Jump to content


Evolution Applied


  • Please log in to reply
97 replies to this topic

#1 Guest_tharock220_*

Guest_tharock220_*
  • Guests

Posted 13 April 2010 - 02:17 PM

If you went to a public school in a developed nation chances are you were subject to mandatory immunizations(if you were a kid you only knew them as shots :) ), or if you grew up prior to the mid 90's your parents would get you together with other children, one of which would have chicken pox, and you would all get sick.

One way of immunizing people is to use an attenuated vaccine which is a living, less virulent form of a pathogen. Attenuated vaccines are made by cultivating bacteria or viruses in the tissue or eggs of other animals. After several generations, the pathogen has evolved to survive in its new environment and is less pathogenic towards humans. At that point, the cultures are harvested and given to humans. They provoke a response from the immune system, but they aren't deadly. The desired effect is for the adaptive immune system to "remember" the pathogen and be ready to prevent future infection.

Attenuated vaccines are the standard way of immunizing people from polio, measles, mumps, chicken pox, the flu, tuberculosis, etc.

Polio killed 6000 Americans in 1916 and left 27000 paralyzed.
In Europe the vaccine reduced tuberculosis cases by 90%.
The measles was killing 450 people per year in the US prior to development of a vaccine. Now only those not eligible to receive MMR vaccines have been the only recorded deaths.

This is just three vaccines developed this way.

So the application of evolutionary theory has actually saved lives and lengthened life expectancy. How many lives has creation science saved???

And this is just one of the applications evolutionary biology has.

#2 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 13 April 2010 - 02:40 PM

I think vaccination is the immune systems ability to remember how to attach to an antibody and has nothing to do with genetic mutation or natural selection.

lrYlZJiuf18&hl=en_US&fs=1


Enjoy.

#3 Guest_tharock220_*

Guest_tharock220_*
  • Guests

Posted 13 April 2010 - 04:06 PM

I think vaccination is the immune systems ability to remember how to attach to an antibody and has nothing to do with genetic mutation or natural selection.

lrYlZJiuf18&hl=en_US&fs=1
Enjoy.

View Post


The production of vaccines does.

#4 Cata

Cata

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 326 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 16
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Bellevue, Washington

Posted 13 April 2010 - 04:15 PM

That is not macro-evolution, that is micro evolution.
I have no problems with micro-evolution. Micro is a different thing from macro however.

#5 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 13 April 2010 - 04:36 PM

The production of vaccines does.


I see what your saying now; sorry about that. How did they observe the genetic mutation? Are they just assuming it again? These type of adaptations are usually proven to be from protein replacement, which is'nt a mutation since the gene already has the ability to produce it.




Thanks.

#6 Guest_tharock220_*

Guest_tharock220_*
  • Guests

Posted 13 April 2010 - 06:14 PM

The production of vaccines does.


I see what your saying now; sorry about that. How did they observe the genetic mutation? Are they just assuming it again? These type of adaptations are usually proven to be from protein replacement, which is'nt a mutation since the gene already has the ability to produce it.
Thanks.

View Post



I don't know what was observed.

Evolutionary biology clearly has application. Does creationism???

That is not macro-evolution, that is micro evolution.
I have no problems with micro-evolution. Micro is a different thing from macro however.


Forming a fundamentally different strain of a virus or bacteria is micro evolution?? Well what would macro evolution be in a virus or bacteria???

#7 Cata

Cata

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 326 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 16
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Bellevue, Washington

Posted 13 April 2010 - 06:20 PM

Forming a fundamentally different strain of a virus or bacteria is micro evolution??  Well what would macro evolution be in a virus or bacteria???


Fundamentally different?
Making something stop causing harm makes it fundamentally different?
If it were fundamentally different it would not work in the first place.

#8 Guest_tharock220_*

Guest_tharock220_*
  • Guests

Posted 13 April 2010 - 06:22 PM

Fundamentally different?
Making something stop causing harm makes it fundamentally different?
If it were fundamentally different it would not work in the first place.

View Post


You do realize there are different strains of basically the same pathogen that infect different animals right???

Does creationism have any application??? Has creationism every saved lives???

#9 Cata

Cata

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 326 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 16
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Bellevue, Washington

Posted 13 April 2010 - 06:34 PM

You do realize there are different strains of basically the same pathogen that infect different animals right???


And? So it adapts to the animal's immune system, so?
Does it gain any new trait? Does it develop a new structure?

Does creationism have any application???  Has creationism every saved lives???


Has evolution saved lives? No, it has promoted racism, and hate, and led to DEATH. Not life.

Creation is a rather important part of Christianity, one must believe in Christ to believe in Creation, and some people here have been saved after realizing Creation is true.
Physically, ask someone else, I'm not in the mood to search right now. Spiritually, certainly.

#10 Guest_tharock220_*

Guest_tharock220_*
  • Guests

Posted 13 April 2010 - 08:07 PM

And? So it adapts to the animal's immune system, so?
Does it gain any new trait? Does it develop a new structure?

View Post


Somehow being able to thrive where it wasn't able to before isn't a trait???

Has evolution saved lives? No, it has promoted racism, and hate, and led to DEATH. Not life.

Creation is a rather important part of Christianity, one must believe in Christ to believe in Creation, and some people here have been saved after realizing Creation is true.
Physically, ask someone else, I'm not in the mood to search right now. Spiritually, certainly.

View Post


So your answer to my question is no. Moving on, would anyone else like to take a shot at it???

#11 Cata

Cata

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 326 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 16
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Bellevue, Washington

Posted 13 April 2010 - 08:10 PM

Somehow being able to thrive where it wasn't able to before isn't a trait??? 


Em, no it isn't. Adapting to conditions does not require developing a new trait. I do not see any reason for it to require a new trait.

So your answer to my question is no.  Moving on, would anyone else like to take a shot at it???


So, once again, for the xth time, you ignored what I say and attack a straw man.

#12 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 13 April 2010 - 11:57 PM

How did they observe the genetic mutation? Are they just assuming it again? These type of adaptations are usually proven to be from protein replacement, which is'nt a mutation since the gene already has the ability to produce it.

I don't know what was observed.

Evolutionary biology clearly has application. Does creationism???


The father of micro-biology "Louis Pasteur" was a Creationist. So, this is just another case of evolution being parasitic on prior creation breakthroughs without any empirical evidence to validate the assumption of evolution. Pasteur also established the "Law of Biogenesis" by empirical experiments; before that people believed in spontaneous generation.

Louis Pasteur was a French chemist, microbiologist, devout Catholic, and creationist. His discovery that most infectious diseases are caused by germs, known as the "germ theory of disease," is one of the most important in medical history. From his work also stemmed additional branches of science: stereochemistry, bacteriology, virology, immunology, and molecular biology. He is considered by many today to be the father of modern microbiology.

Other very significant contributions to science include the process of pasteurization, which bears his name, and the debunking of the once popular idea of spontaneous generation. Louis discovered that heating foods such as wine, beer or milk briefly to 135° F. destroyed the dangerous microbes without ruining the flavor.

In 1847, while a student at the Ecole Normale, Pasteur found that molecular asymmetry differentiates the organic world from the mineral world. He used this knowledge to determine that fermentation of alcohol was not a purely chemical process, but required microorganisms.

Louis also discovered three bacteria: staphylococcus, streptococcus and pneumococcus. He developed vaccines against chicken cholera, anthrax, swine erysipelas, and rabies. His rabies treatment was tested on a man in 1885 for the first time.

Pasteur's son-in-law (Rene Vallery Radot) said that absolute faith in God and in eternity were feelings which filled Louis Pasteur's whole life. In his panegyric of Littré, whose fauteuil he took, he said: "Happy the man who bears within him a divinity, an ideal of beauty and obeys it; and ideal of art, and ideal of science, an ideal of country, and ideal of the virtues of the Gospel."


http://creationwiki....ur&oldid=197336

#13 Ron

Ron

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 50
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Johnstown, PA

Posted 14 April 2010 - 04:02 AM

Evolutionary biology clearly has application.  Does creationism???

View Post


With that coming from a self-professed "theistic" evolutionist, I would wonder why you would pose such a question; and what you are driving at?

Creation is the origin of biology as we know it. Even if evolution were true, it would have originated at creation... So what is your point?

#14 Guest_tharock220_*

Guest_tharock220_*
  • Guests

Posted 14 April 2010 - 06:21 PM

With that coming from a self-professed "theistic" evolutionist, I would wonder why you would pose such a question; and what you are driving at?

Creation is the origin of biology as we know it. Even if evolution were true, it would have originated at creation... So what is your point?

View Post


I really can't elucidate my belief much more in my status. I believe in God, but that's about it.

#15 Guest_tharock220_*

Guest_tharock220_*
  • Guests

Posted 14 April 2010 - 06:54 PM

The father of micro-biology "Louis Pasteur" was a Creationist. So, this is just another case of evolution being parasitic on prior creation breakthroughs without any empirical evidence to validate the assumption of evolution. Pasteur also established the "Law of Biogenesis" by empirical experiments; before that people believed in spontaneous generation.
http://creationwiki....ur&oldid=197336

View Post


How was creationism applied here???

Pasteur vaccines were developed by weakening pathogens by allowing the medium in which they were growing to be destroyed.

#16 bobabelever

bobabelever

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 392 posts
  • Age: 43
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Arizona

Posted 15 April 2010 - 08:06 AM

:P
Why does it need to be "evolutionary" or "creationist" biology, why isn't it simply "biology"?
:)

#17 Ron

Ron

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 50
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Johnstown, PA

Posted 15 April 2010 - 08:50 AM

:P
Why does it need to be "evolutionary" or "creationist" biology, why isn't it simply "biology"?
:)

View Post


It is simply "biology", the problem is that the evolutionists want to claim it by labeling it for themselves.

#18 Ron

Ron

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 50
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Johnstown, PA

Posted 15 April 2010 - 08:51 AM

I really can't elucidate my belief much more in my status.  I believe in God, but that's about it.

View Post


Theism by it's very term implies creation...

#19 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 15 April 2010 - 02:26 PM

How was creationism applied here???


The point is; this science was developed by a creationists, which means, evolution was not applied. Evolution is still N/A unless you can verify a frame shift mutation that resulted in a new trait. An adaptation is'nt a new trait; it's a pre-existing ability to produce a different protein or delete a molecule from the protein being used.



Enjoy.

#20 Bex

Bex

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1066 posts
  • Interests:God, creation, friends/family, animals, health topics, auto/biographies, movies (horror, comedy, drama, whatever, just as long as it's good), music, video games (mainly survival horror, or survival/adventure types), crossword puzzles, books on real life crime/serial killers/etc. Prophecy/miracles/supernatural/hauntings etc, net surfing/forums etc.<br /><br />One of my favourite forums for information on many topics:<br /><br />http://orbisvitae.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=cfrm
  • Age: 38
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • New Zealand

Posted 15 April 2010 - 02:50 PM

:)
Why does it need to be "evolutionary" or "creationist" biology, why isn't it simply "biology"?
:)

View Post


:) Exactly what I was thinking bob!

Although, the vaccines themselves were created and tested! ;)




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users