preventing streptomycin from holding on to the ribosome. Although this is interpreted as "bacteria developing immunity against streptomycin," this is not a benefit for the bacteria but rather a loss for it. Spetner writes:

This change in the surface of the microorganism's ribosome prevents the streptomycin molecule from attaching and carrying out its antibiotic function. It turns out that this degradation is a loss of specificity and therefore a loss of information. The main point is that Evolution… cannot be achieved by mutations of this sort, no matter how many of them there are. Evolution cannot be built by accumulating mutations that only degrade specificity.309

To sum up, a mutation impinging on a bacterium's ribosome makes that bacterium resistant to streptomycin. The reason for this is the "decomposition" of the ribosome by mutation. That is, no new genetic information is added to the bacterium. On the contrary, the structure of the ribosome is decomposed, that is to say, the bacterium becomes "disabled." (Also, it has been discovered that the ribosome of the mutated bacterium is less functional than that of a normal bacterium.) Since this "disability" prevents the antibiotic from attaching onto the ribosome, "antibiotic resistance" develops.

Finally, there is no example of mutation that "develops the genetic information." Evolutionists, who want to present antibiotic resistance as evidence for evolution, treat the issue in a very superficial way and are thus mistaken.

The same situation holds true for the immunity that insects develop to DDT and similar insecticides. In most of these instances, immunity genes that already exist are used. The evolutionary biologist Francisco Ayala admits this fact, saying, "The genetic variants required for resistance to the most diverse kinds of pesticides were apparently present in every one of the populations exposed to these man-made compounds."310 Some other examples explained by mutation, just as with the ribosome mutation mentioned above, are phenomena that cause "genetic information deficit" in insects.

In this case, it cannot be claimed that the immunity mechanisms in bacteria and insects constitute evidence for the theory of evolution. That is because the theory of evolution is based on the assertion that living things develop through mutations. However, Spetner explains that neither antibiotic immunity nor any other biological phenomena indicate such an example of mutation:

The mutations needed for macroevolution have never been observed. No random mutations that could represent the mutations required by Neo-Darwinian Theory that have been examined on the molecular level have added any information. The question I address is: Are the mutations that have been observed the kind the theory needs for support? The answer turns out to be NO!311

Darwinism Refuted.com

306 Dr. Lee Spetner, "Lee Spetner/Edward Max Dialogue: Continuing an exchange with Dr. Edward E. Max," 2001, Dr. Lee Spetner's continued exchange with Dr. Edward E. Max
307 Dr. Lee Spetner, "Lee Spetner/Edward Max Dialogue: Continuing an exchange with Dr. Edward E. Max," 2001, Dr. Lee Spetner's continued exchange with Dr. Edward E. Max
308 Dr. Lee Spetner, "Lee Spetner/Edward Max Dialogue: Continuing an exchange with Dr. Edward E. Max," 2001, Dr. Lee Spetner's continued exchange with Dr. Edward E. Max
309 Dr. Lee Spetner, "Lee Spetner/Edward Max Dialogue: Continuing an exchange with Dr. Edward E. Max," 2001, Dr. Lee Spetner's continued exchange with Dr. Edward E. Max
310 Francisco J. Ayala, "The Mechanisms of Evolution," Scientific American, Vol. 239, September 1978, p. 64.
311 Dr. Lee Spetner, "Lee Spetner/Edward Max Dialogue: Continuing an exchange with Dr. Edward E. Max," 2001, Dr. Lee Spetner's continued exchange with Dr. Edward E. Max


You should really read up on Dr. Spetners argumement again'st Neo darwinism.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

It's time for you to sober up, cupcake.

The booze is writing checks your brains can't cash.

hey fruit loop good thing for you if I was drunk, you need all the help you can get.

Your dumb is obvious from a mile away--your drunk doesn't make your dumb any more (or less) obvious.

Fruit loop I am neither drunk today, nor have I been stupid. Now what is your excuse?

 

[LOki]

hey fruit loop good thing for you if I was drunk, you need all the help you can get.

Your dumb is obvious from a mile away--your drunk doesn't make your dumb any more (or less) obvious.

Fruit loop I am neither drunk today, nor have I been stupid. Now what is your excuse?

Denial of reality: the refuge of the superstitious.

Cupcake, you've been dumb as long as I've known about you. Has someone explained for you the difference between mutation and adaptation yet? Or are you still too fascinated by the taste of the windows on the short-bus that takes you to Sunday school to pay attention?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Your dumb is obvious from a mile away--your drunk doesn't make your dumb any more (or less) obvious.

Fruit loop I am neither drunk today, nor have I been stupid. Now what is your excuse?

Denial of reality: the refuge of the superstitious.

Cupcake, you've been dumb as long as I've known about you. Has someone explained for you the difference between mutation and adaptation yet? Or are you still too fascinated by the taste of the windows on the short-bus that takes you to Sunday school to pay attention?

Fruit loop I live here in the U.S. unlike you you live in denial.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Fruit loop I am neither drunk today, nor have I been stupid. Now what is your excuse?

Denial of reality: the refuge of the superstitious.

Cupcake, you've been dumb as long as I've known about you. Has someone explained for you the difference between mutation and adaptation yet? Or are you still too fascinated by the taste of the windows on the short-bus that takes you to Sunday school to pay attention?

Fruit loop I live here in the U.S. unlike you you live in denial.

Not just denial but faith ,andyou can add ignorance to that list as well

 

[Montrovant]

Denial of reality: the refuge of the superstitious.

Cupcake, you've been dumb as long as I've known about you. Has someone explained for you the difference between mutation and adaptation yet? Or are you still too fascinated by the taste of the windows on the short-bus that takes you to Sunday school to pay attention?

Fruit loop I live here in the U.S. unlike you you live in denial.

Not just denial but faith ,andyou can add ignorance to that list as well

Oh, sweet Irony, thy name is Youwerecreated.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Fruit loop I live here in the U.S. unlike you you live in denial.

Not just denial but faith ,andyou can add ignorance to that list as well

Oh, sweet Irony, thy name is Youwerecreated.

Well I can admit it you guys can't when it has clearly been pointed out to you.

 

[LOki]

Not just denial but faith ,andyou can add ignorance to that list as well

Oh, sweet Irony, thy name is Youwerecreated.

Well I can admit it you guys can't when it has clearly been pointed out to you.

Maybe you might remind me where you pointed out how I applied faith. And maybe you might also point out where you point out what you think I'm in denial of. Finally, why don't you point out exactly what I'm not admitting.

Thanks.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Oh, sweet Irony, thy name is Youwerecreated.

Well I can admit it you guys can't when it has clearly been pointed out to you.

Maybe you might remind me where you pointed out how I applied faith. And maybe you might also point out where you point out what you think I'm in denial of. Finally, why don't you point out exactly what I'm not admitting.

Thanks.

Believing the rubbish you do requires faith.

Unless of course you would like to point out your mechanism for evolutiuon and explain the evidence that supports this mechanism.

 

[LOki]

Well I can admit it you guys can't when it has clearly been pointed out to you.

Maybe you might remind me where you pointed out how I applied faith. And maybe you might also point out where you point out what you think I'm in denial of. Finally, why don't you point out exactly what I'm not admitting.

Thanks.

Believing the rubbish you do requires faith.

Demonstrate.

Unless of course you would like to point out your mechanism for evolutiuon and explain the evidence that supports this mechanism.

This evidence has been presented rather well by others. I see no reason to reprise it.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Maybe you might remind me where you pointed out how I applied faith. And maybe you might also point out where you point out what you think I'm in denial of. Finally, why don't you point out exactly what I'm not admitting.

Thanks.

Believing the rubbish you do requires faith.

Demonstrate.

Unless of course you would like to point out your mechanism for evolutiuon and explain the evidence that supports this mechanism.

This evidence has been presented rather well by others. I see no reason to reprise it.

You believe that lifeless matter created life,need I say more ?

No no mechanism was presented. Do you understand what a mechanism is ? And there was no evidence presented to support the mechanism notice how hick ran for the hills.

 

[Montrovant]

Believing the rubbish you do requires faith.

Demonstrate.

Unless of course you would like to point out your mechanism for evolutiuon and explain the evidence that supports this mechanism.

This evidence has been presented rather well by others. I see no reason to reprise it.

You believe that lifeless matter created life,need I say more ?

No no mechanism was presented. Do you understand what a mechanism is ? And there was no evidence presented to support the mechanism notice how hick ran for the hills.

You believe that god created everything from nothing, is that correct? Why is that so much more reasonable?

Also, once again, belief in evolution is not tied to belief in abiogenesis.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Believing the rubbish you do requires faith.

Demonstrate.

Unless of course you would like to point out your mechanism for evolutiuon and explain the evidence that supports this mechanism.

This evidence has been presented rather well by others. I see no reason to reprise it.

You believe that lifeless matter created life,need I say more ?

No no mechanism was presented. Do you understand what a mechanism is ? And there was no evidence presented to support the mechanism notice how hick ran for the hills.

Hey...........You Were Excreted...........got news for you, they've successfully created amino acids (the building blocks of life) by re-creating the conditions that existed millions of years ago, and zapping the goo with electricity.

You really should keep up with science.

 

[LOki]

Believing the rubbish you do requires faith.

Demonstrate.

Unless of course you would like to point out your mechanism for evolutiuon and explain the evidence that supports this mechanism.

This evidence has been presented rather well by others. I see no reason to reprise it.

You believe that lifeless matter created life,need I say more ?

Since that's what the verifiable evidence and valid logic suggest, yes. Yes, you must say more to demonstrate that my beliefs are faith.

No no mechanism was presented. Do you understand what a mechanism is ? And there was no evidence presented to support the mechanism notice how hick ran for the hills.

Mutation, genetic drift, and natural selection were not presented as mechanisms by which evolution occurs? I say they were.