Genome sequencing leaves Creationists unable to respond

[Onlooker]

Originally Posted by Autodidact

ToE does not assert this, as I have now said at least five times in this thread. ToE only describes HOW, of God created all things, He did so. It says nothing about whether He did so.

So we have yet another creationist who doesn't know what ToE says, and doesn't want to learn.
There is no science of ID. ID is not science.

Your system is a belief also.
Accept your belief.
Until you can show your proof like you stated earlier, all this is for naught.

[Onlooker]

Originally Posted by David M

And yet more evidence that you are ignorant of genetics and DNA.

Please give us all a primer.

[Autodidact]

Originally Posted by Onlooker

All nice sites. Out of the millions of pages you can give, did you really need to site Berekely?
No doubt many pages explaining all the faith based beliefs and greater power and strength with mutations that may or may not have done something beneficial.

all my cites are from scientific sources. So you equate science with faith-based?

You need to read some elementary genetics and figure out the system.
How does proteins get made?
What is the rate of mutations that occur?
What does that mutation actually do?
How many of these improbable mutations can actually do anything constructive just on a "1 protein" model.
Now calculate on a simple organelle.
Just not probable.
Your system is faith based.You do the math.

Actually, you're the one making an assertion and challenging the entire structure of Biology--you do the math.

[Autodidact]

Originally Posted by Onlooker

All nice sites. Out of the millions of pages you can give, did you really need to site Berekely?

You have a problem with scientific sources?

You made an assertion. You asserted that mutations cause disease. This assertion is false, as I have shown. Do you have a cite to support your assertion, or would you like to just admit your error?

[Autodidact]

Originally Posted by Onlooker

So why do you ask for proof on ID.

I asked for proof on something? Please cite post; I'm skeptical.

Use the scientific method to study all possibilities.

We did that, over 100 years ago. We found that one of them is correct. Now you expect science to go back and unlearn, undo its foundations, as well as the last 100 years of progress in Biology.

Like Intelligent Design.
That is the scientific way.

Science cannot study ID, because it is not a scientific concept. It's philosophy or theology, which is where it belongs. Do you understand why, or do I need to explain it?

[Autodidact]

Originally Posted by Onlooker

So why do you ask for proof on ID.
Use the scientific method to study all possibilities.
Like Intelligent Design.
That is the scientific way.

Originally Posted by Onlooker

Your system is a belief also.

My belief is that science works. Do you agree or disagree?

Accept your belief.

Did that.

Until you can show your proof like you stated earlier, all this is for naught.

As I have now explained several times, science does not admit of proof. Proof is math. Science is evidence. The evidence supports ToE, which is why science accepts it. You have told us that you are not interested in the evidence, which does not surprise me. If you were, you too would accept ToE.

Science is empirical. It is evidence-based. It's all about the evidence--the one thing, for some reason, you do not want to talk about. Why is that?

[Onlooker]

Originally Posted by Autodidact

Can you produce a scientific cite for this non-fact? Because what I get is: [UC Berkeley Evolution 101] and
Genetics, Vol. 151, 1621-1631, April 1999, Copyright © 1999
Beneficial Mutations, Hitchhiking and the Evolution of Mutation Rates in Sexual Populations

Toby Johnson
Institute of Cell, Animal and Population Biology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH9 3JT, Scotland

and

BMC Evolutionary Biology
Research article Open Access
Identification and dynamics of a beneficial mutation in a long-term
evolution experiment with Escherichia coli
Mark T Stanek†1, Tim F Cooper†2 and Richard E Lenski*1

Would you show your math? thanks.

Are you serious.
What this tells me is you dont read your sources.
Some very, very basic genetic facts.
No citing.

Missense and nonsense mutations are point mutations: sickle cell and thalassemia.
Frameshift are non multiple of 3 (the codon remember) which can cause severe disease/death.

[Onlooker]

Originally Posted by Oberon

Saying "god did it" might make it easily explained but it isn't science. I could just as easily explain it all by saying the process was guided by super powerful aliens.

Read more into your faith based system. What I mean is the non God system believes in Big Bang from no guided force, abiogensis from no guided force or aliens, then evolution from no outside intelligent force.
The kicker is DNA co founder Crick. After thinking about the complex, cryptic and awesome DNA machinery, believed in Panspermia.
So join the club.
Aliens may have done it according to your faith system.

[micrurus]

Originally Posted by Onlooker

Missense and nonsense mutations are point mutations: sickle cell and thalassemia.
Frameshift are non multiple of 3 (the codon remember) which can cause severe disease/death.

ah yes sickle cell, the fact that it gives people resistance to malaria is absolutly not positive.
in the rich spoiled west it may be a didease but when you go to places like......Africa, resistance to malaria is seen as a possitive thing. don't you think?

[Onlooker]

Originally Posted by micrurus

ah yes sickle cell, the fact that it gives people resistance to malaria is absolutly not positive.
in the rich spoiled west it may be a didease but when you go to places like......Africa, resistance to malaria is seen as a possitive thing. don't you think?

Ah yes,
that mutation that substitutes glutamic for valine.
Remember you guys dont believe that the environment caused it, it just selected out with a filter.
Think about this. These mutations killed everybody else (homozygous) prematurely, or gave them harsh limitations compared to not having it.
We found a population that may proportionally live longer in a malarial filled area. That is to say, without the life draining mutation, my life in this malarial filled area is 15 years old. Now that I have this crappy (but ToE says its a gift) mutation, I can live to 35 years old.
This is evolution at work. Excellent example to use.
My point, this mutation in other tribes/peoples living eleswhere, they died off. Only in a diseases filled area did it actually "lengthen" life.
So this random mutation selected a weaker human genome compared to the non mutated genome.
This weaker genome may have proportionally lived longer, along with lung disease, bone breaking pain, clotting in every capillary of your body, strokes, hemorrhages.
Yes, keep using this example, not very convincing.

Rich Spoiled West? You are "leaking" progressiveness.