Macro Evolutionists...

[Noir]

so tell me, why do you think ERVs lead to a conclusion of macro evolution?......

Because they are a clear, readable genetic pathway, that follows exactly how you would expect from class to class (class being Birds, Reptiles etc) and within species in each class.

Retro-viruses, as their name suggests, work backwards to normal viruses, from an enzyme to RNA to DNA, this leaves a mark on the code if said retro-virus joins a replicating code (like a sperm cell that goes on to infuse with an egg) then that mark will be on the genetic code of all of that creatures descendants.

Obviously the chances of this happing are tiny, amazingly tiny, the chances of the same code getting into different classes of animals, in exactly the same place in a code billions of letters long is just inconceivable.

UNLESS there is a creator who designed all life to look as if it had evolved in a certain way, and luckily enough that certain way that we discovered with the discovery of ERVs just happened to match exactly all our current predictions in all the different fields of biology.

Also, for anyone who'd like to research ERVs more i'd recommend here - http://www.evolutionarymodel.com/ervs.htm it covers all the bases, and breaks down the process into videos, moving diagrams and groups.

[PostmodernProphet]

Obviously the chances of this happing are tiny, amazingly tiny, the chances of the same code getting into different classes of animals, in exactly the same place in a code billions of letters long is just inconceivable.

why would it be inconceivable that the same type of code would not intentionally be in every living thing.....isn't it true that you can find traces of identical computer coding in both supercomputers and toasters.....there's nothing inconceivable about it at all......

you're argument is, "its amazing that what we found matches what would expect" when the fact of the matter is what we "expect" is simply the pattern we've observed.....that doesn't mean the pattern is the result of some random event instead of a plan.......

[Missileman]

I don't like to buy cars with pistons at all - but when forced to do so, I prefer one designed...according to a plan.

The faith you have in mere coincidence, happenstance, blind-dumb luck, and statistical impossibilities is commendable if confusing to me.

You haul out a single shred of evidence of the existence of a plan and you win. You present a single shred of evidence that it was anything other than coincidence, happenstance, or dumb luck that led to life spawning on Earth and you win. BTW, I think you mean to say statstical improbabilities, not impossibilities. The fact we are here means it wasn't impossible.

[bullypulpit]

Macro evolution is too steeped in mysticism/religion for my tastes. Props to you for having WAYYYYYYYYY outside the box thinking and massive-amounts of faith in your chosen religion.

Science has makes fundamental assumptions about a given entity, event or process and sets about the task of proving...or disproving...those assumptions. Religion makes basic assumptions about a a given entity, event or process and uncritically accepts those assumptions, decrying any who would point out the absurdity of such a position as somehow morally and/or spiritually defective for their lack of faith.

[bullypulpit]

Hint: Place a single-cell organism in a dish and let it sit for 10 Million years. Heck, try two of them. They will NEVER magically get better or change into something else.

A petri dish is a static and unchanging environment...There is no stimulus for change. Adaptation and evolution do not take place against such a static background. It takes place in response to environmental factors which lead to the extinction of some evolutionary threads while promoting the growth of others. This is known as "natural selection". The existence of this phenomenon has been extensively and exhaustively proven.

[darin]

A petri dish is a static and unchanging environment...There is no stimulus for change. Adaptation and evolution do not take place against such a static background. It takes place in response to environmental factors which lead to the extinction of some evolutionary threads while promoting the growth of others. This is known as "natural selection". The existence of this phenomenon has been extensively and exhaustively proven.

Adaptation and Evolution don't happen 'just magically'. That's the point of the OP.

What element of our digestive system developed first, patiently waiting for enough OTHER mutations to function?

Beyond silly to believe what some secular 'scientists' preach.

[Noir]

why would it be inconceivable that the same type of code would not intentionally be in every living thing.....isn't it true that you can find traces of identical computer coding in both supercomputers and toasters.....there's nothing inconceivable about it at all......

There isn't much other way to say this than this - You obviously don't understand what ERVs are. Please read up on them, they are redundant bits of code, that are in every way totally useless and only their by a biological anomaly.

Why would a god make around 4% of our DNA of totally useless, an not only that, but put such ERVs in all living creatures *and* pattern it in such a way that when studied it looks as if there is a biological link?

you're argument is, "its amazing that what we found matches what would expect" when the fact of the matter is what we "expect" is simply the pattern we've observed.....that doesn't mean the pattern is the result of some random event instead of a plan.......

Maybe it is part of a plan, maybe it isn't, i don't know, however DMP is stating that Macro-Evolution is *not* part of gods plan.

[darin]

Maybe it is part of a plan, maybe it isn't, i don't know, however DMP is stating that Macro-Evolution is *not* part of gods plan.

No, I'm saying biology is designed. The evidence of a designer is overwhelming to people looking at data, facts, and evidence. I'm saying macro-evolution doesn't appear to be even remotely possible because of the gaping holes - like i've illustrated. For our systems to work the way they work, the must have developed at the same time. At once. By design.

At no time did any organism mutate into having veins to carry blood, if there was not yet blood to carry. Conversely, no organism sat around with pools of blood contained therein, wishing it had veins and arteries to carry the blood where it needed to be.

If somebody chooses to have faith in THAT kind of mysticism - the kind that says "We'll just assume everything worked out" they have enough faith to be pope. Probably more.

[Noir]

No, I'm saying biology is designed. The evidence of a designer is overwhelming to people looking at data, facts, and evidence. I'm saying macro-evolution doesn't appear to be even remotely possible because of the gaping holes - like i've illustrated. For our systems to work the way they work, the must have developed at the same time. At once. By design.

At no time did any organism mutate into having veins to carry blood, if there was not yet blood to carry. Conversely, no organism sat around with pools of blood contained therein, wishing it had veins and arteries to carry the blood where it needed to be.

If somebody chooses to have faith in THAT kind of mysticism - the kind that says "We'll just assume everything worked out" they have enough faith to be pope. Probably more.

But there are creatures with basic types of blood, Sponges are a good example of this, they contain cells that act like blood, (using the process of phagocytics) when you move on to more complex creatures like sea-worms, you find that their blood is a liquid layer held between the spaces between the worms gut and the other skin layer.

Again all i can suggest is you look this stuff up yourself of you submitted written questions to those with expertise in the field to get detailed answers to what are obviously important questions.

[darin]

But there are creatures with basic types of blood, Sponges are a good example of this, they contain cells that act like blood, (using the process of phagocytics) when you move on to more complex creatures like sea-worms, you find that their blood is a liquid layer held between the spaces between the worms gut and the other skin layer.

Again all i can suggest is you look this stuff up yourself of you submitted written questions to those with expertise in the field to get detailed answers to what are obviously important questions.

And you don't find it at least a little bit silly to assume a Sponge could somehow become a shark based on mutation? Sure it could be a different type, size, color - but to think it could somehow, given enough time and a benefit, grow feet. Or flippers.


Noir, I'm VERY glad - most sincerely glad - you were designed to be, and have become the guy you are. You're valuable in my circle of e-friends. Cheers!

[Noir]

And you don't find it at least a little bit silly to assume a Sponge could somehow become a shark based on mutation? Sure it could be a different type, size, color - but to think it could somehow, given enough time and a benefit, grow feet. Or flippers.

Regardless of how i think of things (which flippant comments like sponge to shark exaggerate) has no affect on the facts.

Here's something else i find silly, a galaxy of a hundred billion stars, in a universe of two hundred billion galaxies, over 13 billion years old, and all made just for us? Thats amazingly silly IMO, but all the same that *may* be true, i don't know.

I also find it silly that you can fire a photon of light at a wall with two slits, and the photon will go through one slit, the other slit, both slits and neither slit at the same time. But thats what happens. and thats much more bizarre than macro evolution imo.

Noir, I'm VERY glad - most sincerely glad - you were designed to be, and have become the guy you are. You're valuable in my circle of e-friends. Cheers!

And i'm so very glad that i probably wasn't. ^,^

[darin]

Regardless of how i think of things (which flippant comments like sponge to shark exaggerate) has no affect on the facts.

Here's something else i find silly, a galaxy of a hundred billion stars, in a universe of two hundred billion galaxies, over 13 billion years old, and all made just for us? Thats amazingly silly IMO, but all the same that *may* be true, i don't know.

I also find it silly that you can fire a photon of light at a wall with two slits, and the photon will go through one slit, the other slit, both slits and neither slit at the same time. But thats what happens. and thats much more bizarre than macro evolution imo.

Fine - you look at those facts - out of a hundred billion stars, planets, stars - everything...our planet is uniquely and perfectly positioned to support life as we know it. Our moon system, gravity, etc, is PERFECT for us...our wonderfully-complex bodies/biological systems are complex beyond our understanding...and ALL this...just sorta happened by pure random chance. Take away my example of a sponge becoming a shark - and think about any OTHER simple organism becoming one vastly complex, by pure random chance.

Next time you walk past a store and see a 5000 piece puzzle put-together on display, imagine the pieces being shaken by an earthquake until they align correctly. That's the probability you call 'science'.

And i'm so very glad that i probably wasn't. ^,^

[Noir]

Fine - you look at those facts - out of a hundred billion stars, planets, stars - everything...our planet is uniquely and perfectly positioned to support life as we know it. Our moon system, gravity, etc, is PERFECT for us...our wonderfully-complex bodies/biological systems are complex beyond our understanding...and ALL this...just sorta happened by pure random chance. Take away my example of a sponge becoming a shark - and think about any OTHER simple organism becoming one vastly complex, by pure random chance.

Yet there is almost certainly signs of life on bodies outside of the earth in our own solar system. Nevermind the billions of billions of other potential planets over a timeline of many billions of years in the past (and many more billions in the future)

Next time you walk past a store and see a 5000 piece puzzle put-together on display, imagine the pieces being shaken by an earthquake until they align correctly. That's the probability you call 'science'.

This shows a fundamental misunderstanding of evolution by natural selection, but i'm sure you know that.

[fj1200]

Hint - Study ERVs.

Why do you think that disproves a God?

[Noir]

Why do you think that disproves a God?

It doesn't.
Nor did i claim that it did.
kthanks.