Jump to content


Photo

What Can Stop Micro To Macro?


  • Please log in to reply
350 replies to this topic

#1 performedge

performedge

    Don - a Child of the King

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 400 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Carolina
  • Interests:Being a logician. Debating the origins controversy. Going to heaven. Taking others with me. Seeing the creator.
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Rock Hill, SC

Posted 20 February 2009 - 08:44 AM

I am posting this topic, because I.Skeptic brought it up in his intro thread. I think it is a great topic to discuss, and I have some answers, but my time is limited right now. I will respond later. Feel free to chime in!

Without getting into the tired old ‘a dog is still a dog’ argument…let me ask this question - at what point does adaptation (variation within a species) stop? And why does it stop? Maybe this could be a new thread?

View Post



#2 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7048 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 20 February 2009 - 09:05 AM

I addressed this once here: :P

http://www.evolution...indpost&p=21279

#3 jason777

jason777

    Moderator

  • Moderator Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2670 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Machining, Engine Building, Geology, Paleontology, Fishing
  • Age: 40
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Springdale,AR.

Posted 20 February 2009 - 11:12 PM

We really need to find a Creationists that is well educated in genetics to join the forum.Maybe I'll run an add in craigslist. :P

The best I understand it is that macro requires an increase in genetic information.



Here is Dr. Georgia Purdom

[godtube]3e2b88fa7a30f18c746f[/godtube]

[godtube]0797e77e1230fe8053e1[/godtube]



Here is a good paper you can reference as well.

http://creationwiki.org/Mutations

http://www.answersin...ions-the-engine



Enjoy.

#4 Yorzhik

Yorzhik

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 233 posts
  • Age: 42
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Michigan

Posted 21 February 2009 - 06:47 AM

I am posting this topic, because I.Skeptic brought it up in his intro thread.  I think it is a great topic to discuss, and I have some answers, but my time is limited right now.  I will respond later.  Feel free to chime in!

Without getting into the tired old ‘a dog is still a dog’ argument…let me ask this question - at what point does adaptation (variation within a species) stop? And why does it stop? Maybe this could be a new thread?

The simple answer is that DNA is a program, and mutations can only make a program non-functional, not a different program.

#5 scott

scott

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1749 posts
  • Age: 21
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • mississippi

Posted 21 February 2009 - 05:45 PM

Okay, first off evolutionist believe that micro-evolution requires an increase in genetic information, therefore macro-evolution is possible.

Quite Frankly micro-evolution does not exist. No increase in information has ever been observed, tested or studied. So the subject of micro to macro is moot.

Why? Because Farmers and breeders are the absolute greatest evidence against all of this genetic increase nonesense. Breeding is highly predictable... always has been.

We can breed different cows, over and over again to get whatever breed we want, thats the same process for cats, dogs, squirrels, and yes even humans.

We can do this using the exact same genetic information that we have been using for thousands of years of breeding. Not once has anyone proven that the genetic information that we have been using all this time has increased... at all.

Yet, somehow evolutionist believe they can get the information to increase. Well, all they need to do is start breeding, and maybe just maybe if their lucky they will get something totally NEW that farmers and breeders have been trying to do for years.

#6 jason777

jason777

    Moderator

  • Moderator Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2670 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Machining, Engine Building, Geology, Paleontology, Fishing
  • Age: 40
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Springdale,AR.

Posted 21 February 2009 - 10:44 PM

Heres A great example that has been observed and verified.



Darwin's fishes: the threespine stickleback of the Pacific Northwest

In his voluminous writings, Charles Darwin made only brief mention of a little fish called the stickleback.

The great naturalist was grappling with the question of how animals select mates, and male sticklebacks were a case in point: They construct nests of sand and weeds, attack rivals and dance feverishly to lure females.

But 200 years after Darwin's birth, the stickleback has become an unlikely superstar of evolutionary science — due largely to research rooted in the Pacific Northwest.

Like the finches and tortoises of the Galápagos Islands that sparked Darwin's revolutionary theory, sticklebacks have adapted to myriad habitats in an evolutionary eye-blink. Scientists in Seattle, British Columbia and elsewhere now are using molecular techniques to study those adaptations, and their work is yielding the clearest insights yet into the way natural selection works at the genetic level.

In some cases, they find nature needs to tweak only a few genes to cause major changes in the stickleback body. Other studies show the fish can evolve to cope with new conditions in as little as 10 years. And though sticklebacks are different from people, there may be evolutionary parallels that could help explain human development and disease.


http://seattletimes......darwinfishes1...


Note the part that I bolded.Variation within the phenotype is what Creationists predicted and observed centuries ago.No new genetic information is involved,but here it is being presented as evidence of what Darwin predicted. :mellow:





Enjoy.

#7 CTD

CTD

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2059 posts
  • Age: 44
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Missouri

Posted 22 February 2009 - 01:02 AM

What can stop the set of even numbers from 3216 thru 88752, a paperclip, and an open-end wrench from banding together and robbing every bank in Europe within a 12-minute timespan?

#8 jason78

jason78

    Veteran Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1349 posts
  • Age: 30
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Birmingham, UK

Posted 22 February 2009 - 01:41 AM

The simple answer is that DNA is a program, and mutations can only make a program non-functional, not a different program.

View Post


I disagree. If you are going with a computer program analogy then DNA would be the data, proteins would be the hardware and the cell would be the computer. Mutations to the DNA wouldn't suddenly stop the program working, it would just make it work differently, like you see happening in cancer cells.

#9 CTD

CTD

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2059 posts
  • Age: 44
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Missouri

Posted 22 February 2009 - 03:17 AM

I disagree.  If you are going with a computer program analogy then DNA would be the data, proteins would be the hardware and the cell would be the computer.  Mutations to the DNA wouldn't suddenly stop the program working, it would just make it work differently, like you see happening in cancer cells.

View Post

If you haven't seen programs crash, I must conclude your experience with computers is not sufficient for you to be employing them in analogy. I would doubt your capacity to understand such analogies when others employ them as well. The severity of bugs is not uniform.

#10 deadlock

deadlock

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1196 posts
  • Age: 43
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Rio de Janeiro

Posted 22 February 2009 - 05:08 AM

I disagree.  If you are going with a computer program analogy then DNA would be the data, proteins would be the hardware and the cell would be the computer.  Mutations to the DNA wouldn't suddenly stop the program working, it would just make it work differently, like you see happening in cancer cells.

View Post


I think that computer is not a good analogy.Cells are like nano-factories.DNA is the coded instructions of how to build nano-machines.RNA is the code-translator.Ribosomes are the nano-machines builders.The proteins are the nano-machines themselves.

#11 de_skudd

de_skudd

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1518 posts
  • Location:North Augusta, SC
  • Interests:reading, learning, talking and stuff
  • Age: 41
  • no affiliation
  • Creationist
  • North Augusta, SC

Posted 22 February 2009 - 09:44 AM

I am posting this topic, because I.Skeptic brought it up in his intro thread.  I think it is a great topic to discuss, and I have some answers, but my time is limited right now.  I will respond later.  Feel free to chime in!

View Post


Thanks performedge, I’ll take a whack at it…


Without getting into the tired old ‘a dog is still a dog’ argument…let me ask this question - at what point does adaptation (variation within a species) stop? And why does it stop? Maybe this could be a new thread?

View Post


While the original question “What Can Stop Micro To Macro?” isn’t exactly the question being asked by I.Skeptic, it is at the heart of what he was really trying to ask (I believe). And the most simple answer is this: The fact that there is absolutely no evidence for Macro-evolution stops it in it’s tracks. Therefore “Macro-evolution is nothing more than an unproven model, and nowhere near a fact….

To posit that micro-evolution (change within a kind or species) somehow transforms into macro-evolution (change from one kind or species to another) is therefore a moot point.

#12 de_skudd

de_skudd

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1518 posts
  • Location:North Augusta, SC
  • Interests:reading, learning, talking and stuff
  • Age: 41
  • no affiliation
  • Creationist
  • North Augusta, SC

Posted 22 February 2009 - 09:50 AM

I think that computer is not a good analogy.Cells are like nano-factories.DNA is the coded instructions of how to build nano-machines.RNA is the code-translator.Ribosomes are the nano-machines builders.The proteins are the nano-machines themselves.

View Post


I actually like the computer analogy (especially when an atheists or agnostic bring it into the conversation) because it posits the connotation of design. And this only helps the creationists….

#13 de_skudd

de_skudd

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1518 posts
  • Location:North Augusta, SC
  • Interests:reading, learning, talking and stuff
  • Age: 41
  • no affiliation
  • Creationist
  • North Augusta, SC

Posted 22 February 2009 - 09:51 AM

What can stop the set of even numbers from 3216 thru 88752, a paperclip, and an open-end wrench from banding together and robbing every bank in Europe within a 12-minute timespan?

View Post


:lol:

#14 de_skudd

de_skudd

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1518 posts
  • Location:North Augusta, SC
  • Interests:reading, learning, talking and stuff
  • Age: 41
  • no affiliation
  • Creationist
  • North Augusta, SC

Posted 22 February 2009 - 09:53 AM

I disagree.  If you are going with a computer program analogy then DNA would be the data, proteins would be the hardware and the cell would be the computer.  Mutations to the DNA wouldn't suddenly stop the program working, it would just make it work differently, like you see happening in cancer cells.

View Post


No, most mutations would be more likened to malware or worms, and as we all know, these are harmful to computers…

#15 Yorzhik

Yorzhik

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 233 posts
  • Age: 42
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Michigan

Posted 22 February 2009 - 01:33 PM

I disagree.  If you are going with a computer program analogy then DNA would be the data, proteins would be the hardware and the cell would be the computer.  Mutations to the DNA wouldn't suddenly stop the program working, it would just make it work differently, like you see happening in cancer cells.

View Post

DNA may very well be data, but then, you'd need regulation code from somewhere. The RNA system? Maybe DNA is both data and program (that is the current understanding).

If you want to say the cell is the program it's the same as saying the factory building with it's machines inside is the code for the robots running in the factory. I'd agree you don't know enough about the computer analogy to comment.

#16 de_skudd

de_skudd

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1518 posts
  • Location:North Augusta, SC
  • Interests:reading, learning, talking and stuff
  • Age: 41
  • no affiliation
  • Creationist
  • North Augusta, SC

Posted 22 February 2009 - 02:27 PM

DNA may very well be data, but then, you'd need regulation code from somewhere. The RNA system? Maybe DNA is both data and program (that is the current understanding).

If you want to say the cell is the program it's the same as saying the factory building with it's machines inside is the code for the robots running in the factory. I'd agree you don't know enough about the computer analogy to comment.

View Post


Actually,we know who wrote the "regulation code"....It's just that some don't like the answer :lol:

#17 Yorzhik

Yorzhik

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 233 posts
  • Age: 42
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Michigan

Posted 22 February 2009 - 03:17 PM

DNA may very well be data, but then, you'd need regulation code from somewhere. The RNA system? Maybe DNA is both data and program (that is the current understanding).

If you want to say the cell is the program it's the same as saying the factory building with it's machines inside is the code for the robots running in the factory. I'd agree you don't know enough about the computer analogy to comment.

View Post

I meant to say "DNA may very well be soley data" at least in some part of it's lifetime.

#18 Yorzhik

Yorzhik

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 233 posts
  • Age: 42
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Michigan

Posted 23 February 2009 - 05:25 AM

I disagree.  If you are going with a computer program analogy then DNA would be the data, proteins would be the hardware and the cell would be the computer.  Mutations to the DNA wouldn't suddenly stop the program working, it would just make it work differently, like you see happening in cancer cells.

View Post

I apologize. I made a mistake. I misread the word "computer" to mean "program" (as in "regulation program"). What I should have asked was... if DNA is the data, and proteins the hardware, then where is the software? where is the regulation programming stored?

#19 jason78

jason78

    Veteran Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1349 posts
  • Age: 30
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Birmingham, UK

Posted 23 February 2009 - 05:58 AM

If you haven't seen programs crash, I must conclude your experience with computers is not sufficient for you to be employing them in analogy. I would doubt your capacity to understand such analogies when others employ them as well. The severity of bugs is not uniform.

View Post


I've seen programs crash, and a bug in computer code won't always cause a crash. A bug is unexpected program behaviour. Such behaviour may cause a program to crash, but not always.

DNA is special because any mutation to any of the amino acids in the chain will either insert, delete, or change the amino acid to one of the other four amino acids. The same isn't true of computer code.

#20 jason78

jason78

    Veteran Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1349 posts
  • Age: 30
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Birmingham, UK

Posted 23 February 2009 - 06:00 AM

I apologize. I made a mistake. I misread the word "computer" to mean "program" (as in "regulation program"). What I should have asked was... if DNA is the data, and proteins the hardware, then where is the software? where is the regulation programming stored?

View Post


The copying software and regulation programming would be hard coded into the protein hardware of the cell wouldn't it? I think there is only so far you can extend the computer analogy.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users