Click Here
home features news forums classifieds faqs links search
5615 members 
Amiga Q&A /  Free for All /  Emulation /  Gaming / (Latest Posts)
Login

Nickname

Password

Lost Password?

Don't have an account yet?
Register now!

Support Amigaworld.net
Your support is needed and is appreciated as Amigaworld.net is primarily dependent upon the support of its users.
Donate

Menu
Main sections
» Home
» Features
» News
» Forums
» Classifieds
» Links
» Downloads
Extras
» OS4 Zone
» IRC Network
» AmigaWorld Radio
» Newsfeed
» Top Members
» Amiga Dealers
Information
» About Us
» FAQs
» Advertise
» Polls
» Terms of Service
» Search

IRC Channel
Server: irc.amigaworld.net
Channel: #Amigaworld
Channel Policy and Guidelines

(Uses JAVA Applet and Port 1024)
Visit the Chatroom Website

Who's Online
 56 guest(s) on-line.
 1 member(s) on-line.


 amigakit

You are an anonymous user.
Register Now!
 amigakit:  2 mins ago
 Fransexy:  7 mins ago
 BigD:  24 mins ago
 TRIPOS:  25 mins ago
 Srtest:  26 mins ago
 Templario:  37 mins ago
 kamelit0:  44 mins ago
 jorit2:  47 mins ago
 number6:  1 hr 2 mins ago
 50mm:  1 hr 2 mins ago

/  Forum Index
   /  Free For All
      /  Three Parent Babies given the all clear in the UK
Register To Post

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 Next Page )
PosterThread
BigD 
Re: Three Parent Babies given the all clear in the UK
Posted on 23-Mar-2017 20:39:19
#21 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 11-Aug-2005
Posts: 4067
From: UK

@Thread

The Newcastle Fertility Centre at the Life Centre (I know the irony of the name is not lost on me ) has been granted the first licence in the UK to undertake the controversial 3 parent embryo procedure on a couple that would likely hand down a mitochondrial related genetic abnormality to their child should they have conceived naturally.


The Telegraph: Controversial 3 Parent Baby Procedure given a licence to proceed this year in Newcastle!

It would have led to far less discarded fetuses, ethical issues and wasted NHS funds if the couple had just adopted a child and the politicians said no to this procedure in principle. We are completely out of step with the rest of the world on this and although we have Prince Charles pottering around complaining about GM crops most people are clueless about the GM-human issue. This is a watershed moment when GM babies become a reality in the UK and the human genome is put under threat from direct interference from unethical doctors and 'experts'.

Last edited by BigD on 23-Mar-2017 at 08:58 PM.
Last edited by BigD on 23-Mar-2017 at 08:56 PM.
Last edited by BigD on 23-Mar-2017 at 08:53 PM.
Last edited by BigD on 23-Mar-2017 at 08:52 PM.

_________________
"Art challenges technology. Technology inspires the art."
John Lasseter, Pixar Animation Studios

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
BigD 
Re: Three Parent Babies given the all clear in the UK
Posted on 23-Mar-2017 20:50:36
#22 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 11-Aug-2005
Posts: 4067
From: UK

@Nimrod

Quote:
If the environment hasn't changed then the change in the mutated young is unlikely to offer a significant advantage over its non-mutated siblings. However in a changing environment the mutated offspring may well have the advantage.


It is not advantageous for an individual to mutate to a point of being unable to reproduce with its own kind (it would die out without procreating i.e. it could be said to be genetically damaged but certainly not improved). For the mutated individual to be able to reproduce only with a fictitious second mutated individual with exactly the same 'advantageous' species defining mutation is quite frankly the stuff of science fiction.

Yes, it's true that finches over successive generations can change the shape of their beaks when food of certain types gets scarce; that's called natural selection. They never lose the ability to reproduce with their own kind or form a new species.

EVOLUTION HAS NOT BEEN OBSERVED IN THE NATURAL WORLD TODAY. NATURAL SELECTION HAS BEEN OBSERVED IN THE WORLD TODAY!

While it is understandable that you want natural selection to equate to evolution you are simply unable to substantiate that leap in provable science. You can't back it up with anything tangible and are standing on a faith position based on your predisposed world view that is out of kilter with the science you claim to know so much about!

Last edited by BigD on 23-Mar-2017 at 09:01 PM.

_________________
"Art challenges technology. Technology inspires the art."
John Lasseter, Pixar Animation Studios

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Nimrod 
Re: Three Parent Babies given the all clear in the UK
Posted on 24-Mar-2017 15:29:26
#23 ]
Super Member
Joined: 30-Jan-2010
Posts: 1182
From: Untied Kingdom

@BigD
In biology, a ring species is a connected series of neighboring populations that can interbreed with relatively closely related populations, but for which there exist at least two "end" populations in the series that are too distantly related to interbreed.
The most well known ring species are the much quoted Ensatina Salamander, The Larus Gull and the Greenish Warbler from the Animal kingdom and Euphorbia tithymaloides from the plant kingdom.

Your claim that there is a difference between natural selection and evolution is patently false. If evolution never happened, what did Flavobacterium sp. KI72 and Pseudomonas aeruginosa, the two first nylon eating bacteria eat before the invention of Nylon back in 1935.
Prior to 2005, creationists comforted themselves in that science demonstrated a clear difference between Apes with 24 chromosome pairs and Humans with 23. Then Hillier et.al. were able to demonstrate that Human chromosome 2 was an end-to-end joining of Simian chromosomes 2p and 2q, with the telomere to reversed telomere sequence and the deactivated centromere in exactly the right place out of 242 million base pairs. What more tangible evidence is there beyond every cell in your own body?

Quote:
Yes, it's true that finches over successive generations can change the shape of their beaks when food of certain types gets scarce; that's called natural selection. They never lose the ability to reproduce with their own kind or form a new species

Except that Darwin's finches ARE all different species of finches and not interfertile, even though they all descended from the same original limited stock as has been proved by genetic analysis that wasn't even dreamed about in Darwin's day.

Did you know that when Darwin first set out on the Beagle he was a proponent of William Paley's "Watchmaker" hypothesis, and was consciously seeking evidence that would prove the existence of the Judaeo-Christian deity. It was only the evidence that convinced him that there was no intervention from any deity and neither was any intervention required. His Atheism came far later, and as a consequence of an entirely different set of circumstances. Suffice only to say that Atheism had become a far easier step to take as a result of his findings based on the evidence found on the Galapagos islands. Darwin did not come up with the theory of evolution by means of natural selection because of his preconceptions, but despite his preconceptions.

_________________
When in trouble, fear or doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Nimrod 
Re: Three Parent Babies given the all clear in the UK
Posted on 24-Mar-2017 15:40:17
#24 ]
Super Member
Joined: 30-Jan-2010
Posts: 1182
From: Untied Kingdom

@BigD

Quote:
It would have led to far less...insert emotional claptrap here... if the couple had just adopted a child

Perhaps the couple didn't want to take on somebody else's child, but wanted a child that was genetically their own, but without the attendant risk of a long, drawn-out death from a preventable disease. Maybe there are no children available for adoption left in their part of the country because "the gays" have snapped them all up as wedding presents to each other. [/s]
The only ethical issue here is letting theofascists interfere with scientific progress because they lack the ability to get their tiny minds away from bronze age superstitions. Not only do you know nothing of science, you also know nothing of your own holy book. If you did you would not be posting the sort of idiocy that you are on this computer forum.

_________________
When in trouble, fear or doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
BigD 
Re: Three Parent Babies given the all clear in the UK
Posted on 24-Mar-2017 18:47:55
#25 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 11-Aug-2005
Posts: 4067
From: UK

@Nimrod

Believe whatever your world view informs you to believe. The evidence for creation is all around you and your being confused by conjecture and pseudo-history and a seemingly neat correlation between short chromosomes in Simians and the long 23rd chromosone in humans. All magnetic storage media bears a resemblance to other forms because a designer used similar technology to create it! Some contain extra sectors and capacities; so what do you deduce about their origins? Did they lived in the utimate transistor rich clean room, mutating into higher capacity drives? Did they evolved into SSD hard drives due to pure chance as resistors and silicon collided?! All the chromosome information proves is we're made from similar building blocks not that the human race came from them! Mutations bring disease weakness and death not new species and genetic improvement. Chaos is not observed as to create order and our creation was not down to ridiculous feats of probability with a few millions years added to make it all seem more plausible.

You're the one that needs to go back to school not me!

The fruit of GM-babies research is death! Death of spare fetuses that they don't need, death of healthy fetuses generated from the third parent (if the Pronuclear Transfer method is used) and then sacrificed to 'correct' the 1st mother's genetically diseased fetus! This is warped science that is outlawed by every other state in the world. It is sick science comparable to the sick abortions we carry out on mothers without warning them of the long term psychological trauma of doing so. Science can be used for good and progress if our world view is in line with the teachings of the Bible. If not it just seems to become another excuse to do what every other failing state begins to do at the end of its history; i.e. butcher babies, commit infanticide and embrace fornication and sexual depravity (please study some REAL world history: The fall of Rome).

Last edited by BigD on 24-Mar-2017 at 06:59 PM.
Last edited by BigD on 24-Mar-2017 at 06:56 PM.
Last edited by BigD on 24-Mar-2017 at 06:55 PM.
Last edited by BigD on 24-Mar-2017 at 06:52 PM.

_________________
"Art challenges technology. Technology inspires the art."
John Lasseter, Pixar Animation Studios

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Rob 
Re: Three Parent Babies given the all clear in the UK
Posted on 24-Mar-2017 22:22:35
#26 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 20-Mar-2003
Posts: 5559
From: S.Wales

@BigD

Quote:
All magnetic storage media bears a resemblance to other forms because a designer used similar technology to create it! Some contain extra sectors and capacities; so what do you deduce about their origins? Did they lived in the utimate transistor rich clean room, mutating into higher capacity drives? Did they evolved into SSD hard drives due to pure chance as resistors and silicon collided?!


You're talking nonsense. Storage media does not reproduce itself any advancement in technology requires intervention. Cells don't need special intervention to divide and produce further cells.

In manufacturing, products are usually made to stay within certain tolerances. In some cases each product is tested against the last at each stage of the process and if any variation is found the line is stopped and the relevant tool is replaced. There are no such safeguards in nature. If a cell creates an inexact copy as it divides, the mutated cell will produce copies of itself and not the cell it came from.

The fertilised eggs don't even reach the stage of a foetus before the nucleus of the donor egg is removed and replaced with that of the parents.

There is another technique where the nucleus of the donor egg is replaced with that of the mother before being fertilised. No embryo is destroyed in this process. This was acceptable for a Muslim couple in Mexico who had similar concerns to your own.

Last edited by Rob on 24-Mar-2017 at 11:52 PM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
AndyC 
Re: Three Parent Babies given the all clear in the UK
Posted on 25-Mar-2017 0:12:50
#27 ]
Regular Member
Joined: 28-Oct-2002
Posts: 180
From: Edinburgh

@BigD

This thread is pure gold. I wonder if it will reach the dizzying heights of the gay marriage thread?

/me gets popcorn

AndyC

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
BigD 
Re: Three Parent Babies given the all clear in the UK
Posted on 25-Mar-2017 0:33:07
#28 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 11-Aug-2005
Posts: 4067
From: UK

@Rob

Fertilised egg, fetus or embryo it's all human life being thrown in the incinerator at the whim of the medical elite and a selfish couple who despite having the equivalent of an unrecoverable checksum error on their sex organs think that the NHS and multiple human lives should bend to their will.

The muslim couple went to Mexico to dodge the sensible legislation that exists in the USA. Mexico has no bioethical safeguards and hence the US doctors involved could do whatever they wanted. The difference in the UK is that the politicians are complicit in this twisted GM-baby experiment. One London NHS Trust has stopped giving NHS funded IVF to save £2million over 2 years. Let's hope that this would be the sign of things to come. If IVF loses funding and we also stop aborting 200,000 babies a year we would have enough babies to adopt and there would be enough UK citizens so that we wouldn't need as much immigration to cover the job shortfalls. It's nuts to murder the healthy babies and then spend millions getting people who can't have children to be artificially inseminated thereby killing countless other embryos (that are classed as spares or byproducts) and costing the tax payer millions!

Last edited by BigD on 25-Mar-2017 at 12:35 AM.
Last edited by BigD on 25-Mar-2017 at 12:33 AM.

_________________
"Art challenges technology. Technology inspires the art."
John Lasseter, Pixar Animation Studios

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Nimrod 
Re: Three Parent Babies given the all clear in the UK
Posted on 28-Mar-2017 15:45:20
#29 ]
Super Member
Joined: 30-Jan-2010
Posts: 1182
From: Untied Kingdom

@BigD

Quote:
As previously divulged I have a Geology degree and am studying for a Masters. I'm perfectly aware of what science is and accepting the theory of evolution as proven fact definitely isn't science!!

I was not aware that you had previously claimed to have a geology degree, however your comment makes me wonder how much you paid as a back-hander to get a degree without understanding what a theory is in science. If I want to know anything about geology I will ask T-J. You may want to read his posts in the thread about "Nibiru" to see how somebody who actually does have a masters in geology presents his case.
A scientific theory summarizes a hypothesis or group of hypotheses that have been supported with repeated testing. If enough evidence accumulates to support a hypothesis, it moves to the next step - a theory - in the scientific method and becomes accepted as a valid explanation of a phenomenon.
A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method, and repeatedly confirmed through observation and experimentation.
As for your assertion that the bible is supported by science, that is blatantly ridiculous. For starters the bible asserts that we are on a flat earth that is at the centre of everything, being orbited by the Sun, and an equal sized, radiant moon.
The creation myths in Genesis 1 are directly contradicted by the creation myths in Genesis 2 and also both fantasies contradict both the evidence and basic logic. To understand the complete failure of creationism and its illegitimate offspring "Intelligent Design" you need to realise why Judge John E. Jones excoriated the Dover School board defendants in the Kitzmiller trial I loved the scene where Michael Behe got barricaded into the witness box behind a wall of books and papers that he had ignored because they refuted his presuppositions. Another highpoint for me was at 1:28 in the video where the transitional form "cdesign proponentsists" turns up in the drafts of the book, proving conclusively that creationism evolved into "Intelligent design" for entirely dishonest reasons

_________________
When in trouble, fear or doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Nimrod 
Re: Three Parent Babies given the all clear in the UK
Posted on 28-Mar-2017 15:50:18
#30 ]
Super Member
Joined: 30-Jan-2010
Posts: 1182
From: Untied Kingdom

@BigD
The other fallacy that you are falling into is the mistaken belief that if you somehow discredit Darwin it automatically makes your religion somehow magically superior to all of the other religions and exxempt from the need to prove its own assertions.
What evidence do you have to set your imaginary friend up as any different than Anoia, Benzeiten, Cronus, Dionysus, Eros, Freya, Geb, Hera, Isis, Jupiter, Kephri Loki, Marduk, Nemesis, Osiris, Poseidon, Quetzalcoatl, Ra, Saturn, Tengri, Uller, Vesta, Wadjet, Xanthe, Yakshini, or Zeus.
There are over 1100 different religions, and your preferred religion, Christianity, is subdivided into over 42,000 different denominations, persuasions, movements, communities, schisms, sects, orders and cults. Many of them involved in violent disputes with other "Christians". This very disunity among followers is the best possible indication that there is not a single grain of truth in the entire stinking cesspit of religious ideology.

_________________
When in trouble, fear or doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
BigD 
Re: Three Parent Babies given the all clear in the UK
Posted on 28-Mar-2017 17:38:15
#31 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 11-Aug-2005
Posts: 4067
From: UK

@Nimrod

Jesus did not come to start a 'religion' but to offer a THE way of communing with God despite our sinfulness. All 'religions' as far as I can tell are about working your way into a distant god's good books. A faith in Jesus is simply that; Jesus has atoned for our sin and by believing, asking forgiveness and turning from that sin we are saved. I don't see what that has to do with 'religion' and I don't make a habit of acknowledging them as they are such a waste of human energy. If you want to join a man made organisation join a snooker club or leisure centre. Sitting in a building and striving to reach a false god with hollow 'good works' or even 'Yaweh' if your doing it in your own strength with your own agenda, picking and chosing which part of the Bible you study etc is a pointless endeavour.

I really don't see any parallel between the reformed or early Christian church and organised sects or religions you describe. Due in part to the UK's push for multiculturism and inclusion maybe people have got confused that these are all just 'religions', but there is a reason that Jesus changed the world and other 'religious' figures just peddled a 'religion' and pointless traditions and sects. They offered no hope other than in an individuals own efforts to work their way to gods unknown or uncaring.

You can throw the unquestioning belief that natural selection equals evolution into the man-made 'religion' category as far as I'm concerned. Add to that the unquestioning worship of Dawin's theory of evolution. Darwin postulated a theory which is unproven. He doesn't have to be discredited to see how his studies into natural selection were valid but his final deductions and hypothesis that species could change into new species was deeply flawed and not proven by Galapagos finches! There were 15 species of finches studied and all showed variation in beak shape but it's still a jump to say they originally evolved from a common ancestor. They are seperate species after all and not a single 'evolved' new species has been documented in modern history. Just because you throw millions of years at a problem doesn't make it any more plausible. What about animals that can't possible have evolved such as the Bombardier beetle with the irreducible complexity of its defence system?

I must reiterate that order does not come out of chaos and mutation is observed to weaken offspring rather that strengthen them. However, a finch that has a beak that helps it to eat a certain type of food that is abundant will flourish over a species that has a less than favourable beak shape for that abundant food source. This obviously makes perfect sense. See also the example of Grey and Red squirrels; that's true natural selection; two species battling for supremacy. There's is no new 'evolved' squirrel species in sight and quite frankly why is the theory of evolution even mentioned when discussing animal distribution when natural selection does an adequate job? Maybe it's because people start from the premise that God doesn't exist and then they clutch at straws to attempt to explain him away despite the evidence to the contrary.

Last edited by BigD on 28-Mar-2017 at 05:50 PM.
Last edited by BigD on 28-Mar-2017 at 05:47 PM.
Last edited by BigD on 28-Mar-2017 at 05:46 PM.
Last edited by BigD on 28-Mar-2017 at 05:42 PM.
Last edited by BigD on 28-Mar-2017 at 05:38 PM.

_________________
"Art challenges technology. Technology inspires the art."
John Lasseter, Pixar Animation Studios

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Nimrod 
Re: Three Parent Babies given the all clear in the UK
Posted on 28-Mar-2017 22:00:40
#32 ]
Super Member
Joined: 30-Jan-2010
Posts: 1182
From: Untied Kingdom

@BigD
If you go into the chemistry laboratory of any school in the world you will see a chart on the wall listing the elements. No matter what school you go to they will all teach the periodic table of elements first hypothesised by the Russian scientist Gregor Mendeleev. The reason for this is quite siple, it is because Mendeleev's chart atomic numbers proved to be a better description of the nature of matter than Becher's ideas about phlogiston or the earlir ideas about there being four elements of Earth Fire Air and Water. When evidence exists for any given area of study all competing ideas quickly fall aside and only the truth remains. In the religious study classes of schools around the world all have different competing gods being worshipped, or similar gods worshipped in entirely different ways. This indicates a total absence of evidence on which to base answers.

Quote:
"No opinion can be heretical, but that which is not true.... Conflicting falsehoods we can comprehend; but truths can never war against each other." Rev Adam Sedgwick (22 March 1785 – 27 January 1873)
This quote from an eighteenth century theologian beautifully expresses the problem that plagues the stories about Jesus. If they were true they would not be mutually contradictory, and since the claims made in the bible are contradicted by other claims made in the same book then the claims cannot be true.

Did you know that when Charles Darwin signed on as a member of the expedition of the Beagle he was convinced that William Paley's "watchmaker" hypothesis was correct and that by collecting enough evidence he would be able to prove the hand of god in creation. The evidence however pointed away from divine intervention and towards natural selection. This shows that "belief" in evolution by natural selection has never fallen into the category of "unquestioning belief" In fact theists have been trying unsuccessfully to pour scorn on Darwins ideas since before he even published his book, and so far they have proved nothing beyond their own dishonesty.

You keep repeating the mantra that science involves unquestioning obedience to authority and acceptance of dogma. This use of false equivalence could not be further from the truth. Being a top scientist is akin to being the "fastest gun in the West" in that all the young guns want to topple you from your elevated status. Far from wanting to bolster Darwins status as the top dog any biologist who could successfully refute the scientific theory of evolution would instantly become the top dog, earning the Nobel Prize and many more scientific accolades. That is what happened to Albert Einstein when he came up with a better explanation of how gravity makes the planets orbit the Sun than Newton had postulated.

The other thing that you ignore about the biological sciences is that they have moved on more than a little sice Darwin first published. In his book Darwin predicted that the mechanism by which information is passed from generation to generation would be discovered. Had he been able to read German he would have known that Gregor Mendel was on the verge of making that discovery. Genetics came into being shortly after Darwins publication leading to the discovery of DNA. Darwin also predicted ring species, something you choose to ignore

Mutation does indeed often weaken and even kill the offspring. Many mutations are so instantly deadly that the foetus is aborted within days, if not hours of the sperm meeting the ovum. Other mutations like the one for blue eyes, or blonde hair make no discernible difference. some mutations such as the one that enabled certain bacteria to exploit a new food source however are beneficial. Hence the evolution of Flavobacterium sp. KI72 and Pseudomonas aeruginosa, the two first nylon eating bacteria. One of these evolved in the waste storage of a chemical works, and the other evolved while under observation in a laboratory.

As I have already pointed out to you, biologists have moved on from simple observation that led Darwin to his ideas. They can now read the genome of a creature or a plant and determine its ancestry, so they do know that all of the "Darwin's Finches" do indeed have a common ancestry. Likewise the defence mechanism of the Bombardier Beetle is no more "Irreducibly complex" than the human eye, or even the much quoted example from the Kitzmiller trial the bacterial flagellum.

Last edited by Nimrod on 28-Mar-2017 at 10:37 PM.
Last edited by Nimrod on 28-Mar-2017 at 10:28 PM.
Last edited by Nimrod on 28-Mar-2017 at 10:26 PM.
Last edited by Nimrod on 28-Mar-2017 at 10:25 PM.
Last edited by Nimrod on 28-Mar-2017 at 10:24 PM.

_________________
When in trouble, fear or doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Nimrod 
Re: Three Parent Babies given the all clear in the UK
Posted on 28-Mar-2017 22:19:01
#33 ]
Super Member
Joined: 30-Jan-2010
Posts: 1182
From: Untied Kingdom

@BigD
Quote:
Maybe it's because people start from the premise that God doesn't exist

I will ask you again What evidence do you have to support the idea that your imaginary magic skyfairy is any different from the alphabet of imaginary magic skyfairies that I posted?
Can you prove that ANY deities exist, and beyond that can you even demonstrate that the deity you presuppose is
a) real
b) somehow superior to any of the other deities.

In fact not only is there no contemporary archaeological, historical, or documented evidence that "Jesus" existed, there is also no archaeological, historical, or documented evidence that NAZARETH existed before the site was decided on by the Roman emperor Constantine's mother. In fact such evidence as exists demonstrates that neither Jesus nor Nazareth existed during the lifetime of Herod the great or at least a century after his death.

As a child I believed in god, just as I believed in Santa Claus. At the age of seven when I began to learn the skill of "critical thinking I stopped believing in Santa, and shortly after applied the same logic to the god that my parents had hammered into my mind. It took quite a bit of shifting, but eventually I was able to overcome the childhood conditioning, so NO, I didn't start with the idea that god didn't exist, it took a lot of mental discipline to come to that conclusion and even more determination to tell the ordained minister who was headmaster of my school that I no longer believed in his invisible friend. My first declaration of independence was almost half a century ago, and I was able to produce proofs from the bible to back my claim that the bible was entirely fictional. The intervening years have not changed my mind.

_________________
When in trouble, fear or doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
BigD 
Re: Three Parent Babies given the all clear in the UK
Posted on 28-Mar-2017 22:50:25
#34 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 11-Aug-2005
Posts: 4067
From: UK

@Nimrod

Quote:
They can now read the genome of a creature or a plant and determine its ancestry, so they do know that all of the "Darwin's Finches" do indeed have a common ancestry. Likewise the defence mechanism of the Bombardier Beetle is no more "Irreducibly complex" than the human eye, or even the much quoted example from the Kitzmiller trial the bacterial flagellum.


So you do accept that it's highly improbable that both a human eye and a Bombardier Beetle would be produced by chance and chaos then? Progress

Quote:
Darwin also predicted ring species, something you choose to ignore


Show me a present day ring species alive today that can only procreate with some but not all of its own species and I'll consider it evidence. Other than that it's pure conjecture and just another wishful thinking faith position to explain away the creator God.

In regards to your bacteria example, they redroduce asexually and so the concept of species change is not comparible to a theoretical theory of evolution. The subtle changes in, say, the shape of a certain protein which sits on the cell wall of a bacteria are again explained by natural selection not evolution. The same processes that change the shape of a protein cannot explain the intricate design of the human eye or the Bombardier Beetle. As comparison, the seemingly periodic ripples in a garden pond cannot explain the careful intricate design of a luxury watch.

_________________
"Art challenges technology. Technology inspires the art."
John Lasseter, Pixar Animation Studios

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
BigD 
Re: Three Parent Babies given the all clear in the UK
Posted on 28-Mar-2017 22:56:41
#35 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 11-Aug-2005
Posts: 4067
From: UK

@Nimrod

Quote:
In fact not only is there no contemporary archaeological, historical, or documented evidence that "Jesus" existed


Now you really are deluded! I've asked you before to read Frank Morrison's book; Who Moved the Stone (written by a secular lawyer). Please read it before you make more ridiculous statements about there being no contemporary historical; evidence of Jesus' life and death. It just makes you seem really uninformed and arrogant to be honest (like you know all there is to know about this subject) without reading up on it. That or give Mark's gospel another go

Last edited by BigD on 28-Mar-2017 at 10:57 PM.

_________________
"Art challenges technology. Technology inspires the art."
John Lasseter, Pixar Animation Studios

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
BigD 
Re: Three Parent Babies given the all clear in the UK
Posted on 28-Mar-2017 23:05:12
#36 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 11-Aug-2005
Posts: 4067
From: UK

@Nimrod

P.S. That's a funny cartoon because that's exactly what evolutionary scientists do. Assume the theory of evolution is true and then build assumption on top of assumption without ever needing to show modern day observable proof!

The whole blinkered thinking that "chaos is improbable in creating the human eyeball unless you consider it took millions of years", is a case in point. You're assuming we evolved for starters (unprovable) and then you assume you know how long the imaginery process has been occuring to give it more credence! I've seen the correction factors in dating calculations to give calculations the 'correct' order of magnitude. As I said it all starts with a faith position or were you there when the first amphibean crawled out of the primordeal soup?

_________________
"Art challenges technology. Technology inspires the art."
John Lasseter, Pixar Animation Studios

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Nimrod 
Re: Three Parent Babies given the all clear in the UK
Posted on 29-Mar-2017 14:59:42
#37 ]
Super Member
Joined: 30-Jan-2010
Posts: 1182
From: Untied Kingdom

@BigD

Quote:
So you do accept that it's highly improbable that both a human eye and a Bombardier Beetle would be produced by chance and chaos then?
Improbable, yes, but not as impossible as an intangible invisible skyfairy wishing them into existence using a magic incantation or golem spell, depending on which of the mutually contradictory creation myths you want to accept from the "Wholly Babble"

Quote:
Show me a present day ring species alive today that can only procreate with some but not all of its own species and I'll consider it evidence.
It doesn't matter whether you consider it evidence or not, you are not the judge in this matter. Larus Gulls are one ring species that you will see flying around Britain, and there are also Ensatina Salamanders in America, and the Greenish Warbler

It doesn't matter what hey do to reproduce, whether genetic material is exchanged between individuals or simple cell fission is the mechanism the fact remains that transcription errors or other mutations occur. And if natural selection gives the mutated offspring an advantage then evolution by means of natural selection has just occurred. Your pathetic attempt to separate the result from the mechanism by pretending that "natural selection" is somehow different from evolution will not wash. It shows not only your ignorance of science but also your total and absolute lack of honesty.

Finally your closing claim on your post of 28-Mar-2017 22:50:25 is also wrong in every way. The accumulation of minor and almost insignificant changes not only can but DOES explain the evolution of the intricacies of the human eye, the Bombardier Beetle's defence mechanism, the immune response and all the other things that liars like Michael Behe and his wedge organisation keep touting as "proofs of ID" In fact even his term of "Irreducible complexity" was a plagiarism and deliberate misrepresentation of Herman Muller's "Interlocking Complexity" which was an explanation of how new systems and functions can be, and indeed are added.

_________________
When in trouble, fear or doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Nimrod 
Re: Three Parent Babies given the all clear in the UK
Posted on 29-Mar-2017 15:12:48
#38 ]
Super Member
Joined: 30-Jan-2010
Posts: 1182
From: Untied Kingdom

@BigD
You keep insisting on reversing the truth in your claims. When Darwin first started gathering the evidence that led to his theory of evolution by means of natural selection, he was not "assuming" that evolution occurred by natural selection. In fact he was looking to prove William Paley's "watchmaker" hypothesis to be true. So even Darwin himself wanted evolution by natural selection to be wrong.

You have however inadvertently given away the reason you have to be so insistent that evolution has to be discredited regardless of the facts. Evolution is proof that the world was not created at 09:30 in the morning of the 22nd of October 4004BC as claimed by Bishop James Ussher. Geology and evolutionary biology prove an old Earth that came about by natural means having absolutely no requirement for intervention by an invisible intangible skyfairy with a magic wand, and you hate them for it.

Even if you could prove Darwin made mistakes (which he did, but you don't know what they were) that still doesn't prove your claims to be true, any more than Darwins errors prove the Hindu pantheon and creation mythology to be true. If you want to prove the Christian religion to be the one true faith™" then you need to find some evidence to show that somebody who was a "young child" during the reign of Herod the great which ended in 4BC could hide so successfully that he wasn't even born until more than ten years after the death of Herod the great. Is that what you Christ-stains mean when you talk about "born again?"

_________________
When in trouble, fear or doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
broadblues 
Re: Three Parent Babies given the all clear in the UK
Posted on 29-Mar-2017 17:28:06
#39 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 20-Jul-2004
Posts: 4119
From: Portsmouth England

@BigD

Quote:

Quote:
They can now read the genome of a creature or a plant and determine its ancestry, so they do know that all of the "Darwin's Finches" do indeed have a common ancestry. Likewise the defence mechanism of the Bombardier Beetle is no more "Irreducibly complex" than the human eye, or even the much quoted example from the Kitzmiller trial the bacterial flagellum.

Quote:

So you do accept that it's highly improbable that both a human eye and a Bombardier Beetle would be produced by chance and chaos then? Progress



Your reading comprehension skills need alittle work there I think!

Last edited by broadblues on 29-Mar-2017 at 05:28 PM.

_________________
BroadBlues On Blues BroadBlues On Amiga Walker Broad

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Nimrod 
Re: Three Parent Babies given the all clear in the UK
Posted on 29-Mar-2017 18:11:34
#40 ]
Super Member
Joined: 30-Jan-2010
Posts: 1182
From: Untied Kingdom

@BigD
What makes you think that I haven't read the source you state? The fact that lies and baseless assumptions no longer impress me doesn't mean I haven't been made aware of the nature of the lies and baseless assumptions. Likewise unless you are going to point out something in Marks disjointed collection of folk tales and fantasies that actually offers proof, or a reference to verifiable evidence, don't waste my time. The Author of "Mark" wrote his stories around AD70 as the Jewish revolt crumbled and Jerusalem was being beseiged. Whoever he was knew nothing of the geography of Galilee and even less about Jewish law. The events as told just before the story of the demons in the piggies involves Jesus going for a morning stroll with his mates. A casual stroll of around eighty miles that includes doubling back on himself for over twenty miles because the only route from Sidon to Tiberias at the time went through Tyre, where he had just set out from. Then there is the problem of the piggies. In Marks story Gerasa is half way between lake Tiberias and the dead sea and also further to the east of Jordan than Jerusalem is to the west. In other words it is nowhere near the "sea of Galilee". Matthew attempts to correct this by moving the story to Gergesa which has the advantage of being right by the shore, but unfortunately there is no hill for the piggies to run down before drowning themselves. Luke looked for a town that was closer to the lake than Gerasa and was in hilly country but Gadara is still so far from the lake that the piggies would have been knackered long before they got their little trotters wet.

"Mark" also knows nothing of Jewish law as is evidenced by Mark 10:12 "And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery." Jewish women didn't win the right to divorce their husbands until the twelfth century, and even that was strictly limited.

_________________
When in trouble, fear or doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 Next Page )

[ home ][ about us ] [ forums ][ classifieds ] [ links ][ news archive ] [ link to us ][ user account ]
Copyright © 2000 - 2017 Amigaworld.net.

Amigaworld.net was originally founded by David Doyle