by JanH 68 Replies latest jw friends
Abbadon,
I just got home from work(haha).
I will look it up(Prions), but if you think it will help our discussion by all means post it.
If someone lived a trillion X longer than you, and had a billion X more reasoning ability would he come to the same conclusions as you?
Perfectpie,
Evolution cannot hold up to empirical thinking. Why? "Not one change of species into another is on record...we cannot prove that a single species has been changed." Charles DarwinPerhaps this was true in Darwin's day (the 19th century), but we certainly see speciation today:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/speciation.html
Could you expand on your following assertion?
The concept of one ancestor violates the fundamental principles of random process in relation to genetics and mathematic probabilities. 4 Evolution to be true it is required that there be so many different base strands of DNA that we must be able to accuratley place every organism on Earth into a specific genetic family.Thanks,
rem
"We all do no end of feeling, and we mistake it for thinking." - Mark Twain
Abbadon,
Here is an intresting link for prions and evolution:
http://www.mad-cow.org/~tom/prion_evol.html
The discovery is a shattering blow for the evolutionary argument that because humans seem unable to contract prion diseases from sheep infected with scrapie, they would be unlikely to contract CJD from contaminated beef. The study, published in the 25 April issue ofNature comes from a team of researchers based in Oxford, in the UK, including Professor T. R. E. Southwood, a former advisor to the British Government on BSE.
If someone lived a trillion X longer than you, and had a billion X more reasoning ability would he come to the same conclusions as you?
D wiltshire;
Sorry to diasappoint you mate, but the quote you made, in context, means that the prion disease in cows and humans is probably unrealted to that of sheep, despite the fact that everyone kind of assumed it.
It doesn't mean that evolution is shattered, just that science has been able to show that one thing probably didn't evolve from another.
Initiating mindsets!! ;-)
I hoped you got as far as;
Transmitted from an infected animal or human to a new host, they convert any 'normal' prions they encounter into copies of themselves. This conversion process eventually results in spongiform encephalopathies such as BSE and CJD.Prions are not life as we know it. Yet they can reproduce by conversion. This shows that replication is not a unique characteristic of organisms with DNA, and shows that complex amino-acids can show 'life-like' characteristics.
perfect pie; nice one - your arrogant tine and rudeness has changed the whole tone of tthis thread. I hope you are proud of yourself. No go read some more modern books on evolution. Leading off with a quote from 'Origin' as if you've found a flaw no-one lese has ever seen just makes me laugh so much I spit coffee on my computer screen.
People living in glass paradigms shouldn't throw stones...
Abaddon the destroyer, the terminator. very cool.
Yes, perhaps I need a little of this evolution force to improve my manners. Hum. Great line on the spitting coffee on your screen bloody good.
Yes, I have read modern books on evolution. There are so many today it's hard to keep up. I've been spending most of my reading time recently on physics and the sort.
I used the Darwin quote because for me that point he made has still not changed and his book "orgin of species" did so much to mold the common thinking on evolution. I am still not convinced that such small micro-evolution within species gives evidence of speciation.
The threads some posted on here didn't convince me either.
Your post have been excellent and I have learned the most from them, especially your takes on prions.
If you could pick the most definitive modern book on evolution could you give me a recommendation.
Thanks 3.14
P.S. have you ever heard of the "Golden Mean"
Now put the coffee down...
"Species do not originate. All they do is remain in existence or become extinct." G.H. Harper
perfectpie: file my name under 'self-depreciating humour' instead of 'cool', as it's closer to the truth. I'm Gyles anyway, it's in my profile.
As for 'definative', and 'evolution', is that a trap? LOL!!
Evolution is a developing theory. No evolutionist would claim otherwise, or rather, should claim otherwise.
In about 2,000 years I expect it to be not quite definative, but as close as not being there THEN allows. The fact the theory of god is not definative after way more than 2,000 years is one of the main reasons why I don't believe in god! As I stated in this, or another thread, I could quite happily believe in god if there were the evidence.
But there is more evidence of evolution!
Have you ever looked into evolutionary algorithms?
An evoltuionary algorithm is used when the answer is known, but how to find the answer is not. To find how to get an answer in a similar set of circumstances, a whole bunch of algorithms are used.
Those most closly matching the known answer are kept, modified slightly so there are again a whole bunch of them, and the process is run again.
Each time, you get closer to the answer, discard the worst results, modify the algorithms that prodiced the best results (one could say 'breed'), and run it again.
Eventually you get the answer.
In any 'niche' in an ecosystem, there is an 'answer'. Survival of the fittest discards those far away from the answer, and breeding allows variation of those closer to the answer so that the next generation will be closer still. It's dazzling.
Oh, fossils... ever think how many animals get fossilised today? Not many. Most get eaten, decayed, consumed. Fossilisation is a very rare process. It's actually quite surprising the fossil record is so good!
I make no claim to a perfect theory, just that it's a better theory than creation especially given the lack of evidence for god in other areas.
People living in glass paradigms shouldn't throw stones...
wow! great thread! Thanks to all participants! What a print-out!
Tina-gathering ref texts and papers lol. You guys have me working way hard here,and I LOVE it!! hugs to all,Tina
Vive Bene
Spesso L'amore
Di Risata Molto!!!
Abbadon,
Referring to your post on Prions.
I knew that.(just kidding)
I didn't mean to imply that I beleived it shattered evolution, I just brought up the quote to the thread since it seems to come from a person who has a good reputation in the Scientific community.
If someone lived a trillion X longer than you, and had a billion X more reasoning ability would he come to the same conclusions as you?
In fact there are countless infinities which exist.And in like manner if you are four feet from a door and cover half the distance you have two feet left, then you cover another half the distance and there's only 1 foot left, then you cover half that distance towards the door and there is still half of that distance left... and so forth eternally, and this even though in our realm of the universe above the quantum level we in fact do get to the door and may even go beyond it.
Infinity is only a concept. It doesn't exist in real life unless it has four tires and a steering wheel. I'll give you an example to counter your example.
The hapless Detroit Lions, after going 0-15, are playing the Dallas Cowboys in the final game of the season. Neither team has managed to score a point, and they are now in overtime. The Lion's return man receives the overtime kickoff and is tackled at the four yard line.
First down: Quarterback muffs the snap and fumbles the football. He dives on the ball at the two yard line.
Second down: Hand-off to the Fullback. He barrels into the line for a one-yard loss. Ball at the one yard line.
Third down: After scrambling, the Quarterback tosses to the Tight End, who drops the ball--incomplete pass. But when he releases the ball, the Quarterback is picked up and slammed to the ground by a Cowboy Defensive Lineman. Roughing the Quarterback is a 15 yard penalty from the spot of the foul, which was the 1/2 yard mark, and an automatic first down. But the Lion's Left Guard, who had a 5:00 tee time at Oakland Hills Golf Club, is infuriated that he might now be late. In disgust (it's tough to get a good Sunday afternoon tee time at Oakland Hills) he yanks off his helmet and throws it into the stands. The Referee, a non-golfer, throws a penalty flag (removing the helmet while on the field). Penalty is 15 yards--back to the 1/2 yard line. Still first down, at the Lion's 1/2 yard line.
First Down: Center snaps the ball to the Quarterback while the equipment coach is still on the field, trying to tape a spit-bucket on the Left Guard's head, to replace the helmet he threw into the stands. Lion's are called for too many men on the field. Half the distance to the goal. Second down, 1/4 yard line.
Second down: Quarterback throws a hail mary. The wide receiver beats coverage and goes 99 yards for the game-winning touchdown. But wait, there's a flag on the field. Lion's offensive lineman is called for holding. The penalty wipes out the touchdown and the ball will be moved back half the distance to the goal. Third down at the 1/8 yard line.
You would think this could go on forever, to infinity; both teams putting on a display of incompetence, the ball always ending up half the distance closer to the Lion's goal line, but you're wrong. Next play, the Quarterback drops back to pass and accidentally steps on the back line of the end zone. It's a safety. Two points and the Lions lose.
As you can clearly see, infinity is only a mathematical concept. It doesn't really exist in nature.
Hmmm
[Edit: Please ignore this post. I've been away from the board for a while, working much too hard, and am feeling a little loopy. I didn't mean to hijack Jan's thread.]
