The Problem of Darwin and DNA

[Asclepias]

You claimed i was wrong. Prove it.

Prove a negative? Sorry I cannot.

Sir, you made a claim. Please back it up with facts.

Yes you can prove a negative. if i say 2+2 = 10 then you can show me how that was wrong with a math example. Please get busy showing us proof.

 

[Asclepias]

You miss the point. Both discoverers of the human genome do not believe in evolution into other species any more.

This is not a matter of denying Darwin his due for "natural selection". Because that is ONE form of evolution. He had no way to see other paths to evolution as we do now. Those of you that blindly accept the grade school notion that Darwin's "survival of fittest" is the unimpeachable end point of evolutionary science are as retarded as the folks who reject all evolution through faith.t.

I think you are giving Weather too much credit.

Weather has made some large unsubstantiated claims- and has danced from them ever since.

I am not sure who you are talking to when you tell me 'those of you that blindly accept' when it comes to Darwin's theories- Darwin was one of the two men who bundled up and put together a coherent theory of evolution that revolutionary for its time, and amazingly prescient in what it predicted given the tools at Darwin's disposal.

It would be amazing if Darwin got everything right- but the general theory that he produced- that organisms evolve from other organisms remains intact.

The only problem I see in the OP's assertions here is that mutations are destructions and "no new information can be created". The links I posted to "jumping genes" explain how RAPID transitions in evolution can be made. WITHOUT ADDING (physically inserting) new DNA.

This is because the DNA is not a static program. Genes can lie unexpressed for ages and suddenly be switched on. Like with the retroviruses that Coyote linked to -- All this REDUNDANT material is already there !!!

And the jumping genes can literally be like the "RESTORE" function on your computer. Bringing back ancient features that never activated in that plant/animal before.

If he really believes that mutations are destructions then he is calling white people inferior. The gene to have light skin is a mutation.

Which...when you consider where light skinned people evolved, is actually an advantage in northern climates when it comes to sunshine and vitamin D. The melanin that protects dark skinned people in southern climates from sun damage reduces their ability to form Vit D.

I honestly don't know, nor care, about the melanin vs. vitamin D content theories. A lot of evolution is chance. Pure fucking luck.

Is sickle cell anemia bad luck or a sign of inferiority? Color blindness? The fact remains that all of humanity is 99.5% genetically alike. Why do we make such a BFD about that 0.5%? My best guess is psychology. There's something in us about it. My theory is the natural evolutionary survival trait of xenophobia.

You sound angry and uncomfortable about the racial differences. No wonder you dont know or care to know much about them. No wonder you just claim I'm wrong when you just admitted you didnt know what you were talking about.

 

[Divine Wind]

I care because I find it fascinating.

There is a natural evolutionary survival trait in xenophobia. It makes a hell of a lot of sense when we existed in a primative state. I suspect we're hard wired to a certain extent...but, we also seemed wired to be more cooperative with outside groups then say chimps.

Agreed 100%, very fascinating!

We're definitely wired to be "troop" animals (I hesitate to use the word "herd" since that isn't true). Obviously there is strength in numbers for a creature with no claws, no great strengths except the one that differentiates us from all the other animals. Our species spent up to 200,000 years in the wild before leaving Africa about 60,000 years ago. We've only spent the last 200 years in an industrialized society sitting in cubicles and strapped to a car a few hours a day.

Our natural reactions to the daily stresses of modern life are often in conflict to our evolution.

 

[Divine Wind]

Yes you can prove a negative. if i say 2+2 = 10 then you can show me how that was wrong with a math example. Please get busy showing us proof.

Translation: You are correct, DW. I have no proof of my ideas, so I'm going to continue bitching at you since that is all I have.

Have a good day, Asclepias.

 

[Asclepias]

Yes you can prove a negative. if i say 2+2 = 10 then you can show me how that was wrong with a math example. Please get busy showing us proof.

Translation: You are correct, DW. I have no proof of my ideas, so I'm going to continue bitching at you since that is all I have.

Have a good day, Asclepias.

Now youre deflecting after being shown you can indeed prove a negative. So you admit you have no proof of being correct by default.

 

[Divine Wind]

You sound angry and uncomfortable about the racial differences. No wonder you dont know or care to know much about them. No wonder you just claim I'm wrong when you just admitted you didnt know what you were talking about.

What makes you think I'm "angry and uncomfortable about the racial differences"?

I do care. What I don't care about are those who are racists, regardless of what "race" they claim to be. Prove me wrong.

 

[Asclepias]

You sound angry and uncomfortable about the racial differences. No wonder you dont know or care to know much about them. No wonder you just claim I'm wrong when you just admitted you didnt know what you were talking about.

What makes you think I'm "angry and uncomfortable about the racial differences"?

I do care. What I don't care about are those who are racists, regardless of what "race" they claim to be. Prove me wrong.

Your words and phrasing tell me you are angry and uncomfortable.

If you cared then you wouldnt have said you dont care. I dont need to prove you wrong. Your words prove it for all of us to see.

 

[Divine Wind]

Now youre deflecting after being shown you can indeed prove a negative. So you admit you have no proof of being correct by default.

Translation: Dyam, DW! You got me again. No, I have no proof of my opinion so I'll just keep asking you to prove my opinions wrong because that's how I roll.

Seriously, Asclepias? That's how you want to leave this? I think you're a fucking racist, but I didn't believe you were stupid....until now.

 

[Divine Wind]

Your words and phrasing tell me you are angry and uncomfortable.

If you cared then you wouldnt have said you dont care. I dont need to prove you wrong. Your words prove it for all of us to see.

In your opinion. Fine. I can accept it's your opinion.

 

[Asclepias]

Now youre deflecting after being shown you can indeed prove a negative. So you admit you have no proof of being correct by default.

Translation: Dyam, DW! You got me again. No, I have no proof of my opinion so I'll just keep asking you to prove my opinions wrong because that's how I roll.

Seriously, Asclepias? That's how you want to leave this? I think you're a fucking racist, but I didn't believe you were stupid....until now.

Of course I'm serious. You dont honestly believe what you think is important to me do you? Since you cant prove my statements are wrong with evidence to the contrary then we all know your are just full of hot air as usual. No wonder you look silly everytime you disagree with me.

 

[Divine Wind]

Of course I'm serious. You dont honestly believe what you think is important to me do you? Since you cant prove my statements are wrong with evidence to the contrary then we all know your are just full of hot air as usual. No wonder you look silly everytime you disagree with me.

I judge people by their actions, not their words.

Yes, I believe you care about my comments because you keep responding to them.

If you can't prove your own opinions, why can't you be honest enough to just admit they are opinions, not facts?

 

[Asclepias]

Of course I'm serious. You dont honestly believe what you think is important to me do you? Since you cant prove my statements are wrong with evidence to the contrary then we all know your are just full of hot air as usual. No wonder you look silly everytime you disagree with me.

I judge people by their actions, not their words.

Yes, I believe you care about my comments because you keep responding to them.

If you can't prove your own opinions, why can't you be honest enough to just admit they are opinions, not facts?

No. I dont care about what you think. Your comments are nothing but fodder for me to shred so that is the only importance they hold.

You keep thinking you are important enough to prove my opinions to. You dont rate that consideration. If I saw you as a credible interlocutor I would prove you wrong. Since you are just full of hot air I dont waste my time dignifying you with a response I would give someone credible.

 

[Divine Wind]

No. I dont care about what you think. Your comments are nothing but fodder for me to shred so that is the only importance they hold.

You keep thinking you are important enough to prove my opinions to. You dont rate that consideration. If I saw you as a credible interlocutor I would prove you wrong. Since you are just full of hot air I dont waste my time dignifying you with a response I would give someone credible.

Your actions belie your words, sir.

If you don't want to prove your own opinions, that's fine. It's not a requirement.

 

[Asclepias]

No. I dont care about what you think. Your comments are nothing but fodder for me to shred so that is the only importance they hold.

You keep thinking you are important enough to prove my opinions to. You dont rate that consideration. If I saw you as a credible interlocutor I would prove you wrong. Since you are just full of hot air I dont waste my time dignifying you with a response I would give someone credible.

Your actions belie your words, sir.

If you don't want to prove your own opinions, that's fine. It's not a requirement.

My actions are that I'm not attempting to prove anything to you.

I know its fine. You dont have a choice in the matter.

 

[Old Rocks]

Darwin had no idea how reproduction worked in the age he lived in. Today we have a pretty good idea so let's look at how his theory fits into science.
View attachment 92909

Every cell in our body has DNA, and reproduces using that DNA. Everything we are is in that DNA strand. Yeah, you thought a blu-ray held a lot of information. Each cell in your body has that DNA strand that has all the information that is you in it.
So a single cell organism will have a DNA strand of a length, let's call it a length of 1 for the discussion. A horse will have a DNA strand length of 100,000. Longer because it has information about bones, eyes, ears, fur, etc.
View attachment 92904


When we reproduce each parent has DNA that is combined to make the offspring. If the DNA is split exactly 50/50 there are 2 possible outcomes for the offspring. In nature the DNA will be split between the parents in any combination, thus the offspring has over a million possible outcomes on their DNA. In this diagram there are 2 lines, each being the side of the double helix.
View attachment 92906
So when DNA replicates there is a sophisticated series of mechanisms that basically unzips the DNA and rezips it. Since every tiny section of that DNA is information as to who you are. Any error in the replication process is a mutation (there are mechanisms to repair these defects, but not for this discussion). For example, if you receive a lethal dose of radiation, the radiation does not kill your cells. What it does is damage the DNA so it cannot properly replicate. And since your body is having to constantly replace your cells, you soon die because your cells are not being replaced.

View attachment 92908

But let's say there is damage to the DNA that is nonlethal but there is enough DNA damage that causes a mutation in offspring. All mutations are because information is now missing from the DNA strand.
View attachment 92910

Let's use dogs as an example. The wolf is the most diverse animal in that group, because it has the most complex DNA. Because of that all of our dogs today are probably decendants of Wolves. Why? People have bred them into unique shapes and sizes. Each change (mutation) in the animals offspring is due to a section of information being removed or replaced.
For example, I want a dog with short legs so I keep breeding those with the shortest legs. What I have done is removed the information about a wolfs long legs and replaced it with short legs. But the inbreeding has created other errors in the DNA with parts now missing. I want a breed of dog with a short nose. What I've done is remove the DNA information about a wolfs long nose. That's why many breeds have a large number of health issues - we have altered DNA so that information has been removed or replaced into mutations we call poodles and pit bulls. The DNA strand of our pet dogs is much shorter than that of wolves. The changes I have made are only removing or replacing information in that DNA strand. In nature information can never be created.
View attachment 92911
That is important to remember. Information does not get created in nature. It has never been observed in a lab and we don't even know how it would be possible. It would be like ten thousand scrabble pieces falling on the floor and creating a logical and grammer perfect story, except the scrabble pieces would also have to self replicate out of nothing. Yes, information in a DNA strand can be duplicated. But that is not new information, it is a mutation of existing information. An insect can lose their wings because that information about wings is now gone. The information about wings cannot be added naturally. A brown moth species can become a white moth species because the DNA is altered so that white is the only color option in the DNA information.
View attachment 92912

So let's go back to Darwin. Our starting point is some primeval goo. That goo then reproduced into insects and soybeans and eventually humans.
View attachment 92913

Here lies the problem that Darwin had no way of knowing. For each progression additional information must be added to the DNA. In order for the goo to become a soybean plant a lot of information must be added to the DNA strand. That single cell organism that has a strand length of 1 must somehow obtain the information to get to a strand length of 1,000 for the Soybean plant.
View attachment 92914

But in nature, information can only be removed, not created. The problem Darwin has is his theory must have additional information being added all of the time, and we know in nature exactly the opposite is what occurs.

For information to be created, it needs a creator.

So what really happened to start life? Each shall reproduce of its own kind it says in Genesis. So take the Darwin chart again.
View attachment 92913

Instead of you being a family member of soybeans, each species was created and evolved (mutated) from there. Something like a wolf was first created, then information was removed to create toy poodles and chihuahuas. So that is one branch started. Cows mutated into Black Angus and other breeds. Another branch started. So thousands of branches were created, humans being one of them. Each species has its own tree, but each species remains unique and unchanging into alternate species because DNA information cannot be added in nature.

Dogs are not descended from wolves. They do share a common ancestor much like chimps and humans.

All life has a double helix DNA. Human DNA and Banana plants are 60% related. But it does not mean your relative is a banana.

On the contrary, that is exactly what it indicates. Apparently we all come from the same genetic line that started at least 3.8 billion years ago.

 

[Old Rocks]

... Instead of you being a family member of soybeans, each species was created and evolved (mutated) from there. Something like a wolf was first created, then information was removed to create toy poodles and chihuahuas. So that is one branch started. Cows mutated into Black Angus and other breeds. Another branch started. So thousands of branches were created, humans being one of them. Each species has its own tree, but each species remains unique and unchanging into alternate species because DNA information cannot be added in nature.

Agreed about the evolution of various animal species, but disagreed about various animal species not being related.

Why do we share 98% of the same DNA as chimps? 44% of a fruit fly? Putting DNA to Work - Introduction - Tracing Similarities and Differences in Our DNA

And you are missing the primary point. In order for you to go from fruit fly to chimp a lot of DNA information must be created. In nature that is impossible.

Since the fruit fly and the alligator are contemporary animals, you are not merely missing the point, you have no point. Somewhere prior to the Cambrian, the fruit fly and the chimp did have a common ancestor.

 

[Old Rocks]

Darwin had no idea how reproduction worked in the age he lived in. Today we have a pretty good idea so let's look at how his theory fits into science.
View attachment 92909

Every cell in our body has DNA, and reproduces using that DNA. Everything we are is in that DNA strand. Yeah, you thought a blu-ray held a lot of information. Each cell in your body has that DNA strand that has all the information that is you in it.
So a single cell organism will have a DNA strand of a length, let's call it a length of 1 for the discussion. A horse will have a DNA strand length of 100,000. Longer because it has information about bones, eyes, ears, fur, etc.
View attachment 92904


When we reproduce each parent has DNA that is combined to make the offspring. If the DNA is split exactly 50/50 there are 2 possible outcomes for the offspring. In nature the DNA will be split between the parents in any combination, thus the offspring has over a million possible outcomes on their DNA. In this diagram there are 2 lines, each being the side of the double helix.
View attachment 92906
So when DNA replicates there is a sophisticated series of mechanisms that basically unzips the DNA and rezips it. Since every tiny section of that DNA is information as to who you are. Any error in the replication process is a mutation (there are mechanisms to repair these defects, but not for this discussion). For example, if you receive a lethal dose of radiation, the radiation does not kill your cells. What it does is damage the DNA so it cannot properly replicate. And since your body is having to constantly replace your cells, you soon die because your cells are not being replaced.

View attachment 92908

But let's say there is damage to the DNA that is nonlethal but there is enough DNA damage that causes a mutation in offspring. All mutations are because information is now missing from the DNA strand.
View attachment 92910

Let's use dogs as an example. The wolf is the most diverse animal in that group, because it has the most complex DNA. Because of that all of our dogs today are probably decendants of Wolves. Why? People have bred them into unique shapes and sizes. Each change (mutation) in the animals offspring is due to a section of information being removed or replaced.
For example, I want a dog with short legs so I keep breeding those with the shortest legs. What I have done is removed the information about a wolfs long legs and replaced it with short legs. But the inbreeding has created other errors in the DNA with parts now missing. I want a breed of dog with a short nose. What I've done is remove the DNA information about a wolfs long nose. That's why many breeds have a large number of health issues - we have altered DNA so that information has been removed or replaced into mutations we call poodles and pit bulls. The DNA strand of our pet dogs is much shorter than that of wolves. The changes I have made are only removing or replacing information in that DNA strand. In nature information can never be created.
View attachment 92911
That is important to remember. Information does not get created in nature. It has never been observed in a lab and we don't even know how it would be possible. It would be like ten thousand scrabble pieces falling on the floor and creating a logical and grammer perfect story, except the scrabble pieces would also have to self replicate out of nothing. Yes, information in a DNA strand can be duplicated. But that is not new information, it is a mutation of existing information. An insect can lose their wings because that information about wings is now gone. The information about wings cannot be added naturally. A brown moth species can become a white moth species because the DNA is altered so that white is the only color option in the DNA information.
View attachment 92912

So let's go back to Darwin. Our starting point is some primeval goo. That goo then reproduced into insects and soybeans and eventually humans.
View attachment 92913

Here lies the problem that Darwin had no way of knowing. For each progression additional information must be added to the DNA. In order for the goo to become a soybean plant a lot of information must be added to the DNA strand. That single cell organism that has a strand length of 1 must somehow obtain the information to get to a strand length of 1,000 for the Soybean plant.
View attachment 92914

But in nature, information can only be removed, not created. The problem Darwin has is his theory must have additional information being added all of the time, and we know in nature exactly the opposite is what occurs.

For information to be created, it needs a creator.

So what really happened to start life? Each shall reproduce of its own kind it says in Genesis. So take the Darwin chart again.
View attachment 92913

Instead of you being a family member of soybeans, each species was created and evolved (mutated) from there. Something like a wolf was first created, then information was removed to create toy poodles and chihuahuas. So that is one branch started. Cows mutated into Black Angus and other breeds. Another branch started. So thousands of branches were created, humans being one of them. Each species has its own tree, but each species remains unique and unchanging into alternate species because DNA information cannot be added in nature.

Where's a link?

Here's a link. Go there and you can write your own OP on the topic too.
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)

What the hell does contract theory have to do with Natural Selection? If you are going to post something to support your arguement, post a direct link to an article.

 

[Divine Wind]

My actions are that I'm not attempting to prove anything to you.

I know its fine. You dont have a choice in the matter.

Bullshit. The very fact you respond to my posts in disagreement is an attempt by you to prove me wrong.

The fact you wanted me to prove your opinions wrong is proof you are trying to prove you are correct without ever offering evidence. Silly? Yes, but that seems to be your strategy.

 

[Asclepias]

My actions are that I'm not attempting to prove anything to you.

I know its fine. You dont have a choice in the matter.

Bullshit. The very fact you respond to my posts in disagreement is an attempt by you to prove me wrong.

The fact you wanted me to prove your opinions wrong is proof you are trying to prove you are correct without ever offering evidence. Silly? Yes, but that seems to be your strategy.

Bullshit. If i wanted to prove you wrong all I needed to do was post the evidence you want. I could care less about your opinions.

Why would I offer evidence to someone when I dont care about their opinion?

 

[Divine Wind]

Bullshit. If i wanted to prove you wrong all I needed to do was post the evidence you want. I could care less about your opinions.

Why would I offer evidence to someone when I dont care about their opinion?

So why don't you post the evidence? Why did you demand I prove your opinion wrong?