Discussion:
More Evidence of Evolution: Plant Genomes
(too old to reply)
Budikka666
2009-03-28 15:36:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Ed Yong at www.scienceblogs.com/notrocketscience
http://tinyurl.com/d4l4yr
blogs on peer-reviewed research regarding plant evolution. His
opening paragraph is devastating to creationist claims:
"Sixty-five million years ago, life on Earth was sorely tested.
One or more catastrophic events including a massive asteroid strike
and increased volcanic activity, created wildfires on a global scale
and dust clouds that cut the planet's surface off from the sun's vital
light. The majority of animal species went extinct including, most
famously, the dinosaurs. The fate of the planet's plants is less
familiar, but 60% of those also perished. What separated the survivors
from the deceased? How did some species cross this so-called 'K/T
boundary'?"

If, as the young-Earth creationists insist, the Earth is only 6,000 to
10,000 years old (not that they have any scientific support for this
claim), and humans have been on the planet since the very first week,
how come the Bible writers never noticed this massive asteroid strike
which affected the whole globe for some considerable time and killed
off the majority of living things?

So how does this fit into the Theory of Evolution? Well, read on:
"Jeffrey Fawcett form the Flanders Institute for Biotechnology
thinks that the answer lies in their genomes and specifically how many
copies they have. Geneticists have found that the majority of plants
have duplicated their entire portfolio of genetic material at some
point in their evolution. They are called "polyploids" - species with
multiple copies of the same genome.
"By dating these doublings, Fawcett had found that the most
recent of them cluster at a specific point in geological time - 65
million years ago, at the K/T boundary. It suggests that having extra
copies of their genomes on hand gave these plants the edge they needed
to cope with the dramatic environmental changes that wiped out the
dinosaurs and other less well-endowed species."

Many plants, including, apparently, the bulk of survivors of that
asteroid, have doubled their entire genome - some more than once.

Why would a perfect designer, who had all eternity in which to work
and infinite resources at his command, need to duplicate everything if
his design was perfect? If it wasn't perfect, how did a perfect god
ever end up designing something which was so substandard to begin
with?

If this duplication was a design feature, how come it was pretty much
only in plants, and then not even all of those? Most living things do
not duplicate their genome, but in plants - modern plants, it's quite
common.

Evolutionist have no problem with this. An organism with a duplicated
gene is at an advantage, because mutations can play havoc with the
duplicate without comprising the organism's survival chances. The
extra gene can be re-tasked and as scientists have shown, these
duplications and mutations to the extra copy can provide organisms
with new genes which convey survival and reproductive advantages upon
their owner.

Curious, isn't it, that when it comes to evolution, everything ties
together, but when it comes to creation, nothing fits? Whilst the
evolutionists are regularly providing ever more evidence for
evolution, all the creationists appear able to do is bitch, and whine,
and moan, and complain. Never do they offer any positive scientific
evidence, as their responses in this thread will doubtlessly prove, if
their previous track record is anything to go by

To paraphrase and expand upon what a Christian, Theodosius Dobzhansky,
said: in biology, nothing makes sense except in the light of
evolution. In creationism, nothing makes sense, period.

Budikka
p***@worldonline.nl
2009-03-29 13:20:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Ed Yong atwww.scienceblogs.com/notrocketsciencehttp://tinyurl.com/d4l4yr
blogs on peer-reviewed research regarding plant evolution.  His
     "Sixty-five million years ago, life on Earth was sorely tested.
One or more catastrophic events including a massive asteroid strike
and increased volcanic activity, created wildfires on a global scale
and dust clouds that cut the planet's surface off from the sun's vital
light. The majority of animal species went extinct including, most
famously, the dinosaurs. The fate of the planet's plants is less
familiar, but 60% of those also perished. What separated the survivors
from the deceased? How did some species cross this so-called 'K/T
boundary'?"
If, as the young-Earth creationists insist, the Earth is only 6,000 to
10,000 years old (not that they have any scientific support for this
claim), and humans have been on the planet since the very first week,
how come the Bible writers never noticed this massive asteroid strike
which affected the whole globe for some considerable time and killed
off the majority of living things?
     "Jeffrey Fawcett form the Flanders Institute for Biotechnology
thinks that the answer lies in their genomes and specifically how many
copies they have. Geneticists have found that the majority of plants
have duplicated their entire portfolio of genetic material at some
point in their evolution. They are called "polyploids" - species with
multiple copies of the same genome.
     "By dating these doublings, Fawcett had found that the most
recent of them cluster at a specific point in geological time - 65
million years ago, at the K/T boundary. It suggests that having extra
copies of their genomes on hand gave these plants the edge they needed
to cope with the dramatic environmental changes that wiped out the
dinosaurs and other less well-endowed species."
Many plants, including, apparently, the bulk of survivors of that
asteroid, have doubled their entire genome - some more than once.
Why would a perfect designer, who had all eternity in which to work
and infinite resources at his command, need to duplicate everything if
his design was perfect?  If it wasn't perfect, how did a perfect god
ever end up designing something which was so substandard to begin
with?
If this duplication was a design feature, how come it was pretty much
only in plants, and then not even all of those?  Most living things do
not duplicate their genome, but in plants - modern plants, it's quite
common.
Evolutionist have no problem with this.  An organism with a duplicated
gene is at an advantage, because mutations can play havoc with the
duplicate without comprising the organism's survival chances.  The
extra gene can be re-tasked and as scientists have shown, these
duplications and mutations to the extra copy can provide organisms
with new genes which convey survival and reproductive advantages upon
their owner.
Curious, isn't it, that when it comes to evolution, everything ties
together, but when it comes to creation, nothing fits?  Whilst the
evolutionists are regularly providing ever more evidence for
evolution, all the creationists appear able to do is bitch, and whine,
and moan, and complain.  Never do they offer any positive scientific
evidence, as their responses in this thread will doubtlessly prove, if
their previous track record is anything to go by
To paraphrase and expand upon what a Christian, Theodosius Dobzhansky,
said: in biology, nothing makes sense except in the light of
evolution.  In creationism, nothing makes sense, period.
Budikka
Great man Theodosius Dobzhansky. Both as a biologist and co-shaper of
the present day evolution theory, but also as an enemy of racism.

Thanks for bringing the name to my attention!

Love,

Peter van Velzen
March 2009
Amstelveen
The Netherlands
I***@gmail.com
2009-03-30 13:00:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Budikka666
Ed Yong at www.scienceblogs.com/notrocketscience
http://tinyurl.com/d4l4yr
blogs on peer-reviewed research regarding plant evolution. His
"Sixty-five million years ago, life on Earth was sorely tested.
One or more catastrophic events including a massive asteroid strike
and increased volcanic activity, created wildfires on a global scale
and dust clouds that cut the planet's surface off from the sun's vital
light. The majority of animal species went extinct including, most
famously, the dinosaurs. The fate of the planet's plants is less
familiar, but 60% of those also perished. What separated the survivors
from the deceased? How did some species cross this so-called 'K/T
boundary'?"
If, as the young-Earth creationists insist, the Earth is only 6,000 to
10,000 years old (not that they have any scientific support for this
claim), and humans have been on the planet since the very first week,
how come the Bible writers never noticed this massive asteroid strike
which affected the whole globe for some considerable time and killed
off the majority of living things?
"Jeffrey Fawcett form the Flanders Institute for Biotechnology
thinks that the answer lies in their genomes and specifically how many
copies they have. Geneticists have found that the majority of plants
have duplicated their entire portfolio of genetic material at some
point in their evolution. They are called "polyploids" - species with
multiple copies of the same genome.
"By dating these doublings, Fawcett had found that the most
recent of them cluster at a specific point in geological time - 65
million years ago, at the K/T boundary. It suggests that having extra
copies of their genomes on hand gave these plants the edge they needed
to cope with the dramatic environmental changes that wiped out the
dinosaurs and other less well-endowed species."
Many plants, including, apparently, the bulk of survivors of that
asteroid, have doubled their entire genome - some more than once.
Why would a perfect designer, who had all eternity in which to work
and infinite resources at his command, need to duplicate everything if
his design was perfect? If it wasn't perfect, how did a perfect god
ever end up designing something which was so substandard to begin
with?
If this duplication was a design feature, how come it was pretty much
only in plants, and then not even all of those? Most living things do
not duplicate their genome, but in plants - modern plants, it's quite
common.
Evolutionist have no problem with this. An organism with a duplicated
gene is at an advantage, because mutations can play havoc with the
duplicate without comprising the organism's survival chances. The
extra gene can be re-tasked and as scientists have shown, these
duplications and mutations to the extra copy can provide organisms
with new genes which convey survival and reproductive advantages upon
their owner.
Curious, isn't it, that when it comes to evolution, everything ties
together, but when it comes to creation, nothing fits? Whilst the
evolutionists are regularly providing ever more evidence for
evolution, all the creationists appear able to do is bitch, and whine,
and moan, and complain. Never do they offer any positive scientific
evidence, as their responses in this thread will doubtlessly prove, if
their previous track record is anything to go by
To paraphrase and expand upon what a Christian, Theodosius Dobzhansky,
said: in biology, nothing makes sense except in the light of
evolution. In creationism, nothing makes sense, period.
Budikka
65,000,000 years ago, the Sun would have touched the earth . In fact,
long before. Please provide scientific proof that dead chemicals in
a Soup-Pond allowed a one celled Pond Scum protozoa without
personality to come forth , so macro evolution could occur and turn
into a highly personal 206 bone human being having 60 major anatomical
systems all working in unison so you can live . If you cant prove
this, then all of atheistic macro evolution is untenable and a
desperate dream.
Tim Miller
2009-03-30 13:58:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by I***@gmail.com
65,000,000 years ago, the Sun would have touched the earth .
Where do you pinheads GET this stuff??
Christopher A. Lee
2009-03-30 14:50:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 30 Mar 2009 09:58:48 -0400, Tim Miller
Post by Tim Miller
Post by I***@gmail.com
65,000,000 years ago, the Sun would have touched the earth .
Where do you pinheads GET this stuff??
There are two kinds of creationists:

The liars who know they are lying.

The ignorant, unthinking idiots who fall for their bullshit.

Curiously enough these correlate with the two kinds of
fundamentalists.

It goes back to the travelling travelling con men who sold snake oil,
miracle cures etc at revival meetings.

We've seen them in Westerns but they actually did exist.
--
Agent 5 users can filter 90% of Usenet spam using
message-id: {google}
Ken
2009-03-30 15:46:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tim Miller
Post by I***@gmail.com
65,000,000 years ago, the Sun would have touched the earth .
Where do you pinheads GET this stuff??
He pulls it right outta his ass, the same place ALL creatioNUTS get
their "scientific education"
Ken
2009-03-30 15:55:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mar 30, 6:00 am, "***@gmail.com" <***@gmail.com> wrote:
a load of BULLCRAP

BTW after your dumbassed statement of
From: "***@gmail.com"
Subject: Re: SAFE SEX GUIDE - OR - 5 REASONS TO USE CONDOMS:

"HIV is smaller than the holes in a latex condom"


Have you tried this test yet????
The water molecule is at least 100 times smaller than the AIDS virus.
Go out and buy a few, fill them all up with water and see how fast it
leaks out

Here's a clue..It won't
Too bad you didn't use one instead of knocking up your underaged
spermbank, Dimwit
Fred Stone
2009-03-30 17:55:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ken
a load of BULLCRAP
BTW after your dumbassed statement of
"HIV is smaller than the holes in a latex condom"
It's the "natural" sheepskin condoms which are porous enough to let HIV
virus through. Latex condoms are not so porous.
Post by Ken
Have you tried this test yet????
The water molecule is at least 100 times smaller than the AIDS virus.
Go out and buy a few, fill them all up with water and see how fast it
leaks out
Here's a clue..It won't
Too bad you didn't use one instead of knocking up your underaged
spermbank, Dimwit
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough
to take everything you have. - Thomas Jefferson
Thurisaz, Germanic barbarian
2009-03-31 08:18:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by I***@gmail.com
65,000,000 years ago, the Sun would have touched the earth . In fact,
long before.
*hysterical laughter*

How about you provide some evidence for that hmmmm? Oh I forgot, you're a
morontheist. You have none.
--
"To his friend a man a friend shall prove, and gifts with gifts requite;
But men shall mocking with mockery answer, and fraud with falsehood meet."
(The Poetic Edda)
Must have been written with fundies in mind...

My personal judgment of monotheism:
http://www.carcosa.de/nojebus
Loading...