|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
apobetics
Guest
|
 Posted: Mon Jun 30, 2008 3:59 pm Post subject: Controversy 5 |
 |
|
Controversy 5
Natural Selection & Chance Mutations 3
Point five:
A series of chance mutations in the DNA causes animals to adapt to the
environment.
Counterpoint:
Many scientists believe the word "adaptation" is misleading when used
to prove evolution and should be eliminated. An individual animal
cannot directly adapt to the environment. Any changes that occur to
an animal must be by accidental mutations. Some scientists still
incorrectly use the term or concept of adaptation in a context that
suggests that an individual animal can respond directly to the
environment, which is genetically impossible.
Bears or hyenas do not adapt to the sea and become whales as evolution
would claim.
6/24/6000 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Ken
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 30, 2008 7:36 pm Post subject: Re: Controversy 5 |
|
|
On Jun 30, 11:42 am, Sam Buckland <noth...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
Apo can't even name his real father |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
John Baker
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 30, 2008 9:19 pm Post subject: Re: Controversy 5 |
|
|
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 12:36:46 -0700 (PDT), Ken <flakey714@aol.com>
wrote:
| Quote: |
On Jun 30, 11:42 am, Sam Buckland <noth...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
Name one.
Apo can't even name his real father
|
Slime molds don't have fathers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Steven J.
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 30, 2008 9:59 pm Post subject: Re: Controversy 5 |
|
|
On Jun 30, 10:59 am, apobetics <apobet...@gmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
Controversy 5
Natural Selection & Chance Mutations 3
Point five:
A series of chance mutations in the DNA causes animals to adapt to the
environment.
That would be *random* mutations ("random" in the sense that the |
causes of the mutations have nothing to do with the causes of
mutations being beneficial, harmful, or neutral; a mammal isn't more
likely to get a mutation for thicker fur in a cold environment than
you are in a hot environment), coupled with natural selection.
Mutations, by themselves, do not cause adaption, and natural selection
can produce adaptive changes, within vague limits, even without new
mutations.
| Quote: |
Counterpoint:
Many scientists believe the word "adaptation" is misleading when used
to prove evolution and should be eliminated.
Somehow, I doubt you're familiar with the views of many scientists.
An individual animal cannot directly adapt to the environment.
This is not quite true. On the one hand, geneticists speak of the |
"norm of reaction," the effect a gene produces in a given environment
(if the environment is different, the effect of the gene may be
different). On the other hand, even after an organism is grown, its
body may be capable of a range of responses to its environment,
ranging from developing calluses to changing its skin coloration. But
this is not the sort of adaption dealt with by evolutionists.
| Quote: |
Any changes that occur to an animal must be by accidental mutations.
"Accidental mutations" imply that the organism was trying for some |
different sort of genetic change, or at least for no change, but in
general organisms don't try to do anything about their genes, since
they don't generally know they have genes.
| Quote: |
Some scientists still incorrectly use the term or concept of adaptation in a context that
suggests that an individual animal can respond directly to the
environment, which is genetically impossible.
I think you are mistaken here. But maybe I'm wrong, and you're just |
lying.
| Quote: |
Bears or hyenas do not adapt to the sea and become whales as evolution
would claim.
Individually, this is correct. But within a species living near |
water, different individuals will have different hunting habits (some
hunting more in the water than others do), and different swimming
abilities, etc. Among those who take up a purely aquatic lifestyle,
there will still be differences, in streamlining, in degree of webbing
for feet, etc. Over time, while individuals don't change, the
population will. Your "argument" to the contrary makes the very
mistake -- confusing individual changes with changes to a species made
up of many variant individuals -- that you attribute to "scientists."
4.55 billion
-- Steven J. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Sam Buckland
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 30, 2008 11:42 pm Post subject: Re: Controversy 5 |
|
|
apobetics wrote:
| Quote: |
Controversy 5
Natural Selection & Chance Mutations 3
Point five:
A series of chance mutations in the DNA causes animals to adapt to the
environment.
Counterpoint:
Many scientists believe the word "adaptation" is misleading when used
to prove evolution and should be eliminated.
|
Name one. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Devil's Advocaat
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 03, 2008 3:35 pm Post subject: Re: Controversy 5 |
|
|
On 30 Jun, 17:19, John Baker <nu...@bizniz.net> wrote:
| Quote: |
On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 12:36:46 -0700 (PDT), Ken <flakey...@aol.com
wrote:
On Jun 30, 11:42 am, Sam Buckland <noth...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
Name one.
Apo can't even name his real father
Slime molds don't have fathers.
|
Most slime moulds would be deeply offended to find you comparing them
to this entity called "apobetics". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Sam Buckland
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 03, 2008 8:32 pm Post subject: Re: Controversy 5 |
|
|
Sam Buckland wrote:
| Quote: |
apobetics wrote:
Controversy 5
Natural Selection & Chance Mutations 3
Point five:
A series of chance mutations in the DNA causes animals to adapt to the
environment.
Counterpoint:
Many scientists believe the word "adaptation" is misleading when used
to prove evolution and should be eliminated.
Name one.
|
STILL waiting... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Sam Buckland
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 04, 2008 9:57 pm Post subject: Re: Controversy 5 |
|
|
Sam Buckland wrote:
| Quote: |
Sam Buckland wrote:
apobetics wrote:
Controversy 5
Natural Selection & Chance Mutations 3
Point five:
A series of chance mutations in the DNA causes animals to adapt to the
environment.
Counterpoint:
Many scientists believe the word "adaptation" is misleading when used
to prove evolution and should be eliminated.
Name one.
STILL waiting...
|
STILL waiting... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Devil's Advocaat
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 05, 2008 4:55 am Post subject: Re: Controversy 5 |
|
|
On 5 Jul, 01:11, Cory Albrecht <coryalbre...@hotmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
Sam Buckland wrote, On 04/07/08 12:57 PM:
Sam Buckland wrote:
Sam Buckland wrote:
apobetics wrote:
Controversy 5
Natural Selection & Chance Mutations 3
Point five:
A series of chance mutations in the DNA causes animals to adapt to the
environment.
Counterpoint:
Many scientists believe the word "adaptation" is misleading when used
to prove evolution and should be eliminated.
Name one.
STILL waiting...
STILL waiting...
I'm thinking that Apobetics is now like Daniel Joseph Min in that he
posts to one or more newsgroups but doesn't actually subscribe to them
to read the responses, so that's why he no longer replies.
|
Then what is the point of him/her/it posting anything?
| Quote: |
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text - |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Cory Albrecht
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 05, 2008 5:11 am Post subject: Re: Controversy 5 |
|
|
Sam Buckland wrote, On 04/07/08 12:57 PM:
| Quote: |
Sam Buckland wrote:
Sam Buckland wrote:
apobetics wrote:
Controversy 5
Natural Selection & Chance Mutations 3
Point five:
A series of chance mutations in the DNA causes animals to adapt to the
environment.
Counterpoint:
Many scientists believe the word "adaptation" is misleading when used
to prove evolution and should be eliminated.
Name one.
STILL waiting...
STILL waiting...
|
I'm thinking that Apobetics is now like Daniel Joseph Min in that he
posts to one or more newsgroups but doesn't actually subscribe to them
to read the responses, so that's why he no longer replies. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Cory Albrecht
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 05, 2008 6:29 pm Post subject: Re: Controversy 5 |
|
|
Devil's Advocaat wrote, On 05/07/08 12:55 AM:
| Quote: |
On 5 Jul, 01:11, Cory Albrecht <coryalbre...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Sam Buckland wrote, On 04/07/08 12:57 PM:
Sam Buckland wrote:
Sam Buckland wrote:
apobetics wrote:
Controversy 5
Natural Selection & Chance Mutations 3
Point five:
A series of chance mutations in the DNA causes animals to adapt to the
environment.
Counterpoint:
Many scientists believe the word "adaptation" is misleading when used
to prove evolution and should be eliminated.
Name one.
STILL waiting...
STILL waiting...
I'm thinking that Apobetics is now like Daniel Joseph Min in that he
posts to one or more newsgroups but doesn't actually subscribe to them
to read the responses, so that's why he no longer replies.
Then what is the point of him/her/it posting anything?
|
That would be the point - so his poor little ego can think he's "Doing
God's work" and smacking down the evil evolutionists who can't respond
to any of his arguments. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
