Uh Oh: Rick Perry Gets Popped With The Dreaded Evolution Question. (Click For Answer)

[Youwerecreated]

Keep telling yourself that, but it is just not true. You do not want to accept evolution so you lie to yourself and lie to us. Do you really think that is what god would want you to do?

I'm not a liar,and it's clear you can't seem to refute what i say you turn to the typical rhetoric. Football time have a good night.

 

[Youwerecreated]

DNA is a natural chemical code just like RNA and unlike any code written by an intelligence it is all driven by well established chemical reactions.

There are no languages or forms of communication that came in to existence absent of intelligence.

How come you didn't answer the question where the information and order of the information come from ?

Nucleotides are reactive molecules that self assemble. They are natural, there is no order to the information just chemical reactions. There is no real information, just chemical reactions. We call it a language and a code, but it is all just chemical reactions.

Then you need to let all your buddies know that see it differently,it definitely is a code of information.

If it's not a code or language can you explain how these Doctors could diagnose this child ?

Doctors use genetic code to make groundbreaking diagnosis - JSOnline

DNA The Code of Life | The Language of Life | deCODEme

The genetic code - the language of genetics

http://creationwiki.org/The_genetic_code_is_a_language_(Talk.Origins)

Deciphering the Genetic Code

Code - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Genetic Code


You really want to see this one.

Tutorial 12.2 Deciphering The Genetic Code


Don't waste my time.

 

[FurthurBB]

Yes it does.

Here is just a few recently, Hmm looks like crossbreeding has been going on.

10 Recently Extinct*Animals

No, it actually doesn't. Extinction has nothing to do with natural selection. Natural selection is just if a species is reproductively successful its genes get passed on. I guess it is too difficult for you to understand.

Oh really


Dictionary






Search Results

nat·u·ral se·lec·tion



noun 



1.The process whereby organisms better adapted to their environment tend to survive and produce more offspring. The theory of its action was first fully expounded by Charles Darwin and is now believed to be the main process that brings about evolution

So what happens to groups of organisms that can't adapt to their enviornment ? Look up survival of the fittest you should be familiar with this.

I do not need to look up survival of the fittest. Natural selection is just if a species can survive to reproduce its genes get passed on. If you are reproductively successful you are fit. You should familiarize yourself with this concept so you stop thinking there is something intelligent about it.

 

[FurthurBB]

I'm not a liar,and it's clear you can't seem to refute what i say you turn to the typical rhetoric. Football time have a good night.

Well, if you are not a liar than use the words as they are defined and then try to support your suppositions. If not than you are either lying to us or lying to yourself by being disingenuous. I guess you realize that is not what god would want you to do and don't even want to do it yourself. So just stop.

 

[FurthurBB]

There are no languages or forms of communication that came in to existence absent of intelligence.

How come you didn't answer the question where the information and order of the information come from ?

Nucleotides are reactive molecules that self assemble. They are natural, there is no order to the information just chemical reactions. There is no real information, just chemical reactions. We call it a language and a code, but it is all just chemical reactions.

Then you need to let all your buddies know that see it differently,it definitely is a code of information.

If it's not a code or language can you explain how these Doctors could diagnose this child ?

Doctors use genetic code to make groundbreaking diagnosis - JSOnline

DNA The Code of Life | The Language of Life | deCODEme

The genetic code - the language of genetics

http://creationwiki.org/The_genetic_code_is_a_language_(Talk.Origins)

Deciphering the Genetic Code

Code - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Genetic Code


You really want to see this one.

Tutorial 12.2 Deciphering The Genetic Code


Don't waste my time.

You are wasting your own time by trying to equate DNA to a language. We say it is a language or a code because it contains the information that lead to what we see in organisms. I see it exactly the same way all biologists see it. I studied it, saw it self assemble, saw how you can alter and change the way it is translated by changing the charges on it or the charges in the environment. Can you change the English language by adding salt? Can you change computer codes by changing the temperature?

 

[Youwerecreated]

Natural selection filters out mutation based on what would survive best. I'm not sure how it stunts diversity, really. If there are two separate mutations in different organisms of the same species that help them survive, then both will survive and pass on the mutation.

There have been many organisms go extinct would that not fall under the definition of natural selection ?

Dictionary

Search Results

nat·u·ral se·lec·tion

noun


1.The process whereby organisms better adapted to their environment tend to survive and produce more offspring. The theory of its action was first fully expounded by Charles Darwin and is now believed to be the main process that brings about evolution

Yes. What's your point, then? Natural selection is an evolutionary process. Just because you have a beneficial mutation, doesn't guarantee your survival forever, or even at all. It just increases your chances of it, and of passing on your genes.

Is this not what i have been saying ?

I was under the impression you didn't believe in evolution.

now knowing how rare beneficial mutations are how can you believe that every group of organisms that are alive today ,managed to pass on enough beneficial mutations to where every group could evolve that evolutionist said evolved ? it has never made any sense and i have already provided the method to why we see such diversity and it does not envolve mutations.

There's a reason evolution takes millions of years for truly significant change. If you're confused, I suggest you take a look at a timeline of the evolution of life on earth, and see just how long it took for life to develop.

Also, please stop repeating your same, old and tired claims. I've already shot down your 'cross-breeding' theory several times now. Please come up with some new arguments, or stop wasting my time acting like a broken record.

I believe changes happen within a family,call it micro-evolution or micro-adaptations but not the grander scale of evolution where new families are formed from a former family.

 

[Youwerecreated]

No, it actually doesn't. Extinction has nothing to do with natural selection. Natural selection is just if a species is reproductively successful its genes get passed on. I guess it is too difficult for you to understand.

Oh really


Dictionary






Search Results

nat·u·ral se·lec·tion



noun 



1.The process whereby organisms better adapted to their environment tend to survive and produce more offspring. The theory of its action was first fully expounded by Charles Darwin and is now believed to be the main process that brings about evolution

So what happens to groups of organisms that can't adapt to their enviornment ? Look up survival of the fittest you should be familiar with this.

I do not need to look up survival of the fittest. Natural selection is just if a species can survive to reproduce its genes get passed on. If you are reproductively successful you are fit. You should familiarize yourself with this concept so you stop thinking there is something intelligent about it.

Natural selection is not an intelligent process when did I say that ?

 

[Youwerecreated]

Well, if you are not a liar than use the words as they are defined and then try to support your suppositions. If not than you are either lying to us or lying to yourself by being disingenuous. I guess you realize that is not what god would want you to do and don't even want to do it yourself. So just stop.

Why do I need to use terms that are only there to add support to your theory ? I think you understand what I mean when I use terms like kind, family,group,and breed.

By not using your terms I am lying

Let me give you the honest test since it concerns you so much. The same question that woyzeck ignored.

Was the bible right when it say's kinds bring forth offspring of their own kind ?

 

[Youwerecreated]

Nucleotides are reactive molecules that self assemble. They are natural, there is no order to the information just chemical reactions. There is no real information, just chemical reactions. We call it a language and a code, but it is all just chemical reactions.

Then you need to let all your buddies know that see it differently,it definitely is a code of information.

If it's not a code or language can you explain how these Doctors could diagnose this child ?

Doctors use genetic code to make groundbreaking diagnosis - JSOnline

DNA The Code of Life | The Language of Life | deCODEme

The genetic code - the language of genetics

http://creationwiki.org/The_genetic_code_is_a_language_(Talk.Origins)

Deciphering the Genetic Code

Code - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Genetic Code


You really want to see this one.

Tutorial 12.2 Deciphering The Genetic Code


Don't waste my time.

You are wasting your own time by trying to equate DNA to a language. We say it is a language or a code because it contains the information that lead to what we see in organisms. I see it exactly the same way all biologists see it. I studied it, saw it self assemble, saw how you can alter and change the way it is translated by changing the charges on it or the charges in the environment. Can you change the English language by adding salt? Can you change computer codes by changing the temperature?

Really ? because most scientist equate the Genetic code as a language. You're reaching, the genetic code allows us to identify individuals.

Standford school of medicine thinks it is a language. from what I have read from you so far I doubt your credentials are more impressive. Like i said quit wasting my time.

Understanding Genetics: Human Health and the Genome

 

[Youwerecreated]

One more thing furtherBB, did you notice in the article from Standford school of medicine, that scientist were causing bacteria to speak in a different language by making their DNA to mutate,and it was intelligence once again behind the new language.

 

[Dr.Drock]

There have been many organisms go extinct would that not fall under the definition of natural selection ?

Dictionary

Search Results

nat·u·ral se·lec·tion

noun


1.The process whereby organisms better adapted to their environment tend to survive and produce more offspring. The theory of its action was first fully expounded by Charles Darwin and is now believed to be the main process that brings about evolution

Yes. What's your point, then? Natural selection is an evolutionary process. Just because you have a beneficial mutation, doesn't guarantee your survival forever, or even at all. It just increases your chances of it, and of passing on your genes.



I was under the impression you didn't believe in evolution.

now knowing how rare beneficial mutations are how can you believe that every group of organisms that are alive today ,managed to pass on enough beneficial mutations to where every group could evolve that evolutionist said evolved ? it has never made any sense and i have already provided the method to why we see such diversity and it does not envolve mutations.

There's a reason evolution takes millions of years for truly significant change. If you're confused, I suggest you take a look at a timeline of the evolution of life on earth, and see just how long it took for life to develop.

Also, please stop repeating your same, old and tired claims. I've already shot down your 'cross-breeding' theory several times now. Please come up with some new arguments, or stop wasting my time acting like a broken record.

I believe changes happen within a family,call it micro-evolution or micro-adaptations but not the grander scale of evolution where new families are formed from a former family.

Except you somehow think the human species is immune to that. You deny micro-evolution in the hominidae family.

 

[Woyzeck]

There have been many organisms go extinct would that not fall under the definition of natural selection ?

Dictionary

Search Results

nat·u·ral se·lec·tion

noun


1.The process whereby organisms better adapted to their environment tend to survive and produce more offspring. The theory of its action was first fully expounded by Charles Darwin and is now believed to be the main process that brings about evolution

Yes. What's your point, then? Natural selection is an evolutionary process. Just because you have a beneficial mutation, doesn't guarantee your survival forever, or even at all. It just increases your chances of it, and of passing on your genes.



I was under the impression you didn't believe in evolution.

now knowing how rare beneficial mutations are how can you believe that every group of organisms that are alive today ,managed to pass on enough beneficial mutations to where every group could evolve that evolutionist said evolved ? it has never made any sense and i have already provided the method to why we see such diversity and it does not envolve mutations.

There's a reason evolution takes millions of years for truly significant change. If you're confused, I suggest you take a look at a timeline of the evolution of life on earth, and see just how long it took for life to develop.

Also, please stop repeating your same, old and tired claims. I've already shot down your 'cross-breeding' theory several times now. Please come up with some new arguments, or stop wasting my time acting like a broken record.

I believe changes happen within a family,call it micro-evolution or micro-adaptations but not the grander scale of evolution where new families are formed from a former family.

That's nice. But we have evidence of macro-evolution. So you're still a broken record. See, you can choose to believe what you want, but science is something while you don't have to believe it, it's still reality.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Yes. What's your point, then? Natural selection is an evolutionary process. Just because you have a beneficial mutation, doesn't guarantee your survival forever, or even at all. It just increases your chances of it, and of passing on your genes.



I was under the impression you didn't believe in evolution.



There's a reason evolution takes millions of years for truly significant change. If you're confused, I suggest you take a look at a timeline of the evolution of life on earth, and see just how long it took for life to develop.

Also, please stop repeating your same, old and tired claims. I've already shot down your 'cross-breeding' theory several times now. Please come up with some new arguments, or stop wasting my time acting like a broken record.

I believe changes happen within a family,call it micro-evolution or micro-adaptations but not the grander scale of evolution where new families are formed from a former family.

Except you somehow think the human species is immune to that. You deny micro-evolution in the hominidae family.

Really ? humans have different races, that was change from the origional parents.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Yes. What's your point, then? Natural selection is an evolutionary process. Just because you have a beneficial mutation, doesn't guarantee your survival forever, or even at all. It just increases your chances of it, and of passing on your genes.



I was under the impression you didn't believe in evolution.



There's a reason evolution takes millions of years for truly significant change. If you're confused, I suggest you take a look at a timeline of the evolution of life on earth, and see just how long it took for life to develop.

Also, please stop repeating your same, old and tired claims. I've already shot down your 'cross-breeding' theory several times now. Please come up with some new arguments, or stop wasting my time acting like a broken record.

I believe changes happen within a family,call it micro-evolution or micro-adaptations but not the grander scale of evolution where new families are formed from a former family.

That's nice. But we have evidence of macro-evolution. So you're still a broken record. See, you can choose to believe what you want, but science is something while you don't have to believe it, it's still reality.

There are no documented cases of one family becoming a new family,none ,zero.

If you wish to continue confusing micro-adaptations or evolution with macro-evolution,knock yourself out.

There are changes within a family but not one family becoming a new family. and these changes do not come from mutations.

So was the bible accurate in saying kinds bring forth offspring of their own kind ,is this what we see ?

Is this not a question you have an answer for or are you deliberately avoiding this question because you might have to agree with the bible ?

 

[JScott]

I believe changes happen within a family,call it micro-evolution or micro-adaptations but not the grander scale of evolution where new families are formed from a former family.

That's nice. But we have evidence of macro-evolution. So you're still a broken record. See, you can choose to believe what you want, but science is something while you don't have to believe it, it's still reality.

There are no documented cases of one family becoming a new family,none ,zero.

If you wish to continue confusing micro-adaptations or evolution with macro-evolution,knock yourself out.

There are changes within a family but not one family becoming a new family. and these changes do not come from mutations.

So was the bible accurate in saying kinds bring forth offspring of their own kind ,is this what we see ?

Is this not a question you have an answer for or are you deliberately avoiding this question because you might have to agree with the bible ?

You lose once again....

 

[Youwerecreated]

That's nice. But we have evidence of macro-evolution. So you're still a broken record. See, you can choose to believe what you want, but science is something while you don't have to believe it, it's still reality.

There are no documented cases of one family becoming a new family,none ,zero.

If you wish to continue confusing micro-adaptations or evolution with macro-evolution,knock yourself out.

There are changes within a family but not one family becoming a new family. and these changes do not come from mutations.

So was the bible accurate in saying kinds bring forth offspring of their own kind ,is this what we see ?

Is this not a question you have an answer for or are you deliberately avoiding this question because you might have to agree with the bible ?

You lose once again....

Well hello J, you ignored the question I asked to I see. What is it with you evolutionist, you want me to respond and even expect me to respond to your questions but you simply ignore my questions, It makes me wonder why.

 

[Dr.Drock]

I believe changes happen within a family,call it micro-evolution or micro-adaptations but not the grander scale of evolution where new families are formed from a former family.

Except you somehow think the human species is immune to that. You deny micro-evolution in the hominidae family.

Really ? humans have different races, that was change from the origional parents.

You've admitted many times before that you believe that new species come about within families, but you deny that humans became a new species within a family.

Thus, you think humans are magically immune to certain aspects of biology.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Except you somehow think the human species is immune to that. You deny micro-evolution in the hominidae family.

Really ? humans have different races, that was change from the origional parents.

You've admitted many times before that you believe that new species come about within families, but you deny that humans became a new species within a family.

Thus, you think humans are magically immune to certain aspects of biology.

Humans are the greatest creation of all living organisms.

Nothing will ever change humans from what we see now that is correct.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Really ? humans have different races, that was change from the origional parents.

You've admitted many times before that you believe that new species come about within families, but you deny that humans became a new species within a family.

Thus, you think humans are magically immune to certain aspects of biology.

Humans are the greatest creation of all living organisms.

Nothing will ever change humans from what we see now that is correct.

Thank you for agreeing with me, humans are immune to science while every other species are not.

Continue your own personal crusade against Satan's weapon (science) and you'll probably get a very comfortable seat in the front row of heaven.

 

[Youwerecreated]

You've admitted many times before that you believe that new species come about within families, but you deny that humans became a new species within a family.

Thus, you think humans are magically immune to certain aspects of biology.

Humans are the greatest creation of all living organisms.

Nothing will ever change humans from what we see now that is correct.

Thank you for agreeing with me, humans are immune to science while every other species are not.

Continue your own personal crusade against Satan's weapon (science) and you'll probably get a very comfortable seat in the front row of heaven.

We are the only creation that was created in the image of God.

So yes I agree with you now that I think about it.

No not science, Macro-evolution is pseudoscience.