Yes... we do live in an amazing creation. It would be awesome to see the original creation before death, suffering and extinctions were introduced after sin entered our world. As the Bible says, all creation now suffers.
Yes, not sure what game you invisible friend is supposed to be playing there. What a nasty fiction to believe in.
Genetic load shows we would be extinct long before another million years. Back in '97 geneticist J.F.Crow said " the decrease in viability from mutation accumulation is some 1- 2% per generation". He continued on to say that he regards mutation accumulation as something like the population bomb.
http://m.pnas.org/content/94/16/8380.full
Yep, but did you read the paper you cited? He goes on to discuss the mechanisms that reduce the rate of deleterious mutations at more than the rate they are induced. He is concerned about modern population growth, but I didn't see him discuss the one factor that is probably the greatest way of 'truncating' mutations, that of the very high rate of non-implantation of zygotes.
About only about 1 in every 6 fertilised human eggs ever makes it to implantation in the uterus wall, and even then there is a rate of attrition after that. Significant numbers of those spontaneously aborted zygotes are non-viable for genetic reasons. So I don't think there is going to be any shortage of means of eliminating any kind of deleterious mutation at any stage.
As to 'drift'...Genetic drift is a process that leads to increased genetic load…
How do you justify that claim?
In the past, people thought that we had neutral mutation that were added to our genome with each successive generation. ( some people still believe in neutral mutations). But geneticists now consider these to be VSDM’S… very slightly deleterious mutations. There may be about 150 of these that are added to our genome with each successive generation. Every human has thousands of deleterious mutations in their genome. This accumulation of mutations leads to eventual problems that some geneticist have referred to as the population bomb. Evidence shows that genetic drift is of a good genome that is being slowly corrupted.
I think you don't understand this topic. Or else you have been reading IRC again. They are a wonderful source of misunderstanding.
We deny the psuedoscience of wild extrapolations
No, you celebrate it, for example claims about the age of starlight, or a fictional global flood laying down fossils all at once (in perfect sorting order of evolutionary speciation, somehow). That sure is pseudoscience involving wild extrapolation from outlying (or non-existent) data.
It isn't like us at all Stuu. Bacteria share genetic info in unique ways that humans can't.
And what precise difference are you meaning to explain by that?
And, bacteria have a MUCH higher reproductive rate. (humans have a high mutation rate and a low reproduction rate which is what is causing the problem).
I thought I had just pointed that out to you. I think you fail to read, or take in, about 1/3 of the material in my replies to you.
Adaptation and speciation can happen rapidly. It doesn't require thousandas of generations. Observational science shows Darwins finches likely speciated in a short while... not the 5,000 years originally speculated.
It depends what kind of change you are talking about, though doesn't it. Some changes can be relatively rapid and others will be slow. Mutations that affect hair and skin colour in humans take perhaps only a few thousand years to become established in a population, whereas changes to skull shape in humans have taken hundreds of thousands to millions of years.
The original ancestor species of Darwin's finches arrived two million years ago on the Galapagos Islands, and in that time a diversity of 18 species of finch has arisen. So the beak is the very least of it.
Or... Here is another example of evolutionists admitting being surprised
Well done to get 'admitting'
and 'surprised' into the creationist slur there. I guess it would be too much to force a 'shocked' and a 'puzzled' in there as well. Or a 'dismayed'? There must be a whole division of IRC devoted to this one aspect of the creationist's dishonest art.
at rapid adaptation. They call it remarkable. Too bad they don't realize the cause is our remarkable God.
Yes, the invisible friend that your book of talking snakes and magic donkeys says can't be seen or heard...and says also that it
can be seen and heard. Maybe just not seen by scientists, who would no doubt be shocked, dismayed and surprised.
Why are the evolutionists surprised? It does not take millions of years for organisms to adapt. God gave creatures the genetic information and mechanisms allowing them to adapt and survive in various environments.
So why is there extinction then? You are trying to have this both ways. Either your god has provided some kind of Calvanist biological insurance of information that can be referenced when needed, or else an event where a talking snake convinced a woman to eat a metaphorical apple led to total 'entropy' (your use of the word, not mind) and everything has been going to pot ever since. Who are these favoured races that have a protective genetic database, and how is it expressed? So many questions for these creationist experts to answer. We will be shocked and amazed, and dismayed and puzzled no doubt.
Rapid adapatation is exactly what we expect in the Biblical creation and flood model.
That's not what they used to claim. Someone must have corrected scripture.
Are you able to argue more effectively against a straw-man you create? What I said was "island and coral populations are very highly adapted to their environment but they are endangered and often unable to survive slight environmental change."
Indeed. Where is the emergency genetic info pack you are claiming earlier. Is that option not available to coral? Is the coral a sinner unworthy of saving from these 'slight' changes?
You mean like the "useless" appendix that is functional?
Maybe natural selection has found an immune-related use for the tissue, and it may still harbour bacteria for repopulating the gut. That takes nothing away from the main point that the appendix does not serve the function it had in our distant ancestor species, and has in other extant species of the job of the caecum, and that the only other interpretation is that, regardless of adapted functions, your god has put a timebomb in everyone's abdomens that can only be disarmed by modern surgery.
Explain why we have an appendix, and why it was 'designed' that way. You might have to admit, and be shocked by the possibility that your god needs an easy way to get rid of humans it doesn't like. That could be a function of the appendix.
"junk" DNA that performs regulatory functions?
By definition, it doesn't. Regulatory genes perform regulatory functions.
The 'poorly designed' vertebrate eye that is optimal?
You mean isn't optimal. The octopus has a better eye. It is wired the right way round.
common ancestry beliefs requires uphill evolution. Without increasing levels of sophistication and complexity a frog could never evolved into a handsome prince.
You're the only one claiming that. Well, it's AiG and IRC talking, but it's not me saying frogs can turn into humans. But your main mistake here is to look at this through human eyes. Define exactly what you mean by sophistication and complexity. Some of the simplest genomes code for some of the most successful species. Evolution has no direction, except that provided by natural selection.
Natural selection has certainly stumbled upon some elegant solutions to survival fitness by a massive effort of trial and error of random mutation, but many solutions are of the 'it will just have to do' kind.
We are stuck with our eyes because of the order of the changes that allowed them to develop.
We have a massive compromise in the lower position of the larynx compared with other great apes, which means we gain the ability to speak but we are at greater danger of choking.
Men are stuck with a prostate gland liable to swell up, shutting off the urethra. It is functional but really poor engineering.
The recurrent laryngeal nerve goes down from the head, around the aorta on top of the heart then back up into the neck to the part it enervates. That's pretty poor design, and it only adds a short distance of unnecessary nerve for us but it becomes absurd in the giraffe which has five metres of recurrent laryngeal nerve. Of course the actual reason why this has happened is that in ancestral fish species the nerve went from the brain straight to the 'neck' around the aorta, which is how embryonic development happened in the fish species. As evolutionary adaptation took place over the hundreds of millions of years since then to the present day mammals, the nerve has stayed stuck behind the aorta because there is no way to have the nerve magically jump from one side of the aorta to the other. It's a fundamental part of the development of all descendant species from that common ancestor, and one that cannot be escaped.
Of course a perfect engineer god could have done that properly. Please ask for more examples if you wish, there are very many.
Science helps confirm the Biblical account. We have a very good genome which has been subjected to corruption.
Your god does leave a lot to chance, doesn't it. Or did it invent radiation and mutagenic chemicals as a further punishment for the actions of the talking snake and the Eve woman? It mentions snakes crawling on their bellies in Genesis, but not ionising radiation or polyaromatic hydrocarbons.
Stuart
lain: A superior education shows itself superior despite inept protest. I always know exactly where I stand with you. Sorry if that hurts but you really don't know how to argue but to disdain another's academic prowess as if it doesn't exist, when in truth, my degree is all about knowing the difference. I am better educated than you are past your posturing and likely better at science as well. You just don't have the grades OR education and it shows. Stop trying to put others down for YOUR lack.