Every mutation that the Evotards believe are "positive" actually have genetic diseases associated with them, sometimes up to six multicausal diseases. When they present them to the cult of moron believers, the believers never check out the sources to realize this. Believers only want to believe. They don't want the truth.
There are 6800 and more genetic diseases caused by deleterious mutations, because there is no other kind of mutation.
READ TWICE: We know they are screwed up DNA coding because we can see the original fit condition in people who do not have the particular disease. Read AGAIN and again.
That means there is only genetic degradation shown in ALL the absolutely irrefutable physical evidence.
There is no evolution from simple towards complex.
There are 6800 and more genetic diseases caused by deleterious mutations, because there is no other kind of mutation.
READ TWICE: We know they are screwed up DNA coding because we can see the original fit condition in people who do not have the particular disease. Read AGAIN and again.
That means there is only genetic degradation shown in ALL the absolutely irrefutable physical evidence.
There is no evolution from simple towards complex.
We know there are now 6000 diseases caused by screwed up mutations because we have samples of the correct coding in some people.
That means the fit condition is already existing. There is no way for any improvements to take place from "evolution" because there is no genetic mechanism for it.
There are 6800 and more genetic diseases caused by deleterious mutations, because there is no other kind of mutation.
READ TWICE: We know they are screwed up DNA coding because we can see the original fit condition in people who do not have the particular disease. Read AGAIN and again.
That means there is only genetic degradation shown in ALL the absolutely irrefutable physical evidence.
There is no evolution from simple towards complex.
There are 6800 and more genetic diseases caused by deleterious mutations, because there is no other kind of mutation.
READ TWICE: We know they are screwed up DNA coding because we can see the original fit condition in people who do not have the particular disease. Read AGAIN and again.
That means there is only genetic degradation shown in ALL the absolutely irrefutable physical evidence.
There is no evolution from simple towards complex.
The truth is we have traced ONLY genetic degradation in DNA evidence on humans. There are over 6800 diseases directly associated with genetic defects. We know these are defects because we have the older fit condition of any gene producing fit cells in living humans. There is only genetic degradation in humans. There is no such thing as "human evolution". It is human degradation leading to extinction.
Every mutation that the Evodelusionists PhD's Medical Doctors, Biologists have presented as positive, have at least three genetic diseases associated with them. There in no mechanism for evolution.
All of the evidence we have on humans only shows genetic degradation as our path of self destruction.
@peteymandem Quiz; Why do we know these negative mutations that cause disease exist? What do we see in people without a particular disease in that area of the DNA that reflects this disease?
@peteymandem Ah yes, but scientists are more likely than other people to look up statistics, check facts, look for causes and correlations, and in general live in the real world. I don't know about you, but those are traits and habits that I myself feel are useful in making any kind of decisions, political or otherwise. They are also traits I would hope to find in politicians I would vote for. They are also traits sadly lacking in the majority of the electorate.
@ptolemyauletesXII That's true thanks for actually making a valid argument. I agree with everything you said, however I would also like to point out that scientists are generally atheist, christians have given the right wing a bad name in america, same reason you don't get many gay republicans. I'm sure if you took the bigotry out of the republicans the numbers would start to increase. I'm right wing in many ways and i would be embarrassed to say I voted Repubican if I lived in America.
So a guy that studies bugs or whatever is automatically politically enlightened? Are we to assume scientist are studying the cause of the European crisis and its effect on the value of our dollar while they are drilling ice core samples in the arctic? As someone that dislikes both parties, I think this clip is the same poor application of childish logic being used to chide the other side. People like Cenk and Beck encourage the ignorance and arrogance of both parties with this kind of soundbite.
@ABE01dr Being a scientist requires, for no matter what form of work it is, a University degree, that makes scientists, of any sort, more inteligent then the avarage Republican.
@dave19941000 Actually in the real world. A degree doesn't mean shit. This is why companies hire specialist to weed out the people who have degrees but have no brains to perform even simple jobs. It has been proven that when people get a four year degree their IQ's go down at least 10 points. This is from the conflicting bullshit being taught.
@peteymandem "An IQ never changes" Bullshit. Every hear of Google? There are many reasons for IQ's to change all physiological and or psychological. When the mind is clear and fresh with less conflicting data, it works better. That is why I teach people to never believe anyone until you find absolute evidence to back up a claim. If they tell you there is no absolute evidence then tell them they are insane for believing in unproven crap.
@AlanCFA Actually it does. I always thought it was from all the drinking in college. But it turns out it is from the confusing bullshit that is contrary to logic mostly from crap sciences like Evodelusionism. The mind does not do well with delusional bullshit.
The numbers come from Human Genome Project. NORD, Diabetes.org, CDC. You education seems to leave out a lot of data. Deaths from cancer have gone up 20% per day since 1948 (no treatments other than cutting), even with all the modern treatments. Cancer is winning because the human genome is degrading faster than ever with modern mutagens.
In less than 3000 years we will be extinct at the present rate. And you believe in magical mutations? What is the matter with your education?
i like how 45% are independent. they know whats up. polarization of dems and reps will run this country into the ground. thanks to news and opinion like this. when everything goes to shit after years and years of gridlock the people will turn their backs on this sort of media, and we will enter an age of reason and critical thinking(those who dont will fall straight to the bottom rungs of society), and a golden age willl begin(not just the US, the entire world). hopefully its in my lifetime
WHATS GENIUS ABOUT BEING A SOCIAL PARASITE? WHATS GENIUS ABOUT BEING A GANG BANGER? WHATS GENIUS ABOUT BEING A FAT WELFARE MOM WITH 7 CHILDREN WHO ALL LIVE ON FOOD STAMPS? WHATS GENIUS ABOUT AL GORE'S DUMB FUCKING MOVIE? ARE'NT WE SUPPOSED TO BE UNDER WATER RIGHT NOW? I THOUGHT YOU WERE GOING TO END ALL WAR, WHATS GENIUS ABOUT BLOWING UP ARABS WITHOUT EVEN ASKING QUESTIONS? WHATS GENIUS ABOUT DESTROYING THE ECONOMY? YOU HAVE TO REMIND THEM WHO THEY ARE EVER SO OFTEN
@petersz98 I agree that only educated persons have the moral justification to vote. That's the general idea of the Electoral College and Legislators. On that principle, I believe that debates for office and EC should have mandatory law questions. Ask Romney what Constitutional Amendment talks about the housing of soldiers and he might stutter a little. These debates are a joke. Almost all of them want to Executive Order the United States into chaos and bomb Iran into the ocean.
Liberals are far more likely to throw around money and scientific grants than fiscal conservatives.
I can't imagine scientists shun republicans just because of evolution, especially since it's a topic that doesn't really affect politics, at least when politics is done right.
I'm an extremely intelligent Republican Atheist, and I'm here to tell you that there are morons on all sides. Let's hope that the 55% of scientists are the freely charitable and socially-free kind of Democrats and not the Simpsons-quoting, genital-awed, immature, conclusion-jumping kind.
You're absolutely right when you make the point that religion and science can't mix. I wish that "Scientist = Smart" were always true. It's not. Some people just do what they're told.
@petersz98 Most of them. When you start talking about raising taxes, you're feeding special interest groups and mismanagement of existing programs, those of which Statists love. If you're being serious about the camps (which I can't believe anyone would be), you're talking about another instrument of force. Force is force, no matter what the intention. I'm an old school Republican, unlike the Neo-Cons.
I've had second thoughts putting people in re-education camps is a bit extreme! Instead when Americans register to vote they should have to pass a stupid test asking questions like the following:-
Is North Korea an ally of the USA?
Is Africa a country or a continent?
Is evolution a proven fact?
Is global warning a proven fact?
Its expected 1 in 3 Americans (mostly Republicans) would fail the test and would not be allowed to vote until they get all the answers right. LOL
@petersz98 You are an Evotard, and that is clear, since there is no evolution found on this planet. There is only genetic degradation shown in ALL complex multicellular creatures. DNA is absolute evidence showing this is the only reality.
@GoodScienceForYou "There is only genetic degradation shown in ALL complex multicellular creatures. DNA is absolute evidence showing this is the only reality."
Look, clown. Ever hear of genetic algorithms? These things mirror the biological natural selection process in computer science and the approach essentially is an general optimization algorithm with well understood performance characteristics.
@GoodScienceForYou They are used all over the place where complex multi-variable optimization is required and completely destroy human intuition in finding efficient solutions. It should come as no surprise, therefore, that experiments refuting your assertion have been done. Destroying functional DNA on purpose and watching the original functionality evolve back over generations through simple random mutation and natural selection.
@Gnomefro This is not evolution. We know that when you have the healthy version of a gene, it will breed out the mutation. IF and only IF you have the healthy version to breed with. That is not evolution. It is what we need to do to survive as species. It will take about 1000 years to have somewhat healthy people if we stop all the "modern" mutagens.
@GoodScienceForYou "This is not evolution. We know that when you have the healthy version of a gene, it will breed out the mutation. IF and only IF you have the healthy version to breed with."
That's utterly false. You didn't even look at the experiment. The point is that what you call "a healthy version of the gene" gets created via the evolutionary mechanism of random mutation and selection through a series of minor mutations.
@GoodScienceForYou If you needed "a healthy version of the gene to breed with", evolution would have zero explanatory power and never have made it as a scientific theory, nor would evolutionary algorithms in computer science be able to do their jobs, but they do, which means you're wrong. All that's required is that there are consequences to mutations that either improve power of replication of lessens it.
@Gnomefro I wonder how people like you can exist with all the conflicting religious emotionally driven bullshit in your head.
Wake the fuck up and take a look around for the real world of absolute evidence.
Humans are sick and dying. Every human has genetic diseases and tons of genetic weaknesses from teeth that rot out of your head to wearing glasses, back pain, and your knees rip apart from running. And you think we are improving?
It is difficult for me to realize how stupid you are.
@Gnomefro Here is the real world of obvious that you evotards avoid like the plague. You hate reality so you twist your minds around religious bullshit.
33% of people in the US will die from cancer ages 15 to 64.
The rate of invasive cancer incidents in children in 20 years has risen 126%.
The death rate per day per population from cancer since 1948 with no treatments has risen over 20% with billions upon billions spent on cancer treatments. We are rapidly degrading, not evolving.
@peteymandem You are really silly. There are 6800 and more genetic diseases caused by deleterious mutations, because there is no other kind of mutation.
READ TWICE: We know they are screwed up DNA coding because we can see the original fit condition in people who do not have the particular disease. Read AGAIN and again.
That means there is only genetic degradation shown in ALL the absolutely irrefutable physical evidence.
There is no evolution from simple towards complex.
@GoodScienceForYou "...caused by deleterious mutations, because there is no other kind of mutation..." Yet only yesterday you admitted that nylon-digesting bacteria are a mutant due to a frame shift mutation. Do you consider that ability deleterious?
What about the ability of humans to digest lactose - that is due to a mutation as well. Do you consider that ability to be deleterious?
@AlanCFA The nylon eating bacteria does the same thing every time. Which means it is done from existing programming. Bacteria is designed to adapt to eat whatever "foods" are present that have digestible carbon, even carbon dioxide.
Humans do not have this ability in their genome. They only degrade as the DNA is slowly destroyed by mutations.
The chimp is a perfect example of genetic degradation heading for extinction. Chimps come from the same superior human ancestor as we do.
@Gnomefro 1 in 7 women have breast cancer. 1 in 15 people have heart disease. 1 in 10 have rare genetic diseases making the total NOT RARE. 1 in 12 people in the US have diabetes. All caused by genetic defects and no other reason. Humans are degrading rapidly from the crap we do to the planet and to ourselves and you would stick your head in your ass and deny this?
@GoodScienceForYou "1 in 10 have rare genetic diseases..." Not true For single gene mutations, the rate is 1 in 200 and for the other three types, the rate is lower.
The American Diabetes Assn website says that genes are not enough to bring on diabetes - your claim that it is a genetic disease is bullshit, just like the rest of your claims.
@AlanCFA You are a liar. It states clearly that it is genetic with triggers in the environment. It it was caused by simply overeating, no exercise or eating sugar as most morons believe then everybody in the US would have it considering that the consume over 150LB of sugar per person each year. Obesity is also genetic, by the way.
@GoodScienceForYou It's just laughable that people can have problems with understanding the rather simple idea of a pseudo-random gradient descent optimization algorithm and make statements like "That's not evolution" when staring directly at a physical demonstration of the process - and believe they are intellectuals while doing so no less.
@Gnomefro A man made computer program based on belief is not evidence of evolution. DNA is absolute. There is only genetic loss shown in DNA. Evolution has no value in science at all, but to retard medical science and to allow humans to continue to destroy the planet and their own species.
@Gnomefro There is no evidence whatsoever of evolution today in DNA studies. There are over 6000 genetic defects in humans from mutagens we create. There are no verifiable positive mutations anywhere shown.
We know the sick genes because we can see the healthy ones.
Repeat that a few hundred times to catch on to real science.
@GoodScienceForYou What these morons think are "mutations" are just traits that already exist.
When you have a sick population with over 30% full of genetic defects that cause cancer, in order to heal this you stop the mutagens and allow the healthy genes to breed into the population. This is how it works.
There is no magical time of evolution in the past. Genetics works the same now as always. What morons call "new magical mutations with out cause" are existing genes in the species NOT MAGIC!
@GSFY "What morons call "new magical mutations with out cause" are existing genes in the species..." Nobody but you calls beneficial mutations "magical" or "without cause." You do it because you are a creotard with little intelligence and a huge ego.
Mutations DO occur and most are neutral. Some are beneficial due to environment. The ability to digest lactose is an example that you deny because you are dishonest and only care about your Jehovah's Witless beliefs
"More than 750,000 Americans develop septic shock every year, and it causes about 200,000 fatalities -- about a 40% mortality rate. Vasodilatory shock, or collapse of the circulatory system due to bacterial toxin induced vasodilatation, is the primary reason for death."
From mutation of bacteria by our lifestyle, and poor foods, combined with weakened immune systems.
This is a quote from garith21 "5) It's only an ad homenim if the insult is the argument rather than when I point out why I think you're an idiot and state that you are an idiot."
This guy, garith21, is arguing genetics with me, and has no clue what he is talking about.
@GoodScienceForYou "The irony from Evotards is funny. They are constantly protecting their precious religious HEMG, and have no clue about science at all." Yet this comment comes from a Creationist who bases his beliefs on Genesis, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy, who knows nothing about science, and who claimed that humans mated with gorillas to produce chimpanzees. Funny, too, how he claims an IQ of 180 and asserts a mastery of math but cannot answer Calculus II problems.
So you link what I say about what an ad homenim is then you use an ad homenim brilliant....just brilliant. You then make a claim that I don't know anything about genetics even though I've gone in depth about basic genetics, like how amino acids are coded and you don't even seem aware on any of it and then claim you can understand or comprehend other scientific papers that rely on this sort of knowledge to understand and you want to say I don't know anything? amazing.
@garith21 Jimmy likes to claim that he has studied the subject for over 40 years. You would think he would understand the basics after that much study, but he only understands insults and what the Bible tells him.
@garith21 You obviously have no education in genetics. You would not know a codon from an amino acid. You know nothing about the human immune system. I know biology better than anyone who believes in evolution, because that belief negates them, destroys their credibility.
There is no science of evolution. It is a religion.
Beliefs based on inference, assumptions, religious slogans, and just wrong science, is the pseudo science of evolution.
@GoodScienceForYou "I know biology better than anyone who believes in evolution..." HAHAHAHA!!!
You do not know much of anything about biology, much less know it "better than anyone." You are delusional, Jimbo. Quit relying on a diagnosis from the stone age, you brain is shot.
@GoodScienceForYou "This guy, garith21, is arguing genetics with me, and has no clue what he is talking about."
If that were true, then you would be on a level playing field, since you know nothing about the subject. But it is obvious to those of us who took biology in college that he does understand the subject and that you are making it up as you go along.
DNA is absolutely irrefutable evidence that only shows genetic degradation in all complex creatures. Humans have over 4600 genetic defects causing diseases and more are showing each study. This is not possible if "evolution" were true.
@GoodScienceForYou "Humans have over 4600 genetic defects causing diseases and more are showing each study. This is not possible if "evolution" were true." Evolution is true. There are 6,000 single-gene defects, not 4,600, and this is not inconsistent with the theory of evolution.
Scientists would like to know how and when such differences arose, and new research from the University of Michigan shows how one process - gene loss - may have figured in.
The work, by a group led by associate professor of ecology and evolutionary biology Jianzhi Zhang, is reported in the journal PLoS Biology.
Myoclonic Epilepsy with Ragged Red Fibers (MERRF)
progressive myoclonic epilepsy
"Ragged Red Fibers" – clumps of diseased mitochondria accumulate in the subsarcolemmal region of the muscle fiber and appear as "Ragged Red Fibers" when muscle is stained with modified Gömöri trichrome stain
Out of 100 people 100 people will have a genetic disorder(s). Out of 1000 people, 1000 will have a genetic disorder(s). Out of 10000, 10000 will have a genetic disorder(s). Get it. You combine all the numbers and your odds of being sick from a genetic defect are 100% The odds of you having 2 disorders is just as bad. Three is common. This does not include all the babies who die from genetic defects in the womb. Only covers the live births.
@GoodScienceForYou "Out of 100 people 100 people will have a genetic disorder(s). Out of 1000 people, 1000 will have a genetic disorder(s). Out of 10000, 10000 will have a genetic disorder(s). Get it." Yes, I get it - you are a blatant liar and an ignoramus.
"You combine all the numbers and your odds of being sick from a genetic defect are 100%" LIE. Flat-out untrue. I have cited the stats from the Human Genome Project and you make up lies to support your Jehovah's Witnesses beliefs.
2 Department of Veterinary Integrative Biosciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, United States of America, 3 San Diego Zoo's Institute for Conservation Research, Escondido, California, United States of America
There are over 4600 genetic defects in humans and only 4 thought to be positive. That is a 99.13% net negative "evolution" or genetic degradation. This fact is shown in all creatures with more than one cell.
Your "evolution" is just a path towards eventual extinction. This is shown in absolute evidence.
The original definition of evolution was and still is all about ONLY advancement leading to the eventual evolution of complex creatures from less complex and less fit. This is the fantasy of this mythological religion.
2 of X In order to have any advancement with added complexity,added intelligence, increased fitness and more ability to survive. You would need to have 51% positive mutations that would add this magical evolution to any creature. You could be more precise, and say 50.0000001% as a start. But 51% means that increase could be possible.
2) Most mutations just by how amino acids are coded for are almost by definition neutral because there's a vast amount of redundancy even more so when a mutation occurs in junk DNA, because of that redundant system I can have at least 3 billion mutations that will do absolutely nothing to me
3) Why the fuck do you think natural selection is relevant? If you die you can't pass on your genes and the genes don't stay in the gene pool
@garith21 "1) Populations evolve not individuals" That is a religious slogan not supported by the evidence. The evidence shows this: Populations degenerate when mutations enter the species.
DNA is absolutely irrefutable physical evidence that shows this.
In all cases the ancestors were more fit for survival. You cannot argue with absolutely irrefutable physical evidence, but the earth is flat people persisted for over 150 years.
@garith21 "3 billion mutations that will do absolutely nothing to me" Humans have no idea what the non coding DNA does. That is fact. They make guesses and speculate, but have no clue.
All it takes is one mutation to kill you.
Are you willing to do the experiment and let us scramble 100 or so of your DNA base pairs?
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@GoodScienceForYou "Are you willing to do the experiment and let us scramble 100 or so of your DNA base pairs? "
The average human zygote has 128 mutations and yet there are several billion people on the planet. You try to mine facts to support your religious dogma, but you fail miserably.
Maybe you should try some of your cult's meditation or, better yet, some medication.
@AlanCFA Here is your problem. You don't have a clue about human reproduction. The intermixing of parental traits are the cause of our uniqueness as humans. These so called mutations are NOT mutations at all. Not one scientist has ever looked to see which ancestor has those DNA coding, because it would ruin the faith and belief.
@GSFY "You don't have a clue about human reproduction." Compared to you, I have lots of knowledge
"The intermixing of parental traits are the cause of our uniqueness as humans." Yes, genetic traits are dominant over mutations
"These so called mutations are NOT mutations at all" You base this on what, exactly? The National Center for Biotechnology Information is my source, what is yours?
"Not one scientist has ever looked to see which ancestor has those DNA coding" You are making this up
Any one mutation "can" kill you, or it can do nothing or it can offer a benefit. Secondly we undergo over 100 mutations just while undergoing fertilization and dozens more as we age. Do you seriously not understand how codons code for resulting amino acids? If I change 100 base pairs that result in the same amino acid it won't do anything to me.
@garith21 Here is your problem. You don't have a clue about human reproduction. The intermixing of parental traits are the cause of our uniqueness as humans. These are NOT mutations at all. Not one scientist has ever looked to see which ancestor has those DNA coding, because it would ruin the faith and belief.
@garith21 "Natural Selection" has resulted in genetic degradation as is shown in the DNA evidence. In all complex creatures where we have the living predecessor, the predecessor is more fit although has genetic loss from the point of speciation. Do your research on this. It is clear.
And I suppose you think that all complex creatures got there by magic and that the common ancestor of chimps and humans was far smarter than humans, and the common ancestor of those were far smarter still because obviously we're just a dumber and less fit version of any earlier counterparts or perhaps you're underestimating the ability of intelligence, empathy and technology to overcome otherwise fatal selective pressures.
@garith21 If you realize just how stupid people are today, as I do, then it is easy to see the degradation. You must first have some degreee of intelligence beyond the low IQ standards. The ancients were far more intelligent. Have you ever read any of the earliest writings? Have you seen the incredible construction methods of the ancients. How about the amazing discoveries?
@garith21 Scientific discovery has nothing to do with capacity of intelligence. Intelligence is an empty computer waiting for information. When that computer is defective then it is defective. Over 50% of adults in the US are on drugs for mental problems. DNA shows this. It is probably higher than that.
Which of course is only a sign of degradation and not a sign that we have a better ability to even identify and diagnose such cases and have the capability of developing the drugs necessary in the first place. This is like saying cancer never existed in the ancient world because no one knew what cancer was, brilliant reasoning, brilliant.
@garith21 Do you have any idea the money that drug companies make from human suffering? Do you really think they want a cure? They only want to sell drugs and buy off politicians to sell them. All of the great drugs have been sued off the market for bad side effects. Have you ever read the PDR? Do you ever study the news?
@garith21 Cancer is caused by natural events. We were made with the ability to fight off cancer cells and destroy them very quickly. Now that the human immune system is so full of genetic defects cancer is on the rise.
In the last 63 years the death rate has gone up per day by 12% even though 63 years ago when they started the study of this statistic there was no treatment other than removing tumors. This has been know for over 24 years, but drug companies ignore it.
How does this statement contradict my statement on your flawed logic in the slightest. All you did was make more claims and then make another claim of some super devolution without any supporting evidence. Not to mention making an absurd statistic that claims cancer death rates climb by 4380% every year over at least the last 63 years claiming a 275940% increase in cancer deaths
@garith21 "How does this statement contradict my statement on your flawed logic in the slightest." I really don't think you are capable of thinking for yourself, nor do you have any real objective reasoning. You are driven by emotionally powered ideas. Emotions are not rational.
I am sorry for you. I give you a path towards intellectual freedom and objective awareness and you reject it. That is sad. It is a wonderful thing to be objective and free. I want that for you, but you don't.
So, I point out why you have flawed logic and why and then you simply respond by calling me brainwashed rather than addressing the argument. Cute deflection, but it still only indicates your irrationality and self centered ideals backed only by your cognitive dissonance and cognitive bias. You are the perfect example of a closed and irrational mind.
@garith21 I answered all of your questions clearly and concisely with the place to look up the data. I am sorry that you are not capable of understanding. That is where you lose out. I am very clear, and your projections on what I am telling you are in the way of your understanding.
Right now, you are a waste of my precious time. I actually thought you wanted an education on what is contained in the absolute evidence.
You mean cherrypicked data that rely on your lack of understanding to get to your interpretation? You ignore an awful lot of data and observations to come to your particular conclusions, not to mention you fabricate and make up a lot of untestable claims to get to your conclusions as well. This isn't science, it's pseudoscience.
@garith21 I was tested with an extreme logic. It is what I do the best according to the PhD who tested me. I am sorry that you don't have that ability. The evidence is clear, there is no evolution. It is just a fairy tale myth that you want to believe. I am sorry that you are not able to understand the absolute data we have on this now. This religion of Evodelusionism has a lot of people in this cult. You are just another person who is easy, because of your emotional needs; a lemming.
@garith21 Ever hear of the work "irony". You are a lemming, one who is controlled by your environment. You are not capable of rational thoughts because you are emotional. It stands out like a "sore thumb" in all your posts. I have never lost a debate with an Evotard, because the evidence points to only genetic degradation. There is no possible improvement in any species with more than one cell.
@garith21 You obviously have not studied anything about genetic diseases and how the fact of the huge numbers of defects cause by mutations in the human genome destroy any idea of evolution. There are no magical mutations that fix screwed up DNA. Mutations are bad. You do not want them! Yet Evotards think they are good.
"Now that the human immune system is so full of genetic defects cancer is on the rise."
So it's all because of the human immune system and not because of carcinogens or exposure to them, even though a few posts ago you said you accepted that mutagens and carcinogens existed. If you're going to be crazy stupid can you at least be consistent in your crazy stupid so you don't contradict yourself several times within the span of a day?
@garith21 The human immune system was designed to destroy cancer cells as soon as it detects them. Because of genetic defects many humans cannot destroy these cells. If their immune system is weakened, but still functions, removing the toxic food and allowing the immune system to work on the cancer will cure it. If the immune system is worthless, they have intense treatments and still die.
Oh geesh, you're going to pretend to know how cancer works now too, I'm going to pretend that I don't know about angiogenesis or the fact that most of us have some form of cancer in our bodies that doesn't become harmful till angiogenesis is involved with it and let you be crazy by yourself. I've pointed out far too many things you seem to be proudly ignorant of to believe that either you're a troll or deluded beyond any rational discussion.
@garith21 I posted a video of an electron microscope showing the human immune system destroying a cancer cell. Yet you don't take the time to educate yourself with the data I have gathered. Only allowing the people who indoctrinate you to control you learning is called a cult. I have no religion and I don't allow anyone to tell me how to learn or how to think. but you just repeat the same crap that others taught you. You are owned by them. It is 4 minutes of science.
gairth21: I'm reposting your comment, GSFY falsely flagged it
"Now that the human immune system is so full of genetic defects cancer is on the rise."
So it's all because of the human immune system and not because of carcinogens or exposure to them, even though a few posts ago you said you accepted that mutagens and carcinogens existed. If you're going to be crazy stupid can you at least be consistent in your crazy stupid so you don't contradict yourself several times within the span of a day?
@AlanCFA 1 of 2 It is because you are too stupid to understand the nature of cancer. Cancer is a malformed cell that replicates rapidly without any normal function. It replaces normally healthy tissue. In an ancient human, the immune system was so strong that it killed off all cancer cells. This is why cancer was never heard of until humans degraded to a point where the genetic degradation of the immune system results in not being able to kill these malformed cells.
@GoodScienceForYou "It is because you are too stupid to understand the nature of cancer. " Look who is talking about stupid, you cannot even read. I REPOSTED GAIRTH21's comment, you blithering idiot, you know, the one that you falsely flagged as spam! Yet you reply to me, though it was his comment. Don't try and say you were replying to him, you would have done that in his original post instead of flagging it.
@AlanCFA 2 of 2 Carcinogens are part of the environment and humans were made to respond to this until the genetic degradation of the cancer fighting cells of our body, including the ability to sense partially screwed up cells and make repairs. Now that humans are genetically degraded. Cancer death rates in the USA have increased since 1948 (with almost no treatments) by 12% per day even with all the modern treatments. This is because humans continue to degrade genetically each generation.
@GoodScienceForYou "Over 50% of adults in the US are on drugs for mental problems. " Too bad that number does not include you. You definitely could benefit.
During a time when about 90% of the population was illiterate, the world was thought to be a flat disk, that the sun orbited the earth and supernatural thinking was used to solve any unknown problem. Yeah, obviously they were far more intelligent and not just the cherry picking of a few examples of intelligence which have been far more extended in modern times at an accelerated rate.
@garith21 Modern humans are really in bad shape. Not only because of the genetic diseases, and mental problems. They will kill for any stupid reason. They are more tribal now than ever, looking for ways to hate, strap bombs on and make fantasy villains. Putting your faith in humanity has never been a good idea and today it is an extremely bad idea.
Yet a majority do not, otherwise your entire family and neighbors surely would have killed you by statics suggestive of that statement alone.
"Do you never read the news? Do you never study human psychology? Do you know anything about human history?"
A better question is do you? I find it amusing that you think academics are always wrong unless you think they're right, cognitive dissonance/bias much?
@garith21 You are not reading what I am typing. Strawman is your projection of what you think I wrote.
There are no boundaries on this planet as observed from space. It is cultural brainwashing that causes all the wars. Only really stupid people will fabricate reasons to kill each other. If we are so evolved why are we heading towards WW3? Where is this increase in intelligence?
The obvious isn't obvious until it is obvious.
Genetic degradation is caused by mutagens we do to ourselves.
@garith21 You are wanting so bad to have faith in humans. Do you live in a tiny box? Do you never read the news? Do you never study human psychology? Do you know anything about human history? Do you know that the religion of the time is what is taught in academia? The best people to brainwash are children and the best place to do it is school, and using science for the new religion is just the same crap recycled. Read history. DNA only shows genetic degradation.
@garith21 "1) I don't really care if people think I'm smart or not, I do however research a topic so i know a lot about it when I discuss it and I look for others to challenge my views as to test my current assumptions and conclusions". Assumptions are not science!
garith; You obviously have not studied anything about genetic diseases and how the fact of the huge numbers of defects cause by mutations in the human genome destroy any idea of evolution. There are no magical mutations that fix screwed up DNA. Mutations are bad. You do not want them! Yet Evotards think they are good.
@GoodScienceForYou "There are no magical mutations that fix screwed up DNA" I have never seen a real scientist assert that there were. Only you claim that scientists hold this belief. You cannot understand basic English. You should go back to school and learn how to read.
Yeah, assumptions like I can learn about reality with facts and that my senses are at least sometimes accurate. If you can't make some basic assumptions you can't even begin to ask scientific questions. Science starts with basic assumptions for this very reason, later discoveries are always based upon previous assumptions that were justified by earlier facts and testing. Either that or you can't determine the density of mars by it's gravity.
the guy on the right has no timing, seriously that was painful
purrot 5 hours ago
dumb fucking ass
90jmt 6 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Every mutation that the Evotards believe are "positive" actually have genetic diseases associated with them, sometimes up to six multicausal diseases. When they present them to the cult of moron believers, the believers never check out the sources to realize this. Believers only want to believe. They don't want the truth.
GoodScienceForYou 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
There are 6800 and more genetic diseases caused by deleterious mutations, because there is no other kind of mutation.
READ TWICE: We know they are screwed up DNA coding because we can see the original fit condition in people who do not have the particular disease. Read AGAIN and again.
That means there is only genetic degradation shown in ALL the absolutely irrefutable physical evidence.
There is no evolution from simple towards complex.
GoodScienceForYou 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
There are 6800 and more genetic diseases caused by deleterious mutations, because there is no other kind of mutation.
READ TWICE: We know they are screwed up DNA coding because we can see the original fit condition in people who do not have the particular disease. Read AGAIN and again.
That means there is only genetic degradation shown in ALL the absolutely irrefutable physical evidence.
There is no evolution from simple towards complex.
GoodScienceForYou 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
We know there are now 6000 diseases caused by screwed up mutations because we have samples of the correct coding in some people.
That means the fit condition is already existing. There is no way for any improvements to take place from "evolution" because there is no genetic mechanism for it.
/watch?v=spuZtAa80qI
/watch?v=emPINOUlfnE
GoodScienceForYou 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Since 1975 the invasive cancer incidents among children has risen over 129%. That is alarming.
Children only have genetics to blame and very little to do with environment.
GoodScienceForYou 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
There are 6800 and more genetic diseases caused by deleterious mutations, because there is no other kind of mutation.
READ TWICE: We know they are screwed up DNA coding because we can see the original fit condition in people who do not have the particular disease. Read AGAIN and again.
That means there is only genetic degradation shown in ALL the absolutely irrefutable physical evidence.
There is no evolution from simple towards complex.
GoodScienceForYou 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
There are 6800 and more genetic diseases caused by deleterious mutations, because there is no other kind of mutation.
READ TWICE: We know they are screwed up DNA coding because we can see the original fit condition in people who do not have the particular disease. Read AGAIN and again.
That means there is only genetic degradation shown in ALL the absolutely irrefutable physical evidence.
There is no evolution from simple towards complex.
GoodScienceForYou 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The truth is we have traced ONLY genetic degradation in DNA evidence on humans. There are over 6800 diseases directly associated with genetic defects. We know these are defects because we have the older fit condition of any gene producing fit cells in living humans. There is only genetic degradation in humans. There is no such thing as "human evolution". It is human degradation leading to extinction.
GoodScienceForYou 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Every mutation that the Evodelusionists PhD's Medical Doctors, Biologists have presented as positive, have at least three genetic diseases associated with them. There in no mechanism for evolution.
All of the evidence we have on humans only shows genetic degradation as our path of self destruction.
GoodScienceForYou 1 week ago
ah what a delightfully ignorant leading statistic. scientists do not have a more valid political opinion than others,
peteymandem 1 week ago
@peteymandem well let me explain it to you. Science believe in facts. Republicans don't believe in facts. :)
ymkamara420 1 week ago
@ymkamara420 another ignorant statement, learn to see things from your opponents point of view or your arguments are pointless
peteymandem 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@peteymandem Quiz; Why do we know these negative mutations that cause disease exist? What do we see in people without a particular disease in that area of the DNA that reflects this disease?
GoodScienceForYou 1 week ago
@peteymandem Ah yes, but scientists are more likely than other people to look up statistics, check facts, look for causes and correlations, and in general live in the real world. I don't know about you, but those are traits and habits that I myself feel are useful in making any kind of decisions, political or otherwise. They are also traits I would hope to find in politicians I would vote for. They are also traits sadly lacking in the majority of the electorate.
ptolemyauletesXII 3 days ago
@ptolemyauletesXII That's true thanks for actually making a valid argument. I agree with everything you said, however I would also like to point out that scientists are generally atheist, christians have given the right wing a bad name in america, same reason you don't get many gay republicans. I'm sure if you took the bigotry out of the republicans the numbers would start to increase. I'm right wing in many ways and i would be embarrassed to say I voted Repubican if I lived in America.
peteymandem 2 days ago
the 6% are moderate fiscal conservatives
harrisonconstantinou 3 weeks ago
this is complete bullshit, from what ive read 65% of scientists are republicans, 25% independents and rest democrats
Scattnam 3 weeks ago
@Scattnam And from what I've read 100% are communists.
Cenk has numbers, you're taking them out of your ass.
atosafi1 2 weeks ago
That is because most republicans believe only in the bible
folladordeprostis 3 weeks ago
So a guy that studies bugs or whatever is automatically politically enlightened? Are we to assume scientist are studying the cause of the European crisis and its effect on the value of our dollar while they are drilling ice core samples in the arctic? As someone that dislikes both parties, I think this clip is the same poor application of childish logic being used to chide the other side. People like Cenk and Beck encourage the ignorance and arrogance of both parties with this kind of soundbite.
vertigo0331 1 month ago
@vertigo0331 you obviously didn't get it
it's not about sientists being educated about politics and economics..
it's about scientists being generally educated and rational thinking people who base their opinion on facts and objectivity
R3dSt4r90 1 month ago
Really? Only 6% of scientists have brains? This is not good for us!!
ABE01dr 1 month ago
@ABE01dr Being a scientist requires, for no matter what form of work it is, a University degree, that makes scientists, of any sort, more inteligent then the avarage Republican.
dave19941000 3 weeks ago
@dave19941000 Actually in the real world. A degree doesn't mean shit. This is why companies hire specialist to weed out the people who have degrees but have no brains to perform even simple jobs. It has been proven that when people get a four year degree their IQ's go down at least 10 points. This is from the conflicting bullshit being taught.
GoodScienceForYou 2 weeks ago
@GoodScienceForYou I need a source. No source, no credibility.
dave19941000 2 weeks ago
@GoodScienceForYou It has been proven that when people get a four year degree their IQ's go down at least 10 points."
Ahhh, then you should be able to show us some studies or will you run because you can't?
srexob715 2 weeks ago
@GoodScienceForYou An IQ never changes
peteymandem 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@peteymandem "An IQ never changes" Bullshit. Every hear of Google? There are many reasons for IQ's to change all physiological and or psychological. When the mind is clear and fresh with less conflicting data, it works better. That is why I teach people to never believe anyone until you find absolute evidence to back up a claim. If they tell you there is no absolute evidence then tell them they are insane for believing in unproven crap.
GoodScienceForYou 1 week ago
@GoodScienceForYou "It has been proven that when people get a four year degree their IQ's go down at least 10 points." No it hasn't.
AlanCFA 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AlanCFA Actually it does. I always thought it was from all the drinking in college. But it turns out it is from the confusing bullshit that is contrary to logic mostly from crap sciences like Evodelusionism. The mind does not do well with delusional bullshit.
GoodScienceForYou 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
33% of humans ages 15 to 64 die of cancer. Source CDC.
You know nothing about biology and how mutaions actually work.
Here is a video from the data of the US Gov Medical Library.
I doubt that you can (more like "want to") understand it.
/watch?v=spuZtAa80qI
GoodScienceForYou 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The numbers come from Human Genome Project. NORD, Diabetes.org, CDC. You education seems to leave out a lot of data. Deaths from cancer have gone up 20% per day since 1948 (no treatments other than cutting), even with all the modern treatments. Cancer is winning because the human genome is degrading faster than ever with modern mutagens.
In less than 3000 years we will be extinct at the present rate. And you believe in magical mutations? What is the matter with your education?
GoodScienceForYou 1 month ago
A conservative pundits that does not exist! oxymoron
TheBuzzo01 1 month ago
LOL, same percentage as believers... Go figure...
Acrimonator 1 month ago
just from the titles i tend to want to watch the young turks but they are always boring as fuck.
beatlesto 1 month ago
@beatlesto its a news show lolwhat do u expect
xxxfealerxxx 1 month ago
i like how 45% are independent. they know whats up. polarization of dems and reps will run this country into the ground. thanks to news and opinion like this. when everything goes to shit after years and years of gridlock the people will turn their backs on this sort of media, and we will enter an age of reason and critical thinking(those who dont will fall straight to the bottom rungs of society), and a golden age willl begin(not just the US, the entire world). hopefully its in my lifetime
magua4 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
WHATS GENIUS ABOUT BEING A SOCIAL PARASITE? WHATS GENIUS ABOUT BEING A GANG BANGER? WHATS GENIUS ABOUT BEING A FAT WELFARE MOM WITH 7 CHILDREN WHO ALL LIVE ON FOOD STAMPS? WHATS GENIUS ABOUT AL GORE'S DUMB FUCKING MOVIE? ARE'NT WE SUPPOSED TO BE UNDER WATER RIGHT NOW? I THOUGHT YOU WERE GOING TO END ALL WAR, WHATS GENIUS ABOUT BLOWING UP ARABS WITHOUT EVEN ASKING QUESTIONS? WHATS GENIUS ABOUT DESTROYING THE ECONOMY? YOU HAVE TO REMIND THEM WHO THEY ARE EVER SO OFTEN
Klauwsawitzz 1 month ago
@petersz98 I agree that only educated persons have the moral justification to vote. That's the general idea of the Electoral College and Legislators. On that principle, I believe that debates for office and EC should have mandatory law questions. Ask Romney what Constitutional Amendment talks about the housing of soldiers and he might stutter a little. These debates are a joke. Almost all of them want to Executive Order the United States into chaos and bomb Iran into the ocean.
teeterharris 2 months ago
Comment removed
teeterharris 2 months ago
Comment removed
mgore90 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Liberals are far more likely to throw around money and scientific grants than fiscal conservatives.
I can't imagine scientists shun republicans just because of evolution, especially since it's a topic that doesn't really affect politics, at least when politics is done right.
BlindMaphisto 2 months ago
Comment removed
BlindMaphisto 2 months ago
Comment removed
BlindMaphisto 2 months ago
Comment removed
BlindMaphisto 2 months ago
I'm an extremely intelligent Republican Atheist, and I'm here to tell you that there are morons on all sides. Let's hope that the 55% of scientists are the freely charitable and socially-free kind of Democrats and not the Simpsons-quoting, genital-awed, immature, conclusion-jumping kind.
You're absolutely right when you make the point that religion and science can't mix. I wish that "Scientist = Smart" were always true. It's not. Some people just do what they're told.
teeterharris 2 months ago
@teeterharris
Anyone who is a Republican is a retard!
petersz98 2 months ago
@petersz98 Your ignorance is showing.
teeterharris 2 months ago
@teeterharris
Republicans should all be put into re-education camps to cure them of their stupidity and ignorance.
petersz98 2 months ago
@petersz98 Jawohl, mein Kommandant!
teeterharris 2 months ago
@teeterharris
The Republican re-education camps would teach things like:-
Dinosaurs & humans never coexisted.
The world is a lot more 6000 years old.
Evolution is a proven fact.
Cutting taxes does not increase revenues.
How many of these do you accept?
petersz98 2 months ago
@petersz98 Most of them. When you start talking about raising taxes, you're feeding special interest groups and mismanagement of existing programs, those of which Statists love. If you're being serious about the camps (which I can't believe anyone would be), you're talking about another instrument of force. Force is force, no matter what the intention. I'm an old school Republican, unlike the Neo-Cons.
teeterharris 2 months ago
@teeterharris
I've had second thoughts putting people in re-education camps is a bit extreme! Instead when Americans register to vote they should have to pass a stupid test asking questions like the following:-
Is North Korea an ally of the USA?
Is Africa a country or a continent?
Is evolution a proven fact?
Is global warning a proven fact?
Its expected 1 in 3 Americans (mostly Republicans) would fail the test and would not be allowed to vote until they get all the answers right. LOL
petersz98 2 months ago
@petersz98 You are an Evotard, and that is clear, since there is no evolution found on this planet. There is only genetic degradation shown in ALL complex multicellular creatures. DNA is absolute evidence showing this is the only reality.
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@GoodScienceForYou "There is only genetic degradation shown in ALL complex multicellular creatures. DNA is absolute evidence showing this is the only reality."
Look, clown. Ever hear of genetic algorithms? These things mirror the biological natural selection process in computer science and the approach essentially is an general optimization algorithm with well understood performance characteristics.
Gnomefro 1 month ago
@GoodScienceForYou They are used all over the place where complex multi-variable optimization is required and completely destroy human intuition in finding efficient solutions. It should come as no surprise, therefore, that experiments refuting your assertion have been done. Destroying functional DNA on purpose and watching the original functionality evolve back over generations through simple random mutation and natural selection.
Gnomefro 1 month ago
@Gnomefro This is not evolution. We know that when you have the healthy version of a gene, it will breed out the mutation. IF and only IF you have the healthy version to breed with. That is not evolution. It is what we need to do to survive as species. It will take about 1000 years to have somewhat healthy people if we stop all the "modern" mutagens.
GoodScienceForYou 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@GoodScienceForYou "This is not evolution. We know that when you have the healthy version of a gene, it will breed out the mutation. IF and only IF you have the healthy version to breed with."
That's utterly false. You didn't even look at the experiment. The point is that what you call "a healthy version of the gene" gets created via the evolutionary mechanism of random mutation and selection through a series of minor mutations.
Gnomefro 2 weeks ago
@GoodScienceForYou If you needed "a healthy version of the gene to breed with", evolution would have zero explanatory power and never have made it as a scientific theory, nor would evolutionary algorithms in computer science be able to do their jobs, but they do, which means you're wrong. All that's required is that there are consequences to mutations that either improve power of replication of lessens it.
Gnomefro 2 weeks ago
@Gnomefro I wonder how people like you can exist with all the conflicting religious emotionally driven bullshit in your head.
Wake the fuck up and take a look around for the real world of absolute evidence.
Humans are sick and dying. Every human has genetic diseases and tons of genetic weaknesses from teeth that rot out of your head to wearing glasses, back pain, and your knees rip apart from running. And you think we are improving?
It is difficult for me to realize how stupid you are.
GoodScienceForYou 2 weeks ago
@Gnomefro Here is the real world of obvious that you evotards avoid like the plague. You hate reality so you twist your minds around religious bullshit.
33% of people in the US will die from cancer ages 15 to 64.
The rate of invasive cancer incidents in children in 20 years has risen 126%.
The death rate per day per population from cancer since 1948 with no treatments has risen over 20% with billions upon billions spent on cancer treatments. We are rapidly degrading, not evolving.
GoodScienceForYou 2 weeks ago
@GoodScienceForYou evolving does not go in a particular direction. learn what evolution means.
peteymandem 1 week ago
@peteymandem You are really silly. There are 6800 and more genetic diseases caused by deleterious mutations, because there is no other kind of mutation.
READ TWICE: We know they are screwed up DNA coding because we can see the original fit condition in people who do not have the particular disease. Read AGAIN and again.
That means there is only genetic degradation shown in ALL the absolutely irrefutable physical evidence.
There is no evolution from simple towards complex.
GoodScienceForYou 1 week ago
@GoodScienceForYou "...caused by deleterious mutations, because there is no other kind of mutation..." Yet only yesterday you admitted that nylon-digesting bacteria are a mutant due to a frame shift mutation. Do you consider that ability deleterious?
What about the ability of humans to digest lactose - that is due to a mutation as well. Do you consider that ability to be deleterious?
AlanCFA 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AlanCFA The nylon eating bacteria does the same thing every time. Which means it is done from existing programming. Bacteria is designed to adapt to eat whatever "foods" are present that have digestible carbon, even carbon dioxide.
Humans do not have this ability in their genome. They only degrade as the DNA is slowly destroyed by mutations.
The chimp is a perfect example of genetic degradation heading for extinction. Chimps come from the same superior human ancestor as we do.
GoodScienceForYou 1 week ago
@Gnomefro 1 in 7 women have breast cancer. 1 in 15 people have heart disease. 1 in 10 have rare genetic diseases making the total NOT RARE. 1 in 12 people in the US have diabetes. All caused by genetic defects and no other reason. Humans are degrading rapidly from the crap we do to the planet and to ourselves and you would stick your head in your ass and deny this?
GoodScienceForYou 2 weeks ago
@GoodScienceForYou "1 in 10 have rare genetic diseases..." Not true For single gene mutations, the rate is 1 in 200 and for the other three types, the rate is lower.
The American Diabetes Assn website says that genes are not enough to bring on diabetes - your claim that it is a genetic disease is bullshit, just like the rest of your claims.
AlanCFA 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AlanCFA You are a liar. It states clearly that it is genetic with triggers in the environment. It it was caused by simply overeating, no exercise or eating sugar as most morons believe then everybody in the US would have it considering that the consume over 150LB of sugar per person each year. Obesity is also genetic, by the way.
GoodScienceForYou 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AlanCFA On the first page of NORD website National Organization of Rare Diseases they state 1 in 10 have rare genetic diseases.
GoodScienceForYou 1 week ago
@GoodScienceForYou It's just laughable that people can have problems with understanding the rather simple idea of a pseudo-random gradient descent optimization algorithm and make statements like "That's not evolution" when staring directly at a physical demonstration of the process - and believe they are intellectuals while doing so no less.
Gnomefro 2 weeks ago
@Gnomefro A man made computer program based on belief is not evidence of evolution. DNA is absolute. There is only genetic loss shown in DNA. Evolution has no value in science at all, but to retard medical science and to allow humans to continue to destroy the planet and their own species.
You are really quite poorly educated.
GoodScienceForYou 2 weeks ago
@Gnomefro There is no evidence whatsoever of evolution today in DNA studies. There are over 6000 genetic defects in humans from mutagens we create. There are no verifiable positive mutations anywhere shown.
We know the sick genes because we can see the healthy ones.
Repeat that a few hundred times to catch on to real science.
GoodScienceForYou 2 weeks ago
@GoodScienceForYou What these morons think are "mutations" are just traits that already exist.
When you have a sick population with over 30% full of genetic defects that cause cancer, in order to heal this you stop the mutagens and allow the healthy genes to breed into the population. This is how it works.
There is no magical time of evolution in the past. Genetics works the same now as always. What morons call "new magical mutations with out cause" are existing genes in the species NOT MAGIC!
GoodScienceForYou 2 weeks ago
@GSFY "What morons call "new magical mutations with out cause" are existing genes in the species..." Nobody but you calls beneficial mutations "magical" or "without cause." You do it because you are a creotard with little intelligence and a huge ego.
Mutations DO occur and most are neutral. Some are beneficial due to environment. The ability to digest lactose is an example that you deny because you are dishonest and only care about your Jehovah's Witless beliefs
AlanCFA 1 week ago
@GoodScienceForYou "There is no evidence whatsoever of evolution today in DNA studies. "
Yes there is. You simply deny it because you are a religious kook.
AlanCFA 1 week ago
@GoodScienceForYou You can even get a quick rundown of such experiments here on youtube. Search for "an increase in information".
Gnomefro 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
/watch?v=emPINOUlfnE
This video sums up all the data from real accredited scientists in the medical fields. And sums up my disgust for ignorance in academia.
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"More than 750,000 Americans develop septic shock every year, and it causes about 200,000 fatalities -- about a 40% mortality rate. Vasodilatory shock, or collapse of the circulatory system due to bacterial toxin induced vasodilatation, is the primary reason for death."
From mutation of bacteria by our lifestyle, and poor foods, combined with weakened immune systems.
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This is a quote from garith21 "5) It's only an ad homenim if the insult is the argument rather than when I point out why I think you're an idiot and state that you are an idiot."
This guy, garith21, is arguing genetics with me, and has no clue what he is talking about.
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The irony from Evotards is funny. They are constantly protecting their precious religious HEMG, and have no clue about science at all.
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@GoodScienceForYou "The irony from Evotards is funny. They are constantly protecting their precious religious HEMG, and have no clue about science at all." Yet this comment comes from a Creationist who bases his beliefs on Genesis, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy, who knows nothing about science, and who claimed that humans mated with gorillas to produce chimpanzees. Funny, too, how he claims an IQ of 180 and asserts a mastery of math but cannot answer Calculus II problems.
AlanCFA 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@GoodScienceForYou
So you link what I say about what an ad homenim is then you use an ad homenim brilliant....just brilliant. You then make a claim that I don't know anything about genetics even though I've gone in depth about basic genetics, like how amino acids are coded and you don't even seem aware on any of it and then claim you can understand or comprehend other scientific papers that rely on this sort of knowledge to understand and you want to say I don't know anything? amazing.
garith21 2 months ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@garith21 Jimmy likes to claim that he has studied the subject for over 40 years. You would think he would understand the basics after that much study, but he only understands insults and what the Bible tells him.
watch?v=K9m3f0RdGBs
AlanCFA 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@garith21 You obviously have no education in genetics. You would not know a codon from an amino acid. You know nothing about the human immune system. I know biology better than anyone who believes in evolution, because that belief negates them, destroys their credibility.
There is no science of evolution. It is a religion.
Beliefs based on inference, assumptions, religious slogans, and just wrong science, is the pseudo science of evolution.
Goto
"Neutral Evolution Forum" and learn something.
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou "I know biology better than anyone who believes in evolution..." HAHAHAHA!!!
You do not know much of anything about biology, much less know it "better than anyone." You are delusional, Jimbo. Quit relying on a diagnosis from the stone age, you brain is shot.
AlanCFA 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AlanCFA Anyone who believes that humans or anything evolved from a simple life form is not a scientists.
Therefore they have no real understanding of what is taking place. But I do.
You don't, because you are an Evotard.
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@GoodScienceForYou "This guy, garith21, is arguing genetics with me, and has no clue what he is talking about."
If that were true, then you would be on a level playing field, since you know nothing about the subject. But it is obvious to those of us who took biology in college that he does understand the subject and that you are making it up as you go along.
AlanCFA 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
DNA is absolutely irrefutable evidence that only shows genetic degradation in all complex creatures. Humans have over 4600 genetic defects causing diseases and more are showing each study. This is not possible if "evolution" were true.
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@GoodScienceForYou "Humans have over 4600 genetic defects causing diseases and more are showing each study. This is not possible if "evolution" were true." Evolution is true. There are 6,000 single-gene defects, not 4,600, and this is not inconsistent with the theory of evolution.
AlanCFA 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Scientists would like to know how and when such differences arose, and new research from the University of Michigan shows how one process - gene loss - may have figured in.
The work, by a group led by associate professor of ecology and evolutionary biology Jianzhi Zhang, is reported in the journal PLoS Biology.
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Cancer Breast 1 in 7. Prostrate 1 in 150 , In addition to the mitochondrial myopathies, other examples include:
Diabetes mellitus and deafness (DAD)
this combination at an early age can be due to mitochondrial disease
Diabetes mellitus and deafness can also be found together for other reasons
Leber's hereditary optic neuropathy (LHON)
visual loss beginning in young adulthood
eye disorder (cont)
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
characterized by progressive loss of central vision due to degeneration of the optic nerves and retina
Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome
multiple sclerosis-type disease
affects 1 in 50,000 people in Finland
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Leigh syndrome, subacute sclerosing encephalopathy
after normal development the disease usually begins late in the first year of life, although onset may occur in adulthood
a rapid decline in function occurs and is marked by seizures, altered states of consciousness, dementia, ventilatory failure
Neuropathy, ataxia, retinitis pigmentosa, and ptosis (NARP)
progressive symptoms as described in the acronym
dementia
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Myoneurogenic gastrointestinal encephalopathy (MNGIE)
gastrointestinal pseudo-obstruction
neuropathy
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Myoclonic Epilepsy with Ragged Red Fibers (MERRF)
progressive myoclonic epilepsy
"Ragged Red Fibers" – clumps of diseased mitochondria accumulate in the subsarcolemmal region of the muscle fiber and appear as "Ragged Red Fibers" when muscle is stained with modified Gömöri trichrome stain
short stature
hearing loss
lactic acidosis
exercise intolerance
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Mitochondrial myopathy, encephalomyopathy, lactic acidosis, stroke-like symptoms (MELAS)
mtDNA depletion
mitochondrial neurogastrointestinal encephalomyopathy (MNGIE)
Nota bene: Conditions such as Friedreich's ataxia can affect the mitochondria, but are not associated with mitochondrial proteins.
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Out of 100 people 100 people will have a genetic disorder(s). Out of 1000 people, 1000 will have a genetic disorder(s). Out of 10000, 10000 will have a genetic disorder(s). Get it. You combine all the numbers and your odds of being sick from a genetic defect are 100% The odds of you having 2 disorders is just as bad. Three is common. This does not include all the babies who die from genetic defects in the womb. Only covers the live births.
/watch?v=abcsZZ9Duxw
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@GoodScienceForYou "Out of 100 people 100 people will have a genetic disorder(s). Out of 1000 people, 1000 will have a genetic disorder(s). Out of 10000, 10000 will have a genetic disorder(s). Get it." Yes, I get it - you are a blatant liar and an ignoramus.
"You combine all the numbers and your odds of being sick from a genetic defect are 100%" LIE. Flat-out untrue. I have cited the stats from the Human Genome Project and you make up lies to support your Jehovah's Witnesses beliefs.
AlanCFA 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Sickle cell anemia 1 in 625 (African Americans) Cystic fibrosis 1 in 2,000 (Caucasians) Lysosomal Acid Lipase (LAL) Deficiency 1 in 40,000 Tay-Sachs disease 1 in 3,000 (American Jews) Phenylketonuria 1 in 12,000 Mucopolysaccharidoses 1 in 25,000 Glycogen storage diseases 1 in 50,000 Galactosemia 1 in 57,000
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
1 in 12 in the US have diabetes a genetic disease.
26,000,000 people out of 312,598,910
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
There are 173719 papers on human genetic disorders on pubmed site.
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Familial hypercholesterolemia 1 in 500
Polycystic kidney disease 1 in 1250
Neurofibromatosis Type I 1 in 2,500
Hereditary spherocytosis 1 in 5,000
Marfan syndrome 1 in 4,000 [2]
Huntington's disease 1 in 15,000 [3
GoodScienceForYou 3 days ago
Duchenne muscular dystrophy 1 in 7,000
Hemophilia 1 in 10,000
This list is just the "single gene disorders".
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
1 of 2 Molecular Decay of the Tooth Gene Enamelin (ENAM) Mirrors the Loss of Enamel in the Fossil Record of Placental Mammals
Robert W. Meredith1, John Gatesy1, William J. Murphy2, Oliver A. Ryder3, Mark S. Springer1*
1 Department of Biology, University of California Riverside, Riverside, California, United States of America,
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
2 Department of Veterinary Integrative Biosciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, United States of America, 3 San Diego Zoo's Institute for Conservation Research, Escondido, California, United States of America
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Gene loss, protein sequence divergence, gene dispensability, expression level, and interactivity are correlated in eukaryotic evolution.
Krylov DM, Wolf YI, Rogozin IB, Koonin EV.
Source
National Center for Biotechnology Information, National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20894, USA.
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Am J Med Genet A. 2011 Nov 3. doi: 10.1002/ajmg.a.34302. [Epub ahead of print]
Two new cases with microdeletion of 17q23.2 suggest presence of a candidate gene for sensorineural hearing loss within this region.
Schönewolf-Greulich B, Ronan A, Ravn K, Baekgaard P, Lodahl M, Nielsen K, Rendtorff ND, Tranebjaerg L, Brøndum-Nielsen K, Tümer Z.
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2011 Nov 4. [Epub ahead of print]
Identification of copy number alterations associated with the progression of DCIS to invasive ductal carcinoma.
Johnson CE, Gorringe KL, Thompson ER, Opeskin K, Boyle SE, Wang Y, Hill P, Mann GB, Campbell IG.
Source
VBCRC Cancer Genetics Laboratory, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Locked Bag 1, A'Beckett St, East Melbourne, Victoria, VIC, 8006, Australia.
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
There are over 4600 genetic defects in humans and only 4 thought to be positive. That is a 99.13% net negative "evolution" or genetic degradation. This fact is shown in all creatures with more than one cell.
Your "evolution" is just a path towards eventual extinction. This is shown in absolute evidence.
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
Comment removed
HavenHead 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The original definition of evolution was and still is all about ONLY advancement leading to the eventual evolution of complex creatures from less complex and less fit. This is the fantasy of this mythological religion.
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
2 of X In order to have any advancement with added complexity,added intelligence, increased fitness and more ability to survive. You would need to have 51% positive mutations that would add this magical evolution to any creature. You could be more precise, and say 50.0000001% as a start. But 51% means that increase could be possible.
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago 2
@GoodScienceForYou
1) Populations evolve not individuals
2) Most mutations just by how amino acids are coded for are almost by definition neutral because there's a vast amount of redundancy even more so when a mutation occurs in junk DNA, because of that redundant system I can have at least 3 billion mutations that will do absolutely nothing to me
3) Why the fuck do you think natural selection is relevant? If you die you can't pass on your genes and the genes don't stay in the gene pool
garith21 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@garith21 "1) Populations evolve not individuals" That is a religious slogan not supported by the evidence. The evidence shows this: Populations degenerate when mutations enter the species.
DNA is absolutely irrefutable physical evidence that shows this.
In all cases the ancestors were more fit for survival. You cannot argue with absolutely irrefutable physical evidence, but the earth is flat people persisted for over 150 years.
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago 5
This has been flagged as spam show
@garith21 "3 billion mutations that will do absolutely nothing to me" Humans have no idea what the non coding DNA does. That is fact. They make guesses and speculate, but have no clue.
All it takes is one mutation to kill you.
Are you willing to do the experiment and let us scramble 100 or so of your DNA base pairs?
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@GoodScienceForYou "Are you willing to do the experiment and let us scramble 100 or so of your DNA base pairs? "
The average human zygote has 128 mutations and yet there are several billion people on the planet. You try to mine facts to support your religious dogma, but you fail miserably.
Maybe you should try some of your cult's meditation or, better yet, some medication.
AlanCFA 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AlanCFA Here is your problem. You don't have a clue about human reproduction. The intermixing of parental traits are the cause of our uniqueness as humans. These so called mutations are NOT mutations at all. Not one scientist has ever looked to see which ancestor has those DNA coding, because it would ruin the faith and belief.
Mutations are this: /watch?v=spuZtAa80qI
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago 5
This has been flagged as spam show
@GSFY "You don't have a clue about human reproduction." Compared to you, I have lots of knowledge
"The intermixing of parental traits are the cause of our uniqueness as humans." Yes, genetic traits are dominant over mutations
"These so called mutations are NOT mutations at all" You base this on what, exactly? The National Center for Biotechnology Information is my source, what is yours?
"Not one scientist has ever looked to see which ancestor has those DNA coding" You are making this up
AlanCFA 2 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou
Any one mutation "can" kill you, or it can do nothing or it can offer a benefit. Secondly we undergo over 100 mutations just while undergoing fertilization and dozens more as we age. Do you seriously not understand how codons code for resulting amino acids? If I change 100 base pairs that result in the same amino acid it won't do anything to me.
garith21 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@garith21 Here is your problem. You don't have a clue about human reproduction. The intermixing of parental traits are the cause of our uniqueness as humans. These are NOT mutations at all. Not one scientist has ever looked to see which ancestor has those DNA coding, because it would ruin the faith and belief.
Mutations are this: /watch?v=spuZtAa80qI
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@garith21 "Natural Selection" has resulted in genetic degradation as is shown in the DNA evidence. In all complex creatures where we have the living predecessor, the predecessor is more fit although has genetic loss from the point of speciation. Do your research on this. It is clear.
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@GoodScienceForYou
And I suppose you think that all complex creatures got there by magic and that the common ancestor of chimps and humans was far smarter than humans, and the common ancestor of those were far smarter still because obviously we're just a dumber and less fit version of any earlier counterparts or perhaps you're underestimating the ability of intelligence, empathy and technology to overcome otherwise fatal selective pressures.
garith21 2 months ago 5
This has been flagged as spam show
@garith21 If you realize just how stupid people are today, as I do, then it is easy to see the degradation. You must first have some degreee of intelligence beyond the low IQ standards. The ancients were far more intelligent. Have you ever read any of the earliest writings? Have you seen the incredible construction methods of the ancients. How about the amazing discoveries?
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago 2
Comment removed
garith21 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@garith21 Scientific discovery has nothing to do with capacity of intelligence. Intelligence is an empty computer waiting for information. When that computer is defective then it is defective. Over 50% of adults in the US are on drugs for mental problems. DNA shows this. It is probably higher than that.
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
@GoodScienceForYou
Which of course is only a sign of degradation and not a sign that we have a better ability to even identify and diagnose such cases and have the capability of developing the drugs necessary in the first place. This is like saying cancer never existed in the ancient world because no one knew what cancer was, brilliant reasoning, brilliant.
garith21 2 months ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
@garith21 Do you have any idea the money that drug companies make from human suffering? Do you really think they want a cure? They only want to sell drugs and buy off politicians to sell them. All of the great drugs have been sued off the market for bad side effects. Have you ever read the PDR? Do you ever study the news?
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@garith21 Cancer is caused by natural events. We were made with the ability to fight off cancer cells and destroy them very quickly. Now that the human immune system is so full of genetic defects cancer is on the rise.
In the last 63 years the death rate has gone up per day by 12% even though 63 years ago when they started the study of this statistic there was no treatment other than removing tumors. This has been know for over 24 years, but drug companies ignore it.
/watch?v=YJSrxzatNzY
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago 3
@GoodScienceForYou
How does this statement contradict my statement on your flawed logic in the slightest. All you did was make more claims and then make another claim of some super devolution without any supporting evidence. Not to mention making an absurd statistic that claims cancer death rates climb by 4380% every year over at least the last 63 years claiming a 275940% increase in cancer deaths
garith21 2 months ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@garith21 The statistics on Cancer can be found by anyone. It was not common until we allowed the people with weakened immune systems to live.
The first year statistics on cancer death rate was 1948. You can look this up. I give you very exacting data always.
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
@garith21 "How does this statement contradict my statement on your flawed logic in the slightest." I really don't think you are capable of thinking for yourself, nor do you have any real objective reasoning. You are driven by emotionally powered ideas. Emotions are not rational.
I am sorry for you. I give you a path towards intellectual freedom and objective awareness and you reject it. That is sad. It is a wonderful thing to be objective and free. I want that for you, but you don't.
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@GoodScienceForYou
So, I point out why you have flawed logic and why and then you simply respond by calling me brainwashed rather than addressing the argument. Cute deflection, but it still only indicates your irrationality and self centered ideals backed only by your cognitive dissonance and cognitive bias. You are the perfect example of a closed and irrational mind.
garith21 2 months ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
@garith21 I answered all of your questions clearly and concisely with the place to look up the data. I am sorry that you are not capable of understanding. That is where you lose out. I am very clear, and your projections on what I am telling you are in the way of your understanding.
Right now, you are a waste of my precious time. I actually thought you wanted an education on what is contained in the absolute evidence.
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@GoodScienceForYou
"contained in the absolute evidence."
You mean cherrypicked data that rely on your lack of understanding to get to your interpretation? You ignore an awful lot of data and observations to come to your particular conclusions, not to mention you fabricate and make up a lot of untestable claims to get to your conclusions as well. This isn't science, it's pseudoscience.
garith21 2 months ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
@garith21 I was tested with an extreme logic. It is what I do the best according to the PhD who tested me. I am sorry that you don't have that ability. The evidence is clear, there is no evolution. It is just a fairy tale myth that you want to believe. I am sorry that you are not able to understand the absolute data we have on this now. This religion of Evodelusionism has a lot of people in this cult. You are just another person who is easy, because of your emotional needs; a lemming.
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@garith21 Ever hear of the work "irony". You are a lemming, one who is controlled by your environment. You are not capable of rational thoughts because you are emotional. It stands out like a "sore thumb" in all your posts. I have never lost a debate with an Evotard, because the evidence points to only genetic degradation. There is no possible improvement in any species with more than one cell.
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@garith21 You obviously have not studied anything about genetic diseases and how the fact of the huge numbers of defects cause by mutations in the human genome destroy any idea of evolution. There are no magical mutations that fix screwed up DNA. Mutations are bad. You do not want them! Yet Evotards think they are good.
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@GoodScienceForYou
"Now that the human immune system is so full of genetic defects cancer is on the rise."
So it's all because of the human immune system and not because of carcinogens or exposure to them, even though a few posts ago you said you accepted that mutagens and carcinogens existed. If you're going to be crazy stupid can you at least be consistent in your crazy stupid so you don't contradict yourself several times within the span of a day?
garith21 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@garith21 The human immune system was designed to destroy cancer cells as soon as it detects them. Because of genetic defects many humans cannot destroy these cells. If their immune system is weakened, but still functions, removing the toxic food and allowing the immune system to work on the cancer will cure it. If the immune system is worthless, they have intense treatments and still die.
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
@GoodScienceForYou
Oh geesh, you're going to pretend to know how cancer works now too, I'm going to pretend that I don't know about angiogenesis or the fact that most of us have some form of cancer in our bodies that doesn't become harmful till angiogenesis is involved with it and let you be crazy by yourself. I've pointed out far too many things you seem to be proudly ignorant of to believe that either you're a troll or deluded beyond any rational discussion.
garith21 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@garith21 I posted a video of an electron microscope showing the human immune system destroying a cancer cell. Yet you don't take the time to educate yourself with the data I have gathered. Only allowing the people who indoctrinate you to control you learning is called a cult. I have no religion and I don't allow anyone to tell me how to learn or how to think. but you just repeat the same crap that others taught you. You are owned by them. It is 4 minutes of science.
/watch?v=YJSrxzatNzY
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago 2
gairth21: I'm reposting your comment, GSFY falsely flagged it
"Now that the human immune system is so full of genetic defects cancer is on the rise."
So it's all because of the human immune system and not because of carcinogens or exposure to them, even though a few posts ago you said you accepted that mutagens and carcinogens existed. If you're going to be crazy stupid can you at least be consistent in your crazy stupid so you don't contradict yourself several times within the span of a day?
AlanCFA 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AlanCFA 1 of 2 It is because you are too stupid to understand the nature of cancer. Cancer is a malformed cell that replicates rapidly without any normal function. It replaces normally healthy tissue. In an ancient human, the immune system was so strong that it killed off all cancer cells. This is why cancer was never heard of until humans degraded to a point where the genetic degradation of the immune system results in not being able to kill these malformed cells.
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
@GoodScienceForYou "It is because you are too stupid to understand the nature of cancer. " Look who is talking about stupid, you cannot even read. I REPOSTED GAIRTH21's comment, you blithering idiot, you know, the one that you falsely flagged as spam! Yet you reply to me, though it was his comment. Don't try and say you were replying to him, you would have done that in his original post instead of flagging it.
AlanCFA 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AlanCFA 2 of 2 Carcinogens are part of the environment and humans were made to respond to this until the genetic degradation of the cancer fighting cells of our body, including the ability to sense partially screwed up cells and make repairs. Now that humans are genetically degraded. Cancer death rates in the USA have increased since 1948 (with almost no treatments) by 12% per day even with all the modern treatments. This is because humans continue to degrade genetically each generation.
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@GoodScienceForYou "Over 50% of adults in the US are on drugs for mental problems. " Too bad that number does not include you. You definitely could benefit.
AlanCFA 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@GoodScienceForYou
During a time when about 90% of the population was illiterate, the world was thought to be a flat disk, that the sun orbited the earth and supernatural thinking was used to solve any unknown problem. Yeah, obviously they were far more intelligent and not just the cherry picking of a few examples of intelligence which have been far more extended in modern times at an accelerated rate.
garith21 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@garith21 Modern humans are really in bad shape. Not only because of the genetic diseases, and mental problems. They will kill for any stupid reason. They are more tribal now than ever, looking for ways to hate, strap bombs on and make fantasy villains. Putting your faith in humanity has never been a good idea and today it is an extremely bad idea.
Humans as a group are always wrong.
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@GoodScienceForYou
"They will kill for any stupid reason."
Yet a majority do not, otherwise your entire family and neighbors surely would have killed you by statics suggestive of that statement alone.
"Do you never read the news? Do you never study human psychology? Do you know anything about human history?"
A better question is do you? I find it amusing that you think academics are always wrong unless you think they're right, cognitive dissonance/bias much?
garith21 2 months ago 5
This has been flagged as spam show
@garith21 You are not reading what I am typing. Strawman is your projection of what you think I wrote.
There are no boundaries on this planet as observed from space. It is cultural brainwashing that causes all the wars. Only really stupid people will fabricate reasons to kill each other. If we are so evolved why are we heading towards WW3? Where is this increase in intelligence?
The obvious isn't obvious until it is obvious.
Genetic degradation is caused by mutagens we do to ourselves.
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@GoodScienceForYou
"Only really stupid people will fabricate reasons to kill each other"
Which contradicts the statement that any human will kill anyone for any stupid reason
" If we are so evolved why are we heading towards WW3?"
Then why did we ever get in fights centuries before? Obviously we were smarter and more peaceful then right?
"Where is this increase in intelligence?"
Being packed down a toilet by individuals such as yourself.
garith21 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@garith21 You are wanting so bad to have faith in humans. Do you live in a tiny box? Do you never read the news? Do you never study human psychology? Do you know anything about human history? Do you know that the religion of the time is what is taught in academia? The best people to brainwash are children and the best place to do it is school, and using science for the new religion is just the same crap recycled. Read history. DNA only shows genetic degradation.
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@garith21 "1) I don't really care if people think I'm smart or not, I do however research a topic so i know a lot about it when I discuss it and I look for others to challenge my views as to test my current assumptions and conclusions". Assumptions are not science!
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
garith; You obviously have not studied anything about genetic diseases and how the fact of the huge numbers of defects cause by mutations in the human genome destroy any idea of evolution. There are no magical mutations that fix screwed up DNA. Mutations are bad. You do not want them! Yet Evotards think they are good.
GoodScienceForYou 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@GoodScienceForYou "There are no magical mutations that fix screwed up DNA" I have never seen a real scientist assert that there were. Only you claim that scientists hold this belief. You cannot understand basic English. You should go back to school and learn how to read.
AlanCFA 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@GoodScienceForYou
"Assumptions are not science!"
Yeah, assumptions like I can learn about reality with facts and that my senses are at least sometimes accurate. If you can't make some basic assumptions you can't even begin to ask scientific questions. Science starts with basic assumptions for this very reason, later discoveries are always based upon previous assumptions that were justified by earlier facts and testing. Either that or you can't determine the density of mars by it's gravity.
garith21 2 months ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
@garith21 "f you die you can't pass on your genes and the genes don't stay in the gene pool" GSFY is not intelligent enough to realize that.
AlanCFA 2 months ago