Post by blue ringed 8Post by aaaOn Wednesday, June 13, 2018 at 8:48:11 AM UTC-7, aaa
Post by MarkAPost by MarkAPost by aaaOn Sat, 09 Jun 2018 23:29:47 -0700, Amazing
Post by Amazing AnswersHere's a new one. It's a link to a chart.
It's a yellow chart with a diagram showing how
from lemurs came Old world monkeys and from
that main stock also came great apes. This all
leads to mankind.
This is the schlock that evolutionists teach.
https://imgur.com/a/G1IOeVN
Can you point to an anatomic structure in humans
that you couldn't get from a lemur with a series
of small changes? We'll wait.....
The real point is that for every change however
small, it is impossible to happen without being
designed by intelligence. Random mutation doesn't
change anything. It only absolutely destroys
everything. There is never any evolution. There is
only intelligent design happening right in front of
the eyes of the evolutionists.
+
Post by MarkAa specific protein, such as one strand of hemoglobin.
Suppose that
Post by MarkAa random change in a single amino acid causes the
protein to function at a slightly reduced level.
Another, completely random change could cause the
original amino acid to be restored, thus improving
the function of the protein. This is a clear example
of a random mutation improving the function.
Your clear example is nothing but your suppositions. I
question your such suppositions. I believe none of your
suppositions is random. They all must be intelligently
designed because they can only be the result of
construction of new order with the result of reduced
entropy. They can't happen randomly by pure chance
because they can only be accomplished by moving against
the second law of thermodynamics. Moving against a
natural physical law can never be something random
because everything in the physical universe will only
follow the natural physical law.
A random copying error leading to the substitution of one
nucleotide for another nucleotide, one out of the hundred
million on a chromosome is not a reduction of entropy.
It does not "move against the second law" [sic]
It violates no physical law.
https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms15183
Wrong. Any DNA alteration unless it's just a simple break
down is always a construction of new DNA sequence. A DNA
molecule is built by preserving energy. It always defies
the second law from its very beginning. It's the same as
every sugar molecule is always the result of defying the
second law. You can't imagine anything happening in life
that doesn't defy the second law.
Secondly, if it's a random break down of healthy DNA, it
would lead to genetic disease. There is no beneficial DNA
change happening. Your special case actually demonstrates
life's intelligent ability to take the risk of genetic
disease for the future generation in order to deal with the
current life threatening crisis at hand. Such evidence of
intelligence can't be an aimless random mistake of data
exchange.
When was the last time you experience hard disk crash with
enhanced operating system performance?
What?
DNA is not a computer. It's not a car, a washing machine, or
a tennis racket either. A chromosome is not a hard drive.
You're doing biology-by-metaphor, which is what is making you
simply wrong. Wrong wrong wrong. Hilariously wrong.
DNA makes proteins. DNA makes thousands and thousands of
different proteins. Changing one nucleotide out of a hundred
million in one chromosome can very easily make no difference
at all. Changing one protein out of thousands can make a big
difference, a small difference, no difference at all. DNA is
not "running a program"; DNA is running thousands of
different subprograms. Some of them all of the time, some of
them almost never.
And a great deal of DNA does nothing at all. Ever.
The part that does do something, such as making proteins, is
in a redundant code. Which means you can change one
nucleotide and still have a decent chance of making exactly
the same protein. No change, no harm, no foul. None.
If you do change that one amino acid, it will most likely be
in a non critical portion of its protein. If it's not in the
active site, the pocket, and if it doesn't change the shape
of the protein, it makes no difference at all. Which is why
the same protein often occurs in many slightly different
variants among humans, and even more among animals.
A few proteins are so critical that they are termed "highly
conserved", which means they do not vary among humans, and
maybe not between humans and animals. Presumably you mess
with these, you're in trouble. Otherwise they would not have
been so rigidly selected for.
There are only a few such highly conserved proteins. The
remainder are much more variable. There's room for latitude,
and latitude is what we find. Small differences are
generally no difference at all.
Post by aaaYour argument isn't even logical.
DNA is not a computer. A chromosome is not a hard drive.
That is a totally bogus metaphor. It is not even an
argument. Just a metaphor.
One that betrays a total ignorance of the way the genome
actually works.
Total.
