How many steps does it take?

[Laury]

OK, so I went to the first site and read the following:
Here's how some scientists think some eyes may have evolved: The simple light-sensitive spot on the skin of some ancestral creature gave it some tiny survival advantage, perhaps allowing it to evade a predator. Random changes then created a depression in the light-sensitive patch, a deepening pit that made "vision" a little sharper. At the same time, the pit's opening gradually narrowed, so light entered through a small aperture, like a pinhole camera.

.....and you dare post..."The eye has been known for quite some time"...really? All you produced was someone scenario of how they thought it happened.

Cadet, you've produced nothing but the typical coloring book version....once again....you never showed how random changes then created a depression....and so on. Nothing but pure speculation. Sorry, you failed. F

Would this one be more satisfying?

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3143066/

 

[-57]

Would this one be more satisfying?

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3143066/

nope. It's based upon assumptions. The evo-crowd has to show how MUTATIONS could have cause what they claimed happened...not line up fossils and applying their typical circular reasoning.

 

[-57]

How many mutations did it take to evolve the Spork?

 

[SkyWriting]

In order to establish a new trait..such as a dolphins echo-location system according to evolutionism mutations are required. Those that believe in evolutionism also tell us the changes are small and incremental.

And they could still be planned and well thought out.

 

[Audacious]

I'm pretty sure that the local community college has an intro to biology class, if anyone feels like they need to understand basic aspects of science like evolution.

Or how the earth isn't flat, or how it's 4.5 billion years old, or how germs cause disease...

 

[SkyWriting]

How many mutations did it take to evolve the Spork? View attachment 169331

It's impossible to know.
How many for WD-40?

It was Water Displacement test mixture # 40.

 

[SkyWriting]

OK, so I went to the first site and read the following:
Here's how some scientists think some eyes may have evolved: The simple light-sensitive spot on the skin of some ancestral creature gave it some tiny survival advantage, perhaps allowing it to evade a predator. Random changes then created a depression in the light-sensitive patch, a deepening pit that made "vision" a little sharper. At the same time, the pit's opening gradually narrowed, so light entered through a small aperture, like a pinhole camera......and you dare post..."The eye has been known for quite some time"...really? All you produced was someone scenario of how they thought it happened.Cadet, you've produced nothing but the typical coloring book version....once again....you never showed how random changes then created a depression....and so on. Nothing but pure speculation. Sorry, you failed. F

It may be so well planned out, it could form a number of features.

 

[-57]

And they could still be planned and well thought out.

Posting as a christian on a christian forum...and as one who doesn't accept evolutionism....the bible says God didn't use evolutionism. Women was created from a rib not an ape like primate.

 

[SkyWriting]

Posting as a christian on a christian forum...and as one who doesn't accept evolution-ism....the bible says God didn't use evolutionism. Women was created from a rib not an ape like primate.

The scriptures do not say those things did not happen as you say they did not.
Best not to add to the scriptures especially if somebody says things
are there, that are not.

 

[-57]

The scriptures do not say those things did not happen as you say they did not.
Best not to add to the scriptures.

I'm not...adding evolutionism is adding to and changing scripture.
Eve was the mother of all...or the bible is wrong and she wasn't. Oh, how much you have to change.

 

[Hoghead1]

Not all Christians, -57, accept that the Bible is or has to be inerrant.

 

[The Cadet]

you never showed how random changes then created a depression

What you seem to be asking for is for scientists to recompile the entire evolutionary history of the world in a laboratory, complete with the long-extinct DNA of ancient species. This, obviously, is not going to happen. Your standards of evidence are absurd, because you're looking for a reason to reject it and replace it with your own nonsensical hypothesis ("God did it"), rather than actually make coherent, predictive models about reality. I have neither the expertise nor the interest to explain the absolute basics of biology to someone with no interest in learning.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Cadet, you've produced nothing but the typical coloring book version....once again....you never showed how random changes then created a depression....and so on. Nothing but pure speculation. Sorry, you failed. F

No, you did not ask intelligent questions and jumped to an incorrect conclusion. Variation will occur with any population. Surfaces will not be perfectly smooth. And there will be variation in the surfaces. What would be impossible is stopping some of the organisms from having depressions in their surfaces. When those depressions were combined with sensors that would be a positive difference and would be selected. I guess the F is yours.

Edit: By the way a bulge can be positive too. A bulge early on in evolution was probably one of the earliest steps in the evolution of complex eyes that insects and spiders have. Either a bulge or a depression can be positive. They both can lead to directionality.

 

[ecco]

Posting as a christian on a christian forum...and as one who doesn't accept evolutionism....the bible says God didn't use evolutionism. Women was created from a rib not an ape like primate.

Is that why men, even today, have one less rib than women?

 

[ecco]

nope. It's based upon assumptions. The evo-crowd has to show how MUTATIONS could have cause what they claimed happened...not line up fossils and applying their typical circular reasoning.

Do you look exactly the same way you looked at age 14? No? Cay you explain or document step by step all the changes that have occurred in your body since then? No? I guess that proves your life is false.

 

[Loudmouth]

The big problem for the evos-crowd is they don't know what to assume the whale evolved from.

Please support this assertion.

The second problem would be if it were even possible to increase the information in the so-called proto-whale DNA to code for a whale via a process which contains random chance.

Which of the DNA changes leading to whales from an ancestor would be impossible through random mutation and natural selection?

 

[Loudmouth]

It's not a mutation that's a problem.....it's a beneficial mutation occurring over and over again that is the problem. TO DATE the Evo's have not even come close to demonstrating this is possible.

What is impossible about it?

 

[Loudmouth]

In order to establish a new trait..such as a dolphins echo-location system according to evolutionism mutations are required. Those that believe in evolutionism also tell us the changes are small and incremental.

I accept evolution, and I am telling you that morphological and/or genetic changes can be large and cause drastic change. So much for that argument.

For those so-called beneficial mutations to add up they must occur in and change the coding of the DNA responsible for the trait. Later a second mutation must occur which is also considered as beneficial and enhances the fitness of the trait and make a change to the DNA information in the animals progeny. This MUST occur over and over again many, many times.

You are committing the Sharpshooter fallacy. You are pretending that the mutations that did occur are the only ones that could occur. That is completely false. If what you claim is true, then there should only be one species alive today, and all members of that species would have identical genomes. This isn't the case. Obviously, there are many, many possible solutions and many, many possible combinations of beneficial mutations.

Considering just how rare a so-called beneficial mutation are...

Yet another assertion you need to support.

the huge number of places where it can occur...how it must occur in the correct DNA, often at just the right time...fold the proteins precisly..there is no known method for this to occur.

There is a method. It is called random mutation and natural selection.

Evolutionism simply fails.

You haven't demonstrated how it fails, other than to just assert it.

 

[Loudmouth]

OK, so I went to the first site and read the following:
Here's how some scientists think some eyes may have evolved: The simple light-sensitive spot on the skin of some ancestral creature gave it some tiny survival advantage, perhaps allowing it to evade a predator. Random changes then created a depression in the light-sensitive patch, a deepening pit that made "vision" a little sharper. At the same time, the pit's opening gradually narrowed, so light entered through a small aperture, like a pinhole camera.

.....and you dare post..."The eye has been known for quite some time"...really? All you produced was someone scenario of how they thought it happened.

You seemed to have forgotten your own argument. Your argument is that all of the features of the vertebrate camera eye had to come together all at once. Simply finding functional eyes without all of those features falsifies your argument.

 

[Loudmouth]

How many mutations did it take to evolve the Spork? View attachment 169331

Sporks don't reproduce. You seem to not understand the most basic features of biology.