HAS AN EVOLUTIONARY LINK BEEN DISCOVERED?

by badboy 46 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  slacker911

  
  Abaddon,

  It is a pleasure to meet you as well! I will say that that was one of the more thorough and targeted intellectual beatdowns I have seen someone receive in a while! I enjoyed it greatly...thank you!

  I appreciate the warning regarding some of the creation fundamentalists out there and on this board. I probably have too much faith in others! I just always remember that I was once one as well, which I shudder at the mere thought of, but I guess that is what happens when you born into "the truth". I just can never figure out how people don't make it all the way out. Do they really need something that bad?

  I guess I will not get my hopes up in the way of receiving a reply from Hooberus though...either way, perhaps it will help others!

  Looking forward to seeing you around here!
• 

  Abaddon

  slacker911

  I know what you mean about having (sometimes unrealsitic) faith in the good nature of people; if I didn't I wouldn't even bother talking to people like hooberus. Despite the fact I should know beter I hope one day something will penetrate.

  I do take comfort from the fact (by comments in threads and PMs) I know sometimes the information shared by myself and others DOES help and inform people; even if hoob and his ilk never listen, there are those who have had help seeing toxic religion (and I don't mean all religion, just those which will elevate opinion over fact) for what it is, and those who have had sincerely believed misinformation about evoilution et. al., corrected by reading threads addressed to such individuals.

  And for your information, he never was a JW, he is a fundy Christian stalking a board for escapees of a religious cult looking for converts to his opinion, basically staking out a website where he can get people before they begin to get their life together and develop critical thinking abilitites. Bit like a man outside a playground with a bag of sweeties... a 'sugar-fix' for those who still have a craving for simplistic anodynes and are too immature in the ways of the world to be aware of the dangers of such offers.

  Warms the very cockles of one's heart, doesn't it?
• 

  hooberus

  Hooberus,
  
  
  I see you have revisited this thread multiple times since I last posted my response to the AnswersInGenesis link that you posted. I had looked forward to your reply to the points that I made regarding the problem with those links. This would be a good opportunity for you to show FunkyDerek, and others, that you actually know what you are talking about and are interested in the actual truth...not maintaining a belief that you already hold.

  
  Slacker, I already have hundreds of posts on creation/evolution subjects on this forum, and thus I see no need "to show FunkyDerek, and others," that I "actually know what" I am "talking about and are interested in the actual truth" etc.
  

  As far as your comments regarding one of the links that I posted, it appears that there may be an ongoing dispute over the issue of the mechanism for the nylon degradation, as well as its relevance regarding neo-darwinian evolutionism. I would recommend that you consider writing a letter to Dr. Batten if you are interested in a specific resonse regarding Musgrave's and other's technical points on this specific issue. However, I will comment on your main point which seems to be the issue of the addition of new genetic information by mutation and creationist claims reagarding this. You state: "This new bacteria literally has a different amino acid sequence, as opposed to its ancestor, and this is strictly due to the additional genetic information contained within the bacteria, something every creationist website spends their entire existence saying doesnt happen. " I think that if you will read in detail you will find that creationist websites do not necessarily deny the possibility of the addition of new genetic information ever being added by mutation (let alone that these sites spend spend their "entire existence" denying the possibility of such), but instead that creationists point out things such as ". . . the likelihood of it happening is so remote that it cannot be the mechanism that could have generated the encyclopedic quantities of information of all living creatures." and that though "It is just possible that some trivial cases of increased information could occur amongst the billions of mutations that occur . . . the problem is that the process is overwhelmingly negative (information loss)." http://www.answersingenesis.org/Home/Area/feedback/2005/0311.asp

  Creationists also point out the lack of documented examples of information gain by mutation in the neo-darwinian sense (the nylon degradation one being possibly one of the better candidates though), and importantly the fact that some of the most common examples of evolutionary change used by evolutionists (such as antibiotic resistance) frequently involve the loss of genetic information- and thus are not valid as examples of upward evolution as they involve the opposite process (see my second link in my first post here).
• 

  hooberus

  Re: comments by Abaddon. Responses to numerous false accusations by Abaddon regarding myself and the sources that I use can be found on the following thread http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/12/106111/3.ashx and its accompanying links as well as the statement to him that: "Finally, I hope to discontinue all further discussions with you regarding your accusations against myself and the sources I use as several more than sufficient responses have been given and I see no need to take any more time."
• 

  Abaddon

  So hooberus, are you saying you WERE a JW?

  That you are NOT trying to convert people recovering from being in a cult to your own religious opinion?

  That you are NOT elevating your opinion over documented fact?

  That you HAVE succesfully rebutted the falsifiction of a literal interpretation of the Biblical Flood account provided by dendrochronology and archaeology?

  That you DO NOT continually use references drawen from a website that has been shown numerous times to have very poor standards of scientific integrity, and that pays its executive officers salaries far above those of comparable charitable insititutions?

  You're lying hooberus - Christians shouldn't do that, didn't you know?

  Your previous defences of your actions and scientific beliefs have been incomplete, evasive, insincere and factually incorrect. You ommit mention of the fact your previous defences have been comprehensively responded to; but then ommitting mention of facts that don't suit your opinion is just typical of your modus operandi.

  This defence of your actions is no different.
• 

  badboy

  HOOBERUS,You say DNA is sealed in stone,can you explain mutations,example cancer which I believe is caused by damage to DNA.

  EPIGENETICS
• 

  Abaddon

  badboy

  To be fair, it was Apostate Kate who gave us the benefit of her drive-by 'wisdom' regarding DNA. I think hooberus knows she is wronger than a wrong thing wearing a wrong hat on wrong day on wrong island.

  As is sadly typical of such instances, there is no "whoops, sorry guys, I was talking through my hat - is there anything you suggest I might read to clear-up my miscnceptions?" Nor is there likely to be.