Scientists Decipher the Chimpanzee's DNA

[optimist_1]

[quote="dhuusa_deer"]

Why are you keep harping on the unsupported 'implausibility' of life arising from lifeless chemicals? I already explained to you that we HAVE actually made protiens, the building blocks of life, from inorganic chemicals in laboratories under early earth atmospheric conditions. Why is that so hard for you to believe Ureeyso? We have the evidence for it, does that not mean anything to you? cajeeb

Besides, evolution's reference point is the first living organism. Not how first living organism came about.[/quote]

they tried but they failed wasaqyahow. Why u gotta ly.Show me the evidence

[dhuusa_deer]

optimist,

what are your scietific credentials?

if I get you a bona fide scientific paper, a peer reviewed one, that details experimentals results where simple inanimate amino acids (the building blocks of protiens) self-assembled into polymers of amino acids, would accept it?

[optimist_1]

Dhuusa now you talking. The basic building blocks of life hydrogen nitrogen oxygen did they suddenly form an organism?

Show me the stuff!!

[dhuusa_deer]

[quote="optimist_1"]Dhuusa now you talking. The basic building blocks of life hydrogen nitrogen oxygen did they suddenly form an organism?

Show me the stuff!![/quote]

NO! becuz that is not what I said I can provide evidence for. Go back and reread what i wrote. I said we could get simple inanimate, inorganic chemicals to 'self-assemble' into organic compounds. That is what we can do in labs NOW. Who knows what we will be able to accomplish in the future.

So we have demonstrated that you can ACTUALLY have simple chemicals in the environment self-assemble into larger compounds.

Remember that this has NOTHING to do with evolution theory. This is abiogenesis NOT evolution theory.

So will you accept experimental results if I provide you the paper? Yes or No.

[optimist_1]

Dhuusa show the paper im interested what exactly they have used.

[dhuusa_deer]

[quote="optimist_1"]Dhuusa show the paper im interested what exactly they have used.[/quote]

Fine. But you'll have to wait. It takes time to get and i don't have time now.

[optimist_1]

Dhuusa when is why i left islam coming up?

[dhuusa_deer]

^^^when the crypto facists running this site promise not to delete it. They already deleted 'why I left islam posts'. I have no reason to bother writting long essay to see deleted by lowlife cretins.

[LionHeart-112]

^^in another words, NEVER!

[optimist_1]

Dhuusa war make a new post or pm it me

Im curious.

Post that paper too dont forget

[dhuusa_deer]

[quote="optimist_1"]Dhuusa war make a new post or pm it me

Im curious.

Post that paper too dont forget[/quote]

Let me think about it.

I'll give you a hint. It involved 6'0" tall black woman, ugly as hell, claiming to be sheeytaan. I'm not kidding. And it wasn't dream or a day-dreamor hallucination. it happened for real and it scared the shit out of me for good I'm still afraid of big black woman.

[LionHeart-112]

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOH MYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOD..

U CONFIRMED MY SUSPICIONS...DHUUSO, U ARE AN IDIOT! A COMPLETE AND UTTER MORON..

[optimist_1]

That wasn't even funny dhuuso i want to know whyyy

[Ureysoo]

*Dhago Dheer*…..

u know what bro, im just nauseous and exhausted, attempting 2 acknowledge u about certain points which u neglected, seems u r hard headed more than I even contemplated *bisinka*….in this particular post I’ll determined 2 deliberate on the *evolution theory* more than *DNAs*, cause if I instigated portraying the genetic make-ups, plainly will end up waffling on about it, without reaching any sort of obedience…

1st of all *Darwinian* theories appear far 2 weak 2 have brought about the remarkable structures evident in living creatures…if 1 assumes that all life arose out of random generations of proteins then there's a problem. well, every known example of *genetic mutation* either produces no noticeable change or causes death *or in rare cases undoes the mistake of a past mutation*…yet again, *Darwinian evolution* relies on random point mutations creating lots of biological advantages...which is so impossible cause the ratio of useful proteins 2 possible random proteins is 1:10500 therefore, barring incredible fortune, it would take about 10500 trials 2 produce 1 useful protein when a cell needs a minimum of 1 to 2 thousand proteins…consequently, life appeared on earth 2 quickly 4 the *Darwinian* theory of evolution 2 be completely accurate….how can it be in a *random* way, seems like the old hag was bit confused…

beside the speed of the progression of species we see in the fossil record is not consistent with the amount of time it would take 4 the gradual evolution proposed by *Darwinism*…it’s almost certain that genes have diverged over time creating new species…conversely, how these genes diverged is the debatable point….well *Darwinism* maintains that genetic divergence results from chance mutations, nevertheless life has evolved much 2 quickly for this theory 2 be plausible. 4 example if we went back 2 our discussion, *chimps* and *humans* whom r supposed 2 share 98% of their *DNA*…if 1 assumes organisms with a generation time of 20 years could accumulate about 1700 mutations, then it would still not be sufficient enough 2 clarify the genetic dissimilarity between chimps and humans…just knowing the verity his whole theory is build up that live occurred in a random way, makes it grueling 2 demonstrate and comes up 2 scratch 2 be even close proximity 2 reality …*Darwinism* maintains that evolution is a gradual smooth process… yet again the evidence is 2 the contrary….there r numerous *gaps* in the line of evolution…. cause *simply life can’t occur from random genetic mutations*…..

alongside, *evolutionism* has not produced a scientifically credible explanation 4 the origin of such immense complexities as *DNA*, the human *brain*, and many other complex elements of the *cosmos*….and it’s highly premature 4 materialists 2 claim that all living things evolved into existence, when science has yet 2 discover how even 1 protein molecule could actually have come into existence by natural processes…
since u believe in *evolutionism*…*how did living beings, incredibly diversified in nature, emerge* ....*how did the flawless order in the whole universe come into being* ...after knowing the verity there has never been a substantiated case of a living thing being produced from anything other than another living thing….which undoubtedly illustrated that *creationism* does exist….and it’s beyond *humans and animals*…which again makes my solicit 4 a respond 2 this particular Q… *who provided the delicate balances in the world* ...did u ever asked ur self *how the sky is created* …and after all funny how ppl declare that*gravity clasps every thing, but how come the sky didn’t fall of….authenticate that *Allah* is the almighty creator…as it averred in the *Quran* …

***(God! There is no god but Him, the Living, the Self-Sustaining. He is not subject to drowsiness or sleep. Everything in the heavens and the earth belongs to Him. Who can intercede with Him except by His permission He knows what is before them and what is behind them but they cannot grasp any of His knowledge save what He wills. His Footstool encompasses the heavens and the earth and their preservation does not tire Him. He is the Most High, the Magnificent (Surat al-Baqarah: 255)***...

ur comments… *Atheism predated darwin and his theory. In fact my favourite athiest book and probably the best ever, was written before darwin published his theory If you think my believe in evolution thoery is becuz I'm athiest and it gives an explanation not needing God, you are mistaken lady! ….I accept evolution theory becuz it is a FACT and it is a demonstrable one.*…

well, u might be an extraordinary individual, but most of the *atheists* espoused *evolution theory* cause *Darwin* gave them a phony clarification of *How did human beings and living things come to be* ?..that Q was the *vulnerable spot* point 4 all *atheist*…cause that was inhibiting them from disregarding the existence of God…but after *Darwin* came up with *evolutionism* materialize like they adopted it, cause that assisted them 2 neglect *creationism*…..

ur comments.. *Please humiliate me, it means I'll finally learn something from this site, really. Feel free to unleash everything you got, show no clemency *

*aheem aheem* obligating or demeaning isn’t a way 2 acknowledge ppl about certain things, *matter of fact* if u utilized such a way, they might as well rebuff ur point of views and scrutiny cause they felt affronted and the only way 2 shield them selves is 2 verifying the specific person is off beam by coming up with some amplification, which always seems 2 be *bogus*… unfortunately the person won’t be capable of using his mind in the precise way, cause hostility and revenge r taking over it…in another terms they’ll *insult u* rather than maintaining scribbling down facts…on the other hand I believe * a soft answers eases away wrath*…..

[dhuusa_deer]

Ureeyso, Mrs. Verbiage

“u know what bro, im just nauseous and exhausted, attempting 2 acknowledge u about certain points which u neglected, seems u r hard headed more than I even contemplated *bisinka*”
I’m not hard headed at all, just don’t agree with what you wrote. This is a discussion and in discussions like this ppl don’t always agree; more importantly don’t HAVE TO agree. The goal is to get facts straight and hopefully learn something you didn’t know before. This doesn’t mean I won’t agree with you on anything you say. If you show false facts I presented, I’ll without reservation accept my error.

BTW, are you a student of science? If so, what do you take or hope to take?

Darwin’s theory (Evolution Theory) is not weak considering all the available supporting data. This is classic example of logical fallacy Argumentum Ad ignorantiam.. You are simply argueing from a position of ignorance. Had you bothered to read the case for Evolution Theory you wouldn’t have uttered the words: darwinism is too weak. Too weak on what? Evidence?

The case for Evolution Theory is conclusive and comprehensive. It consists not only of collected data but demonstrable facts as well. We have actually demonstrated in labs that evolution (speciation) is not only a theoretical possibility but a reality. Scientists engineered the speciation of Drosophila (fruit flies), Musca domestica (housefly), Rhagoletis pomonella (Apple Maggot Fly among others. So we have shown, experimentally, that evolution is a fact. Further, speciation is observed in nature as well.

What more evidence do you need to accept the fact that one species evolves into another by the process postulated by Natural Selection? If you’re not convinced, state precisely what is not clear to you.

Now, before this debate proceeds any further, lets define what Evolution means. The basic definition of evolution is ‘change in allele frequency of a population’.

Alleles determine traits such as skin color, height, eye color etc. People often confuse physical (morphological) change and evolution. You can have morphological change without having evolution taking place and have evolution take place without morphological change taking place. Take us humans for example. We are physically bigger then our ancestors solely because we consume better diet then they did. But no evolution took place because this physical change is not the result of change in allele frequency, its not heritable change. We can’t pass it on to our offsprings.

You said: *Darwinian evolution* relies on random point mutations creating lots of biological advantages...which is so impossible cause the ratio of useful proteins 2 possible random proteins is 1:10500

Response: Evolution Theory actually relies on genetic diversity and not ‘advantages’ genes. Some of these genetic diversity is advantages, some not.

Evolution never takes place at the individual level but at population level. Each individual has unique genetic make up that adds to the genetic diversity of the population. All the genetically unique individuals give the gene pool of the population a rich genetic diversity. It is this diversity that Natural selection acts on. But there is something important you should know.

Evolution NEVER occurs in large established populations with fixed allele frequency. This is because in such populations there is no pressure for change and its allele frequence is stable enough to withstand any sudden ad/dis-vantageous reduction or addition to its total makeup. However, in smaller population, it’s a different story. Usually when evolution occurs, it is often small group of the much larger population that gets separated for many reasons (weather, natural disasters, diseases,...). When this small group, usually on the margins of the gene pool of parent population, ends up in totally different environment, natural selections facilitates adaptation to new environment. This adaptation maybe genotypic or phenotypic but adaptation nonetheless. Consequently, change results formation of entirely new species, one whose allele frequency is different from parent population. Because this group is VERY small in numbers, change in allele frequence is a must occurance as there are few individuals in the population and small gene pool. This happens via differential reproductive of individuals making up the population. Individuals with advantageous genes will outproduce the rest, therefore increasing there own alleles in the gene pool. The influx of new alleles to the gene pool will change the available alleles that Natural selection could act on, thus resulting in formation of new species.

I do not understand where you got the figure 1:10500 from, it makes no sense at all. Its looks impossible as your body needs protein production far greater since proteins are essential to the functioning of your body. Maybe you can elaborate more.

“beside the speed of the progression of species we see in the fossil record is not consistent with the amount of time it would take 4 the gradual evolution proposed by *Darwinism*”

Refer to my explanation above. Evolution takes place with small population where individuals with advantageous alleles can ‘crowd out’ the more frequent allele’s invdividual in much shorter time period.

“theory is build up that live occurred in a random way, makes it grueling 2 demonstrate and comes up 2 scratch 2 be even close proximity 2 reality”

That is NOT what the Evolution Theory. Are you sure you are reading the same Evolution Theory I’m reading? We can and have demonstrated the factuality of evolution. Does that mean anything to you Ureeyso? Look up the names of the species we have observed ‘evolve’ in labs that I already gave. Others include Yeasts and Bacteria. I’m interested to hear your reply.

“yet again the evidence is 2 the contrary….there r numerous *gaps* in the line of evolution…. cause”

There are NO ‘numerous gaps’ in evolution theory. There are some. Good explanations exist for why. But this does not discredit Evolution Theory one iota. It would be foolish to expect perfect preservation of the fossil record of evolution as climes changed on numerous occasions and there were a number of major extinctions. The earth has changed from one our ancestors dwelled on. However, whatever ‘gaps’ or shortcomings found in the fossil records are filled by the other fields like comparative biochemistry, genetics and anatomy. As well as biogeography, ecology and geology. Scientists rely on the evidence gathered from ALL these fields to make conclusions and not only fossil record evidence.

“alongside, *evolutionism* has not produced a scientifically credible explanation 4 the origin of such immense complexities as *DNA*, the human *brain*, and many other complex elements of the *cosmos*”

With exception of the brain (science does have an explanation for the evolution of the brain), none of what you write above deals with evolution theory. Evolution Theory frame of reference is the existence of at least one living organism. How that organism came into existence is outside the scope of evolution theory. That field is called Abiogenesis. You can’t rationally reject Evolution Theory because it doesn’t provide an explanation on the formation of the first living organism. That is rejecting it for something it doesn’t deal with. Very much like rejecting cars because they can’t fly you; cars aren’t meant to fly you. Same story with ‘cosmos’. Why would you expect evolution theory to explain the origin of the cosmos when it specifically states it purpose is to explain how living things evolved from first living organism?

“and it’s highly premature 4 materialists 2 claim that all living things evolved into existence, when science has yet 2 discover how even 1 protein molecule could actually have come into existence by natural processe”

Again, you are wrong. Proteins do come into existence by natural process all the time. You are an example! We can also synthesis proteins in labs.

“since u believe in *evolutionism*…*how did living beings, incredibly diversified in nature, emerge* flawless order in the whole universe come into being*”

I believe life first arose from lifeless chemicals in a simple process taking millions of years. I also think it is purely accidental that life happened to be a possibility only on our planet and not others. Or why it is only our planet is conducive to life and not others. I have no reason to believe there is a divine being behind life because there is no evidence for such entity. There is a lot evidence for evolution, equally impressive evidence for invariant natural laws being behind the workings of our world. Therefore I believe what facts show to exist and behind the workings of our universe and not what can’t be verified or sensed in any way.

BTW, what flawless order are you talking about? Ever heard of Thermodynamics Second Law, the law of entropy which describes that things in our universe are getting more disorderly as time elapses not less orderly? There is no order in the universe but chaos.

“after knowing the verity there has never been a substantiated case of a living thing being produced from anything other than another living thing….which undoubtedly illustrated that *creationism* does exist”

No, it doesn’t. It only shows that living things are born out of other living things. Nothing more.

“*who provided the delicate balances in the world*”

Invariant natural laws of the universe.

“did u ever asked ur self *how the sky is created*”

The sky wasn’t ‘created’ but formed by natural process billions of years ago. We know HOW. No mystery. And yes, I have asked that question myself.

“and after all funny how ppl declare that*gravity clasps every thing, but how come the sky didn’t fall of”

Huh? What do you mean ‘sky didn’t fall of?’ The sky is nothing but gas and air, what is there to fall off or be clapsed by gravity?

“How did human beings and living things come to be?”

As explained by Evolution Theory.

“that Q was the *vulnerable spot* point 4 all *atheist*”

Not for me.

“cause that was inhibiting them from disregarding the existence of God…but after *Darwin* came up with *evolutionism* materialize like they adopted it, cause that assisted them 2 neglect *creationism*”

No, Evolution Theory came about because the alternative theory, Creationism, failed to pass the test of scientific and rational scrutiny. It couldn’t stand up against FACTS of nature. Simple as that. If Creationism was a convincing theory backed by facts as we see in nature, there would be no need for Evolution theory.

“*aheem aheem* obligating or demeaning isn’t a way 2 acknowledge ppl about certain things, *matter of fact* if u utilized such a way, they might as well rebuff ur point of views and scrutiny cause they felt affronted”

So is this mean you won’t verbally abuse me? That is an anticlimax, I had my hopes high.