Who designed cancer? (page 7)

Qcmbr

Vidqun - what would it look like if it wasn't designed?

snare&racket

Tec,

Yes life could evolve under different circumstances. Read up on silicone life forms.

oldlightnewshite

Unfortunately, God created lots of things that kill people. Volcanoes, Snakes, Poisonous mushrooms etc....

Good job he's a figment of our imagination. Otherwise, we might call him a wicked bastard.

Tec - also if we could go back in time life would certainly evolve very different species (though it is likely we'd see many common forms such as body symmetry , eyes and wings) but it is very uncertain that you'd get consciousness as exhibited in humans - we are quite a very special case on this earth.

cofty

Tammy what I am saying is that evolution doesn't gel with belief in a loving god. I know there is a growing accomodationist movement that pretends god and evolution are perfectly compatible, I don't think they have thought it through.

Do you believe a loving god sat back and observed millions of years of waste and suffering? Did god watch passively listening to the screams of the 3 year old Taung child as it was carried off in the claws of an eagle 2.5 million years ago?

snare&racket

Talking of consciousness,

The society used to big up how unique humans were by saying animals did not think, did not have emotions etc. This was only in the 80's, of course they provided no evidence.

Any dog owner will tell you how nonsensical this is. Nevermind zoologists that witness monkeys making tools, birds problem solving, depression in animals that lose an offspring, bees that communicate etc etc etc....

Vidqun

Well, Yan, I believe in a perfect world there will be no cancer. Things have gone horribly wrong. I don't think God intended it to go this way. Rom. 8:22 says: "For we know that all creation keeps on groaning together and being in pain until now." Hopefully things will change in near future. In a previous post I did mention that animals do not enjoy the prospect of everlasting life, so I am not sure what the position with them would be. And I did add, I thought that was unfair, but my opinion doesn't count. I don't make the rules.

For you S&R, again from Wiki. Notice none of these mutations, good or bad, resulted in a new genus:

Harmful mutations: Changes in DNA caused by mutation can cause errors in protein sequence, creating partially or completely non-functional proteins. To function correctly, each cell depends on thousands of proteins to function in the right places at the right times. When a mutation alters a protein that plays a critical role in the body, a medical condition can result. A condition caused by mutations in one or more genes is called a genetic disorder. Some mutations alter a gene's DNA base sequence but do not change the function of the protein made by the gene. Studies of the fly Drosophila melanogaster suggest that if a mutation does change a protein, this will probably be harmful, with about 70 percent of these mutations having damaging effects, and the remainder being either neutral or weakly beneficial. [ 34 ] However, studies in yeast have shown that only 7% of mutations that are not in genes are harmful. [ 35 ]

If a mutation is present in a germ cell, it can give rise to offspring that carries the mutation in all of its cells. This is the case in hereditary diseases. On the other hand, a mutation may occur in a somatic cell of an organism. Such mutations will be present in all descendants of this cell within the same organism, and certain mutations can cause the cell to become malignant, and thus cause cancer. [ 36 ]

Often, gene mutations that could cause a genetic disorder are repaired by the DNA repair system of the cell. Each cell has a number of pathways through which enzymes recognize and repair mistakes in DNA. Because DNA can be damaged or mutated in many ways, the process of DNA repair is an important way in which the body protects itself from disease.

Beneficial mutations: Although mutations that change in protein sequences can be harmful to an organism; on occasions, the effect may be positive in a given environment. In this case, the mutation may enable the mutant organism to withstand particular environmental stresses better than wild-type organisms, or reproduce more quickly. In these cases a mutation will tend to become more common in a population through natural selection.

For example, a specific 32 base pair deletion in human CCR5 (CCR5-Δ32) confers HIV resistance to homozygotes and delays AIDS onset in heterozygotes. [ 37 ] The CCR5 mutation is more common in those of European descent. One possible explanation of the etiology of the relatively high frequency of CCR5-Δ32 in the European population is that it conferred resistance to the bubonic plague in mid-14th century Europe. People with this mutation were more likely to survive infection; thus its frequency in the population increased. [ 38 ] This theory could explain why this mutation is not found in southern Africa, where the bubonic plague never reached. A newer theory suggests that the selective pressure on the CCR5 Delta 32 mutation was caused by smallpox instead of the bubonic plague. [ 39 ]

Another example is Sickle cell disease, a blood disorder in which the body produces an abnormal type of the oxygen-carrying substance hemoglobin in the red blood cells. One-third of all indigenous inhabitants of Sub-Saharan Africa carry the gene, [ 40 ] because in areas where malaria is common, there is a survival value in carrying only a single sickle-cell gene (sickle cell trait). [ 41 ] Those with only one of the two alleles of the sickle-cell disease are more resistant to malaria, since the infestation of the malaria plasmodium is halted by the sickling of the cells which it infests.

tec

Do you know how evolution works?

I have a basic (very basic) understanding. I researched how bacteria evolve/adapt/mutate for something I was writing once.

It depends on error. Evolution depends on genetic mutation, i.e. the protein reading the dna code making mistakes (among other similar means) this provides diversity in genes and a means for organisms to develop mutations that may

prove advantageous to their enviroment.

Yes, and this is what I researched and found. Which makes it even more amazing to me.

The very same process creates disease and illness.

Yes, I think understand this also. Though not all disease and illness are just random... many are based on things that we do which affect the environment that we live in. So with that in mind, how many more things are we responsible for that we just don't understand yet?

So here is the obvious question, you cant have evolution without disease..... how can god be behind it all ? The biblical story doesnt fit.

Well, the biblical story shows that things went "off the rails" with the introduction of man. As far as I know, a spiritual being is not subject to a phsyical disease. Had we remained in spirit (as we would have to have been to be in the garden of eden - where God walked - which must be a metaphor, since God is spirit), we would not be subject to any of these diseases. As to the rest of living things, I don't know. But there might not be any other way for physical living things to e x ist in a physical world without evolution. I don't know. We're barely infants when it comes to understanding the universe and its workings, and I don't even understanding everything that science has discovered to date.

Peace,

Tammy

cofty

God is spirit

Once again - what is this "spirit" stuff you speak of?

tec

Tec - also if we could go back in time life would certainly evolve very different species (though it is likely we'd see many common forms such as body symmetry , eyes and wings) but it is very uncertain that you'd get consciousness as exhibited in humans - we are quite a very special case on this earth

You'll get no argument from me on that one.

Yes life could evolve under different circumstances. Read up on silicone life forms.

Silicone life forms would still be part of this universe, right? So without this universe as it is, then the possibility of such things changes also.

(I have read some on this, at the same time I was researching bacteria and its evolution; all for a sci-fi project )

Cofty, the idea of evolution and God are completely compatible... the only issue you are having seems to be that the idea of evolution and a loving God are incompatable. I don't think so, because I don't believe He meant for us to have to have all this suffering. But our choices brought us to it, from the first moment that we did things our way instead of the way that He told/taught us to do things.

Peace,

Tammy

Who designed cancer?

Share this